Re: [osol-discuss] SSD anyone
I'm using an SSD root disk (16GB MTron SLC; my home dir, etc, are on a 1TB ZFS Mirror); to be honest I don't think its worth the expense for Solaris which is pretty good at caching. For OS's like Windows which hit the root disk constantly its a bigger win, imho. benr. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [storage-discuss] NDMPCOPY Test Tool and NDMP Protocol Test Suite Released
Vilas Deshpande, I love you!!! Thank you! I've been needing this badly! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] cannot edit /etc/services
If you do this, make sure you change it back. The easer thing to do is to is to, in vi, force the write :w!. benr. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nexenta : Ubuntu Server with ZFS goodness
Nice. Thanks posting this! benr. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Thumper, ZFS and performance
The setup in the first example protects you against failure of a complete controller. The second configuration leaves you open significantly because you only need to loose 2 disks before your data is toast. Aside from that, stripes so large suffer in terms of performance. Keep your stripes small and distributed across the total number of controllers. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] upgrading from 91 to 95
Zpools are self contained, so as stated before its safe. In upgrades like this I often will actually pull or disconnect the zpool disks just for paranoia sake. As for the config of the existing machine, keeping a copy of /etc is never a bad idea. I typically will rsync a copy of it out somewhere, either to another server or in a case like this to the zpool... that way you have a fallback copy of the system config just in case. Upgrades get even easier if you put filesystems like /opt or /usr/local on the zpool. Post-install just mount /opt and /usr/local from the zpool (zfs set mountpoint=/usr/local pool/local zfs mount -a). I frequently upgrade my Nevada boxes (read: reinstall) and ZFS makes like a lot simpler. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] upgrading from 91 to 95
Ian Collins wrote: Ben Rockwood writes: Upgrades get even easier if you put filesystems like /opt or /usr/local on the zpool. Post-install just mount /opt and /usr/local from the zpool (zfs set mountpoint=/usr/local pool/local zfs mount -a). I frequently upgrade my Nevada boxes (read: reinstall) and ZFS makes like a lot simpler. /usr/local ?? Do you move every thing from /opt? I tend to keep the directories that came with the install in the BE (so they get upgraded) and ZFS mount anything I install (csw, studio 12 etc.). I personally don't like LiveUpgrade, so I opt for a system with 2 or more disks. The OS gets installed on one disk, and the second is a ZPOOL (preferably a RAIDZ if you have additional disks). You create, for instance, pool/local, pool/home, and pool/opt, and set the mountpoints appropriately (zfs set mountpoint=/home pool/home, etc.). The advantage is that when you want to upgrade, you just install a fresh OS on the box, re-create your users and any special tuning, then import the zpool and your back in business. I run a heavily customized environment at home, such as the Enlightenment Window Manager, several database servers, etc... using this method above I can go from a fresh install to full expected use in less than 5 minutes. Furthermore, if your doing a lot of experimental stuff and afraid of turning your box into a brick, so what? Just reinstall, import the pool and your back in business. This is my general philosophy... the OS is irrelevant, your apps and data are not. ZFS fits this philosophy perfect. The key is to allow yourself to think of the zpool mounts and the traditional OS mountpoints overlapping. In case your wondering, ZFS boot in no way changes my thinking on this and in fact isn't a big draw for me. If the boot is on UFS, so what, everything that has any value to me is already on ZFS. In that way its like the olden days of Linux where many of us used a 15MB ext2 boot partition and put everything else on JFS or XFS. Thus, the only really nifty thing about ZFS Boot is that you can snapshot and roll back if you really jack up /etc or /usr but with SX:CE thats fine, I'd rather re-install. As we move toward a more dynamic OS with IPS network upgrades where you don't ever do big upgrades, but rather lots of little micro-updates all the time ZFS boot will be more and more important. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] upgrading from 91 to 95
Ian Collins wrote: Ben Rockwood writes: Upgrades get even easier if you put filesystems like /opt or /usr/local on the zpool. Post-install just mount /opt and /usr/local from the zpool (zfs set mountpoint=/usr/local pool/local zfs mount -a). I frequently upgrade my Nevada boxes (read: reinstall) and ZFS makes like a lot simpler. /usr/local ?? Do you move every thing from /opt? I tend to keep the directories that came with the install in the BE (so they get upgraded) and ZFS mount anything I install (csw, studio 12 etc.). Sorry for the second post I should point out that the one consideration for CSW or even non-Express Studio releases is that toasting the /var/sadm package data will cause you problems. I personally don't care about the integrity of the package database... that drives a lot of people crazy, but I take freedom over antiquated thinking. Worst case, re-installing CSW is quick and easy. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] A proposal for ensuring sustained Community Growth and Success
Shawn Walker wrote: The only remedy available, in the author's view, is to ensure that four changes are made by amending our constitution: 1) The OGB is empowered to make more decisions for the community. I believe that the OGB has almost unlimited powers. That is to say, there is little clarification into what the OGB can or can not do, and therefore it will only truly know the extent of its influence once it has attempted to use that power to date they have not. Is the OGB a force to be reckond with or a lame duck? Frankly its an unknown at this time. BUT! This is a good thing! Ambiguity can be easily exploited (for the forces of good, one would hope) in such a way as to put yourself into a position not previously possible under constraint. Its my opinion that the OGB has the power if it so chooses to use them. As Brian Gupta is fond of saying, better to ask forgiveness than permission. 2) An individual is chosen by our community to work with the OGB. They will provide clear, inspired leadership and vision. It must be made known that this position is one that is likely to be full-time and require their complete focus. Any individual that is part of our community should be eligible for this position regardless of whom they are or are not employed by. I agree, a singular leader would be important. I have come to believe that the following are the requirements: 1) They must have non-Sun, non-Solaris F/OSS experience 2) They must have some understanding of Sun and Solaris history and practices 3) They must be (or become) a Sun employee to allow access to various groups within Sun The individual would: 1) Work together with internal projects seeking to open up but lacking guidence. 2) Act as a project manager to OpenSolaris en mass, that is, ensure that community groups and the OGB are working together, keeping on top of day to day activity, and generally acting as a neutral governer over the project. (I previously believed that the OGB itself should do these tasks, but it has resisted such duties at every turn.) 3) Act as a rally point in situations where not appropriate for the OGB I can expound on this but won't unless requested. 3) That Sun is permitted, as the principal stakeholder in our community, to play a key role in product development and marketing of the OpenSolaris trademark (which they own) given their clear experience, accountability to their shareholders, and success in this area. This role must be given a greater degree of authority than what is currently granted by the constitution. See above. Without Sun the community is doomed; without the community Sun is. While the two could part ways again, the future will be bright and full if we are together. 4) That the role of product development and marketing, as outlined in our constitution, should be shared with Sun in a well-defined manner with qualified members of the community. This final point isn't fully developed I believe. Perhaps you can clarify. It is my opinion that Sun _IS_ part of the community; that is, its developers will (we hope) ultimately contribute in the same way that external developers do and thereby this Us vs Them distinction will deteriorate over time. As we learned at the Summit there is still work to be done on Mercurial and process to occur... its taken a long time, but its still not done yet. Its important for all of us to have a measure of faith: nothings dead, just perhaps not moving fast enough to be visible by all. Shawn, you've written an excellent paper here and I thank you for taking the time to write it! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] A proposal for ensuring sustained Community Growth and Success
