--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

> 
> >Well, in my mind, OpenSolaris was on the way to becoming a
> "download
> >iso", "burn disc", "insert into target machine", "boot to CD-ROM",
> >"install", and "run"... Like, hum... Solaris maybe...
> 
> No, not at all; that was never the intention.

Ok, glad that's cleared up.


> That's what distributions do; they collate bits of software and
> make it into a distribution.  Solaris is an example of such
> a distribution.  Should Sun make a second distribution which
> does the same thing but contains only the bits already opensource
> or available in source elsewhere?
> 
> No, it would be silly for Sun to maintain two distributions.

Well, silly it might be, but it would sure make things easier for me.

> Others willmake other OpenSolaris distributions.

But my boss will never let me download and install software that
comes from some community site on our production systems. I need to
be able to point him to a page at SUN and have a binary distro.


> >That's what I'm expecting to see when people say: "We've
> open-sourced
> >Solaris", or "Solaris is Open Source"
> 
> Strange; if I read "they've opensourced product X" then I expect to
> be able to download the *source*; not the installable product.

Oh, I *never* build from source. I have personally never, ever, not
even once built from source any stuff I didn't write. If I can't find
a binary out there, I won't use it.

This is why I use Debian. I don't have to. I manage with apt-get and
have to --purge once in a while because I can't even get that right
sometimes. 

I am an application developer. I build stuff for people to solve
their business problems. I glue stuff together, and I'm always ready
to thank the developers of open-source software with a kind word of
support, a paypal donation, and extolling of the greatness of the
software with the great unwashed masses... But I won't build from
source.  

 
> >So my expectation is: An open-source distro based on Solaris
> >technology with ZFS et al, that will be "the next version" of
> Solaris
> >that people put on their servers to run their enterprise, home,
> media
> >center, embedded systems, set-top boxes, cars, bootable usb keys,
> >etc...
> >
> >I'm fairly sure I'm not the only person with that expectation.
> 
> Yeah, but that's what Solaris is and that's what the distros are.


Ok, but isn't Solaris a distro too? 

Let me recap for my benefit:

OpenSolaris is a set of open sourced software packages. One of these
is the Kernel. Other of these are tools, like ksh.

Solaris is a distro that includes the kernel and a bunch of tools, as
well as other software from other sources such as Apache, PostgreSQL,
 etc.

Am I closer to the mark?

What do people at Sun call the kernel itself?

As an aside for a non-c-coder type out there: I could really use a
diagram of all this.

Thanks.



Chris Mahan
818.943.1850 cell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.christophermahan.com/


 
____________________________________________________________________________________
Need a quick answer? Get one in minutes from people who know.
Ask your question on www.Answers.yahoo.com
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to