Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Software for Solaris (was Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
On May 30, 2006, at 3:27 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Given SUN's payment of $200million to SCO (for not alot of stuff IMHO), the reliability of SUN as a Linux partner comes into question - slam Linux, then provide middleware for it. Do you mind not spreading absolute FUD? Do you have any sources? No. You want to know why? Here: SCO's regulatory filings showed the TOTAL VALUE of the Sun/MS deals (with SCO) to be 13.2 million dollars. Sun was also offered the opportunity to purchase 210,000 thousand shares of SCO at $1.83 ($384,300 total.) I don't know if they exercised this option, but it was available. Assuming they did, and assuming MS gave SCO $0, then Sun (at most) gave SCO the 13.2 million + another $384,300. At *most*. Here's one source: http://www.newsfactor.com/perl/story/21894.html Now, supposedly the licensing deal was 9.3 million. I can't verify this, because I didn't see the report itself when it came out (and I can't be bothered to research it) but assuming that figure is correct (and we know the cap is 13.2 million) then Sun *at most* put $10 million into SCO. That's nothing, compared to costs of litigation and so forth. It's a drop in the bucket. Here: http://news.com.com/Fact+and+fiction+in+the+Microsoft-SCO +relationship/2100-7344_3-5450515.html Now, please, unless you want to back up your $200 million figure, please go crawl back into the hole from which you came, with this utterly ridiculous crap you are so keen to spread. It's really getting old to listen to your constant attempted character assassination of Sun, as if it's your mortal enemy. This discussion list is here for people to discuss OSOL, in general, both positive and negatives - CONSTRUCTIVELY. Simply flaming Sun and spouting absolute nonsense doesn't fall into that kind of activity, and it absolutely makes this mailing list painful to read at times. If you don't have anything useful to say, simply say nothing. Nobody wants to listen to FUD, and I don't want people who are here to learn about OSOL and contribute to OSOL to have to deal with this kind of silliness. Some people are going to assume what you say is true, and get turned off to Sun, and OSOL. This is not cool. I don't like spending my evenings reading inflammatory emails, with absolutely no useful content, either. So please, either contribute to the community in a positive manner, or don't bother. If SUN wishes to get the OSS world to start using Studio 11 as the compiler of choice for Linux, then SUN needs to mend ALOT of bridges with the OSS community - how about offering a version for FreeBSD, have double the participation? I think this might be a good road to take in the future, but unless some more evangelism goes on, nobody is going to have a clue what Studio 11 is, much less know why they should use it over GCC. That's the barrier to entry. People have to know it exists, and they have to have a reason to use it. Making a FreeBSD port won't solve either of these two problems. Now, once those two problems are sorted out, THEN a FreeBSD port would be wonderful (I'm a long-time FreeBSD guy myself..) rant As a side note, why the heck doesn't Sun opensource Java, JFC! the money is made off the middleware, not the framework. As for an internal debate - excuse me Johnnathon, but who is running the company? make a damn decision, and those who don't like it, show them the door. This has been discussed to death, and you should watch the stuff from the recent Java conference. There was clarification on this matter. My understanding (hopefully correct) is the plan *is* to open-source Java, it is being determined what the best route to take is that will keep Java *Java* without a half-gazillion forks everywhere, and while also pleasing the legal and economic beats inside Sun. This is a *huge* undertaking, and it is not something that Sun can afford to take lightly. I'd rather Sun sorts all this out, and open-sources Java when it's ready, so I don't have to deal with the kinds of problems that could emerge from poor planning. Respectfully - but upset, David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On May 30, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Glynn Foster wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Feel the love. -Shawn And with that fine message from Shawn, I'd like to propose an end of thread. This conversation isn't productive, scares the living crap out of me each time I start writing the OpenSolaris weekly news, and discourages people from posting value to the lists. Take this to private mail or IRC please. The original topic is very important to OSOL, I don't think discussion of it should cease due to one user's actions. This *is* an important issue, but we should not all have to pay for one particular user's opinions if it is indeed so bad we are being urged to simply stop discussion. No offense meant of course, I completely agree that the issue needs to be resolved so we can continue on being productive instead of bickering, I just don't think completely shutting a door on an important part of OSOL is the correct solution. Cheers, David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On 5/31/06, David J. Orman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Glynn Foster wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Feel the love. -Shawn And with that fine message from Shawn, I'd like to propose an end of thread. This conversation isn't productive, scares the living crap out of me each time I start writing the OpenSolaris weekly news, and discourages people from posting value to the lists. Take this to private mail or IRC please.The original topic is very important to OSOL, I don't thinkdiscussion of it should cease due to one user's actions. This *is* animportant issue, but we should not all have to pay for one particular user's opinions if it is indeed so bad we are being urgedto simply stop discussion.No offense meant of course, I completely agree that the issue needsto be resolved so we can continue on being productive instead of bickering, I just don't think completely shutting a door on animportant part of OSOL is the correct solution.Personally, I'd love for Solaris x86 to get to the point where we aren't bitching about hardware support or lack of ISV's, but instead complaining about how we're *TOO* productive with Solaris, and how there are too many software and hardware pices we can choose from. The day when I hear someone complain on this forum about the fact that there are too many choices when it comes to desktop publishing, photo manipulation and music capturing etc. on Solaris x86, then I think Solaris has made progress. The day when I hear geeks say, why would I want to run Linux when I can run Solaris, have a great desktop, and all those awesome mainstream applications, then Solaris has made progress - until then, Solaris will remain the red headed step child of the x86 UNIX world, with FreeBSD and Linux users asking why they should move to a platform that is wowfully lacking in hardware support, mainstream software vendor support and lacks any strong direction from the powers that be. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] onnv SXCR status
Karyn Ritter wrote: Steve just delivered the nightly onnv source and SXCR Build 40 was made available on Friday of last week. There currently aren't any issues with next week's deliveries of onnv or SXCR Build 41. I'm thinking that I will move these to status reports every two weeks unless there is an issue to report. Is that reasonable? I'd rather they stayed coming as they are. Absence of something is never a good indicator, particularly in the world of computers ! -- Darren J Moffat ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On May 30, 2006, at 9:47 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Personally, I'd love for Solaris x86 to get to the point where we aren't bitching about hardware support or lack of ISV's, but instead complaining about how we're *TOO* productive with Solaris, and how there are too many software and hardware pices we can choose from. HW support is an issue (known and acknowledged by Sun engineers), and it is being worked on. This takes time. Maybe you weren't, but I was dealing with linux in the .99-pre days, and OSOL is FAR ahead of where linux was during this this period. It takes *time*. It took linux 5-6 years, from the .99-pre point I got involved, until it was semi-usable on a fair amount of HW. OSOL is in the same boat, but it is progressing much more rapidly. Concerning ISVs, Solaris/OSOL has way more support than linux ever did during it's inception. OSOL is new, and it is gaining ground at a phenomenal pace. Don't criticize a project for doing it's best, offer input (negative or positive) in a constructive manner. Code submissions are more than welcome, I am absolutely sure. This isn't the issue I was commenting about, however, nor is it the content of the majority of your recent posts, and that is the problem. The day when I hear someone complain on this forum about the fact that there are too many choices when it comes to desktop publishing, photo manipulation and music capturing etc. on Solaris x86, then I think Solaris has made progress. I agree, if people are complaining about too many choices, Solaris (maybe you meant OSOL?) is in a good position. The day when I hear geeks say, why would I want to run Linux when I can run Solaris, have a great desktop, and all those awesome mainstream applications, then Solaris has made progress - until then, Solaris will remain the red headed step child of the x86 UNIX world, with FreeBSD and Linux users asking why they should move to a platform that is wowfully lacking in hardware support, mainstream software vendor support and lacks any strong direction from the powers that be. That's funny, and THIS was the reason for my post. I moved from Linux (Debian) to FreeBSD for various reasons, mostly technical, around the 2.2.x days. Now, I've moved to Solaris 10 for the same reasons. Usability comes with USERS. People are interested in OSOL (this mailing list makes it apparent.) Usability will follow. The key is users providing constructive feedback, code, and so forth to improve things as they wish. Just like it happened with linux from .99-pre on, from FreeBSD 2.x on, and so forth. This most recent mail from you clarifies the important things that need to occur in order to make OSOL viable on the desktop (as you so wish.) And I'm sure *anybody* reading this mail from you would have absolutely no problem with it, and would be more than happy to help clarify things, expand on the roadmap, give you the current direction and so forth. The key is how you deal with us (the community.) When you approach us (the OSOL community) in the manner you displayed in *THIS* mail, all of us would do our best to help you, clarify things, and provide what you ask. We're all open to your opinions as well, and your opinions very well may change our viewpoints, or at least give us more direction. This is what constructive discussion does! This is what the community needs! Not negative harsh feedback with no basis, and unsupported and unsubstantiated claims of meaninglessness simply aimed at hurting those involved. I hope you spend time to reflect on that, and I sincerely hope the rest of your stay on this mailing list is as clear and non-inflamitory as the post I am replying to. Nobody is out to get you, we are all here by choice. You should be too. If you truly want the OSOL community/project to succeed, please be a part of the positive influence that is needed for it to do so. I truly hope that your intent with this most recent post was to head in a more positive direction, because we need to stick together if what you want (Solaris/OSOL on the desktop) is to be true. Thanks, David\ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Switch to gdm?
Nicolas Linkert wrote: I have installed GNOME 2.14 and would like to switch from dtlogin to gdm. Sorry, I have found no instructions how to do this. The instructions I found did not work: svcadm enable svc:application/graphical-login/gdm:default (before login) svcadm disable svc:application/graphical-login:default (after login) You need to do it the other way around and you need to get the name of the cde one correct. I'd suggest that you probably want to do that while logged in on the console (use the command line login option from dtlogin menu). Command Line Login login: nicolas passwd: ** $ svcadm disable -s svc:/application/graphical-login/cde-login:default $ svcadm enable svc:/application/graphical-login/gdm:default -- Darren J Moffat ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Hence the reason I don't believe Sun has EVER talked to Adobe over this You have no proof of that what so ever. Quite frankly you are being troll, please go away and troll elsewhere instead of winding us all up and filling up our mailboxes. Some of us follow this list because we are interested in technical discussion and the feedback on OpenSolaris. We do this because we love OpenSolaris. You on the other hand seem to just want to throw out pages and pages of flame bait and comments with which you have no facts to backup. -- Darren J Moffat ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
David J. Orman wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Glynn Foster wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Feel the love. -Shawn And with that fine message from Shawn, I'd like to propose an end of thread. This conversation isn't productive, scares the living crap out of me each time I start writing the OpenSolaris weekly news, and discourages people from posting value to the lists. Take this to private mail or IRC please. The original topic is very important to OSOL, I don't think discussion of it should cease due to one user's actions. This *is* an important issue, but we should not all have to pay for one particular user's opinions if it is indeed so bad we are being urged to simply stop discussion. We should not stop discussion to get a solution. I do find the discussion have been strangely circling around having Sun to pay Adobe Acrobat. Acrobat is closed software, this is not the long term solution. We should look more towards OSS, the topic of discussion should be PDF Reader for Solaris x86, personally I think. Granted gpdf is not a very good, so it is dropped by the OS community, evince is better, and will get a lot better if Adobe is not releasing free reader for the various platforms. Adobe acrobat is a good case study for 'evilness' of closed source 'free' software [1]. -Ghee [1] Now I have the market share, just cherry picking which platform I want to release on. