Re: [osol-discuss] (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org down ?
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Al Hopper a...@logical-approach.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Roland Mainz roland.ma...@nrubsig.orgwrote: Hi! Does anyone know what's wrong with (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org ? I can't reach any of these sites since some time... ;-( Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) Looks like a networking issue... I'll get back to when more details are available... Thanks for the heads up. .. It may be tomorrow AM Pacific time before the folks at the ISC NOC can resolve this issue. Thanks for your patience. Regards, -- Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX a...@logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
so, we need to trash a working system and replace it just because of the need of adding bigger disks and because inability of software to handle that ? if other 32bit operating systems can handle those without problems, it`s mostly a matter of good will to change 32bit solaris apropriately. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 9:32 AM, rolanddevz...@web.de wrote: so, we need to trash a working system and replace it just because of the need of adding bigger disks and because inability of software to handle that ? if other 32bit operating systems can handle those without problems, it`s mostly a matter of good will to change 32bit solaris apropriately. Before complaining and trashing against the wall, do some research about the VTOC problematic behind it. Sun did and does have this good will in this case. In the evening I look up a few links for you. Or find them your self, if you are not patient enough. Cheers, Мартин Бохниг ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Martin Bochnigmar...@martux.org wrote: On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 9:32 AM, rolanddevz...@web.de wrote: so, we need to trash a working system and replace it just because of the need of adding bigger disks and because inability of software to handle that ? if other 32bit operating systems can handle those without problems, it`s mostly a matter of good will to change 32bit solaris apropriately. Before complaining and trashing against the wall, do some research about the VTOC problematic behind it. Sun did and does have this good will in this case. In the evening I look up a few links for you. Or find them your self, if you are not patient enough. Cheers, Мартин Бохниг p.s : Did you try format -e and then chose EFI? In this scenario you must EFI-label the whole disk (p0), rather than just a VTOC slice (henn and egg). I didn't use a 32bit cpu since 2004. Time to move on. Have several bigger SATA_2 disks connected via USB2.0 (Because eSata was unreliable at this time). Note: EFI is not yet bootable on most systems. But for 2nd-ary storage it fits well. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
The 32-bit Solaris kernel does not support disks 1TB which is a major annoyance. let 1 or 2 years go by, and disks 1TB will be standard. And so will be 64 bit. The current market seems to offer disks from 160GB to 2TB; it will be some time before you cannot buy a disk = 1TB. I'm a bit more worried about disks over 2TB, Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 10:54 AM, Martin Bochnigmar...@martux.org wrote: On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 10:50 AM, Martin Bochnigmar...@martux.org wrote: On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 9:32 AM, rolanddevz...@web.de wrote: so, we need to trash a working system and replace it just because of the need of adding bigger disks and because inability of software to handle that ? if other 32bit operating systems can handle those without problems, it`s mostly a matter of good will to change 32bit solaris apropriately. Before complaining and trashing against the wall, do some research about the VTOC problematic behind it. Sun did and does have this good will in this case. In the evening I look up a few links for you. Or find them your self, if you are not patient enough. Cheers, Мартин Бохниг p.s : Did you try format -e and then chose EFI? In this scenario you must EFI-label the whole disk (p0), rather than just a VTOC slice (henn and egg). I didn't use a 32bit cpu since 2004. Time to move on. Have several bigger SATA_2 disks connected via USB2.0 (Because eSata was unreliable at this time). Note: EFI is not yet bootable on most systems. But for 2nd-ary storage it fits well. And to avoid confusion: You do not need EFI to make full use of disks with a capacity of up to 2TB. As long as you run a 64bit kernel at least. I'm not sure about the situation under a 32bit kernel, because why should I reboot my Laptop (-server, in stationary non-mobile 24x7x365 use) in order to test it? I only mentioned EFI because I have no clue how the situation looks like under 32bit kernels. I have 2 pairs of 1.5TB disks connected without problems. I use b114 and VTOC based ZFS on the one mirror and EFI (p0) based ZFS on the other. Works smoothly. I use them in external dual-drive enclosures with active cooling. Without using the enclosure-integrated chipset (just have them recognized as normal USB2 disks, ZFS can do the rest better for me). If you demand modern features, then you should not run it on historic hardware. At least you shouldn't complain in such a manner, if maybe not all (yet still most) features are supported on your legacy stuff. Come on: Who is still talking about 32bit kernels nowadays? Next you demand revival of sun4m support? ;) Caspar is right: The 2TB limit is a real hard headache for VTOC. That's the real question. Martin ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [website-discuss] (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org down ?