Jim Grisanzio wrote: Ben Rockwood wrote: I agree, a singular leader would be important. I have come to believe that the following are the requirements: 1) They must have non-Sun, non-Solaris F/OSS experience 2) They must have some understanding of Sun and Solaris history and practices 3) They must be (or become) a Sun employee to allow access to various groups within Sun The individual would: 1) Work together with internal projects seeking to open up but lacking guidence. 2) Act as a project manager to OpenSolaris en mass, that is, ensure that community groups and the OGB are working together, keeping on top of day to day activity, and generally acting as a neutral governer over the project. (I previously believed that the OGB itself should do these tasks, but it has resisted such duties at every turn.) 3) Act as a rally point in situations where not appropriate for the OGB That's a lot for one guy. :) His/her staff would have to be quite big to support that effort. You'd have to include not only the external operations, which are pretty big, but also the internal stuff, which is much bigger. I can't see how one leader would be able to get his/her arms around this, to be honest. My fear would be that that person would get bogged down or become a figurehead and/or dictator. Can you tell my bias is not toward a single leader? :) There is only one person that could have that bias without my arguing it, and thats you. :) However, you are absolutely correct that we need operational and/or project management support at this point. So, why don't we start with the Facilitators? Each CG should have a Facilitator already, and that person is responsible for running the CG (which involves the CG's sponsored projects, by the way) from a project management perspective. The Facilitators *are* the community managers for OpenSolaris in a very real sense. Some of those people will be from Sun and some from outside Sun. I'm one of them, in fact, and I see the outside and inside. We can create an open list and we can organize ourselves a bit by meeting, distributing tasks, writing plans, sharing info, implementing stuff, and reporting back to the OGB. Our job is to run the community. Currently, as a group, we are not. The job of the Facilitator can be expanded, too, if need be or desired, and I see no reason why the Facilitators can't have a leader if they want one but that leader would be operational, not political. And that leader would no be *the* leader of the OpenSolaris community but just one among many. Here in lies the problem... the OGB should, imho, take up the cause of getting all the CG's in line. To date they haven't (OGB or CAB; I'm _not_ pointing fingers). The hope was that following the installation of leadership in each CG, as occured to determine the electorate for the OGB/Constitution votes, these CG's would bootstrap themselves. They did not. Quite the opposite, we've seen several CG's come forward with a quizical look and a desire to bootstrap. They don't know the process, don't know where to ask (without a debate involved) and at some point just give up on the process because, frankly, it doesn't actually matter right now. I agree 100% that the community will ultimately be self governed by individual CG's who are close to the issues and aware of those involved... but where aren't getting to that place. So the leader that I speak of would take on the roles of high-level PM, Admin, and evangelist. You can do it! Here's how! And this would apply both internally and externally. I'd like to separate some things here: The OGB is an elected body by the Members and it runs nothing. It sets policy and enforces policy. The Facilitators run the community from a management perspective (potentially, anyway). There are, what, 150 or so Members and 40 or so Facilitators. The Members already have leadership -- its the OGB. Now, why can't the Facilitators organize into some structure for their own management? When you look at the Constitution, I think it already articulates a political and management structure for us. I think we just need to work it and take ownership of it. I'd be really happy to participate in an effort like that. I think we all want that... but I think there needs to be someone actively, day-to-day, driving it. We have several people who could, Glynn Foster and Stephen Hahn jump immediately to mind, but those individuals are frankly too valuable doing the work that they are today. I don't think its an undoable task, I think it just takes a very special person to pull it all together in a neutral, fair, and productive way. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Apple's new focus on making server administration
Joerg Schilling wrote: Ben Rockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I think they've been UNIX certified for a long time although I'm too lazy to check. It happened this year and I am sure they only passed the UNIX compliance test because it is incomplete. As I believe that UNIX needs to have a default filesystem that by default is case sensitive, this cannot have been done with current Mac OS X. Interesting, you're right of course. Apple has been flashing UNIX logos with OS X since its release I assumed they had gone through the cert but I find no reference to it until just recently (May 2007): http://www.opengroup.org/openbrand/register/brand3555.htm Also of interest is that only Solaris 10, HP-UX 11i V3, AIX 5L and now OS X 10.5 are UNIX 03 certified; with so many UNIX-like platforms out there I'm surprised there aren't more. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] /export/home vs. /home
Do you actually need the automounter? Personally, on every box I install I disabled the automounter and use /home as usual. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] equal access to opensolaris.org
Other sites have solved this problem by providing an audio option. Frankly I wasn't aware there were CAPTCHA's at all. I wouldn't worry much about it unless there was an explicit complaint/request. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Apple's new focus on making server administration
I think they've been UNIX certified for a long time although I'm too lazy to check. Frankly, I'd be happy to see Apple succeed in this space, it only means competition in a much needed area of simplifying and modernizing administrative tools. The key, however, is for them to not just focus on the GUI interfaces. Administering OS X Server via CLI is a real bear right now. In many ways the needs of Solaris and OS X in this area are converse. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] MS Windows 2003 to Solaris 10 ISCSI
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: On Thu, 2007-08-16 at 17:44 +1200, Ian Collins wrote: Curt Mills wrote: So we created an ISCSI target on our Solaris box and are now having trouble connecting to it from Windows 2003, Windows Vista, or Windows XP when the target is greater than 2GB. comp.unix.solaris is a better place to ask Solaris 10 questions. One would also argue that having paid support would be the exact type of thing needed in that scenario. In fact you're both wrong. As stated earlier this list is not a helpdesk, however This is clearly an issue that is of interest to the OpenSolaris Storage Community, and in particular the iSCSI Target Project. I would request that this question be raised there so that we can have a closer look and determine the nature of the problem. When submitting please include as much details as possible, such as what type of target, the discovery method (static, sendfiles, or iSNS), size of the target, Solaris release that you are using, filesystem on which the target LUN exists, and the output of 'iscsitadm list target -v'... along with any other tidbits that might help us analyze the problem. If there really is a problem we'll want to determine why and resolve it. Thanks. Find the discussion list here: http://opensolaris.org/os/project/iscsitgt/discussions/ benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ZFS with ISCSI on x86
Dick Davies wrote: On 03/07/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Either you wait until this stuff is backported to Solaris 10, which is 6 months at a minimum, or you download the source code and compile and package the stuff yourself. It's in update4, that's out in a month or 2. Update 4 is 7/07. Barring anything major it's less than 30 days out. The iSCSI Target Implementation and ZFS Integration are present, which means Update4 is the first properly supported release to really kick Thumper into gear. Good times Jeff, Good times. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] REMINDER: OpenSolaris Picnic in Sunnyvale Tomorow!
