How is the CDDL any more detestable than the GPL family of licenses? Not saying that they are detestable in any way, but the CDDL is also a free software license so I don't get how it's worse or bad
Specifically, the issue is with GPL, which disallows licenses that have more requirements than itself - in case of CDDL, it's IIRC patent sharing requirements and language around file-specific applicability.
And of course then there's the part that GPL doesn't apply to linking at all - it applies to derivative code, which OpenZFS is not and thus it does not violate GPL to ship OpenZFS code linked with Linux kernel.
And of course then there's the part that GPL doesn't apply to linking at all - it applies to derivative code, which OpenZFS is not and thus it does not violate GPL to ship OpenZFS code linked with Linux kernel.