dont want to hijack the thread.. but i've a question: a wikimedia update is not scheduled @ wiki.genunix? it's quite old and probably that's why it's full with spam thanks On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 9:16 AM, Al Hoppera...@logical-approach.com wrote: On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Al Hopper a...@logical-approach.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Roland Mainz roland.ma...@nrubsig.org wrote: Hi! Does anyone know what's wrong with (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org ? I can't reach any of these sites since some time... ;-( Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) Looks like a networking issue... I'll get back to when more details are available... Thanks for the heads up. .. It may be tomorrow AM Pacific time before the folks at the ISC NOC can resolve this issue. Thanks for your patience. Regards, -- Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX a...@logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ website-discuss mailing list website-disc...@opensolaris.org -- Andy http://blog.sartek.net ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
Before complaining and trashing against the wall, do some research about the VTOC problematic behind it. thanks. i read about the vtoc problem, but i believe that there is some way to work around this or to solve it somehow. not easy ,sure - but i think it`s not ok to say this is impossible with 32bit solaris kernel and will never be done. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 2:16 PM, rolanddevz...@web.de wrote: Before complaining and trashing against the wall, do some research about the VTOC problematic behind it. thanks. i read about the vtoc problem, but i believe that there is some way to work around this or to solve it somehow. not easy ,sure - but i think it`s not ok to say this is impossible with 32bit solaris kernel and will never be done. You are invited to work on it. The src is open. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Opensolaris root fs on usb stick
Hi, Yes, running OpenSolaris on USB 8G stick since snv 101, currently snv 117, on HP ProLiant DL165 G5 server with 4 1TB SATA disks raidz pool (2.7 TB usable). It runs pretty smooth, but 8G for rpool is a little tight, especially when you do pkg image-update, so I mounted /var/pkg/download/ on zfs SATA pool, but still I guess at least 16G would be better for a long run. Once installed, you can also make a mirrored rpool with a second USB stick. Regards, -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
Hi Alex, Alex Viskovatoff píše v pá 10. 07. 2009 v 21:40 -0700: Of course I'm not building mplayer as root! Why would I do that? I hardly ever use su any more, since pfexec is so much more elegant... Some people are strange, aren't they? :-) I'm running snv_117 now, since it turns out that I was wrong when I thought that sound is broken under snv_117 on my system. I tried compiling mplayer from cvs using gcc-4.3.2, but I ran into the same problem as was mentioned in [url=http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=104595tstart=0]this thread[/url], which I'd brought up before. Just replace the part of define inside brackets with 4 * 168 (or 672) People who are trying to build mplayer from CVS under OpenSolaris, including myself, understand that you need to use the GNU build tools and not the System V UNIX tools and Sun Studio compilers. Still, I've not seen any posts indicating that anyone has been able to build mplayer from CVS on OpenSolaris recently. I am not so interested in building old versions of mplayer, since I can get all the functionality I need out of mplayer/mencoder on my Linux box. And I'm not aware whether a binary for mencoder has ever been produced for Solaris. Strange, I do not need GNU utils (except those which are detected by configure script and gawk). And with GCC 3.4.3 (yes, I am aware of missalign warnings). My enviroment conforms to Single UNIX Specification v3 (see man standards). And still I can compile mplayer and mencoder, even under Solaris Express (e.g. the latest build 117 with todays today's CVS snapshot). No functionality loss, 3 patches need (and OpenSolaris should need only 2 of them). I think MPlayer upstream is very proactive in fixing multiplatforms problems. spec file for actual mplayer snapshot will go to SFE repository in few minutes. Best regards, Milan ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