Just a friendly reminder to everyone. We're having the first annual OpenSolaris Community Picnic tomorrow at Baylands Park in Sunnyvale! Get details on the event at http://cuddletech.com/tamr/ in Tamarah's blog. If you want to register for the event (most people aren't) visit http://upcoming.yahoo.com/event/204238/. Lots of good BBQ will be present, swag for all, games and contests for kids and adults and lots of fun with peers. Come along and bring you friends! Event runs 11am till whenever. There is no specific time to show up, just drop by when you want to (first come first serve on food though). benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Marc Hamilton, Introduction
Marc Hamilton wrote: Hi, I wanted to introduce myself to the OpenSolaris community. Some of you might know me from my previous roles at Sun, or from my blog, but starting today I'll be leading up Sun's Solaris marketing efforts, including OpenSolaris marketing. The first thing I want to do is listen to the OpenSolaris community and understand what you want Sun to be doing better to support you. I've already had some good advice from my blog posting over the weekend including: - make sure you are telling non-Sun users about OpenSolaris - get more Sun engineers to speak on OpenSolaris at conferences, especially non-Sun oriented conferences like USENIX, LISA, etc. - clean up the branding, i.e. Solaris Express Community Edition, Solaris Express Developer Edition, OpenSolaris, Solaris 10, etc. While it is only my first day in the new job, I can already tell you there is a tremendous amount of executive attention at Sun focused on ensuring the OpenSolaris community is successful. Among many other things, one of my priorities is to ensure we bring our own Solaris 10 distribution closer to the OpenSolaris source base (there is a pretty big time lag right now). I'm really excited about my new job, hope to meet many more OpenSolaris community members, either virtually or in person, and look forward to the growing success of the community. BTW, here is my blog entry from June 14, 2005, the day we launched OpenSolaris. I guess I better get my team to start planning our two year anniversary. http://blogs.sun.com/marchamilton/entry/opensolaris_launch Congrats Marc! I'm very excited to see you in this new role. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE Build 61 available
Derek Cicero wrote: Please find the links to SXCE Build 61 at http://www.opensolaris.org/os/downloads/on/. Helloo CPU Caps! A big congrats to everyone who works on CPU-Caps and especially Alexander Kolbasov, *Andrei Dorofeev, and **Jonathan Chew*. Awesome job all! All we're missing now is VNIC Integration and then we shall unless the ultimate power of Zones! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Why should I vote for you?
Martin Bochnig wrote: Jim Grisanzio wrote: Glynn Foster wrote On 03/09/07 10:58,: Hi, Even though I'm a candidate, there's one overriding question that a lot of candidates haven't answered since they've produced absolutely no content other than accepting their nomination. Why should I spend one of my 7 votes on you? Here's my why: http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/entry/about_me_and_the_ogb Jim +1 Your project has seconds and will be created oh wait. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Revenge of the Unkillable Process
Dennis Clarke wrote: Ben, I'm reading this and calling up Cory Omand also who is the resident Apache2 guru here at Blastwave. We know that the worker model has been tweaked here to cooincide with work from the CoolStack. I am sure that Stefan Teleman will also have some insights. Regardless of what Apache may be doing it does not explain the userland process wedgeing the whole zone and then the Global zone. Let me look at this closely and .. I want to reproduce this here. I have snv_59 here on Sparc. Will that suffice ? I also have an Opteron machine that needs to be brought up to snv_59. Let me know what I can do to help to duplicate the issue and then perhaps track down the root cause. The issues I'm having is on snv_43 on Opteron. As of yet I have no reason to believe that this is solved on snv_56 (which I'm migrating all our systems to) and while there is a sendfilev fix in snv_57 I'm not certain that applies here. Unfortunately this issue is not reproducible. So little information is available when it happens that I can't isolate commonality by which to formulate a method to reproduce. Frankly, if I could reproduce it I could fix it... and thats the kicker. The big pictures issue for me is still the basic: why can a process end up in this state? and why can't I do something about it other than reboot? Thanks to the mdb tips offered in this thread I'll hopefully have some better information next time I encounter the problem. If you guys come up with anything I'll be really interested. I appreciate you having a look Dennis. ;) benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Revenge of the Unkillable Process