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On 5/31/06, David J. Orman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 9:47 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Personally, I'd love for Solaris x86 to get to the point where we aren't bitching about hardware support or lack of ISV's, but instead complaining about how we're *TOO* productive with Solaris, and how there are too many software and hardware pices we can choose from.HW support is an issue (known and acknowledged by Sun engineers), andit is being worked on. This takes time. Maybe you weren't, but I was dealing with linux in the .99-pre days, and OSOL is FAR ahead ofwhere linux was during this this period. It takes *time*. It tooklinux 5-6 years, from the .99-pre point I got involved, until it wassemi-usable on a fair amount of HW. OSOL is in the same boat, but it is progressing much more rapidly.It would be nice to hear a 'this is what we're working on in the way of hardware support - then atleast whiners like me can say, hey, it'll be around soon, they're working on it now . Concerning ISVs, Solaris/OSOL has way more support than linux everdid during it's inception. OSOL is new, and it is gaining ground at a phenomenal pace. Don't criticize a project for doing it's best, offerinput (negative or positive) in a constructive manner. Codesubmissions are more than welcome, I am absolutely sure. This isn'tthe issue I was commenting about, however, nor is it the content of the majority of your recent posts, and that is the problem.The issue can actually be split into two parts; the first is the OSS side of the equation, and getting OSS coders to not only embrace the Forte/Studio compiler, but to realise that the world doesn't revolve around Linux, as much as they would it to occur. The second party is getting commercial ISV's onboard, which is where the whole Adobe/Acrobat issue came into fruitition; it isn't about bashing Sun but saying, hey, Sun has cash, why don't they do something - if I had $4billion sitting around in my closet, building up dust, I'd do something about it right now, but since I am not endowed with such a large fortune, the best I can do (and my cohorts) is to whine to Sun. The day when I hear someone complain on this forum about the fact that there are too many choices when it comes to desktop publishing, photo manipulation and music capturing etc. on Solaris x86, then I think Solaris has made progress.I agree, if people are complaining about too many choices, Solaris(maybe you meant OSOL?) is in a good position. Solaris/OpenSolaris - OpenSolaris as an official distribution hasn't been released yet; it'll be interesting to actually see if OpenSolaris turns into the what Fedora does for RHEL; if we have a fully blown OpenSolaris 'community distro' then I think things will move forward, but if we for ever and a day going to see splintered versions out there, then progress is going to be more difficult. The day when I hear geeks say, why would I want to run Linux when I can run Solaris, have a great desktop, and all those awesome mainstream applications, then Solaris has made progress - until then, Solaris will remain the red headed step child of the x86 UNIX world, with FreeBSD and Linux users asking why they should move to a platform that is wowfully lacking in hardware support, mainstream software vendor support and lacks any strong direction from the powers that be.That's funny, and THIS was the reason for my post. I moved from Linux(Debian) to FreeBSD for various reasons, mostly technical, around the2.2.x days. Now, I've moved to Solaris 10 for the same reasons. Usability comes with USERS. People are interested in OSOL (thismailing list makes it apparent.) Usability will follow. The key isusers providing constructive feedback, code, and so forth to improvethings as they wish. Just like it happened with linux from .99-pre on, from FreeBSD 2.x on, and so forth.I've moved back to FreeBSD 6.1 - before that I was running an PPC970 iMac with MacOS X - gave it to my brother so he could do his engineering study in comfort; I in turn received his Dell Dimension 8400 - which, all things considered, isn't a bad computer, and given its Intel processor, it does a great job heating up the room during winter (which seems to be the only season in Christchurch) This most recent mail from you clarifies the important things thatneed to occur in order to make OSOL viable on the desktop (as you so wish.) And I'm sure *anybody* reading this mail from you would haveabsolutely no problem with it, and would be more than happy to helpclarify things, expand on the roadmap, give you the current directionand so forth. The key is how you deal with us (the community.) When you approach us (the OSOL community) in the manner you displayed in*THIS* mail, all of us would do our best to help you, clarify things,and provide what you ask. We're all open to your opinions as well,and your opinions very well may change our viewpoints, or at least give us more direction. This is what constructive discussion does!This
Re: [osol-discuss] onnv SXCR status
On 5/31/06, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Karyn Ritter wrote: Steve just delivered the nightly onnv source and SXCR Build 40 was made available on Friday of last week. There currently aren't any issues with next week's deliveries of onnv or SXCR Build 41. I'm thinking that I will move these to status reports every two weeks unless there is an issue to report. Is that reasonable?I'd rather they stayed coming as they are.Absence of something is never a good indicator, particularly in the world of computers !A nice little 'this is what the band of Sun's merry people did on the week end' journal would be good - so then people can track Solaris progressing, and see what is being developed. This week, we payed particular attention to improving the SATA I/O, specifically decreasing the CPU utilisation and increasing throughput as an example of a good speal for the OpenSolaris Journal. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On 5/31/06, gheet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: David J. Orman wrote: On May 30, 2006, at 5:34 PM, Glynn Foster wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Feel the love. -Shawn And with that fine message from Shawn, I'd like to propose an end of thread. This conversation isn't productive, scares the living crap out of me each time I start writing the OpenSolaris weekly news, and discourages people from posting value to the lists. Take this to private mail or IRC please. The original topic is very important to OSOL, I don't think discussion of it should cease due to one user's actions. This *is* an important issue, but we should not all have to pay for one particular user's opinions if it is indeed so bad we are being urged to simply stop discussion. We should not stop discussion to get a solution. I do find thediscussion have been strangely circling around having Sun to pay AdobeAcrobat. Acrobat is closed software, this is not the long term solution. We should look more towards OSS, the topic of discussion should be PDFReader for Solaris x86, personally I think.Granted gpdf is not a very good, so it is dropped by the OScommunity, evince is better, and will get a lot better if Adobe is not releasing free reader for the various platforms. Adobe acrobat is a goodcase study for 'evilness' of closed source 'free' software [1].Well, lets assume we go free software and free love - someone has to create this software - and with 5000 employees given the sack at Sun, wouldn't of it been bettter to direct those 5000 (lets assume 1,000 were programmers) or so to put together a decent Adobe Acrobat replacement? I mean, sure, if 5000 were just sitting around with nothing to do, then sure, let them go, but givent he laundry list of things that need to be done in OpenSolaris/Solaris, Sun should be hiring, not firing. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
It would be nice to hear a 'this is what we're working on in the way of hardware support - then atleast whiners like me can say, hey, it'll be around soon, they're working on it now . It's been said a dozen times, use the search function of your email client (or the forums..) The issue can actually be split into two parts; the first is the OSS side of the equation, and getting OSS coders to not only embrace the Forte/Studio compiler, but to realise that the world doesn't revolve around Linux, as much as they would it to occur. The second part I'm not sure what you're alluding to, OSOL is OSS. The second part is a function of the two points I mentioned in my response to you. The second party is getting commercial ISV's onboard, which is where the whole Adobe/Acrobat issue came into fruitition; it isn't about bashing Sun but saying, hey, Sun has cash, why don't they do something - if I had $4billion sitting around in my closet, building up dust, I'd do something about it right now, but since I am not endowed with such a large fortune, the best I can do (and my cohorts) is to whine to Sun. Sun attempted, Adobe wasn't interested. Exactly how much of the $4 billion you seem to see as expendable do you think Sun should throw at Adobe, for something you've stated a dozen times over should be replaced regardless? They've already attempted that route reasonably, it didn't pan out. Again, Adobe Photoshop + Intel mac. There is *way* more demand for that, and it's still not here. If Apple can't get a port with all the die-hard PS guys using Apple computers, what makes you think Sun can toss money into the pot and get a port done of Acrobat? This has been rehashed over and over. Solaris/OpenSolaris - OpenSolaris as an official distribution hasn't been released yet; it'll be interesting to actually see if OpenSolaris turns into the what Fedora does for RHEL; if we have a fully blown OpenSolaris 'community distro' then I think things will move forward, but if we for ever and a day going to see splintered versions out there, then progress is going to be more difficult. RHEL is a mess, I don't even want to begin emulating their model. That's all I'm going to say on this. I've moved back to FreeBSD 6.1 - before that I was running an PPC970 iMac with MacOS X - gave it to my brother so he could do his engineering study in comfort; I in turn received his Dell Dimension 8400 - which, all things considered, isn't a bad computer, and given its Intel processor, it does a great job heating up the room during winter (which seems to be the only season in Christchurch) Ok. Discussion is also a two way street - when someone brings up an issue; the quesiton shouldn't be 'how shall we lynch this individual' but, lets probe this guy, and get some more information, so that we can address the deficiencies in the system - sure, this is a 'community' and the issues of Adobe can't be addressed by this 'community' as it has no political or fiscal muscle, but what it can address for example, is the creation of a OpenSolaris distribution based off the OpenSolaris core, Xorg and offering the end user with two desktops, GNOME and KDE, using the common 'blue print' theme for both desktops. Life is a two-way street. Expect to receive what you give. If you act like a 12 y/o punk, you're going to have people treating you like a 12 y/o punk. Apparently you didn't bother to contemplate my responses to you as I asked (and hoped) you would. As per distributions, there are a few already, and this project/ community is new. I suggest you give them a shot, they may answer a lot of the needs you express (as improperly as I feel you have). Nexenta would seem to fit your ramblings best, from what I've read. David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On 5/31/06, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Hence the reason I don't believe Sun has EVER talked to Adobe over thisYou have no proof of that what so ever.Quite frankly you are beingtroll, please go away and troll elsewhere instead of winding us all up and filling up our mailboxes.And you know sweetcheeks, this is a GENERAL discussion; if you wish to fufil your inner desires of wishing to know the internals of the kernel, may I suggest subscribing to such lists. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On May 30, 2006, at 11:43 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Well, lets assume we go free software and free love - someone has to create this software - and with 5000 employees given the sack at Sun, wouldn't of it been bettter to direct those 5000 (lets assume 1,000 were programmers) or so to put together a decent Adobe Acrobat replacement? I'm not going to debate Sun's financial responsibility here, nor the events that led up to recent events, but based on my knowledge of the market, let me put it bluntly. If you want to fund those 5000 employees given the sack at Sun to make a replacement for Acrobat/ PDF, please do. If you don't, and you can explain to me how you think with the current financial situation at Sun they can justify this to stakeholders, please do. Otherwise, STOP MAKING INFLAMITORY POSTS. This isn't Sun-Discuss. This is OSOL-Discuss. Please stay on topic. If you want to debate this further, take it to email directly with me and whomever else you feel you need to vent to. I mean, sure, if 5000 were just sitting around with nothing to do, then sure, let them go, but givent he laundry list of things that need to be done in OpenSolaris/Solaris, Sun should be hiring, not firing. I'm starting to get the idea you don't listen to reason, and your sole purpose is to cause trouble. David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] onnv SXCR status
A nice little 'this is what the band of Sun's merry people did on the week end' journal would be good - so then people can track Solaris progressing, and see what is being developed. This week, we payed particular attention to improving the SATA I/ O, specifically decreasing the CPU utilisation and increasing throughput as an example of a good speal for the OpenSolaris Journal. Here's a helpful (well known to anybody who has paid attention in the past year+) URL: http://blogs.sun.com/roller/main.do Enjoy, David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Well, lets assume we go free software and free love - someone has to create this software - and with 5000 employees given the sack at Sun, wouldn't of it been bettter to direct those 5000 (lets assume 1,000 were programmers) or so to put together a decent Adobe Acrobat replacement? To me evince is decent enough PDF reader :). Even better it is going to be in SNV B41 as the default PDF viewer. If it can view your PDF document, send us the samples, log bugs, we treasure such contributions more. -Ghee ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: honestly, how many companies would turn down free money? Pretty much every responsibly run company will, if they feel they can get a better return for investing their time resources elsewhere. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Software for Solaris
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: The first thing Sun could do is this; get rid of Xsun - blam, first Working on it, but if we dropped it today, there'd be useless black screens on all our SPARC workstations and Sun Rays. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: GCC Issues, was (Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Well, I started compiling things, all nice, started to compile Xorg 7.1 and it failed to compile; Strange - it's always compiled for me with Studio compilers. I test with gcc occasionally, but there's enough other people testing that works on Linux that I don't do it that often. We build Xorg multiple times a day with Studio compilers and keep a CVS HEAD tree updated to make sure that builds as well. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris
James Carlson wrote: The problem with that idea is that forcing reconfiguration every time kills the boot-time metric, which is an important part of computing overall availability of the system. Such a project would fail on boot-time regression. It would require a very quick way to discover new hardware. If the linuxes and Windows of the world can do it; surely we can figure a way for the great Solaris to do it as well. -spp -- Stephen Potter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lopsa.org Director, LOPSA Executive Board I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is a disgrace, two useless men are a law firm, and three are a congress. - John Adams ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
Bruce Riddle wrote: Acrobat should be as uqbiquitous as power for a desktop computer. It is just plain bullshit that a contemporary version of reader is not available for Solaris x86. I don't think there's any disagreement that everyone here wants Acrobat ported to X86. Sun needs to drive accross the valley, bring a checkbook and an engineer for a given amount of time. I believe several people have already mentioned that this has been tried. My response was aimed at Matty's redefinition of the question he asked. -spp -- Stephen Potter [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.lopsa.org Director, LOPSA Executive Board I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is a disgrace, two useless men are a law firm, and three are a congress. - John Adams ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: What Sun wants are millions of developers to port to Solaris x86 out of the goodness of their own heart - newsflash, the world doens't work that way, people port when either they see the possibility of cash rolling in, or when the CEO pays a visit to pay for the porting. I thought that was the whole point of the Free and Open Source Software movement. Isn't that exactly the argument the FOSS advocates use when pushing for things to be open sourced? Closed source is bad because a company might go under, or they might not do what their customers want, or port to the architectures that their customers want. How many times did we hear that Sun should open source Solaris so that people could port it to other architectures? In fact, isn't that exactly what Joerg, Jurgen, Dennis, Pete, and the other dozens of Open Solaris developers are doing? -spp ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: It would be nice to hear a 'this is what we're working on in the way of hardware support - then atleast whiners like me can say, hey, it'll be around soon, they're working on it now . A quick look at the x86 HCL (and how much it has been growing) would go a long way to answering those questions. Solaris/OpenSolaris - OpenSolaris as an official distribution hasn't been released yet; it'll be interesting to actually see if OpenSolaris turns into Solaris is, to all intents and purposes, Sun's distro of the OpenSolaris code. And we already have at least one release of that, Solaris 10 Update 1, with Update 2 imminent. (Granted, S10 FCS wasn't based on the OpenSOlaris code, beacuse at the time, OpenSolaris disn't exist outside of a small pilot program, of which I am proud to say I was a member.) the what Fedora does for RHEL; if we have a fully blown OpenSolaris 'community distro' then I think things will move forward, but if we for ever We already have a fully blown OpenSolaris community distro--several, in fact. ShilliX, Belenix, Nextenta, and MarTux come to mind. -- Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