Alex Viskovatoff viskovat...@imap.cc wrote: Thanks for the suggestion. I've tried that before, and I just tried it again. The build fails: cc -o mplayer mplayer.o m_property.o mp_fifo.o mp_msg.o mixer.o parser-mpcmd.o subopt-helper.o command.o asxparser.o codec-cfg.o cpudetect.o edl.o find_sub.o get_path.o m_config.o m_option.o m_struct.o mpcommon.o parser-cfg.o playtree.o playtreeparser.o spudec.o sub_cc.o subreader.o vobsub.o unrarlib.o libvo/libvo.a libao2/libao2.a input/libinput.a vidix/libvidix.a libmpcodecs/libmpcodecs.a libaf/libaf.a libmpdemux/libmpdemux.a stream/stream.a libswscale/libswscale.a libvo/libosd.a libavformat/libavformat.a libavcodec/libavcodec.a libavutil/libavutil.a libpostproc/libpostproc.a loader/libloader.a mp3lib/libmp3.a liba52/liba52.a libmpeg2/libmpeg2.a libfaad2/libfaad2.a tremor/libvorbisidec.a dvdread/libdvdread.a libdvdcss/libdvdcss.a libass/libass.a osdep/libosdep.a -lXext -lX11 -lXv -lXinerama -lXxf86vm -lGL -R/opt/csw/lib -lSDL -lpthread -lposix4 -lesd -laudiofile -lm -lrt -lresolv -lnsl -lsocket -lopenal -lfaac -L/opt/csw/lib -L/opt/csw/lib -lkstat -lposix4 -lsocket -lnsl -ltermcap -lsmbclient -lpng -lz -ljpeg -L/opt/csw/lib -R/opt/csw/lib -lfreetype -lz -lfontconfig -L/opt/csw/lib -lfribidi -lz -lmad -lspeex -ltheora -logg -rdynamic -lm cc: unrecognized option `-rdynamic' Undefined first referenced symbol in file libiconv_close mp_msg.o (symbol belongs to implicit dependency /opt/csw/lib/libiconv.so.2) libiconv_open mp_msg.o (symbol belongs to implicit dependency /opt/csw/lib/libiconv.so.2) libiconvmp_msg.o (symbol belongs to implicit dependency /opt/csw/lib/libiconv.so.2) There are two possibilities: 1) It was compiled with incorrect include files. The map from iconv_close() to libiconv_close() is done in the Linux version of /usr/include/iconv.h but not in the Solris version. 2) The source is wrong and contains calls to libiconv_close() instead of iconv_close(). You have to check Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Tracing programs on opensolaris
Hello, I have been studying ptrace(2) on the Unix systems (I have studied it on Debian and OpenBSD so far). On all the systems I have tried there is a request flag that allows for a given process to attach itself to some other running process (given that other process is not setuid and has the same uid as the attacher). Opensolaris' manual pages doesn't say anything about such a request. Opensolaris' ptrace(3C) manual page says that ptrace isn't even a system call in solaris. It is build using some /proc interface. Further investigation showed me that gdb is able to attach itself to a running process (actually, two gdbs are able to attach itself to the same process, something that's impossible on Linux and OpenBSD). Where can I read up on that /proc interface? So, it allows for more than one process attach to a single process? On a related topic, is it possible to change the behaviour of programs using dtrace (like you can with ptrace) or is it read-only? Does it use those /proc features as well? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5TB SATA drive
Before complaining and trashing against the wall, do some research about the VTOC problematic behind it. The VTOC 1TB limit for SMI labels has been raised to 2TB in build 99: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/on/flag-days/pages/2008091102/ But that doesn't help 32-bit kernels, they still refuse to use disks 1TB. Quote from the above flag day message: » The following functional limitations are applicable: * 32-bit kernel will not support disks 1 TB. « -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] worrying hangs
If you are concerned about the availability maybe move it to at least a stable opensolaris release, running of SXCE in production seems to be asking for trouble On Sun, Jul 12, 2009 at 12:22 AM, Matt Harrison iwasinnamuk...@genestate.com wrote: Matt Harrison wrote: Hi all, We've got a filer built on consumer hardware running SXCE snv_97, holding a small (1.4TB) raidz array. It's been going great for the last 6 months or so, but recently its started misbehaving. We use in-kernel CIFS for most of our needs and it works perfectly when playing media or mounting backed-up CD images. The problem comes when we try to explicitly copy something from it. When you actually try a direct copy via CIFS, HTTP, SSH or FTP, the transfer has about a 70% chance it will hang the machine. The larger the file, the more probable it is. I have no idea how to start investigating this as the network is inaccessible, the console is frozen and there are no hints left behind in the logs. My only way to recover the server is to shutdown (with the soft-off button on the case) and bootup. I can tell the machine isn't totally hung as it will apparently do a proper shutdown procedure. We're really out of ideas and worried that there could be a problem with our raidz array, even though there are no errors logged concerning it. As far as we can tell, there is no problem with any data (yet), just the system itself. Any ideas how to go about investigating this further? I hate to pester but I'm surprised no-one has any ideas on this. We are constantly worried about what the side-effects of the server hanging might be, and of course it is decreasing the availability of our data. Thanks Matt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
I'm unable to get my SNV 117 to see a 1,5 TB SATA drive I just got.
