Hey,

Here's the latest edition of the weekly news. This summary makes forward looking
statements, etc etc and while I personally have little interest in the ksh93
thread, I thought it would be nice to summarize as the first public case being
put through ARC. Interested readers should obviously read the entire thread
before commenting.


Glynn

==

> Scurvy Steve mailed [1] to report at the latest nightly of ON from 20060918 
> was
> available for download, with a recommendation to throw back some grog and load
> up the new bits.
> 
> 1. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-announce/2006-September/000262.html
> 
> Moinak Ghosh announced [2] BelaniX 0.5 release, with support for read-only
> mounting and accessing of both Ext2FS and NTFS partitions on primary or 
> logical
> partitions, and updated to build 48. More details of the changes are available
> in the release notes.
> 
> 2. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-announce/2006-September/000265.html
> 
> Don Cragun announced [3] the start of PSARC-EXT 2006/550 Korn Shell 93 
> Integration,
> a fasttrack with timeout on 27th September, noting that it was Sun's intention
> to keep the ksh93 sources in sync with the upstream community, including
> contributing any Solaris specific changes back to AT&T and long term goal 
> [4]. John 
> Plocher noted [5] that many of the mails to the current opensolaris lists 
> were 
> getting held up in moderation, and challenging others to come up with a 
> solution for 
> how to manage this. James Carlson questioned [6] the terms of the Common 
> Public Licence 
> as to whether maintaining code changes would be classified as 'proprietary', 
> and 
> following up on what Joseph Kowalski suggested [7] as to whether there was a 
> need 
> for the addition of the shell in /sbin. April Chen suggested [8] that at the 
> very least
> it would provide a modern, feature-rich alternative to bourne shell for use 
> as a
> root shell, in JumpStart Scripts, or otherwise when dealing with filesystem
> problems. 
> 
> 3. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000052.html
> 4. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000140.html
> 5. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000049.html
> 6. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000055.html
> 7. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000054.html
> 8. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000056.html
> 
> Tim Marsland suggested [9] that this case should set forth a proposal to 
> split out 
> what would be done 'looking backwards' to Solaris 9 and 10 where 
> compatibility [10] 
> expectations are high, and 'looking forwards' in Nevada. Darren Moffat asked 
> [11] 
> if RBAC profiles would be preserved in interaction with pfksh93, with the 
> understanding that this would have to fix mistakes being made in the past. 
> James 
> Carlson tried to summarize [12] the project teams desire for libcmd.so, and 
> how
> to manage the existing library in Solaris with similar name. Roland Mainz 
> argued
> [13] that renaming wasn't a good solution, especially with the desire to be 
> compatible 
> with the upstream version. Sherri Shieh posted [14] details of the open 
> conference 
> call to discuss this case.
> 
> 9.  
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000074.html
> 10. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000083.html
>  
> 11. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000095.html
> 11. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000245.html
> 12. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000245.html
> 13. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000247.html
> 14. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-arc/2006-September/000135.html
> 
> Karyn Ritter mailed [15] to say that Stefan Teleman had been hired by Sun to
> work on SFW and Companion CD.
> 
> 15. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/companion-discuss/2006-September/000252.html
> 
> On top of the recent ksh93 threads, Glynn Foster proposed [16] an moderation
> team, with the goal of moderating each of the opensolaris lists for mails 
> stuck
> in the queue.
> 
> 16. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/website-discuss/2006-September/000937.html
> 
> Derek Cicero mailed [17] to say that they were experiencing issues with adding
> and updating existing pages on opensolaris.org. This issue should be
> semi-resolved, and due to the fact that the Lucene index was getting 
> corrupted.
> Anyone experiencing any problems should mail website-discuss.
> 
> 17. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/website-discuss/2006-September/000929.html
> 
> Zhenghui Xie posted [18] a 2nd draft of the NWAM service model, delivering a
> default standalone Upper Layer Profile (ULP) and several network ULPs. 
> 
> 18. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/smf-discuss/2006-September/001170.html
> 
> Mike Kupfer discussed [19] what the boundaries were for new projects being
> associated with a consolidation, taking into account any possible disputes, 
> and
> the problems associated with existing code. Rich Lowe wondered [20] if firm 
> and
> fast rules could ever be practically established. Stephen Hahn suggested [21]
> that the relevant C-Team would be a good start for providing a set of
> characteristics for what the typical acceptance case might be.
> 
> 19. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/program-team/2006-September/000325.html
> 20. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/program-team/2006-September/000326.html
> 21. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/program-team/2006-September/000334.html
> 
> Bonnie Corwin mailed [22] with a publication history of consolidation sources
> showing the progress the project has made since it launched.
> 
> 22. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/program-team/2006-September/000328.html
> 
> Brendan Gregg posted [23] details of a new network provider for DTrace for
> discussion, providing a few examples of what it might look like. Brendan also
> posted [24] the work he has done in bringing DTrace to JavaScript by providing
> the user statically defined interfaces (USDT) using the Spider Monkey [25] 
> engine.
> 
> 23. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/dtrace-discuss/2006-September/002299.html
> 24. http://blogs.sun.com/brendan/entry/dtrace_meets_javascript
> 25. http://www.mozilla.org/js/spidermonkey/
> 
> Karyn Ritter reported [26] a slight delay in the delivery of build 48, due to 
> a 
> rebuild [27] for a necessary bug fix.
> 
> 26. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2006-September/020445.html
> 27. 
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2006-September/020482.html
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to