From: geoff@clare.See-My-Signature.invalid   
      
   Anssi Saari wrote:   
      
   > Geoff Clare  writes:   
   >   
   >> A major exception to that is ZFS: native and very dependable in   
   >> FreeBSD (and works great as the root filesystem), but a horribly   
   >> fragile dkms mess in Linux.   
   >   
   > How is ZFS fragile and messy in Linux, please? I only run it on my two   
   > file servers, but no issues in the last decade or so. Haven't bothered   
   > with it as root FS though.   
      
   Every time you upgrade the kernel there is a chance that the ZFS dkms   
   install will fail.   
      
   I have ZFS on an external SSD that I use to back up the Linux system on   
   my work laptop.  (Being a work machine, I don't back it up to my   
   personal file server.)  I got so fed up with dkms install failures that   
   I actually resorted to ZFS-fuse and took the performance hit (since it   
   didn't matter too much if the backup took longer).   
      
   Reports of ZFS dkms problems on Linux are easy to find...   
      
   https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=280416   
      
   https://askubuntu.com/questions/1539311/downgrade-kernel-to-install-zfs-dkms   
      
   https://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.php?t=402097   
      
   https://forum.endeavouros.com/t/cannot-install-zfs/62770   
      
   That last one includes an answer that says, "In general, when using zfs   
   you are better off using the LTS kernel"   
      
   That's all well and good if your hardware is supported by an LTS   
   kernel, but if you need a newer kernel then you run a significant risk   
   of dkms install failures (while you wait for a new enough LTS kernel).   
      
   --   
   Geoff Clare    
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)