...
I've tried adding the 1,5TB as the secondary drive, and tried both
'reboot -- -r' and 'devfsadm' but the drive wasn't listed by 'format'.
I tried booting from the SNV 117 x86 DVD, to test installing on the
drive, the install app complained about 'no drive'.
Is the drive listed in iostat -En output?
One thing that could be confusing is that the 32-bit
cmdk driver silently rejects disks 1TB [1], while the
sd driver (USB, S-ATA HDD on S-ATA framework, ...)
at least gives an explanation on the console what
is going on [2].
[1]
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/intel/io/dktp/disk/cmdk.c#389
389 #ifdef _ILP32
390 {
391 struct tgdk_geom phyg;
392 (void) dadk_getphygeom(DKTP_DATA, phyg);
393 if ((phyg.g_cap - 1) DK_MAX_BLOCKS) {
394 (void) dadk_close(DKTP_DATA);
395 goto fail2;
396 }
397 }
398 #endif
[2]
http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/uts/common/io/scsi/targets/sd.c#7790
7790 if (capacity DK_MAX_BLOCKS) {
7791 #ifdef _LP64
7792 if ((capacity + 1)
7793 SD_GROUP1_MAX_ADDRESS) {
7794 /*
7795 * Enable descriptor
format
7796 * sense data so that
we can
7797 * get 64 bit sense data
7798 * fields.
7799 */
7800
sd_enable_descr_sense(ssc);
7801 }
7802 #else
7803 /* 32-bit kernels can't handle
this */
7804 scsi_log(SD_DEVINFO(un),
7805 sd_label, CE_WARN,
7806 disk has %llu blocks,
which
7807 is too large for a 32-bit
7808 kernel, capacity);
7809
7810 #if defined(__i386) || defined(__amd64)
7811 /*
7812 * 1TB disk was treated as (1T
- 512)B
7813 * in the past, so that it
might have
7814 * valid VTOC and solaris
partitions,
7815 * we have to allow it to
continue to
7816 * work.
7817 */
7818 if (capacity -1 DK_MAX_BLOCKS)
7819 #endif
7820 goto spinup_failed;
7821 #endif
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] worrying hangs
Che Kristo wrote: If you are concerned about the availability maybe move it to at least a stable opensolaris release, running of SXCE in production seems to be asking for trouble Thanks for the reply. I am aware that SXCE isn't the best release. I've been planning a move to 2009.06, but I thought if this is a hardware problem, then I should fix that first. I'll try exporting the data pool, installing 2009.06 onto the root disk and re-importing. I understand this should preserve the data perfectly. Of course, that should provide a more stable platform and I'll report back if I'm still having the hangs. Thanks ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
As I have understood it, the SPEC files provide Solaris modifications to Linux source code. Therefore you should try compiling via the SPEC file for VLC. Google for it. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ClearType available for OpenSolaris?
Ive tried dabbling with preferences, but to no avail. Have anyone here succeeded getting the same font appearance as in the picture on the website I link to? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org down ?