Rich Teer wrote: On Wed, 31 May 2006, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Solaris/OpenSolaris - OpenSolaris "as an official distribution" hasn't been released yet; it'll be interesting to actually see if OpenSolaris turns into Solaris is, to all intents and purposes, Sun's distro of the OpenSolaris code. And we already have at least one release of that, Solaris 10 Update 1, with Update 2 imminent. (Granted, S10 FCS wasn't based on the OpenSOlaris code, beacuse at the time, OpenSolaris disn't exist outside of a small pilot program, of which I am proud to say I was a member.) Sorry to contradict, but Solaris *Express* is Sun's distro of the OpenSolaris code. Solaris 10 and its Updates are *not* direct distributions of OpenSolaris, but rather are essentially backports of selected OpenSolaris code. Regards, Glenn -- Glenn Weinberg Vice President, Operating Platforms Group Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, MS UMPK17-301 Menlo Park, CA 94025 US Phone x86207/+1 650 786 6207 Fax +1 650 786 7077 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [zfs-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Re: I wish Sun would open-source QFS... / was:Re: Re: Distributed File System for Solaris
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 06:19:16AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The requirement is not that inodes and data are separate; the requirement is a specific upperbound to disk transactions. The question therefor is not when will ZFS be able to separate inods and data; the question is when ZFS will meet the QoS criteria. And if it were a requirement surely ZFS/pools could be hacked on to support a notion of meta-data vdevs and dnodes/dnode-file/directory blocks could be allocated on meta-data vdevs. But I don't see it as a requirement either. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On Wed, 31 May 2006, Glenn Weinberg wrote: Sorry to contradict, but Solaris *Express* is Sun's distro of the OpenSolaris code. Solaris 10 and its Updates are *not* direct distributions of OpenSolaris, but rather are essentially backports of selected OpenSolaris code. You are correct, of course. Mea culpa. -- Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, OpenSolaris CAB member President, Rite Online Inc. Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638 URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glenn Weinberg wrote: We've tried. Multiple times. Our MDE (Market Development Engineering) team offered to do all the work. (Not that there is much. As you all know it's just a recompile.) The answer has always been no. I wouldn't be so quick to claim it is just a recompile. I lurked on the helix aliases for the port of RealPlayer from Solaris on SPARC to Solaris x86. It was way more than a recompile. Why ? Well lets just say there were lots of the #ifdefs of sun/sparc/solaris/linux were all mixed up. Sometimes when it said sun it was really sparc, sometimes when it said linux it was really x86 and places where it said solaris was really posix and the all sorts of ugly mixes of those. Just because something runs on Solaris on SPARC and Linux on x86 doesn't actually mean that a port to Solaris on x86 is that easy. Unfortunately this is sad but true news. Few programmers are able to structure #ifdefs in a way that is maintainable in case that they need to support many platforms. This is something where people need education. Even cdda2wav has many dark areas although it uses fine grained tests. And Heiko Eissfeldt is one of the better programmers A good programmer is able to write a portable program where you will not directly see that it has been written in a portable way, but these people are rare. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/73711 12000 PCs running Solaris soince 1993 are now migrating to Linux. It is a pitty to see that this important costomer got lost because of wrong information from the Linux camp. They wanted OpenSource kde and claimed that they need to move away from Solaris in order to get this. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
If I'm reading the articles correctly, when they made the decision two years ago the information was, unfortunately, valid. Regards, Glenn Joerg Schilling wrote: http://www.heise.de/newsticker/meldung/73711 12000 PCs running Solaris soince 1993 are now migrating to Linux. It is a pitty to see that this important costomer got lost because of wrong information from the Linux camp. They wanted OpenSource kde and claimed that they need to move away from Solaris in order to get this. Jrg -- Glenn Weinberg Vice President, Operating Platforms Group Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, MS UMPK17-301 Menlo Park, CA 94025 US Phone x86207/+1 650 786 6207 Fax +1 650 786 7077 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: [osol-announce] ON Mercurial changeset bundles
Stephen Lau wrote: Starting with yesterday's nightly delivery, we will be delivery Mercurial (Hg) changeset bundles [1] in addition to the raw source tarball. You should be able to unpack these bundles and have a Mercurial repository of ON dating back to OpenSolaris Launch (2006/06/14). To unpack the bundle: $ hg init hg-onnv $ cd hg-onnv $ hg unbundle -u path_to_bundle.hg Please note that the layout, structure, etc. of the Mercurial repository is subject to change, as these are being done in preparation for the eventual conversion of ON from Teamware/SCCS to Mercurial. So please don't expect or assume consistency :-) We will send out a flag-day notice for any major change along these lines so you have appropriate warning. Builds of ON within the Mercurial workspace should build cleanly, with the exception of checkpaths (which isn't run by the default opensolaris.sh environment file). If enabled, your nightly log file, in the section entitled 'Check lists of files', will contain a bunch of noise complaining about (obviously) missing SCCS objects. This can be worked around by disabling `checkpaths` from running, which you can do by setting CHECK_PATHS to something other than y in your nightly environment file. This is being tracked by CR 6432310. With thanks to James Carlson for pointing this out to me, this is actually a bug in validate_flg, and is tracked by 6428831 already. cheers, steve -- stephen lau // [EMAIL PROTECTED] | 650.786.0845 | http://whacked.net opensolaris // solaris kernel development ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pthread_cancel() does NOT work with several threads
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 07:43:01PM -0700, Luo Kai wrote:
See the following code:
test.c
#include sys/types.h
#include unistd.h
#include pthread.h
#include stdio.h
#include sys/resource.h
pthread_cond_t cond = PTHREAD_COND_INITIALIZER;
pthread_mutex_t mutex = PTHREAD_MUTEX_INITIALIZER;
void *func(void *a)
{
pthread_setcanceltype(PTHREAD_CANCEL_ASYNCHRONOUS, NULL);
No. Do not do this. Bad idea. You don't want asynchronous cancellation if
you are calling any non-async-cancel-safe function. pthread_mutex_lock()
is a non-async-cancel-safe function. So is pthread_cond_wait(). In fact,
about the only async-cancel-safe function is pthread_setcanceltype().
pthread_mutex_lock(mutex);
pthread_cond_wait(cond, mutex);
pthread_mutex_unlock(mutex);
return NULL;
}
You need to have a pthread_cleanup_push(pthread_mutex_unlock, mutex) before
the cond_wait:
pthread_mutex_lock(mutex);
pthread_cleanup_push(pthread_mutex_unlock, mutex)
pthread_cond_wait(cond, mutex);
pthread_cleanup_pop(1); /* unlock the mutex */
return (NULL);
}
int main()
{
int ii;
pthread_t tid[3];
pthread_setcanceltype(PTHREAD_CANCEL_ASYNCHRONOUS, NULL);
Again, you *really* don't want to do this.
Cheers,
- jonathan
--
Jonathan Adams, Solaris Kernel Development
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
Glenn Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I'm reading the articles correctly, when they made the decision two years ago the information was, unfortunately, valid. They did make the final decision last year. The process did start in autumn 2000 when the Linux Verband Deutschland did aproach the OFD Niedersachsen and did tell them that Sun will shut down Solaris x86 support. The final convincing work did start in autumn 2004. This is wy I did aproach Sun marketing at that time when I was in Menlo Park. From the information I have, the final decision must have been made recently. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
They did make the final decision last year. The process did start in autumn 2000 when the Linux Verband Deutschlanddid aproach the OFD Niedersachsen and did tell them that Sun will shut down Solaris x86 support. The final convincing work did start in autumn 2004.This is wy I did aproach Sun marketing at that time when I was in Menlo Park. That's really, and I mean REALLY dirty. What an absolute shame, especially with the cause being such disgusting actions on the part of LVD. :( From the information I have, the final decision must have been made recently. Yarr, let's loot and ransack LVD! In all seriousness, I hope now with larger community involvement we can spot FUD campaigns like this one before they become successful, and Sun can intervene. David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
David J. Orman wrote: They did make the final decision last year. The process did start in autumn 2000 when the Linux Verband Deutschland"did aproach the OFD Niedersachsen and did tell them that Sun will shut down Solaris x86 support. The final convincing work did start in autumn 2004.This is wy I did aproach Sun marketing at that time when I was in Menlo Park. That's really, and I mean REALLY dirty. What an absolute shame, especially with the cause being such disgusting actions on the part of LVD. :( We need to be fair here. Sun did "defer" Solaris for x86 in 2002. We didn't really get it fully back on track until Solaris 10 in 2005. So even in late 2004 all a customer had from us was statements of intent, not an actual product. From the information I have, the final decision must have been made recently. Yarr, let's loot and ransack LVD! In all seriousness, I hope now with larger community involvement we can spot FUD campaigns like this one before they become successful, and Sun can intervene. If someone tries something like this now, it would in fact be FUD and we could vigorously combat it. We couldn't do that prior to the release of Solaris 10, and to some extent even OpenSolaris. There is no question Sun made mistakes that we're still trying to recover from. Regards, Glenn -- Glenn Weinberg Vice President, Operating Platforms Group Sun Microsystems, Inc. 17 Network Circle, MS UMPK17-301 Menlo Park, CA 94025 US Phone x86207/+1 650 786 6207 Fax +1 650 786 7077 Email [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 5/31/06, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glenn Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I'm reading the articles correctly, when they made the decision two years ago the information was, unfortunately, valid. They did make the final decision last year. The process did start in autumn 2000 when the Linux Verband Deutschland did aproach the OFD Niedersachsen and did tell them that Sun will shut down Solaris x86 support. The final convincing work did start in autumn 2004. This is wy I did aproach Sun marketing at that time when I was in Menlo Park. From the information I have, the final decision must have been made recently. Noone from OFD Niedersachsen has contacted KDE Solaris to at least ask a generic question about whether or not KDE is supported on Solaris X86. --Stefan -- Stefan Teleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
We need to be fair here. Sun did defer Solaris for x86 in 2002. We didn't really get it fully back on track until Solaris 10 in 2005. So even in late 2004 all a customer had from us was statements of intent, not an actual product. Good point. I wasn't involved with Sun at all during this time period, so I didn't realize this was true. If someone tries something like this now, it would in fact be FUD and we could vigorously combat it. We couldn't do that prior to the release of Solaris 10, and to some extent even OpenSolaris. Makes sense. There is no question Sun made mistakes that we're still trying to recover from. Well, I'm glad at least the mistakes are realized and that the company is headed in the right direction now. I guess that's the first key to recovery at least in this sense. Thank you for the clarification, David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device Naming (a.k.a Devname)
Hi, You might want to take a look at JET, which resolves these kinds of issues. http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/content/jet/ *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Systems Engineer http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/ http://unixconsole.blogspot.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Lucy Lai [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Peter Tribble [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 10:46:44 PM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device Naming (a.k.a Devname) --- Peter Tribble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 20:55, Yonghong Lucy Lai wrote: I can't see any need to mess with physical names.) I agree with you about the information offered in the WWN itself, and I do not expect that information to go away from the system, either. Here is a real life example of the inconvenience without a generic root device name. In a sparc farm, a script is written for jumpstart 100 systems. It needs 100 copies of the jumpstart scripts because each system has it own WWN for the root device. However, only one copy is needed if root device has a generic name. I don't see how this changes. Currently, if there's only one device it's easy - just use rootdisk. That is not the case. Each host has a different rootdisk name because each one has a different WWN embedded in it. Each host needs a customized copy of the jumpstart script that contains the unique rootdisk name. So, there are 100 different copies of jumpstart scripts for 100 systems, even if there is only one disk on each system. If there's more than one posible device, how do you specify which one is the root device? Changing the names doesn't make it any easier, it just means you have to configure the physical- -to-logical mapping someplace else. Well, a system comes with a default rootdisk, which is suppposely known by the platform subsystem. In this case, the system can translate the generic rootdisk name to the corresponding physical device, with the help of the platform subsystem. That is where we see the possibility to automate the admin task. And the rootdisk won't be changed unless the admin liberally reconfigures it. How do we automate this step? We can't, and what's the point? lucy -- -Peter Tribble L.I.S., University of Hertfordshire - http://www.herts.ac.uk/ http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Switch to gdm?