I brought up a similar issue some time back (http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=20355) which pertained to ligHTTPd. A fix on that issue has been integrated into snv_57, however, I'm seeing a similar situation with other applications include Mongrel and Apache and uncertain as to whether or not its the same issue. The symptoms are always the same: some process stops responding or, less frequently, goes nuts. The user typically attempts to restart the daemon and can't. They then try to 'kill -9' the process but can't. As a last ditch effort they reboot their zone which then ends up in a hung state (ie: perpetual shutting down). The result for us is that we end up needing to reboot the entire system to clear just that one zone. I'm still confused by the fact that any process can become so wedged that the only course of action is to reboot the entire system. Even if a process isn't responding or answering signals why can't the scheduler just dump the process and its mapped memory? In general this issue is really hurting Solaris's image. I'm getting piles of FUD each time we hit one of these issues. When this happened today I tried to dig up as much information as possible to demonstrate the issue: [globalzone:/] root# zoneadm list -vc ID NAME STATUS PATH 0 global running/ 64 zone123 shutting_down /zones/zone123 ... [globalzone:/] root# ps -efZ | grep zone123 global root 13404 1 0 Feb 22 ? 0:01 zoneadmd -z zone123 zone123 root 14220 1 0 Feb 22 ? 0:00 zsched zone123 nobody 15389 1 0 19:46:26 ? 0:00 /opt/csw/apache2/sbin/httpd -k start zone123 113 15932 1 0 19:51:29 ? 0:00 ruby ./script/backgroundrb start [globalzone:/] root# truss -pf 15389 truss: unanticipated system error: 15389 [globalzone:/] root# truss -pf 13404 13404/4:door_return(0x, 0, 0x, 0xFE65DE00, 1007360) (sleeping...) 13404/3:door_return(0x, 0, 0x, 0xFE779E00, 1007360) (sleeping...) 13404/2:door_unref()(sleeping...) 13404/1:pollsys(0x08046BD0, 4, 0x, 0x) (sleeping...) [globalzone:/] root# kill 15389 [globalzone:/] root# ps -efZ | grep 15389 zone123 nobody 15389 1 0 19:46:26 ? 0:00 /opt/csw/apache2/sbin/httpd -k start [globalzone:/] root# kill -9 15389 [globalzone:/] root# ps -efZ | grep 15389 zone123 nobody 15389 1 0 19:46:26 ? 0:00 /opt/csw/apache2/sbin/httpd -k start [globalzone:/] root# pstack 15389 pstack: cannot examine 15389: unanticipated system error [globalzone:/] root# pflags 15389 15389: /opt/csw/apache2/sbin/httpd -k start data model = _ILP32 flags = ORPHAN|MSACCT|MSFORK sigpend = 0x0040c101,0x /1:flags = 0 [globalzone:/] root# pfiles 15389 pfiles: unanticipated system error: 15389 [globalzone:/] root# pldd 15389 pldd: cannot examine 15389: unanticipated system error [globalzone:/] root# kill -9 13404 [globalzone:/] root# zoneadm list -vc ID NAME STATUS PATH 0 global running/ 64 zone123 shutting_down /zones/zone123 ... [globalzone:/] root# ps -efZ | grep zone123 zone123 root 14220 1 0 Feb 22 ? 0:00 zsched zone123 nobody 15389 1 0 19:46:26 ? 0:00 /opt/csw/apache2/sbin/httpd -k start zone123 113 15932 1 0 19:51:29 ? 0:00 ruby ./script/backgroundrb start [globalzone:/] root# kill -9 14220 [globalzone:/] root# ps -efZ | grep zone123 zone123 root 14220 1 0 Feb 22 ? 0:00 zsched zone123 nobody 15389 1 0 19:46:26 ? 0:00 /opt/csw/apache2/sbin/httpd -k start zone123 113 15932 1 0 19:51:29 ? 0:00 ruby ./script/backgroundrb start [globalzone:/] root# ps -efZ | grep zone123 zone123 root 14220 1 0 Feb 22 ? 0:00 zsched zone123 nobody 15389 1 0 19:46:26 ? 0:00 /opt/csw/apache2/sbin/httpd -k start zone123 113 15932 1 0 19:51:29 ? 0:00 ruby ./script/backgroundrb start [globalzone:/] root# dtrace -n profile-1234hz'/pid == 15932/[EMAIL PROTECTED]()] = count()}' dtrace: description 'profile-1234hz' matched 1 probe ^C [globalzone:/] root# dtrace -n profile-1234hz'/pid == 14220/[EMAIL PROTECTED]()] = count()}' dtrace: description 'profile-1234hz' matched 1 probe ^C [globalzone:/] root# dtrace -n profile-1234hz'/pid == 15389/[EMAIL PROTECTED]()] = count()}' dtrace: description 'profile-1234hz' matched 1 probe ^C [globalzone:/] root# mdb -k Loading modules: [ unix krtld genunix specfs dtrace cpu.AuthenticAMD.15 uppc pcplusmp ufs ip sctp usba lofs zfs random crypto ptm fcip fctl md fcp logindmux nfs ipc ] ::zone
Re: [osol-discuss] Y2K7 update?
Lloyd Staley Jr wrote: Hi, While not as precise as Dennis' answer a quick and dirty one: zdump -v $TZ | grep 2007 On my B56 system it shows: alpha% zdump -v $TZ | grep 2007 US/Pacific Mon Mar 5 03:07:34 2007 UTC = Sun Mar 4 19:07:34 2007 PST isdst=0 US/Pacific Sun Mar 11 09:59:59 2007 UTC = Sun Mar 11 01:59:59 2007 PST isdst=0 US/Pacific Sun Mar 11 10:00:00 2007 UTC = Sun Mar 11 03:00:00 2007 PDT isdst=1 US/Pacific Sun Nov 4 08:59:59 2007 UTC = Sun Nov 4 01:59:59 2007 PDT isdst=1 US/Pacific Sun Nov 4 09:00:00 2007 UTC = Sun Nov 4 01:00:00 2007 PST isdst=0 Note that there is also a patch for libc required to get the complete DST update, Since the timezone fix is there I am assuming that the libc fix is also included. Great tip Lloyd! By pulling the BugID's out of the SunSolve alert we find the original two bugs: The libc changes: 6348147 (http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6348147) The zoneinfo changes: 6226357 (http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6226357) Both of these bug fixes were integrated into snv_31, so any one on a even remotely recent system should be good to go. I saw that in B57 there was an update to 2007n which handled some cases for various parts of the world (namely Bermuda) but most everyone should be fine. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Joyent is Hiring: OpenSolaris Savvy Jr SysAdmin's Needed!