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Al Hopper a...@logical-approach.com wrote: On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Al Hopper a...@logical-approach.comwrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Roland Mainz roland.ma...@nrubsig.orgwrote: Hi! Does anyone know what's wrong with (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org ? I can't reach any of these sites since some time... ;-( Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) Looks like a networking issue... I'll get back to when more details are available... Thanks for the heads up. .. It may be tomorrow AM Pacific time before the folks at the ISC NOC can resolve this issue. Thanks for your patience. Problem resolved around 6:10 AM Pacific. A typo in the (ISC) router took away our default route. Murphys law is alive and well! Regards, -- Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc,Plano,TX a...@logical-approach.com Voice: 972.379.2133 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Opensolaris root fs on usb stick
Hi Artisg, Thanks for your reply. By chance did you initially install Solaris on on your usb from livecd or did you copy your root fs from a current working Solaris installation. My problem is that when I boot from a livecd, Solaris recognizes my usb stick through the driver device utility, but when I attempt to install the install wizard hangs at finding disks' this has left me with doing a minimal install and trying to copy the rootfs over to my usb 4GB stick. Im looking for any type of documentation that might help me along with this. Thanks for the heads up on /var/pkg/download as well. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VirtualBox security - global zone vs. non-global zone
I was successful using FreeBSD 7.2 in VirtualBox 3.0.2 in a non-global zone on OpenSolaris 0906. I was partially successful with OpenBSD 4.5 in VirtualBox 3.0.2 in a non-global zone on OpenSolaris 0906. The usual disk full message and segmentation faults occurred during installation but the installation completed. During startup there were a few segmentation faults but it started. On shutdown there was also a segmentation fault. Because of the segmentation faults I'm not ready to switch from FreeBSD to OpenBSD although I would like to. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SPARC Rock is dead,
I really wonder what the problems were with Rock though that made David Yen leave for Juniper and Marc Tremblay leave for Microsoft. 12% to 25% over UltraSPARC T2+ performance gains were cited by Sun's own sales reps. Some of the performance examples cited 2% - 7% improvement. I don't know about you, but in my opinion, that's miserable. Couple that with the fact that most customers' software is such garbage that it's not capable of running on more than one CPU, and therefore most customers aren't not able to take advantage of many slow performing hardware threads, and the disaster becomes pretty apparent. Sun had a good idea, but they either didn't want to invest enough funding, or didn't know how to make their existing UltraSPARC design into a powerful number cruncher, like IBM did with POWER. However, Fujitsu did manage to do that with SPARC, but their hardware is so exorbitantly expensive, that it makes store.sun.com look like selling peanuts in comparison. If that isn't a recipe for disaster, then I don't know what is. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
Hi Milan, Thanks so much for that. Yes, mplayer and mencoder compile as you say, with both GCC 3.4.3 and GCC 4.3.2. My last significant annoyance with OpenSolaris has gone away. Still, it is annoying that GAS in build 117 still can't cope with those parentheses. (Someone posted a patch to get around that [url=http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=104595tstart=0]in the other thread[/url].) That appears to be a bug, but I can't find it in defect.opensolaris.org. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
Thanks! I was able to compile mplayer once I followed some suggestions for how to get around the parentheses problem in the other thread. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Which way to go [push/pull] with bkups of Windows OS's to zfs
Any of you out there that use your opensol and zfs as backup nas for windows machines? I wonder what is a sound plan... it appears with a few experiments that it may be easier to get error free backups by running the backup itself from windows. Perhaps less problems with NTFS style permissions colliding with unix style.? I've tried both rsync and rdiff-backup in both directions (Using cygwin when action is commenced from windows side. Oh, and in my experiments... rdiff-backup appears to have some huge time overhead compared to rsync alone. I've also experimented with a windows client called Retrospect that appears to work well on the connections and such but has trouble on the windows side... where logs show lots of sharing violations. (even though my version has the `openfile backup' function enabled. -- but this is not apparently related to any problems on the zfs end) Anyone here that can offer their experiences toward the end of the least trouble ridden method when dealing with Windows OS. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Which way to go [push/pull] with bkups of Windows OS's to zfs
Harry, for enterprises or small businesses I would recommend some supported solutions such as Nexenta Delorean: http://www.nexenta.com/delorean robocopy and rsync transports, backup browser, snapshots, ACLs, VCS, etc, etc.. Harry Putnam wrote: Any of you out there that use your opensol and zfs as backup nas for windows machines? I wonder what is a sound plan... it appears with a few experiments that it may be easier to get error free backups by running the backup itself from windows. Perhaps less problems with NTFS style permissions colliding with unix style.? I've tried both rsync and rdiff-backup in both directions (Using cygwin when action is commenced from windows side. Oh, and in my experiments... rdiff-backup appears to have some huge time overhead compared to rsync alone. I've also experimented with a windows client called Retrospect that appears to work well on the connections and such but has trouble on the windows side... where logs show lots of sharing violations. (even though my version has the `openfile backup' function enabled. -- but this is not apparently related to any problems on the zfs end) Anyone here that can offer their experiences toward the end of the least trouble ridden method when dealing with Windows OS. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org down ?