Nicolas Linkert wrote: I have installed GNOME 2.14 and would like to switch from dtlogin to gdm. Sorry, I have found no instructions how to do this. The instructions I found did not work: svcadm enable svc:application/graphical-login/gdm:default (before login) svcadm disable svc:application/graphical-login:default (after login) You need to do it the other way around and you need to get the name of the cde one correct. I'd suggest that you probably want to do that while logged in on the console (use the command line login option from dtlogin menu). Command Line Login login: nicolas passwd: ** $ svcadm disable -s svc:/application/graphical-login/cde-login:default $ svcadm enable svc:/application/graphical-login/gdm:default This works: svcadm disable -s svc:/application/graphical-login/cde-login:default Then I did: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ svcs -a | grep gdm disabled 20:48:28 svc:/application/gdm2-login:default But this does not work: svcadm enable svc:/application/gdm2-login:default I get: /usr/bin/gdm failed with status 1 Strange, since gdm is located under /usr/sbin/. I copied gdm over to /usr/bin/ but it did not change the error message. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device
I agree that some consolidation and reorganization is required for the /dev tree. However, I do believe it's important to maintain compatibility. Many sysadmin's depend on knowing which device is on which pci bus, pci slot, or IB cage , etc. It would be nice if that trace-ability is not lost. Having generic names is nice, but having specific names cXtWWNdXsX is kinda handy when swapping a disk or moving a LUN. To illustrate this issue.. lets say.. - 6900 with multiple domains - Box is physically in another location - Multiple NIC's and HBA's for multipathing If I want to know which NIC will be ce0 for jumpstarting, this requires some foot work at the OBP. So ce0 could be /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],60/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the OBP, which translates to PCI slot 7 on IB6. This information will be reflected in /devices. Same situation with HBA's: c12 could be /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],60/SUNW,[EMAIL PROTECTED] in OBP, which translates to PCI slot 6 on IB6. Now multiply this by the number of NIC's and HBA's and you have a lot to troubleshoot when something goes wrong. The good part is that the information is very specific, so I track down a component if I have my sunsolve system handbook ready. This is both a blessing and a curse. It takes time to track down this kind of information. It would be nice to have a command to present this information clearly and correctly. Manually tracking it down can be a pain. The difficult part is appealing to everyone's tastes. Some people depend on very specific info to make decisions and to troubleshoot. Other people don't want to care about such details because they are on a PC. So reaching a balance between the two is critical. Are there any examples of how this project could change this situation? *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Systems Engineer http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/ http://unixconsole.blogspot.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Yonghong Lucy Lai [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 3:10:57 AM Subject: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device There are a lot more information on the Devname architecture that we have not discussed so far. BACKGROUND Solaris devices are represented in two name spaces: /dev and /devices. The /devices namespace represents the physical path to a hardware device, a pseudo device, or a bus nexus device. It reflects the kernel device tree and is managed by the devfs filesystem. The /dev namespace contains logical device names used by applications. The names are either symbolic links to the physical path names under /devices or, in rare cases, device special files created via the mknod(1M) command or the mknod(2) system call. Most of the /dev names are automatically generated by devfsadmd(1M) in response to physical device configuration events. These naming rules are delivered by driver developers through link generator modules for devfsadm and entries in /etc/devlink.tab. It is also possible for system administrators and applications to create device special files and symbolic links directly, bypassing the devfsadm framework. The global /dev namespace resides under the system root /dev directory. Some Solaris applications like ftpd create a chroot'ed environment and export a restricted subset of the system device names into its chroot'ed /dev directory. Solaris zones create virtualized Solaris instance and provide a subset of the system device names inside the virtualized /dev namespace. COMPONENTS delivered with Devname Project: The Devname project builds the foundation for a simplified Solaris device naming model. The project implements an in-memory file system that exports the /dev namespace. This approach brings the flexibilities needed in exporting a subset of the /dev namespaces, intercepting individual /dev name lookup request thus achieving /dev name resoltuion through optionally customized mechanisms. The Devname project delivers the following components: 1. The dev File System – This file system exports the /dev namespace, supports multiple file system instances, intercepts file system operations on /dev names and supports the existing Solaris /dev naming system. 2. Simplified Zones Device Support - The project removes zones dependency on devfsadm[d], and encapsulates the device special file details inside the file system. 3. Simplified /dev/pts Namespace Implementation - This is the feature that demonstrates the directory based device name resolution architecture to achieve better system observability in local pty devices, simpler implementation, and a more reliable pseudo-terminal subsystem. 4. Directory Based device Name Resolution – This is the infrastructure provided by Devname to support flexible
[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris
To a new Solaris user that comes from other OS, (s)he may find it bothersome not to find the device after a normal system reboot has performed. Then they will ask, what is the problem with Solaris? Are you telling us that you're trying to actually dumb Solaris down for some Joe User who doesn't rightly have a clue what UNIX is? We're talking about the same Solaris Operating Environment here, the one that powers huge networks and supercomputers? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: [osol-announce] ON Mercurial changeset bundles
On 5/31/06, Stephen Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Starting with yesterday's nightly delivery, we will be delivery Mercurial (Hg) changeset bundles [1] in addition to the raw source tarball. You should be able to unpack these bundles and have a Mercurial repository of ON dating back to OpenSolaris Launch (2006/06/14). To unpack the bundle: $ hg init hg-onnv $ cd hg-onnv $ hg unbundle -u path_to_bundle.hg The clonable/pullable repo is available at http://svn.genunix.org/hg/on -- Regards, Cyril ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device Naming (a.k.a Devname)
Here is a real life example of the inconvenience without a generic root device name. In a sparc farm, a script is written for jumpstart 100 systems. It needs 100 copies of the jumpstart scripts because each system has it own WWN for the root device. However, only one copy is needed if root device has a generic name. Did you know that by doing the /dev/root and /dev/rroot thing, you'll be copying SGI IRIX 6.5 verbatim? So if you're going to be going that route, can we just have the rest of the IRIX 6.5 brought over into Solaris as well? I still want `inst`, `swmgr` and `swpkg` from IRIX on Solaris... A biref here is that Devname is implementing a filesystem for the /dev namespace. It supports mounting a subset of the /dev namespace to a chroot'ed environment. The FTP device namespace can be such a instance. May I suggest that you use SGI IRIX for solving this one? Surely you guys at Sun have some IRIX systems? SGI solved this about 15 years ago with /dev and /hw. Please take a look at it and relieve yourself of a lot of grief. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Software for Solaris (was Re: AdobeAcrobat for Solari
Let's be even more realistic then -- those people should not be programming then, period. Those people could be students who may be writing their first program... Or scientists who cares about the result and not the process... At any rate, I woudn't blame them, instead I would greatly appreciate what they doing at their free time. You're kidding me. I'm sorry for the kid's bad code, but it's not very likely I'm going to be appreciative of fixing some clueless kid's mess because s/he's learning how to program wrongly. At that price, I might just as well go and write the specification, and implement the thing myself. a) it will be done properly b) there will be quality control c) there will be documentation Much better then fixing some kid's code, while s/he informs me via e-mail that s/he can't support Solaris because s/he only has Linux. The right thing to do here is to teach the kid how to do it properly, or steer him/her in the right direction. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Software for Solaris (was Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x
Maybe Sun should better advertize the fact that the Sun Studio Compilers are available for Linux also and produce better code than GCC. Given the fact that the Intel compiler is no longer available, it may be the right time to do it now. Agreed. Very good idea. We can only do so much evangelizing and mentoring by ourselves. Advertizing Sun Studio tools and Solaris as the main development platform, as THE platform one WOULD WANT to develop on needs to turn into a marketing campaign. Especially the Sun Studio part. Even many commercial SW companies have no clue that Sun Studio tools are now free-as-in-beer. I should know, the code whose company I'm now fixing is completely oblivious of this fact. One of their developers was in complete disbelief and refused to believe when we told him Sun compilers were free until a colleague of mine showed him the downloaded files. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Software for Solaris (was Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x
Studio 11 seems to implement enough GCC bugs to allow to compile most free software that is not just rubbish. The more important problems arise from the fact that there are many Makefiles that have hidden dependencies on GNUmake. I could even live with having to use GNU utilities like gmake if only the code itself would compile with Sun Studio compilers... using gmake is effectively a one time shot and does not affect the performance of the generated binary. Compilers on the other hand do. Not that I like using GNU tools, I hate it, but for a one time build I can live with it. Of course if the Makefiles weren't written for GNU make, one could use `dmake` to do parallel builds... that'd be nice. I could save some serious build time since my system has 32 CPUs. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Software for Solaris (was Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x
If SUN wishes to get the OSS world to start using Studio 11 as the compiler of choice for Linux, then SUN needs to mend ALOT of bridges with the OSS community - how about offering a version for FreeBSD, have double the participation? Actually Sun's been quite friendly to and supportive of the FreeBSD community, just look at all the effort Sun engineers have spent trying to help to get DTrace ported to FreeBSD. If that's any indicator, chances are high Sun engineers would also provide help on porting Sun Studio to *BSD if only someone from the BSD community would take on that task. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device Naming (a.k.a Devname)
I still want `inst`, `swmgr` and `swpkg` from IRIX on Solaris... Is this perhaps Godwin's law for opensolaris-discuss? (If a discussion on OpenSolaris lasts long enough, someone will mention package tools) Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device
So if you're going to be going that route, can we just have the rest of the IRIX 6.5 brought over into Solaris as well? I think I've mentioned before that SGI can probably be bought for slightly more than a song. There's a couple of technologies that might be worth the cost to Sun. -spp This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device
I think I've mentioned before that SGI can probably be bought for slightly more than a song. Ther e's a couple of technologies that might be worth the cost to Sun. Well, it's not slightly more than a song; there's the balance sheet to consider and that isn't looking rosy. (You'll have to buy all shares *and* pay off all debts) Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 12:49:26PM -0700, UNIX admin wrote: To a new Solaris user that comes from other OS, (s)he may find it bothersome not to find the device after a normal system reboot has performed. Then they will ask, what is the problem with Solaris? Are you telling us that you're trying to actually dumb Solaris down for some Joe User who doesn't rightly have a clue what UNIX is? We're talking about the same Solaris Operating Environment here, the one that powers huge networks and supercomputers? hu? i really don't see how you made the jump from eliminating the need for reboot -r to dumbing down solaris. uptime is good, remember? that said, you obviously have quite a clue about what unix is and we wouldn't want to make all your pains takingly acquired knowledge obsolete in one fell swoop, so you can rest easy knowing that we'll leave the reboot -r flag there for backwards compatability, and so you can reboot all your huge servers whenever you add a non-usb/cfgadm enabled device. ed ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device
To expand on Casper's post: http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=bicid=655720 I hope this makes it clear it's a *bit* more than slightly more than a song. - Original Message - From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 10:33 am Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device I think I've mentioned before that SGI can probably be bought for slightly more than a song. Ther e's a couple of technologies that might be worth the cost to Sun. Well, it's not slightly more than a song; there's the balance sheet to consider and that isn't looking rosy. (You'll have to buy all shares*and* pay off all debts) Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris
To a new Solaris user that comes from other OS, (s)he may find it bothersome not to find the device after a normal system reboot has performed. Then they will ask, what is the problem with Solaris? Are you telling us that you're trying to actually dumb Solaris down for some Joe User who doesn't rightly have a clue what UNIX is? We're talking about the same Solaris Operating Environment here, the one that powers huge networks and supercomputers? No. We are trying to make Solaris to be also appealing to *new* users (from Linux, for example), while keeping (or making better) the existing functionalities. That is what we have been discussing about the importance of the compatibility. lucy This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device Naming (a.k.a Devn
Hi, You might want to take a look at JET, which resolves these kinds of issues. http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/content/jet/ Thanks for the info. lucy -*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*Octa ve J. Orgeron Solaris Systems Engineer http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/ http://unixconsole.blogspot.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Lucy Lai [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Peter Tribble [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Saturday, May 27, 2006 10:46:44 PM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device Naming (a.k.a Devname) --- Peter Tribble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 2006-05-26 at 20:55, Yonghong Lucy Lai wrote: I can't see any need to mess with physical names.) I agree with you about the information offered in the WWN itself, and I do not expect that information to go away from the system, either. Here is a real life example of the inconvenience without a generic root device name. In a sparc farm, a script is written for jumpstart 100 systems. It needs 100 copies of the jumpstart scripts because each system has it own WWN for the root device. However, only one copy is needed if root device has a generic name. I don't see how this changes. Currently, if there's only one device it's easy - just use rootdisk. That is not the case. Each host has a different rootdisk name because each one has a different WWN embedded in it. Each host needs a customized copy of the jumpstart script that contains the unique rootdisk name. So, there are 100 different copies of jumpstart scripts for 100 systems, even if there is only one disk on each system. If there's more than one posible device, how do you specify which one is the root device? Changing the names doesn't make it any easier, it just means you have to configure the physical- -to-logical mapping someplace else. Well, a system comes with a default rootdisk, which is suppposely known by the platform subsystem. In this case, the system can translate the generic rootdisk name to the corresponding physical device, with the help of the platform subsystem. That is where we see the possibility to automate the admin task. And the rootdisk won't be changed unless the admin liberally reconfigures it. How do we automate this step? We can't, and what's the point? lucy -- -Peter Tribble L.I.S., University of Hertfordshire - http://www.herts.ac.uk/ http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ __ Do You Yahoo!? Tired of spam? Yahoo! Mail has the best spam protection around http://mail.yahoo.com ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device