Want to get paid to work with OpenSolaris all day? Joyent is constantly pushing at the limits of what OpenSolaris can do. We're running Nevada in a cutting edge environment; this job isn't for the squeamish! Applicants have to be able to think on their feet and be prepared for a write the book as you go environment. If you can pickup a new technology in a day, your the kind of person we're looking for. If you are interested, send me your resume and cover-letter with an understanding that we care a lot more about what you can do than whats on your resume. Serious applicants only please. Ben Rockwood Director of Systems Joyent, Inc. Official Posting: Joyent is looking for a junior systems administrator. Joyent has been in the business of hosting small to large applications since 2004, and via its hosting product was the first to ever support Ruby on Rails applications. Joyent's founders and engineers have experience with some of the worlds largest web, email and newsgroup infrastructures, as well as academic and applied backgrounds in distributed systems. Joyent also has a series of web-delivered applications, and every month these handle more than 100 million emails and 150 million unique web hits. Joyent manages every operational component of a large architecture: systems, routers, switches, load balancers, anti-spam devices, and storage. We're looking for a junior systems administrator to learn what it is to manage large systems, to help support customers on this infrastructure, to assist with various systems migrations and to assist with the deployment, health and maintenance of Joyent's applications. You must be willing to work in a fast paced, constantly evolving environment with long hours and a passion for innovation. You must also have a passion for community, both external open source communities and our own customer communities. We'd like you to be a resourceful learner with an ability to leverage people, mailing lists, vendor support, IRC, documentation and anything else you can get your hands on. Technical Job Requirements: - Experience with a flavor of UNIX: Linux, FreeBSD or Solaris (we use Solaris with some FreeBSD around) - Experience with mail systems: Postfix and Courier - Experience with databases: SQLite, PostgreSQL, and MySQL. Basic SQL skills and backup methodology required. - Experience with Monitoring: SNMP, et al. - Experience with some web frameworks: Java EE, Python/Django, PHP/Zend, Ruby on Rails et al. - Experience administering storage: NFSv2/3/4, iSCSI, et cetera. We'd like you to have: - Excellent troubleshooting skills and familiar with Truss, GDB/MDB, vmstat/iostat and other observability tools. - A fundamental understanding of Networking (OSI Stack/TCP/Routing), DNS, ICMP, PXE and DHCP - A fundamental understanding of Load Balancing, Clustering and HA Solutions - Excellent Documentation Skills: Ability to turn problem solution into repeatable consolidated processes. - Naturally excellent customer service skills And if you really want to stand out: - Located in the Bay Area - Experience with ZFS-based storage systems - Capable of using DTrace for troubleshooting - Experience with F5's BigIP, Force10 Network Equipment and Lantronix Console Servers - Basic C Skills: Building and Packaging software. Experience with Solaris SysV packaging - Capable of writing automation scripts, preferably in Ruby or basic bourne. Perl, Python, and Java experience with willingness to learn is fine. - Experience with DNS systems: PowerDNS and BIND9 - Experience with directory servers and RADIUS: Sun Directory Server, OpenLDAP, and RADIUS/TACACS. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Community participation
Thank you Bonnie. :) benr. Bonnie Corwin wrote: Just FYI, there is a list of the bite-sized bugs: http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports/oss_bite_size I have added link to this page to http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports and we'll get a link on http://bugs.opensolaris.org as soon as we can. Bonnie Ben Rockwood wrote: While that would be handy, we already have a good program in place, its just buried. I refer to Bite Sized Bugs. I've pointed to this problem before: how do you find them? Bugs are (were) flagged in the database but finding a list of these is difficult or impossible. I've suggested in the past that on the 'bugs.opensolaris.org' page there be an small paragraph and link that can bring up all marked bite sized bugs. The idea here is that if someone sits down on a Saturday afternoon and wants a challenge they pull up the list, pull one that looks tasty and start working on a solution. Its got to be super easy for people to get started this way. benr. 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] Re: Project Proposal for Xfce Desktop
Ian Collins wrote: Ben Rockwood wrote: Provisional -1. I think this would be too granular. I'd like to see a rational for why this needs to be an OpenSolaris project. Xfce is developed in its own community setting already, creating a project here would constitute a fork, or parallel fork if you will, in my mind. The question then is: Does work need to be done on Xfce that will not be accepted by the standard Xfce codebase thus requiring an independent project? If not, then I believe this would be part of the SFW or CCD packaging projects which already exist. Have a look at the original thread on the desktop list: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=89897#89897 where this was discussed a few days ago. Excellent. Thank you. I'll upgrade to a +1. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal for Xfce Desktop
Provisional -1. I think this would be too granular. I'd like to see a rational for why this needs to be an OpenSolaris project. Xfce is developed in its own community setting already, creating a project here would constitute a fork, or parallel fork if you will, in my mind. The question then is: Does work need to be done on Xfce that will not be accepted by the standard Xfce codebase thus requiring an independent project? If not, then I believe this would be part of the SFW or CCD packaging projects which already exist. I know that JDS and KDE have projects, but these are much larger desktop projects with hundreds of applications and dependencies. Other desktop efforts such as Xfce and Enlightenment are much smaller by contrast and I don't see them as candidates for project status. I'm welcome to arguments in favor, I have no interest in turning anyone away (not that my opinion has any deciding weight, this proposal already has 4 seconds) but I want to be rational in our criteria, even prior to completion of the constitution. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: What does OpenSolaris Success look like to you? (was Re: [Fwd: Re: [osol-discuss] GPLv3?])
