> I didn't say there weren't significant changes since
> 2.0 and the release of SVR4, but the article implies
> that "significant changes" occurred to Solaris after
> 1994 when he says Sun bought the SVR4 codebase.  That
> is not an accurate statement, given the timeline of
> Solaris development and releases, and especially
> since Solaris 2.0 came out with SVR4.  Solaris 2.0
> came out before 1994.

Solaris 2.0 release AFAIK had nothing to do with Sun buying the
full rights to the SVR4 code.  Those were indeed separate events.

SVR4.0 was released in 1990
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/SVR4#SVR4

Solaris 2.0 came out in June 1992
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Solaris_%28operating_system%29#Version_history

which added some features like a fully pre-emptible kernel, IIRC.

and I _think_ (although I can't find anything as clear as that) that
Sun bought out their royalty obligation in 1994, and bought full rights
to the source (allowing them to re-license it as they wished) in 2003
(except some bits like the internationalization in libc).

As of the end of 1994, Solaris was at 2.4, with quite a few features beyond
vanilla SVR4.0.

The source for OpenSolaris was released in 2005.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OpenSolaris#History

The review that started this thread was IMO not impressive.  I don't
want to beat on it too bad, because the review itself (as opposed
to any background info the author tossed in) wasn't really _wrong_,
and was more positive than not.  But it was really shallow.  One of
the comments pointed out that flash was easy enough to get, if
from a non-default repository rather than from a tarball.  Now I
suppose for a clueless desktop user, it's better if everything they're
going to want magically works right after installing, without doing
anything else.  But getting flash and sound working clearly wasn't
rocket science, as the review author managed ok.  And
the stuff he didn't even mention: DTrace, ZFS, SMF being just the
big stuff that you won't find in a Linux distro.  (DTrace and ZFS have
of course spread to some of the *BSD based OS's, which aren't
stuck with the limitations of GPL)

So I'd rate the review as something that doesn't really hurt, but
is also not something I'd point people to for accurate information.
-- 
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
[email protected]

Reply via email to