On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 12:31:17PM -0700, Octave Orgeron wrote: I agree that some consolidation and reorganization is required for the /dev tree. However, I do believe it's important to maintain compatibility. Many sysadmin's depend on knowing which device is on which pci bus, pci slot, or IB cage , etc. It would be nice if that trace-ability is not lost. Having generic names is nice, but having specific names cXtWWNdXsX is kinda handy when swapping a disk or moving a LUN. To illustrate this issue.. lets say.. - 6900 with multiple domains - Box is physically in another location - Multiple NIC's and HBA's for multipathing If I want to know which NIC will be ce0 for jumpstarting, this requires some foot work at the OBP. So ce0 could be /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],60/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the OBP, which translates to PCI slot 7 on IB6. This information will be reflected in /devices. Same situation with HBA's: c12 could be /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],60/SUNW,[EMAIL PROTECTED] in OBP, which translates to PCI slot 6 on IB6. Now multiply this by the number of NIC's and HBA's and you have a lot to troubleshoot when something goes wrong. The good part is that the information is very specific, so I track down a component if I have my sunsolve system handbook ready. This is both a blessing and a curse. It takes time to track down this kind of information. It would be nice to have a command to present this information clearly and correctly. Manually tracking it down can be a pain. yeah, we could do better in this space. do prtdiag and/or cfgadm help you in these situations? ed ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device Naming (a.k.a Devname)
Here is a real life example of the inconvenience without a generic root device name. In a sparc farm, a script is written for jumpstart 100 systems. It needs 100 copies of the jumpstart scripts because each system has it own WWN for the root device. However, only one copy is needed if root device has a generic name. Did you know that by doing the /dev/root and /dev/rroot thing, you'll be copying SGI IRIX 6.5 verbatim? I do not think anyone mentioned /dev/root yet. If that is what IRIX6.5 was doing, there is no copy issue here. So if you're going to be going that route, can we just have the rest of the IRIX 6.5 brought over into Solaris as well? Inetersting thought. It is probably worth a new thread, though. I still want `inst`, `swmgr` and `swpkg` from IRIX on Solaris... A biref here is that Devname is implementing a filesystem for the /dev namespace. It supports mounting a subset of the /dev namespace to a chroot'ed environment. The FTP device namespace can be such a instance. May I suggest that you use SGI IRIX for solving this one? Surely you guys at Sun have some IRIX systems? SGI solved this about 15 years ago with /dev and /hw. Please take a look at it and relieve yourself of a lot of grief. I do not expect to find the Zones support in SGI IRIX system. Ftpconfig in the local zone is the problem we are trying to solve. lucy This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: [osol-announce] ON Mercurial changeset bundles
Cyril Plisko wrote: On 5/31/06, Stephen Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Starting with yesterday's nightly delivery, we will be delivery Mercurial (Hg) changeset bundles [1] in addition to the raw source tarball. You should be able to unpack these bundles and have a Mercurial repository of ON dating back to OpenSolaris Launch (2006/06/14). To unpack the bundle: $ hg init hg-onnv $ cd hg-onnv $ hg unbundle -u path_to_bundle.hg The clonable/pullable repo is available at http://svn.genunix.org/hg/on It's worth noting Steve's warning about the layout and structure perhaps changing. Especially the fact that should the repository need to be recreated, you'll end up having to recreate this repository from the new bundle, and recreate all trees cloned from it to continue updating from it. There's an issue currently with files that should not be present in the bundle, yet are, that to fix properly would involve such a re-recreation. -- Rich. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 11:49 am, Glenn Weinberg wrote: We need to be fair here. Sun did defer Solaris for x86 in 2002. We didn't really get it fully back on track until Solaris 10 in 2005. So even in late 2004 all a customer had from us was statements of intent, not an actual product. I wouldn't go that far, since Sun even continued shipping S9U2+ for x86, starting around November of 2002. IOW, I believe Sun missed the first S9 release due to the indefinite delay (which turned out to be definite anyway;-) but picked the ball back up with either S9U1 or S9U2 on x86. A product is a pretty good statement of intention, IMO, not to dispute you!wink There is no question Sun made mistakes that we're still trying to recover from. I think there's a track record forming that is becoming impressive though. Sometimes when you're eating steak all the time, a hot dog doesn't taste so bad. If they did in fact convert over to Linux, they might not be the first to realize how good that steak tasted to begin with, or how poor the hot dog starts tasting over time. OTOH, some folks make a stable diet on hot dogs...:-/ -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device
quote who=David J. Orman To expand on Casper's post: http://finance.google.com/finance?fstype=bicid=655720 I hope this makes it clear it's a *bit* more than slightly more than a song. I think I remember seeing that the shares were voided when they went into bankruptcy. Now, they're pretty much in liquidation mode, and can be picked up in pieces. There's a total negative equity of about $250m; not overly huge. -spp -- Stephen Potter [EMAIL PROTECTED] Director, LOPSA Executive Board http://www.lopsa.org I have come to the conclusion that one useless man is a disgrace, two useless men are a law firm, and three are a congress. - John Adams ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
Hi all On Wed, 31 May 2006, Stefan Teleman wrote: On 5/31/06, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glenn Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I'm reading the articles correctly, when they made the decision two years ago the information was, unfortunately, valid. They did make the final decision last year. The process did start in autumn 2000 when the Linux Verband Deutschland did aproach the OFD Niedersachsen and did tell them that Sun will shut down Solaris x86 support. The final convincing work did start in autumn 2004. This is wy I did aproach Sun marketing at that time when I was in Menlo Park. From the information I have, the final decision must have been made recently. Noone from OFD Niedersachsen has contacted KDE Solaris to at least ask a generic question about whether or not KDE is supported on Solaris X86. As other already said: a number of mistakes were made some years back which really confused the not too many Solaris x86 people out in the wild. Nevertheless we should complain about but focus on what's ahead. Before S10 and OpenSolaris came along Solaris simply wasn't ready for a mass market. Maybe for a customer as the mentioned one but it simply lacked a lot of things people just want to have. More on this further down. Another point mentioned in the refered article targets the support for the latest greatest hardware. In my opinion this is a valid and severe point for the OS. Customers like the fiscal authorities usually have to do tenders to get a large number of almost identical PC style hardware. I'm not talking servers but desktop clients. This means that they most likely for most of the time end up with big vendors such as Dell, IBM, Fujitsu Siemens, HP and so on. If you look closer up till recenty ALL of those business boxes came with the latest Intel chipset and CPU. 95% still do as it seems no one dares to put AMD in business PCs at a large scale. Working for the infrastructure department of a german university we also go through this once in a while. OS hardware support for this latest dies is always given for Windows as but looking at the UNIX side it gets much harder and Linux distros and developers to a pretty good job there. Even FreeBSD and the others are behind so no wonder that the small but very enthusiastic OpenSolaris community cannot really keep up coding for new chipsets and on-board devices. Even if they could I doubt such customers would go for it as Linux is just more hip and decision makers for sure don't get grilled for picking it. Maybe those people would even consider OpenSolaris not ready for business. Back to Sun itself: in my opinion they dropped the desktop many years ago during the dot-gone era. They forgot about their own roots and the university kids at the time didn't learn Solaris but Linux and those are the ones to drive decisions today. Actually I do not believe that Sun as a company really changed it's attitude. Sure they support AMD/Intel and have nice servers and some workstations based on. Sure Solaris is a great OS and in the meantime the compilers are superb. Also lots of old friends such as Oracle are loyal to x86 but too many of the smaller ISVs didn't really start yet supporting s10x86. They are either Linux addicts or are still scared the Sun folks may change their mind again. This leads to a situation where schools such as universities and others cannot provide solutions to their customers, students and staff, not because of the OS but because of a lack of supported applications. Sounds like a Catch 22 to me As long as this problem isn't solved or at least aggresivly addressed we will be in a similar postions as the BSDs and Apple used to be. The solution? I don't really know but have a new project/community for OpenSolaris every other day and already 3 (4?) distributions creates a lot of friction. Maybe we, the OpenSolaris supporters, should ask the people capable of kernel developing, to put more focus on the desktop by supporting new commodity hardware. The more poeple you meet running Solaris on their laptop/desktop the more others become aware of the choice they have. The choice named *BSD is around for a decade but they also just didn't manage or didn't want to make it 'sexy' enough. We should make sure to be ready when people recognize that choices are important and that stability and backwards compatibility are key. A hard way and tough job but times were never better then today. Well, sorry for a long comment on a tiny headline Thomas - GPG fingerprint: B1 EE D2 39 2C 82 26 DA A5 4D E0 50 35 75 9E ED ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device
Hi, prtdiag and cfgadm only help out so far. For example, prtdiag will tell you what's on a pci slot, but it does not tell you what instance that card matches up to. So you still have to look at /etc/path_to_inst or the links /dev to figure that out. Cfgadm is definitely handy, but again, it does not give a complete view. I can see different fc fabric controlers, but I don't know which cards those match up to, without looking in /dev/cfg. So when it comes to commands, it would be nice to have a end-to-end view of things. So an hba should be displayed as: c3 = fp1 = device path = IB6(slot 7) For networking.. bge0 = device path = IB5(slot5) And so on for all devices:) *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Systems Engineer http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/sysadmin/ http://unixconsole.blogspot.com [EMAIL PROTECTED] *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Edward Pilatowicz [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Octave Orgeron [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: Yonghong Lucy Lai [EMAIL PROTECTED]; opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Wednesday, May 31, 2006 1:46:12 PM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal - Simplified Solaris Device On Wed, May 31, 2006 at 12:31:17PM -0700, Octave Orgeron wrote: I agree that some consolidation and reorganization is required for the /dev tree. However, I do believe it's important to maintain compatibility. Many sysadmin's depend on knowing which device is on which pci bus, pci slot, or IB cage , etc. It would be nice if that trace-ability is not lost. Having generic names is nice, but having specific names cXtWWNdXsX is kinda handy when swapping a disk or moving a LUN. To illustrate this issue.. lets say.. - 6900 with multiple domains - Box is physically in another location - Multiple NIC's and HBA's for multipathing If I want to know which NIC will be ce0 for jumpstarting, this requires some foot work at the OBP. So ce0 could be /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],60/[EMAIL PROTECTED]/[EMAIL PROTECTED] in the OBP, which translates to PCI slot 7 on IB6. This information will be reflected in /devices. Same situation with HBA's: c12 could be /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/[EMAIL PROTECTED],60/SUNW,[EMAIL PROTECTED] in OBP, which translates to PCI slot 6 on IB6. Now multiply this by the number of NIC's and HBA's and you have a lot to troubleshoot when something goes wrong. The good part is that the information is very specific, so I track down a component if I have my sunsolve system handbook ready. This is both a blessing and a curse. It takes time to track down this kind of information. It would be nice to have a command to present this information clearly and correctly. Manually tracking it down can be a pain. yeah, we could do better in this space. do prtdiag and/or cfgadm help you in these situations? ed ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
I'm not talking servers but desktop clients. This means that they most likely for most of the time end up with big vendors such as Dell, IBM, Fujitsu Siemens, HP and so on. If you look closer up till recenty ALL of those business boxes came with the latest Intel chipset and CPU. 95% still do as it seems no one dares to put AMD in business PCs at a large scale. Working for the infrastructure department of a german university we also go through this once in a while. OS hardware support for this latest dies is always given for Windows as but looking at the UNIX side it gets much harder and Linux distros and developers to a pretty good job there. Even FreeBSD and the others are behind so no wonder that the small but very enthusiastic OpenSolaris community cannot really keep up coding for new chipsets and on-board devices. Even if they could I doubt such customers would go for it as Linux is just more hip and decision makers for sure don't get grilled for picking it. Maybe those people would even consider OpenSolaris not ready for business. Most of this paragraph was building up to a valid point, but the ending kind of ruined it for me :) You talk about business needs, but suddenly all that doesn't matter since Linux is hipper anyway. Is that what decision makers are paid for these days? And I've heard the you can't go wrong with IBM mantra, but it's the first time I hear of Linux as a safe bet. Not possessing any real data I can't disagree here, but it sounds a bit depressing. -Artem. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 6/1/06, Stefan Teleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 5/31/06, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glenn Weinberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If I'm reading the articles correctly, when they made the decision two years ago the information was, unfortunately, valid. They did make the final decision last year. The process did start in autumn 2000 when the Linux Verband Deutschland did aproach the OFD Niedersachsen and did tell them that Sun will shut down Solaris x86 support. The final convincing work did start in autumn 2004. This is wy I did aproach Sun marketing at that time when I was in Menlo Park. From the information I have, the final decision must have been made recently.Noone from OFD Niedersachsen has contacted KDE Solaris to at least ask a generic question about whether or not KDE is supported on SolarisX86.One assumes that when Sun is solely backing GNOME, that there is no 'officiallly supported' KDE for Solaris - all very nice to have a 'community working on it' but companies like the warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there are people they can ring up and abuse when things go wrong. Which brings up the other question - why on gods green earth did SUN go with GNOME? why not just buy out Trolltech, release Qt under CDDL?Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 6/1/06, Artem Kachitchkine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm not talking servers but desktop clients. This means that they most likely for most of the time end up with big vendors such as Dell, IBM, Fujitsu Siemens, HP and so on. If you look closer up till recenty ALL of those business boxes came with the latest Intel chipset and CPU. 95% still do as it seems no one dares to put AMD in business PCs at a large scale. Working for the infrastructure department of a german university we also go through this once in a while. OS hardware support for this latest dies is always given for Windows as but looking at the UNIX side it gets much harder and Linux distros and developers to a pretty good job there. Even FreeBSD and the others are behind so no wonder that the small but very enthusiastic OpenSolaris community cannot really keep up coding for new chipsets and on-board devices. Even if they could I doubt such customers would go for it as Linux is just more hip and decision makers for sure don't get grilled for picking it. Maybe those people would even consider OpenSolaris not ready for business. Most of this paragraph was building up to a valid point, but the ending kind ofruined it for me :) You talk about business needs, but suddenly all that doesn'tmatter since Linux is hipper anyway. Is that what decision makers are paid for these days? And I've heard the you can't go wrong with IBM mantra, but it'sthe first time I hear of Linux as a safe bet. Not possessing any real data Ican't disagree here, but it sounds a bit depressing. Linux is more a GET (good enough technology) - take one average free operating system - could be anything, FreeBSD would have been just as valid; market to the hilt with some cool ad, which gets the name Linux out there in the no-techy world, the start pushing middleware and overpriced services - like the crack seller offering the first hit, IBM will hype, suck and strap you into their web of 'support services'. The problem with Sun, they couldn't market their way out of a paper bag; when am I going to start seeing Solaris or Java advertisements on television? when am I going to open up New Zealand Management magazine, and see a big A4 advertisement promoting Solaris and Solaris Enterprise Software kit? The problem with Sun, they're a company run by engineers; the last company who did that, Digital, is no longer with us. Some times it actually pays to hire some hype merchants and have a marketing department that does actually more than crap 'mock ads', gifs pushed out by double click, and gimics of 'free server for 60 days'. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Lightweight ZFS NAS requirements?