Simon Phipps wrote: On Feb 3, 2007, at 07:49, Ben Rockwood wrote: This is neither the first nor the last time this discussion will occur and frankly I don't see it as productive. You would rather Sun had not asked? Has there previously been a conclusive discussion about GPLv3 (I am aware of the discussions about GPLv2). Do you have evidence that the 18,000 registered on OpenSolaris.org (or at least the Core Contributors) would reject the GPLv3 (or embrace it)? Do you have an alternative method to consult? Would you rather the decision was made secretly? Are governance discussions unproductive by definition because they are not about code?[1] I was not passing judgement on those who've participated in this discussion, simply answered the Why there 800 people on this list and only 15 posting question from my perspective. Others may agree, others might not. As for whether or not governance discussions are productive or not... they are so long as they lead to completion of governance. Once governance is complete and a new OGB is in place we begin work on things that are more interesting, namely refining and honing the development processes. That work can't be completed until the framework of the project is hardened. And may I point out, that while ~15 people are making most of the comments on this thread, less than that are involved in governance. What proposal would you make for getting people here to take their governance responsibilities seriously? It seems people are happy to hack, but when it comes to running the place (that governance, this GPLV3 decision) they would rather leave it to others. Whether or not people care about governance is a personal opinion, people may feel as they wish. I think more people would care if they understood the purpose and direction of the project and how governance fits into that. This goes back to the old discussions on whether the OGB has enforcable power or not, whether or not Sun Executives can over-ride the OGB or not, etc. Maybe I'm wrong, but I've not yet seen anyone approach the OGB for an opinion on these GPLv3 issues. That says something to me. Many of these fears of which you speak are, I think, out of a sense that no one is running the show... and that means that Sun Microsystems Inc (the faceless entity) is in control, not the OGB or engineers or people with faces regardless of who they work for. I personally don't worry so much because I happen to know who makes the decisions. I know that its real people, not some faceless entity. I'm sure lots of people don't have that luxury and are concerned. Just a possibility. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: What does OpenSolaris Success look like to you? (was Re: [Fwd: Re: [osol-discuss] GPLv3?])
Dennis Clarke wrote: Just the facts, sir. 1. There are ~800 people registered on this list. There are ~15 people in these threads making most of the comments. I conclude that there are others to hear from. I do not conclude that your view is either representative or unrepresentative, just that it is your view. I have been wading through, trying to keep quiet, reading, deleting. reading and then wading through ... repeat There are probably 200 people doing the same. Dennis and I don't always agree, but he's right on the money. This is neither the first nor the last time this discussion will occur and frankly I don't see it as productive. We'll see success when people are _involved_ and not just debating and criticizing. The framework needs significant improvement, love, and time. I'm glad to see people talking, thats good, we need more of it, but I'd like to see productive discussion and involvement in the process... making it happen. AVS became a project today, thats productive, thats interesting... debating stupid dual licensing gimmicks to pander to an audience that wants domination rather than cooperation and pointing out failures is a waste. And may I point out, that while ~15 people are making most of the comments on this thread, less than that are involved in governance. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: SXCR Build 56 available
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since your commenting on good things in B56 I'll add the following server observations (on X4100): - Boot seems faster - There isn't any more first boot lag... Solaris has always dog'ed when dealing with devices aft er an install finishes. This is often seen when you have installed a system and run format for t he first time... hang hang hang. No more! - Similar to above, creating zpool's on the first boot is significantly faster. In general B56 just feels more peppy that previous releases even as current as B54. That big bug hunt would seem to have paid off dividends! Great work everone! Did you ever upgrade the firmware? Nope, stock firmware. Was this the 4-8 minute hang on boot trying to access the fake USB floppy/CD? 4-8 minute? Nope, never seen that one, thankfully. On B43 a system can panic and be back online in 8 minutes, which is the time for the dump, reboot, post, and boot. Hopefully I'll never know how long B56 takes to come up following a panic. ;) I thought we fixed that in Solaris a few builds earlier than that. Casper benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Community participation
While that would be handy, we already have a good program in place, its just buried. I refer to Bite Sized Bugs. I've pointed to this problem before: how do you find them? Bugs are (were) flagged in the database but finding a list of these is difficult or impossible. I've suggested in the past that on the 'bugs.opensolaris.org' page there be an small paragraph and link that can bring up all marked bite sized bugs. The idea here is that if someone sits down on a Saturday afternoon and wants a challenge they pull up the list, pull one that looks tasty and start working on a solution. Its got to be super easy for people to get started this way. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: SXCR Build 56 available
Since your commenting on good things in B56 I'll add the following server observations (on X4100): - Boot seems faster - There isn't any more first boot lag... Solaris has always dog'ed when dealing with devices after an install finishes. This is often seen when you have installed a system and run format for the first time... hang hang hang. No more! - Similar to above, creating zpool's on the first boot is significantly faster. In general B56 just feels more peppy that previous releases even as current as B54. That big bug hunt would seem to have paid off dividends! Great work everone! benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: SXCR Build 56 available
w00t! This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] ETA for SX:CR B56
Is there an ETA for SX:CR B56? I've got a lot of things on hold for this release. I know the B55 respin threw a wrench in the works, but any updates or best guesses as to when we'll see 56 would be appreciated. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: ETA for SX:CR B56
Thanks for the clarification Steve. I was about to have a heart attack. :) Incidentally, none of the putbacks were flagged as Duckhorn. The big pieces were integrated as 3 separate PSARC's which I reported here: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=18813tstart=0 Thanks for the link Dick! The SX:CR download link still points to B55 for me: http://opensolaris.org/os/downloads/sol_ex_dvd/ benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: ETA for SX:CR B56
Er, I jumped the gun. I need SX:CR. B56 sources and archives are available, sure, but those have been available for some time in nightlies. So I'm still looking for an ETA on SX:CR B56 itself. Friday? Sooner? Will a case of beer smooth the process? :) benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal: Availability Suite
A very enthusiastic second! benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenGrok useless?
Cyril Plisko wrote: On 12/23/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: In the beginning the opensolaris source index with OpenGok was extremely useful; unfortunately, it has become useless, IMHO, because it also indexes all projects on opensolaris.org. Another thing is that opengrok used to show history going back significantly beyond the opensolaris launch (2 years or someting). Since it was switch to index mercurial repo this feature was lost too. I found it very useful and would really appreciate having it back. I wouldn't say useless, but I will agree with both points. Wading through all the different overlapping tree's can become tedious and confusing. I currently work around this by bookmarking http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/onnv/onnv-gate/usr/src/; and clicking the only in src option to confine all searches to what I actually care about. A drop down box for consolidation on the front page when doing your initial search would be a nifty solution, so long as that setting is thereafter persistent. Regardless, my life would be much more complicated if it weren't for OpenGrok. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Unkillable Processes
You guys are the kings. Indeed it was bug 6455727. And indeed that DTrace one-liner illuminated the problem where no other tool could. The resolution was simple, add the following line to lighttpd.conf: server.network-backend = writev The Blastwave package is built with this backend, so its there and ready to use. After a quick look at lighttpd autof00 for 1.4.13 there doesn't appear to be a configure switch to disable sendfilev or make writev the default out of the box. Thanks Bryan and Matt for being so snappy, its a massive help for a problem thats been driving us crazy. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Unkillable Processes
I'm posting this to OS Discuss because I'm not sure where it would better be
posted. If there is a more appropriate list please say so.
