Hello,
can anyone confirm my observations with the
attached
test script?
pax corrupts files if they contain more than 57
holes
in it.
I just found out today by accident after copying a
large backup file. I was
able to reproduce the bug on Solaris 10 and
snv133,
on
ls /dev/dsk/c4t?d0
/dev/dsk/c4t0d0 /dev/dsk/c4t1d0 /dev/dsk/c4t2d0
/dev/dsk/c4t3d0 /dev/dsk/c4t4d0
Are you sure those /dev/dsk/c*d0 entries
are device nodes?
Try ls -l /dev/dsk/c*d0
and ls -lL /dev/dsk/c*d0,
maybe they are files that have been
created by accident by a user user
with root
rd...@znas:~$ ls -l /dev/dsk/c*d0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 58 апр. 19 09:03 /dev/dsk/c4t0d0 -
../../devices/p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@9/pci15d9,5...@0/s...@0,0:wd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 58 апр. 19 09:03 /dev/dsk/c4t1d0 -
Richard L. Hamilton rlha...@smart.net wrote:
Is the Solaris version of pax somehow superior to the
open source implementation(s)? If not, then why not replace
it with an open source version?
There is nothing like _the_ OSS implementation.
There are several OSS implementations and every
Before I plaster the link that follows, I'd like to thank Adobe for their
support for Solaris OpenSolaris. Yea, I know there's various GNU-ish projects
around, but I seriously dislike the GPL template license too. Not only that but
objectively Adobe's stuff is good software.
If I could, I'd
Simple:
it might be an EFI partition is required. It should be created with:
format -e
:)
rd...@znas:~$ ls -v /dev/dsk/c*d0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 58 апр. 19 09:03 /dev/dsk/c4t0d0 -
../../devices/p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@9/pci15d9,5...@0/s...@0,0:wd
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root
You're right. Someone will still be waiting after 120 days for customer
service to come back and help them. Why they continue to wait, who knows?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
bsd wrote:
You're right. Someone will still be waiting after 120 days for customer
service to come back and help them. Why they continue to wait, who knows?
Your implication that a call can be logged with support and no customer
contact in 90-120 days is way outside of any kind of process
4 months we have been stuck on build 134, 4 months! I don't call this
progress, at this rate Oracle will have to push Solaris 10 out to update 40
before Solaris next is ready. The patch bundle for Solaris 10 is now so large
that it takes 4 hours to patch from update 6 to update 8. Solaris next
• New platform support
Does this mean new driver support?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
• New platform support
Does this mean new driver support?
Indirectly it might. But I think it has always meant
running on new models of systems; that might mean
as much support for newer CPUs or newer chipsets
as for controllers and other sorts of devices.
Someone could always look through
On 06/08/10 13:31, Jason King wrote:
A fast-track case is describing more the review/approval process than
how fast it's being putback. I'm sure there are many examples of
fast-tracks that weren't integrated for many months (if not longer)
from when they were filed.
Sometimes never. I
On June 14th 2005, OpenSolaris was made available to the public.
Today is June 14th 2010 and OpenSolaris is celebrating it's 5th
anniversary.
I hope that OpenSolaris still has a long life to expect in future
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353
Jörg
On June 14th 2005, OpenSolaris was made available to the public.
Today is June 14th 2010 and OpenSolaris is celebrating it's 5th
anniversary.
Thanks for the reminder. Happy 5th B'day to OpenSolaris indeed.
I hope that OpenSolaris still has a long life to expect in future
4 months we have been stuck on build 134, 4 months!
I don't call this progress, at this rate Oracle will
have to push Solaris 10 out to update 40 before
Solaris next is ready. The patch bundle for Solaris
10 is now so large that it takes 4 hours to patch
from update 6 to update 8. Solaris
Thank you for the heads-up, time to upgrade my station to 10.
Sent on the Sprint® Now Network from my BlackBerry®
-Original Message-
From: Tim Scanlon t...@uprising.net
Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 02:43:36
To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Subject: [osol-discuss] Thank you Adobe - Flash
Edward Martinez wrote:
I think the reason why we have been using build 134 that long is because
the next stable release of opensolaris will be from build 134
That is correct.
I remember reading a while back that solaris 11 was going to be based from
opensolaris snv_134.
That is not
Edward Martinez wrote:
I think the reason why we have been using build
134 that long is because the next stable release of
opensolaris will be from build 134
That is correct.
-Alan Coopersmith-
-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com
Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window
ow
There have been occasions where a FreeBSD RELEASE is not on time, but they
typically have RC1, RC2, etc., until the final RELEASE. Such as the case with
FreeBSD 8.0. I believe there was only to be RC1 and RC2, but there were
actually four release candidates.
As with the case of a release
Yup, thank you Jörg for your email :)
5 years already ...
Few months later I started using SXCE on my good ol' Ultra 60 :)
Joyeux anniversaire !!!
Le 14/06/10 17:50, Sean Sprague a écrit :
Jörg
On June 14th 2005, OpenSolaris was made available to the public.
Today is June 14th 2010 and
My apologies in advance if I'm posting this in the wrong place. I have a
Netra240 server and I'd like to use a video card so I can get a graphical
desktop. I put in a SIS 6326 PCI card, but my monitor just goes to sleep. Does
anyone know if I need to activate any settings in the server hardware
On 14.06.2010 20:43, rabindranath seunarine singh wrote:
My apologies in advance if I'm posting this in the wrong place. I have a
Netra240 server and I'd like to use a video card so I can get a graphical
desktop. I put in a SIS 6326 PCI card, but my monitor just goes to sleep.
Does anyone
rabindranath seunarine singh wrote:
My apologies in advance if I'm posting this in the wrong place. I have a
Netra240 server and I'd like to use a video card so I can get a graphical
desktop. I put in a SIS 6326 PCI card, but my monitor just goes to sleep.
Does anyone know if I need to
There have been occasions where a FreeBSD RELEASE is
not on time, but they typically have RC1, RC2, etc.,
until the final RELEASE. Such as the case with
FreeBSD 8.0. I believe there was only to be RC1 and
RC2, but there were actually four release
candidates.
As with the case of a
Edward Martinez wrote:
I do consider 134 as an RC because it was said last year that next stable
release would be 2010.02 and be based from b 134 but how would that be
possible, if build 134 was released on march 8?
It wouldn't be, which is why that was never said.
When the plan was
Rabindranath Seunarinesingh wrote:
Thanks Alan, that piece of info seems to be the missing link in all of
this. I have no problem installing via CLI/console, but does that mean I
wouldn't be able to give the user a GUI desktop even if he connects to
the server via the network?
No. He needs a
On 14.06.2010 21:26, Rabindranath Seunarinesingh wrote:
Thanks for the reply Thomas. I don't have a Sun card, so I guess the
graphical install is out. Now, if I install via console, how can I give
the user a GUI desktop? Will that be possible at all?
BTW, I'm in the same noisy room with all
Edward Martinez wrote:
I do consider 134 as an RC because it was said
last year that next stable release would be 2010.02
and be based from b 134 but how would that be
possible, if build 134 was released on march 8?
It wouldn't be, which is why that was never said.
When the plan
Thanks Alan.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
29 matches
Mail list logo