On Wed, May 03, 2006 at 07:26:13AM -0700, Tom Smith wrote: Hi. I've been thinking about building a SOHO NAS project using ZFS as some others have suggested doing but I'm curious how lightweight I can make Solaris (from a processor, memory, and install disk space) perspective and still have decent performance for a home file server. If I took some time to strip out all the unneeded parts of the system, leaving just enough to run ZFS, a web console, Samba, and the basic kernel functions, what minimum requirements do you think would be needed? If you're really really abusive, I mean, agrresive in your pruning :-) you can get the bytes for running solaris down to about 100 MB on disk. (this consists of doing a core install, then pkgrm'ing stuff, and then beyond that, actually using rm -r. but since it's a fileserver, you're probably not going to be short on disk space) you can also get the in-memory footprint down to about 64megs of RAM. this should be way under your requirements. It should be trivial to get a cheap small machine that has a 1ghz cpu with 128megs RAM, and that should be more than plenty for your needs. btw: running a web console + samba tends to spike your needs, though. 128 megs RAM will probably be minimal. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Software for Solaris
On 6/1/06, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: The first thing Sun could do is this; get rid of Xsun - blam, firstWorking on it, but if we dropped it today, there'd be useless blackscreens on all our SPARC workstations and Sun Rays. Wouldn't be simply a matter of moving the software/drivers from XSun to Xorg, assuming there isn't any funky stuff that Xsun has which Xorg doesn't.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Software for Solaris
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: On 6/1/06, *Alan Coopersmith* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: The first thing Sun could do is this; get rid of Xsun - blam, first Working on it, but if we dropped it today, there'd be useless black screens on all our SPARC workstations and Sun Rays. Wouldn't be simply a matter of moving the software/drivers from XSun to Xorg, assuming there isn't any funky stuff that Xsun has which Xorg doesn't. The driver interfaces are very different. Porting them from Xsun to Xorg is an ongoing project which will take time. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: GCC Issues, was (Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
On 6/1/06, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Well, I started compiling things, all nice, started to compile Xorg 7.1 and it failed to compile;Strange - it's always compiled for me with Studio compilers. I testwith gcc occasionally, but there's enough other people testing that works on Linux that I don't do it that often. We build Xorg multiple times aday with Studio compilers and keep a CVS HEAD tree updated to make surethat builds as well.I built it off the cvsweb tree, damn, I should have remembered which module it stuffed up in, anyway, it stopped compiling, and basically I was at the end of my teather - unfortunately I have very limited patience when things like that occur; if it doesn't work, I simply give up - lazy? probably, but I just don't have the time to spend hours tracking down the problem, and correcting them. I was hopeing to bring the Xorg kicking and screaming into 2006, but it seems to be more painful that I expected. I'm probably better to wait till the next version of Solaris is released.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Software for Solaris
On 6/1/06, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: On 6/1/06, *Alan Coopersmith* [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: The first thing Sun could do is this; get rid of Xsun - blam, first Working on it, but if we dropped it today, there'd be useless black screens on all our SPARC workstations and Sun Rays. Wouldn't be simply a matter of moving the software/drivers from XSun to Xorg, assuming there isn't any funky stuff that Xsun has which Xorg doesn't. The driver interfaces are very different. Porting them from Xsun to Xorg isan ongoing project which will take time.Oh well, any word on when Xorg will be updated in Solaris x86? Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: GCC Issues, was (Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: I built it off the cvsweb tree, damn, I should have remembered which module it stuffed up in, anyway, it stopped compiling, and basically I was at the end of my teather - unfortunately I have very limited patience when things like that occur; if it doesn't work, I simply give up - lazy? probably, but I just don't have the time to spend hours tracking down the problem, and correcting them. Then you picked the wrong OS to go to, since Xorg 7.1 is at least tested and working on Solaris. Support for BSD releases is still being worked on by the BSD X maintainers, so you'll have a much harder time building it on FreeBSD than on Solaris. (With the build system revamp in Xorg 7.0, only Solaris Linux were initially supported, since Sun, Red Hat, SuSE, Ubuntu Gentoo provided the bulk of the development effort.) I was hopeing to bring the Xorg kicking and screaming into 2006, but it seems to be more painful that I expected. I'm probably better to wait till the next version of Solaris is released. We already ship 6.9.0 which was released at the end of December, and is the same source code as 7.0, only with the old build system still - the change between that and 7.1 is not that major. What are you looking for that you don't already have? -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Software for Solaris
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Oh well, any word on when Xorg will be updated in Solaris x86? To 7.1? It's been out a week so far - give us some time to test the new release. We should have it in Solaris Express/Nevada in a couple of months. I doubt most users will notice any real difference between it and the current Xorg 6.9 we ship now - except that if we released it today, we'd break the nvidia binary drivers, which aren't compatible with 7.1 yet. -- -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: GCC Issues, was (Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
On 6/1/06, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: I built it off the cvsweb tree, damn, I should have remembered which module it stuffed up in, anyway, it stopped compiling, and basically I was at the end of my teather - unfortunately I have very limited patience when things like that occur; if it doesn't work, I simply give up - lazy? probably, but I just don't have the time to spend hours tracking down the problem, and correcting them.Then you picked the wrong OS to go to, since Xorg 7.1 is at least testedand working on Solaris. Support for BSD releases is still being workedon by the BSD X maintainers, so you'll have a much harder time building iton FreeBSD than on Solaris. (With the build system revamp in Xorg 7.0,only Solaris Linux were initially supported, since Sun, Red Hat, SuSE,Ubuntu Gentoo provided the bulk of the development effort.)Xorg 6.9 performs nicely on my FreeBSD box, besides the DRI issue (which hopefully get corrected), I expect a delay due to the nature of this new, more modular approach. I was hopeing to bring the Xorg kicking and screaming into 2006, but it seems to be more painful that I expected. I'm probably better to wait till the next version of Solaris is released.We already ship 6.9.0 which was released at the end of December, and is thesame source code as 7.0, only with the old build system still - the changebetween that and 7.1 is not that major. What are you looking for that youdon't already have?As a desktop, the lag is terrible, I'm using a Radeon X300/550 sitting on a PCIe; all lovely-jubbly - running FreeBSD, my desktop with KDE is 'teh snappy' (to coin a Mac phrase), but when it comes to using the default Xorg with Solaris 10 01/06 (which is 6.8.2), coupled with the drivers provided, there is terrible lag, especially when it comes to responsiveness under a heavy load.The problem is made worse when compiling things on Solaris - the paths aren't setup, things break when compiling, its a nightmare just trying to get KDE working - which is the original reason why I was compiling Xorg 7.1 on Solaris 10; to have a nice snappy server, KDE desktop.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Software for Solaris
On 6/1/06, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Oh well, any word on when Xorg will be updated in Solaris x86?To 7.1? It's been out a week so far - give us some time to test the newrelease. We should have it in Solaris Express/Nevada in a couple of months. I doubt most users will notice any real difference between it and the currentXorg 6.9 we ship now - except that if we released it today, we'd break thenvidia binary drivers, which aren't compatible with 7.1 yet.Cool.Btw, how stable is Solaris Express? am I better off heading to Solaris Express if one is simply a desktop user? I'm woundering since Solaris Express has many more features and improvements over the more conservative Solaris release, would I be better off using Solaris Express? Oh, and hopefully that AMD purchasing ATI rumour is true, then we might see a little more Solaris love shown in respects to providing quality drivers for Solaris/Linux/FreeBSD/what have you.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On 5/31/06, gheet [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Well, lets assume we go free software and free love - someone has to create this software - and with 5000 employees given the sack at Sun, wouldn't of it been bettter to direct those 5000 (lets assume 1,000 were programmers) or so to put together a decent Adobe Acrobat replacement?To me evince is decent enough PDF reader :). Even better it is goingto be in SNV B41 as the default PDF viewer. If it can view your PDF document, send us the samples, log bugs, we treasure such contributionsmore.Unfortunately not all documents display things properly, my brothers engineering PDF he downloaded failed to display on either KPDF or MacOS X preview, hence, Adobe Acrobat was required. I'm sure comprehensive PDF support is possible, but the issue is whether said companies are willing to invest time and money into a product that'll give them no direct profit.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
Artem Kachitchkine wrote: I'm not talking servers but desktop clients. This means that they most likely for most of the time end up with big vendors such as Dell, IBM, Fujitsu Siemens, HP and so on. If you look closer up till recenty ALL of those business boxes came with the latest Intel chipset and CPU. 95% still do as it seems no one dares to put AMD in business PCs at a large scale. Working for the infrastructure department of a german university we also go through this once in a while. OS hardware support for this latest dies is always given for Windows as but looking at the UNIX side it gets much harder and Linux distros and developers to a pretty good job there. Even FreeBSD and the others are behind so no wonder that the small but very enthusiastic OpenSolaris community cannot really keep up coding for new chipsets and on-board devices. Even if they could I doubt such customers would go for it as Linux is just more hip and decision makers for sure don't get grilled for picking it. Maybe those people would even consider OpenSolaris not ready for business. Most of this paragraph was building up to a valid point, but the ending kind of ruined it for me :) You talk about business needs, but suddenly all that doesn't matter since Linux is hipper anyway. Is that what decision makers are paid for these days? And I've heard the you can't go wrong with IBM mantra, but it's the first time I hear of Linux as a safe bet. Not possessing any real data I can't disagree here, but it sounds a bit depressing. While I agree this is true today, I believe Solaris will win in the long run. What it has now, that Linux doesn't have, is a stable ABI. More commercial software will be ported due to this fact. It appears in a reasonable amount of time Solaris will have most of the gnu software running. Paul ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Software for Solaris (was Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x
On 6/1/06, a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: If SUN wishes to get the OSS world to start using Studio 11 as the compilerof choice for Linux, then SUN needs to mend ALOT of bridges with the OSScommunity - how about offering a version for FreeBSD, have double the participation?Actually Sun's been quite friendly to and supportive of the FreeBSDcommunity, just look at all the effort Sun engineers have spent trying tohelp to get DTrace ported to FreeBSD. But most of the desktop applications are being developed by those who are running Linux - they're whom they also must win over. If that's any indicator, chances are high Sun engineers would also providehelp on porting Sun Studio to *BSD if only someone from the BSD communitywould take on that task.Sounds like a good plan - if ports can be compiled using both GCC and Studio for FreeBSD, then you'd start seeing those patches used to making compiling with Studio 11, eventually find their way back up stream to their original maintainers. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Software for Solaris (was Re: AdobeAcrobat for Solari
On 6/1/06, a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Let's be even more realistic then -- those people should not beprogramming then, period.Those people could be students who may be writing their first program...Or scientists who cares about the result and not the process... At any rate, I woudn't blame them, instead I would greatly appreciatewhat they doing at their free time.You're kidding me.I'm sorry for the kid's bad code, but it's not very likely I'm going to be appreciative of fixing some clueless kid's mess because s/he's learning howto program wrongly. At that price, I might just as well go and write thespecification, and implement the thing myself.a) it will be done properly b) there will be quality controlc) there will be documentationMuch better then fixing some kid's code, while s/he informs me via e-mailthat s/he can't support Solaris because s/he only has Linux. The right thing to do here is to teach the kid how to do it properly, orsteer him/her in the right direction.I agree - when I was at polytech learning how to programme; the number of times I was sent back projects because they were of an 'unacceptable standard' in regards to messy code, incorrect indentation etc. etc. I hated it, but in the end, it served me well, and provided a good platform for future learning. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: I wish Sun would open-source QFS... /was:Re: Re: Distributed File System for Solaris
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: UNIX admin wrote: There's still an opening in the shared filesystem space (multi-reader and multi-writer). Fix QFS, or extend ZFS? That one's a no-brainer, innit? Extend ZFS and plough on. Uhm... I think this is not that easy. Based on IRC feedback I think it may be difficult to implement the intended features, e.g. storing inodes and data on sepeate disks. We had several projects in the past where this was the only way to gurantee good performace for realtime data collection and processing and due lack of such a feature in ZFS we still need QFS... I'm assuming this means you've measured the performance and found ZFS wanting? No, I didn not test ZFS yet, I only discussed the matter on IRC yet. But based on the original problems (see below) I do not think that ZFS can deliver something (without the inode+data seperation) what neither IBM nor QFS without inode+data split could not deliver a few years ago (even when backed with a giant RAID+caches (which caused more trouble than expected, see below, too)). I don't get it; zfs is a copy-on-write filesystem, so there should be no hotspotting of disks and, theoretically, write performance could be maxed out. What about read performace ? And interactive users who are MAD and run their stuff during data capture ? The requirement is not that inodes and data are separate; the requirement is a specific upperbound to disk transactions. The question therefor is not when will ZFS be able to separate inods and data; the question is when ZFS will meet the QoS criteria. Uhm... that's the point where you are IMO slightly wrong. The exact requirement is that inodes and data need to be seperated. In this specific case (and the setup was copied several times so Sun made a considerable amount of money with it :-) ) the inode data+log were put on a seperate solid-state disks on seperate SCSI controllers (which have nearly zero seek time). The problem was that a high amount of inode activity could starve the data recoding and playback, something which was inacceptable since running the matching experiment just costs around =4Euro/Minute. Similar proposed setups provided by IBM failed (even with giant RAID caches (which mainly were able to flat the problems out, but sometimes suffered from second-long hiccups where read and writes were stalled)) to deliver the requested performance (much data and much inode traffic and tons of scripts and (to make it worse and even more unpredictable) interactive users). The only working solution in this case was to move inodes+log to the seperate solid-state disks with it's own path (e.g. SCSI controller) for these data, freeing the data RAID from such operations. The only alternative was to move everything to solid-state disks - but that was considered to be far to expensive (or better: we already wasted too much money elsewhere... ;-( ). Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 06:38 pm, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: One assumes that when Sun is solely backing GNOME, that there is no 'officiallly supported' KDE for Solaris - all very nice to have a 'community working on it' but companies like the warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there are people they can ring up and abuse when things go wrong. I don't get it. How would someone on Linux have a real company support KDE? Presumably the company is question will be running on Linux, using KDE. Who will they ring up? Which brings up the other question - why on gods green earth did SUN go with GNOME? why not just buy out Trolltech, release Qt under CDDL? Sun offers you the ability to replace your desktop with anything you like. If you don't like GNOME, use another, such as KDE. That's what I do. I can't answer why Sun doesn't buy out Trolltech, because I don't know. I see no reason they should though. Why does that matter to you? -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On Sunday 28 May 2006 06:53 am, Joerg Schilling wrote: A company that does not create new versions of their software in more than 6 years _is_ dead. The thing is that Adobe does create new versions of their software in less time than you state, just that they don't do it for Solaris on x86. Adobe is far from dead, and pretending as if they are and putting our head in the sand is not going to solve the problem, unfortunately. -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On Sunday 28 May 2006 09:08 am, Rich Teer wrote: On Sun, 28 May 2006, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Cheers. (from the patio at my parent's house using VPN over wifi;-) Which is nice, but the fact is, thats server software - I'm refering to workstation software. Exactly how is wifi server software? Rich, Simple. It's server software, because the OS it's running on is a server capable OS, so anything running on it therefore must be server software.wink I want to see Solaris improve, but at the same time, its a painful experience using it as a desktop. Speak for yourself. I'm very comfortable using Solaris as my desktop. I agree, and was pointing out how it is more of a desktop today than it ever has been. I was in a conversation with another Sun engineer not long ago, and pondering what we could do better. Sun has the software, Sun has the hardware. All they have to do is learn how to market it.;-) -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Lightweight ZFS NAS requirements?