I've run into a sad situation several times now, processes that can't be
killed. In all cases it happened to be 'lighttpd'. It sits on CPU consuming
cycles but I can't see what its doing. Even Dtrace is helpless.
[nicole:/] root# dtrace -F -p 4308 -n 'pid$target:::entry,pid$target :::return
{ trace(timestamp); }'
dtrace: failed to grab pid 4308: unanticipated system error
[nicole:/] root# dtrace -n 'profile-1000hz /pid == $target/ { @[ustack()] =
count(); }' -p 4308
dtrace: failed to grab pid 4308: unanticipated system error
[nicole:/] root# ps -ef | grep 4308
root 12640 2538 0 06:15:27 pts/8 0:00 grep 4308
webservd 4308 1 7 Dec 15 ? 65:00 /opt/patch/sbin/lighttpd -f
/opt/batchblue/etc/lighttpd/lighttpd.conf
[nicole:/] root# pstack 4308
pstack: cannot examine 4308: unanticipated system error
[nicole:/] root# truss -p 4308
truss: unanticipated system error: 4308
[nicole:/] root# kill -9 4308
[nicole:/] root# ps -ef | grep 4308
webservd 4308 1 8 Dec 15 ? 65:36 /opt/patch/sbin/lighttpd -f
/opt/batchblue/etc/lighttpd/lighttpd.conf
No amount of tinkering, destruction, or killage can make this process go away.
I can't attach a debugger and can't force it to core dump.
When this happens in a Zone it makes matters worse. Attempting to reboot or
halt the zone won't work because a process is still running inside of it. The
zone then gets into this stuck state where its not up, but it still holding
resources open.
So I have several questions and concerns here:
1) How is it possible for a process to get into an unkillable state?
2) Is there some kind of scheduler magic that can be done to just dump the
process however hostile?
3) Is there some way we can protect zones from this sort of issue?
4) Why can't any of Solaris's dozens of observability tools get a glimpse into
this thing?
Right now there is only one solution to these annoying problems: reboot the box
and avoid using lighttpd where ever possible. I'd gladly patch lighttpd to
keep this issue for happening but without some debugging I can't be sure of
what code is to blame.
I've found several bugs in the database that look similar to this in one way or
another but most say to look at the comments, which sadly we can't see.
I'm open to all ideas and theories.
Thanks.
benr.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal: OpenSolaris Audit
Another enthusiastic thumbs up. I'd love a forum to specifically discuss auditing and its future development. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: 64k kernel project
Holger Berger wrote: Project proposal: 64k kernel project I propose a 64k kernel project. This project should contribute and support on an on-going basis: - A SPARC kernel which uses 64k pages instead of 8k pages (dwarf pages) as default page size. The system should no longer use or support the usage of 8k pages - Necessary modifications to kernel modules to support the 64k page size mode (notable usage of hard coded 8k page size exists for example in the UFS module) - Necessary modifications to user land tools in ON to support the kernel 64k page size mode - Create the tools necessary to create, maintain and profile the kernel performance. The leaders initially will be Knut Reinert and myself. This project proposal has one (large) problem: We can only start this project if Sun is willing to contribute the changes of their own (abandoned) 64k kernel project - is this possible? If work was done toward a 64k kernel some time back it would be interesting to see the result of that work, however this project just sounds cursed from the get-go and a possible drain on resources. A definitely kool project but not one that I think should be in or around NV. Phrases like should no longer support are a total non-starter. -1. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: OpenSolaris Parallels Workstation
Awesome. That CD issue has been killing me. Your the man Duncan! benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal: iSNS Server
Victor Li wrote: Project Proposal: iSNS Server I would like to propose the creation of a new project page for the Solaris iSNS Server work. We are currently in the design stage of this project, we want the community to join early to participate in our design and start to implement it. The project currently consists of: RFC4171 - Internet Storage Name Service (iSNS) I enthusiastically second despite it being approved already. This should be an exciting project and I'm looking forward to participating as much as possible. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal: NDMP
Mark A. Carlson wrote: I'd like to propose a NDMP on Solaris project, the porting of the standard (http://www.ndmp.org/) version of the Network Data Management Protocol, an open standard protocol for network-based backup. NDMP version 2 and version 3 support would be available initially, followed by version 4 support later. This project would be part of the Storage Community that already hosts the Open Solaris storage consolidation. I second. Solaris has needed this for a long time. I look forward to watching the project grow and participating where possible. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Where is the “community” in Solaris Express Community Release?
James Dickens wrote: OpenSolaris has been out a year now and the number one download of the community is Solaris Express Community Release, but what makes it the Community release? Is it because it's released 2 weeks earlier than Solaris Express? How about adding things into it that makes it different and more useful and closer reflect the community as a whole? Most people after installing it immediately have to install 3rd party drivers and apps. My idea is to let the community vote on what should be added to the community release some examples include DTrace Toolkit by Brendan G. All 3rd party hardware drivers that we can obtain permission to put on the disk BrandZ patches if available for the particular build/ Rich Teer's documents on building OpenSolaris Pkg-add Schilly's Lib and Tools (star, sfind, cdrecord, etc.) Firefox Community Submitted themes and Wallpapers. Since Solaris Express Community version obviously not supported by Sun as documented in the click through licensing agreements, why not make it easier on the users and make it easier for Linux converts no need to make them go on the net to get what the Communities have built I'm sure with a little work from a Sun Engineer, all these could be added to the Solaris Express Install quite painlessly before each Solaris Express Community Release Drop. New users and converts are turned off by saying go download foo. To make Solaris work the way they expect it to behave. At the outset, I see your point and respect it, but would make the following arguments: 1) Governance and the development processes are still very much in progress. We're getting closer and closer every day to completing these but its a huge task and as such the proper procedures for making such a case are not yet in place. 2) The community in SX:CR is, by my interpretation, for the development community that is keeping in sync as closely as possible with what the full Solaris build would be like. Diverging from the standard WOD makes it something else(tm), in a sense a seperate competing distribution. 3) There are currently 5 distributions for OpenSolaris. I see no reason to neglect those efforts and to attempt to push effort back into something thats not attempting to compete. 4) Its been made clear that OpenSolaris will not endorse or creation of its own any one distribution. I agree with and respect that opinion. SX:CR is not a distro, nor should it become one. To attempt to do so is to break a long standing agreement. I could go on, but in short, your asking for a distro. Therefore I suggest using a distro. If Nexenta or others isn't keeping up to date or doesn't contain tools you want as quickly as you'd wish, then helping them push out releases fast would be the appropriate course of action. Alternatively, start you own distro. :) benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Where is the “community” in Solaris Express Community Release?