Al Hopper wrote: On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 1:16 AM, Al Hopper a...@logical-approach.com wrote: On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 12:38 AM, Al Hopper a...@logical-approach.com wrote: On Fri, Jul 10, 2009 at 7:58 PM, Roland Mainz roland.ma...@nrubsig.org wrote: Does anyone know what's wrong with (www|hg|svn|wiki).genunix.org ? I can't reach any of these sites since some time... ;-( [snip] It may be tomorrow AM Pacific time before the folks at the ISC NOC can resolve this issue. Problem resolved around 6:10 AM Pacific. Thanks! :-) A typo in the (ISC) router took away our default route. They don't have monitoring scripts which scream ALARM! when something breaks ? Murphys law is alive and well! ;-( Bye, Roland -- __ . . __ (o.\ \/ /.o) roland.ma...@nrubsig.org \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, CJAVASunUnix programmer /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 3992797 (;O/ \/ \O;) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Which way to go [push/pull] with bkups of Windows OS's to zfs
Harry Putnam wrote: Any of you out there that use your opensol and zfs as backup nas for windows machines? One of clients back up all their windows servers via ZFS (using Solaris 10). They use three techniques: 1) Serve all windows networks drives from Solaris. 2) Use iSCSI volumes for specific windows servers. 3) Pull data from stand alone windows boxes with rsync. I wonder what is a sound plan... it appears with a few experiments that it may be easier to get error free backups by running the backup itself from windows. Perhaps less problems with NTFS style permissions colliding with unix style.? ZFS ACLs are a good match for windows ACLs. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
It turns out that except for that apparent bug in GAS that makes it unable to handle nested parentheses, if your PATH is POSIX-compliant (so that /usr/xpg4/bin is at the head of your path, so that sh is POSIX-compliant), the current mplayer in Subversion compiles as is. That's the way I like things to work. Since I prefer mplayer to VLC anyway, I'm not going to bother trying to get VLC to compile. But it will be interesting to see how soon VLC compiles on OpenSolaris as easily as mplayer does. The README in extras/contrib states This is the contrib build system for VLC Media Player. It has been primarily developed for Mac, it has been adapted for BeOs and win32. It would be not too difficult to extend it to other sytem. It would seem that that would be a good place to start. Googling yielded this: [url=http://mailman.videolan.org/pipermail/vlc-devel/2009-June/061818.html][vlc-devel] [PATCH] Fix boostrap for OpenSolaris automake packages[/url] One can detect a hostile attitude to osol on that thread, btw. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] DHCP to Static IP
If you want to use Crossbow then you can't have nwam running That's good information to know! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
roland wrote: so, we need to trash a working system and replace it just because of the need of adding bigger disks and because inability of software to handle that ? if other 32bit operating systems can handle those without problems, it`s mostly a matter of good will to change 32bit solaris apropriately. In short, this is a limitation of the VTOC format Solaris uses for disk labelling. When using EFI, you shouldn't see this issue with the right driver support if I understand correctly. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
it is annoying that GAS in build 117 still can't cope with those parentheses. [...] That appears to be a bug, but I can't find it in defect.opensolaris.org. It turns out not to be a bug. I found the explanation for what's going on [url=http://www.mail-archive.com/bug-binut...@gnu.org/msg00025.html]here[/url]: For compatibility with other assemblers, '/' starts a comment on the i386-elf target. So you can't use division. That link provides a one-line test program, which I've saved in parentheses.s: cmpl $(100/4), %eax Using the --divide option yields the desired behavior: a...@diotima:~$ gas parentheses.s parentheses.s: Assembler messages: parentheses.s:1: Error: unbalanced parenthesis in operand 1. a...@diotima:~$ gas --divide parentheses.s a...@diotima:~$ It would be nice if someone who knows more about how to write make files than I do would create the appropriate patch. It couldn't hurt to pass it upstream, since --divide is ignored by the Linux as, under Fedora at any rate. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any idea why Solaris snv 117 x86 wont see a 1, 5 TB SATA drive