Philip Brown wrote: you can also get the in-memory footprint down to about 64megs of RAM. this should be way under your requirements. It should be trivial to get a cheap small machine that has a 1ghz cpu with 128megs RAM, and that should be more than plenty for your needs. Given the cost of RAM, I don't think attempting to run ZFS in minimal memory makes sense. Stick 1 GB of RAM in the machine and be done w/ it. - Bart -- Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://blogs.sun.com/barts ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Using lofs to overlay single files (like /lib/libc.so.1) ...
Hi! Is there a way to overlay single files using lofs like /lib/libc.so.1 is a lofs-mount to a hardware-optimizsed version version ? I tried the same using mount but it refuses to operate on single files... ;-( How does the boot process get this working ? Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED] \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] GCC 4.1.1 on OpenSolaris
On Sunday 28 May 2006 07:58 pm, James Carlson wrote: Would there be an adventage of removing gcc from /usr/sfw and replacing it with the Sun Studio compilers? (and thus moving gcc to the companion CD) Note that this question is really a Solaris question, and not an Open Solaris question. Open Solaris doesn't have a companion CD. Gcc and Sun Studio are sufficiently different that many folks need both. I missed Bob's comments, but find that odd. We finally get gcc integrated into Solaris and now folks are asking if we should move it out? What's wrong with this picture? I agree we need both, and I hope at some point we have both shipping on the distribution. Note also that these issues are really Solaris issues, and not Open Solaris. Other distributions can certainly deliver whatever version of gcc they see fit at any time. Agreed, at this point those are all packages that are added on when Sun builds their distribution, in the same way that Nexenta does for instance. -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: GCC Issues, was (Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
On May 31, 2006, at 4:14 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Xorg 6.9 performs nicely on my FreeBSD box, besides the DRI issue (which hopefully get corrected), I expect a delay due to the nature of this new, more modular approach. Same for me. We already ship 6.9.0 which was released at the end of December, and is the same source code as 7.0, only with the old build system still - the change between that and 7.1 is not that major. What are you looking for that you don't already have? As a desktop, the lag is terrible, I'm using a Radeon X300/550 sitting on a PCIe; all lovely-jubbly - running FreeBSD, my desktop with KDE is 'teh snappy' (to coin a Mac phrase), but when it comes to using the default Xorg with Solaris 10 01/06 (which is 6.8.2), coupled with the drivers provided, there is terrible lag, especially when it comes to responsiveness under a heavy load. Unfortunately, I absolutely have to agree here. With a dualcore cpu, multiple gigs of ram, and a 7900GT (which Nvidia assured me was supported with their binary driver), Solaris was *unusable* for me as a desktop due to this lag being described. It's almost like a stuttering. I saw it on network activity and hd activity *i think*. It was so terrible, I didn't even bother trying to diagnose it. I'm willing to give it another shot if somebody wants to help me figure out what the issue is. It's occured on lots of different hardware for me though, everything from old athlon xp systems to this current beast. All with Nvidia video cards, all using the binary nvidia driver. Oh, and intel 1000g ethernet cards. It's the *only* thing keeping me from deploying Solaris on my desktop as my primary development/administration platform. Help me! The problem is made worse when compiling things on Solaris - the paths aren't setup, things break when compiling, its a nightmare just trying to get KDE working - which is the original reason why I was compiling Xorg 7.1 on Solaris 10; to have a nice snappy server, KDE desktop. The paths are something already acknowledged, I brought that up a week back or so. It's really not hard to fix, it's just a 30 second PITA when you first install. If you were trying to install/get studio 11 working in a full root zone, I could understand your frustration (you have to manually link a java directory) but even then it's not that bad, again a 30 second fix. It sounds like to me you just don't have the patience to learn a different OS, and you expect Solaris to be as user-friendly as the current crop of desktop OSs. It's not, nobody is going to make-believe it is, either. It's getting there though, just perhaps not quickly enough for your tastes. Enjoy FreeBSD. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 6/1/06, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wednesday 31 May 2006 06:38 pm, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: One assumes that when Sun is solely backing GNOME, that there is no 'officiallly supported' KDE for Solaris - all very nice to have a 'community working on it' but companies like the warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there are people they can ring up and abuse when things go wrong.I don't get it. How would someone on Linux have a real company support KDE?Presumably the company is question will be running on Linux, using KDE. Who will they ring up?RHEL ships with GNOME and KDE - one assumes that Red Hat supports both, in way of technical support, and depending on the level of support, provide fixes for bugs and security issues as well. Which brings up the other question - why on gods green earth did SUN go with GNOME? why not just buy out Trolltech, release Qt under CDDL? Sun offers you the ability to replace your desktop with anything you like. Ifyou don't like GNOME, use another, such as KDE. That's what I do.What I mean is you purchase a copy of Solaris x86, KDE is sitting right there, and you can ring up and get technical support ranging from 'how do I setup this printer to this is a bug, fix it. I can't answer why Sun doesn't buy out Trolltech, because I don't know. I see no reason they should though. Why does that matter to you?Because KDE is a wonderfully integrated desktop with great software such as Kopete, Amarok, KOffice etc. etc. Need I say, its the eXPerience of KDE, the fact that everything works nicely together. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On May 31, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: One assumes that when Sun is solely backing GNOME, that there is no 'officiallly supported' KDE for Solaris - all very nice to have a 'community working on it' but companies like the warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there are people they can ring up and abuse when things go wrong. Sun has the resources it has, and they are allocated how they are. With all of the issues you have stated you encountered with Solaris as a desktop OS, don't you think they should be focusing on getting *one* thing working before spreading their limited resources thin? Yikes, you want the world, and you want it NOW! Which brings up the other question - why on gods green earth did SUN go with GNOME? why not just buy out Trolltech, release Qt under CDDL? Is your solution to everything Sun buying out/paying off *insert random company here with questionable value to Sun*? David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On 6/1/06, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sunday 28 May 2006 09:08 am, Rich Teer wrote: On Sun, 28 May 2006, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Cheers. (from the patio at my parent's house using VPN over wifi;-) Which is nice, but the fact is, thats server software - I'm refering to workstation software. Exactly how is wifi server software?Rich,Simple. It's server software, because the OS it's running on is a servercapable OS, so anything running on it therefore must be server software.winkI was referring to the list of software he spealled off, which included Oracle - is Oracle a desktop application? I want to see Solaris improve, but at the same time, its a painful experience using it as a desktop. Speak for yourself.I'm very comfortable using Solaris as my desktop.I agree, and was pointing out how it is more of a desktop today than it ever has been. I was in a conversation with another Sun engineer not long ago, andpondering what we could do better. Sun has the software, Sun has thehardware. All they have to do is learn how to market it.;-) Comparing Solaris to Solaris is easy, start comparing it to the setup I have here; FreeBSD + KDE 3.5.2 + Amarok - I can play my music, sync my iPod, surf the internet, compile application after application without asingle hickup, KOffice, and office suite that doesn't take several ice ages to load, and most importantly, its teh snappy under a load - which Solaris seems to fail to accomplish - have something compiling on Solaris, and the whole user interface goes gooey and slow. Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 6/1/06, David J. Orman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 31, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: One assumes that when Sun is solely backing GNOME, that there is no 'officiallly supported' KDE for Solaris - all very nice to have a 'community working on it' but companies like the warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there are people they can ring up and abuse when things go wrong.Sun has the resources it has, and they are allocated how they are.With all of the issues you have stated you encountered with Solaris as a desktop OS, don't you think they should be focusing on getting*one* thing working before spreading their limited resources thin?Yikes, you want the world, and you want it NOW!So, what is it? is Solaris a desktop or a server operating system? come on, admit it, you're just burning to say, Matty, its a server OS! Which brings up the other question - why on gods green earth did SUN go with GNOME? why not just buy out Trolltech, release Qt under CDDL?Is your solution to everything Sun buying out/paying off *insertrandom company here with questionable value to Sun*?Lets see; on one had you have a bag of half baked rubbish, collated together, and called GNOME every 6 months OR you have on the other hand, a desktop where all the applications have been developed to work together in an integrated fashioned, called KDE. Sun has limited resources, is it wise to invest so much time and money into a desktop (GNOME) that requires so much TLC when the better option would have been to choose KDE which is already 'there' interms of desktop usability, integration, well written documentation, good GUI based development tools etc. etc. But hey, you keep drinking the GNOME koolaid, one day GNOME just might actually achieve something besides being a 'me too' desktop.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
Trolltech Hey, that's not a bad name ;) -Artem. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: GCC Issues, was (Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
On 6/1/06, David J. Orman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 31, 2006, at 4:14 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Xorg 6.9 performs nicely on my FreeBSD box, besides the DRI issue (which hopefully get corrected), I expect a delay due to the nature of this new, more modular approach.Same for me. We already ship 6.9.0 which was released at the end of December, and is the same source code as 7.0, only with the old build system still - the change between that and 7.1 is not that major. What are you looking for that you don't already have? As a desktop, the lag is terrible, I'm using a Radeon X300/550 sitting on a PCIe; all lovely-jubbly - running FreeBSD, my desktop with KDE is 'teh snappy' (to coin a Mac phrase), but when it comes to using the default Xorg with Solaris 10 01/06 (which is 6.8.2 ), coupled with the drivers provided, there is terrible lag, especially when it comes to responsiveness under a heavy load.Unfortunately, I absolutely have to agree here. With a dualcore cpu, multiple gigs of ram, and a 7900GT (which Nvidia assured me wassupported with their binary driver), Solaris was *unusable* for me asa desktop due to this lag being described. It's almost like astuttering. I saw it on network activity and hd activity *i think*. It was so terrible, I didn't even bother trying to diagnose it. I'mwilling to give it another shot if somebody wants to help me figureout what the issue is. It's occured on lots of different hardware forme though, everything from old athlon xp systems to this current beast. All with Nvidia video cards, all using the binary nvidiadriver. Oh, and intel 1000g ethernet cards. It's the *only* thingkeeping me from deploying Solaris on my desktop as my primarydevelopment/administration platform. Help me! The funny part, when running CDE; there doesn't seem to be that issue to the same extent as it is with GNOME running. I thought that maybe upgrading to Xorg 7.1 would correct the issue, but it seems to be more to do with how Solaris schedules its tasks. The problem is made worse when compiling things on Solaris - the paths aren't setup, things break when compiling, its a nightmare just trying to get KDE working - which is the original reason why I was compiling Xorg 7.1 on Solaris 10; to have a nice snappy server, KDE desktop.The paths are something already acknowledged, I brought that up a week back or so. It's really not hard to fix, it's just a 30 secondPITA when you first install. If you were trying to install/get studio11 working in a full root zone, I could understand your frustration(you have to manually link a java directory) but even then it's not that bad, again a 30 second fix. It sounds like to me you just don'thave the patience to learn a different OS, and you expect Solaris tobe as user-friendly as the current crop of desktop OSs. It's not,nobody is going to make-believe it is, either. It's getting there though, just perhaps not quickly enough for your tastes. Enjoy FreeBSD.Its even worse; I tried downloading and installing the Studio 11 patches using the Solaris update tool, like a good boy - well, the installation failed; I cruised over to /var/sadm/spool and found that the downloaded files were being added, but failed because the individual who wrote the Solaris Update tool, failed to include the -G to allow a global installation of the patch; and hence, I had to manually add the patches; something that shouldn't happen had there been some testing in that area. As for the paths; why aren't they setup correctly in root? if one tries to compile something in user, then drop down into root to go make install, why aren't all the necessary directories setup by default? I can handle having to install and use GCC; thats all good, but when paths aren't setup correctly; it is pretty painful. As for FreeBSD; I might give Solaris Express (the next build) a try; I don't want bleeding edge, but I would like to be able to go, you know, I really like that application; I'll download it, and compile it and it actually compiles without needing to jump through 100 flaming hoops. I'd be quite happy to make packages, upload them etc. etc. if it were made alot easier to compile software for Solaris, but due to the above issues, I can't.As FreeBSD right now, the only thing I dislike is the slow C++ compiling, thanks to GCC, then again, I play Mr Conservative using -Os -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe, which, although not heavily optimised to the hilt, still provides a pretty damn good desktop experience. Xorg + KDE 3.5.2 + Amarok + Koffice = great desktop.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On May 31, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: So, what is it? is Solaris a desktop or a server operating system? come on, admit it, you're just burning to say, Matty, its a server OS! Don't make the mistake again of putting words in my mouth. Solaris is both, and it is improving quite nicely in both areas. I'd say the desktop part is developer oriented right now, or administrator oriented, not normal people oriented. This is improving however. The server part is no different, however. Most linux distros are easier to administrate for somebody who hasn't spent time in UNIX before. That doesn't make them technically better, but they are (generally) more usable from a newbie's perspective. Again, Solaris (OSOL) is improving in this area. So, both. Don't attempt a career as a psychologist. Lets see; on one had you have a bag of half baked rubbish, collated together, and called GNOME every 6 months OR you have on the other hand, a desktop where all the applications have been developed to work together in an integrated fashioned, called KDE. That is your opinion. You are entitled to it, and you are of course welcome to express it. I would, however, suggest you express it with civility, something you seem to have not learned yet. Sun has limited resources, is it wise to invest so much time and money into a desktop (GNOME) that requires so much TLC when the better option would have been to choose KDE which is already 'there' interms of desktop usability, integration, well written documentation, good GUI based development tools etc. etc. Funny, Ubuntu doesn't seem to be having a problem being usable. Last I checked, Ubuntu was Gnome. I believe RH's default is Gnome 2.8, and the large majority of people using RH use Gnome. Between those two distros, you've got a heck of a lot of gnome in the desktop- unix space. KDE has a place too (Suse), but it's quite obvious Gnome isn't the pile of garbage you allude to. But hey, you keep drinking the GNOME koolaid, one day GNOME just might actually achieve something besides being a 'me too' desktop. What is that supposed to mean? Sorry, I'm not caught up with the pre- teen lingo. As for the second part, I think Gnome has already done that, seeing as it's one of the most widely deployed desktop environment in the unix space. David PS - I personally prefer KDE myself, that doesn't mean I'm going to run around bashing projects WITH NO BASIS like you are. PLEASE support your statements from now on, better yet - don't make them. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 6/1/06, Artem Kachitchkine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: TrolltechHey, that's not a bad name ;)Well, it wasn't started by me, my company would have been, Bitter and Twisted Technology Limited.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: GCC Issues, was (Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86)