On Sat, Jul 11, 2009 at 12:32 AM, rolanddevz...@web.de wrote: so, we need to trash a working system and replace it just because of the need of adding bigger disks and because inability of software to handle that ? if other 32bit operating systems can handle those without problems, it`s mostly a matter of good will to change 32bit solaris apropriately. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org I'm surprised you found a 32-bit system even capable of using 1TB drives, lots of older disk controller have issues with greater than 1TB even, setting aside 32-bit kernel limitations. If its a matter of upgrading, why not just pick up a 64-bit CPU? They can be had for around $60 US dollars (assuming you use AMD, a dual core 64-bit X2 is in that range easily) -- Brent Jones br...@servuhome.net ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SPARC Rock is dead,
Yeah, this kinda goes back to my theory that UltraSPARC-KT probably performs better than ROCK and will have a better price point. As for software, most of the legacy apps that companies created or use are indeed garbage and incapable of taking advantage of multi-core or multi-threaded processors. Unfortunately, technologies such as VMware will enable customers to keep such applications around for a bit longer (i.e. running WindowsNT, old versions of Linux, and even old versions of Solaris x86). The flip side is that all the major software vendors have put funding and effort into making their products scale properly on CMT and multi-core/multi-threaded platforms. It's now a matter of time before programmers figure out how to really take advantage of the hardware, OS, and libraries. In many ways, Sun is way ahead of the curve and unfortunately, the market wasn't ready. Also doesn't help when the economy is down and customers are not willing to re-build their applications. Intel and AMD have seen the light that higher clock speeds will not help and that there are limits. It'll be up to programmers to take advantage of the technology. Hopefully Sun will learn and take a more conservative approach and build on the success of the UltraSPARC-T1 and UltraSPARC-T2/T2+. Getting the performance up there like Fujitsu did with SPARC64 VIIIfx should be a goal. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: UNIX admin tripivc...@hotmail.com To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Saturday, July 11, 2009 3:56:54 PM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] SPARC Rock is dead, I really wonder what the problems were with Rock though that made David Yen leave for Juniper and Marc Tremblay leave for Microsoft. 12% to 25% over UltraSPARC T2+ performance gains were cited by Sun's own sales reps. Some of the performance examples cited 2% - 7% improvement. I don't know about you, but in my opinion, that's miserable. Couple that with the fact that most customers' software is such garbage that it's not capable of running on more than one CPU, and therefore most customers aren't not able to take advantage of many slow performing hardware threads, and the disaster becomes pretty apparent. Sun had a good idea, but they either didn't want to invest enough funding, or didn't know how to make their existing UltraSPARC design into a powerful number cruncher, like IBM did with POWER. However, Fujitsu did manage to do that with SPARC, but their hardware is so exorbitantly expensive, that it makes store.sun.com look like selling peanuts in comparison. If that isn't a recipe for disaster, then I don't know what is. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC 1.0.0 is out, but it doesn't compile under osol 2009.06
Here's a patch. I think it should be passed upstream; I don't know how to go about doing that. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org divide.diff Description: Binary data ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] No sound on 2009.6
I have the same problem. Well almost the same. My sound doesn't work at all and when I try to click the sound icon in the menubar it replies with a popup saying The volume control did not find any elements and/or devices to control. This means either that you don't have the right GStreamer plugins installed, or that you don't have a sound card configured. You can remove the volume control from the panel by right-clicking the speaker icon on the panel and selecting Remove From Panel from the menu. or when i try to open up volume control it replies saying No volume control GStreamer plugins and/or devices found. whats up? everything worked fine on ubuntu. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