On May 31, 2006, at 6:03 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: The funny part, when running CDE; there doesn't seem to be that issue to the same extent as it is with GNOME running. I thought that maybe upgrading to Xorg 7.1 would correct the issue, but it seems to be more to do with how Solaris schedules its tasks. I believe it's more related to the relatively light requirements of CDE on the gfx infrastructure vs. Gnome/KDE. It is quite possibly the lack of DRI (my understanding... maybe it's there now..) Its even worse; I tried downloading and installing the Studio 11 patches using the Solaris update tool, like a good boy - well, the installation failed; I cruised over to /var/sadm/spool and found that the downloaded files were being added, but failed because the individual who wrote the Solaris Update tool, failed to include the -G to allow a global installation of the patch; and hence, I had to manually add the patches; something that shouldn't happen had there been some testing in that area. I'm sure it's tested, but as with all things, there are always flaws. Instead of flaming, post your troubles and ask for help, and it'll get noticed and you'll get assisted. Outright flaming every time you run into an issue is just irritating everyone. As for the paths; why aren't they setup correctly in root? if one tries to compile something in user, then drop down into root to go make install, why aren't all the necessary directories setup by default? I can handle having to install and use GCC; thats all good, but when paths aren't setup correctly; it is pretty painful. Again, this was already discussed, I brought something to this effect up in the past week, and it was already responded to by Sun, along with a roadmap of what they plan to do. Go search. As for FreeBSD; I might give Solaris Express (the next build) a try; I don't want bleeding edge, but I would like to be able to go, you know, I really like that application; I'll download it, and compile it and it actually compiles without needing to jump through 100 flaming hoops. I give up discussing things with you, all you want to do is spout unsubstantiated garbage. I'd be quite happy to make packages, upload them etc. etc. if it were made alot easier to compile software for Solaris, but due to the above issues, I can't. If you can't figure out these basics, somehow I doubt you'll be making any packages anytime soon. I never realized setting PATH was that difficult. As FreeBSD right now, the only thing I dislike is the slow C++ compiling, thanks to GCC, then again, I play Mr Conservative using - Os -fno-strict-aliasing -pipe, which, although not heavily optimised to the hilt, still provides a pretty damn good desktop experience. Xorg + KDE 3.5.2 + Amarok + Koffice = great desktop. That's nice, but this is OSOL-Discuss. I give up, David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 6/1/06, Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 6/1/06, David J. Orman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 31, 2006, at 3:38 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: One assumes that when Sun is solely backing GNOME, that there is no 'officiallly supported' KDE for Solaris - all very nice to have a 'community working on it' but companies like the warm fuzzy feeling knowing that there are people they can ring up and abuse when things go wrong. Sun has the resources it has, and they are allocated how they are. With all of the issues you have stated you encountered with Solaris as a desktop OS, don't you think they should be focusing on getting *one* thing working before spreading their limited resources thin? Yikes, you want the world, and you want it NOW! So, what is it? is Solaris a desktop or a server operating system? come on, admit it, you're just burning to say, Matty, its a server OS! opensolaris is less than a year old, solaris is a server os and people are working to make it desktop friendly, even in this short time there was a huge improvement in the area, solaris now has wireless drivers and runs well on laptops, Gnome is in the process of being updated to the latest version, things like hal are being ported to solaris; Rome wasnt built in a day Which brings up the other question - why on gods green earth did SUN go with GNOME? why not just buy out Trolltech, release Qt under CDDL? Is your solution to everything Sun buying out/paying off *insert random company here with questionable value to Sun*? Lets see; on one had you have a bag of half baked rubbish, collated together, and called GNOME every 6 months OR you have on the other hand, a desktop where all the applications have been developed to work together in an integrated fashioned, called KDE. it's funny, the top three linux players (redhat, suse and ubuntu imho) seem to disagree and are strongly backing gnome, have you ever tried ubuntu? it makes a great desktop and it looks really polished Sun has limited resources, is it wise to invest so much time and money into a desktop (GNOME) that requires so much TLC when the better option would have been to choose KDE which is already 'there' interms of desktop usability, integration, well written documentation, good GUI based development tools etc. etc. I'm getting really tired of this, it's better for YOU, what makes you think the rest of the world think alike? all i've heard you say during the last few days is sun should do this or buy that do you realize that this is an opensolaris mainling list and sun is just one more player in the community? But hey, you keep drinking the GNOME koolaid, one day GNOME just might actually achieve something besides being a 'me too' desktop. you're more than free not to use it, i told you this once before and i will repeat it, if you think you can do a better job start your own opensolaris distribution, ship KDE and whatever else you want, if you're right and people would rather kde over gnome, you might even make some cash from it. nacho ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 12:47 am, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Personally, I'd love for Solaris x86 to get to the point where we aren't bitching about hardware support or lack of ISV's Even if we got the point that *YOU* weren't [EMAIL PROTECTED] about it, we'd all be better off. -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On 6/1/06, David J. Orman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On May 31, 2006, at 5:50 PM, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: So, what is it? is Solaris a desktop or a server operating system? come on, admit it, you're just burning to say, Matty, its a server OS!Don't make the mistake again of putting words in my mouth. Solaris isboth, and it is improving quite nicely in both areas. I'd say thedesktop part is developer oriented right now, or administrator oriented, not normal people oriented. This is improving however.The server part is no different, however. Most linux distros areeasier to administrate for somebody who hasn't spent time in UNIX before. That doesn't make them technically better, but they are(generally) more usable from a newbie's perspective. Again, Solaris(OSOL) is improving in this area. So, both. Don't attempt a career asa psychologist. But the thing is, my requirements are *very* simple; if KDE 3.5.2 worked, along with Amarok, and the performance of the Solaris xorg was 'snappy' rather than the current sloppy; I'd be a very happy man. Lets see; on one had you have a bag of half baked rubbish, collated together, and called GNOME every 6 months OR you have on the other hand, a desktop where all the applications have been developed to work together in an integrated fashioned, called KDE. That is your opinion. You are entitled to it, and you are of coursewelcome to express it. I would, however, suggest you express it withcivility, something you seem to have not learned yet.How so? I tried to get something moving in GNOME a while back - what did I get 'thats someone elses responsibility' in respects to getting a tool up and running to make administration a Linux machine a little easier. Sun has limited resources, is it wise to invest so much time and money into a desktop (GNOME) that requires so much TLC when the better option would have been to choose KDE which is already 'there' interms of desktop usability, integration, well written documentation, good GUI based development tools etc. etc.Funny, Ubuntu doesn't seem to be having a problem being usable. Last I checked, Ubuntu was Gnome. I believe RH's default is Gnome2.8, and the large majority of people using RH use Gnome. Betweenthose two distros, you've got a heck of a lot of gnome in the desktop-unix space. KDE has a place too (Suse), but it's quite obvious Gnome isn't the pile of garbage you allude to.Look at Rhythmbox; compare Rhythmbox to Amarok - I can sync my iPod, listen to music, create play lists etc. etc. all from the same application. But hey, you keep drinking the GNOME koolaid, one day GNOME just might actually achieve something besides being a 'me too' desktop. What is that supposed to mean? Sorry, I'm not caught up with the pre-teen lingo. As for the second part, I think Gnome has already donethat, seeing as it's one of the most widely deployed desktopenvironment in the unix space. KDE still sits at around 60%. From what it appears; the overseas marketshare is alot higher. DavidPS - I personally prefer KDE myself, that doesn't mean I'm going torun around bashing projects WITH NO BASIS like you are. PLEASEsupport your statements from now on, better yet - don't make them. Look at the applications on KDE; they speak for themselves! maybe my writing ability at this time of the afternoon is rather crap, but setup two machines, and compare; compare the usability and integration of KOffice compared to OpenOffice.org; compare the ease of use of KDE PIM with Evolution. Compare the feature richness of Amarok compared to Rhythmbox.Matty ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On May 31, 2006, at 6:11 PM, Alan DuBoff wrote: On Wednesday 31 May 2006 12:47 am, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: Personally, I'd love for Solaris x86 to get to the point where we aren't bitching about hardware support or lack of ISV's Even if we got the point that *YOU* weren't [EMAIL PROTECTED] about it, we'd all be better off. +1 to the [EMAIL PROTECTED] project. Are we allowed multiple votes? David ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: ... So, what is it? is Solaris a desktop or a server operating system? come on, admit it, you're just burning to say, Matty, its a server OS! I don't understand why you are under the impression that Sun can't have an OS that runs just fine on a desktop and also runs just fine on a server. Yes, there are definite gaps in the desktop... but amazingly enough these are being dealt with through projects and sub-communities: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/device_drivers/ http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/desktop/ http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/desktop/communities/kde http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/games/ http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/immigrants/ Are you contributing to any of these? ... Lets see; on one had you have a bag of half baked rubbish, collated together, and called GNOME every 6 months OR you have on the other hand, a desktop where all the applications have been developed to work together in an integrated fashioned, called KDE. Sun has limited resources, is it wise to invest so much time and money into a desktop (GNOME) that requires so much TLC when the better option would have been to choose KDE which is already 'there' interms of desktop usability, integration, well written documentation, good GUI based development tools etc. etc. You would probably be surprised to find out that there is actually a solid, well-reasoned and technical basis for Sun's decision to use gnome rather than kde. I know this has been hashed over time and time again in various newsgroups and mailing lists. Of course, you probably wouldn't be interested to read answer #23 in this document: http://www.sun.com/software/star/gnome/faq/generalfaq.xml James C. McPherson -- Solaris Datapath Engineering Data Management Group Sun Microsystems ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 02:45 am, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: And you know sweetcheeks, this is a GENERAL discussion; if you wish to fufil your inner desires of wishing to know the internals of the kernel, may I suggest subscribing to such lists. Yes, and let's remind ourselves that this is not a place intended for Matty to rant, this is a place to discuss OpenSolaris. If you have something to discuss in regards to OpenSolaris, by all means present it. But if you plan to insist on splitting hairs over how much money Sun spend on something, or how Sun should utilize their engineers, this is probably not the place for that. Seems a week or two ago you weren't using OpenSolaris, but you've continued to fill up inboxes with messages of continual [EMAIL PROTECTED] Let's all move on and discuss opensolaris. -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun lost one of it's biggest and oldest x86 customer
On Wednesday 31 May 2006 08:50 pm, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: So, what is it? is Solaris a desktop or a server operating system? come on, admit it, you're just burning to say, Matty, its a server OS! No, most folks at this point are just burning to ask, what the [EMAIL PROTECTED] does this have to do with OpenSolaris?. Let's try to stick to discussions based on OpenSolaris. This is the ON consolidation at this point. Thanks, -- Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems Solaris x86 Engineering - IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