James Dickens wrote: All 5 current distrobutions are currently handicaped. There are lack the ability of including close bits that are included by Solaris Express. Untill everything is open it has advantages that no other distrobution can have why not include what the community has created. Handycapped how? I'm not sure what it is that you want in a distro that isn't already available in the open. What if Sun isn't the one that does it, but the community as a whole votes on what it wants, will Sun allow us to submit a request to incdude what the Community wants in its special community release By your words, Sun IS the one doing it, the community simply would be applying pressure. We all want things to go, not just into SX:CR, but into S10 Updates as well. Everyones list is diffrent. Thats where distros really shine, because each caters to a diffrent group of people. Even still, yes, there are some things that aren't open yet, sometimes thats an issue, many times its not. Lord knows I want desprately to make Enlightenment a standard part of the install, I've got my list too. One way to resolve this is to create downloadable Booster Packs; your own CCD if you will. People could download all the things you want and install them on top of the OS without having to integrate through the development procedures. I did such a thing with SIDEkick. Changing just SX:CR isn't without its potential problems and its a lot of work. If we, in the community, can do all that work and Sun just needs to give a thumbs up or down, I'm willing to join such an effort. However, if we're just going to use apply pressure untill it happens, forcing the work on someone else, I'm not. In the (hopefully) very near future there will be ways to make proposals like this through solid channels within our OpenSolaris community so that there is a bit more order. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Anniversary meet up for Bay Area locals?
Ow Mun Heng wrote: On Tue, 2006-06-13 at 13:23 -0700, Octave Orgeron wrote: Hi Karyn Great idea! For those who are a little further north in SF, would anyone be willing to meet up downtown? I'm a little bit south though, at San Jose. (vicinity of airport) How many are going anyway? Show of Hands? I had plans for Wed night, but my wife is insisting that I drink Guinness instead, so I'll be there. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Patricipation in the .org pavilion at Linuxworld SF
Sounds good. I'll take what we've got. ;) Thanks for offering the ISO Steve. ;) benr. Sara Dornsife wrote: I have ordered both CDs and DVDs, so you can use which ever is appropriate. Sara Teresa Giacomini wrote: Fantastic. Hey Ben, what do you think? This is a cool idea. We can figure out exactly what we are going to include closer to the date of the conference. Sara Dornsife wrote On 06/06/06 14:01,: And we will have some DVDRs printed up that you can produce them on. Sara Stephen Lau wrote: Teresa, I still have my SXCR+Studio10+ON+NexentaLiveCD mash-up DVD ISO if you want to produce some of those for LinuxWorld. I can update it for build 41. cheers, steve On Tue, Jun 06, 2006 at 12:44:15AM -0700, Ben Rockwood wrote: Teresa Giacomini wrote: Awesome Ben. Thanks so much for taking this on. And to Alan for offering to be there. Rich, I've got no idea whether Sun will be able to fund a tripI think the answer is likely not. I'm happy to help with logistics and suchlike concall numbers for planning and such. So, shall we have the discussion hereor create a special alias for the planning folks? Thoughts? I don't think we need a special list, its all pretty straight forward. I'll need the booth number when you have it. As for stuff... I'll need the standard signage spread and at least two machines, preferably a T2000 and an Ultra 45. I'll bring along a box of my own (whitebox) as well, as usual. At least we'll have net access at LinuxWorld, we didn't at the MySQL Users Conf. If there is swag I'll take what you've got... but please, black only, no more hidious white ringer tshirts. If we've got code kits, thats good, but not required. Basically, since we're in .Org we're not expected to have swag on hand, but it never hurts. So really, signage and systems are the biggies. Beyond that, getting as many people as possible to help in the booth is good. I'll plan to be there for the full show, but its a good ways away and who knows what'll come up and its always nice to have another body there, makes it seem less like work. When you've got the passes available let me know and I'll swing by MPK17 to grab a stack. In my experience its nearly impossible to give out all the passes they give you, but having them a little before hand we could possibly give them out at a local user group, namely SVOSUG and BayLISA. So, about 40 or so should cover that. Lastly, if there are any other Sun events occuring at or around the show, as much forewarning as possible is good. BOF's or grip-and-grins, etc. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Patricipation in the .org pavilion at Linuxworld SF
Teresa Giacomini wrote: Awesome Ben. Thanks so much for taking this on. And to Alan for offering to be there. Rich, I've got no idea whether Sun will be able to fund a tripI think the answer is likely not. I'm happy to help with logistics and suchlike concall numbers for planning and such. So, shall we have the discussion hereor create a special alias for the planning folks? Thoughts? I don't think we need a special list, its all pretty straight forward. I'll need the booth number when you have it. As for stuff... I'll need the standard signage spread and at least two machines, preferably a T2000 and an Ultra 45. I'll bring along a box of my own (whitebox) as well, as usual. At least we'll have net access at LinuxWorld, we didn't at the MySQL Users Conf. If there is swag I'll take what you've got... but please, black only, no more hidious white ringer tshirts. If we've got code kits, thats good, but not required. Basically, since we're in .Org we're not expected to have swag on hand, but it never hurts. So really, signage and systems are the biggies. Beyond that, getting as many people as possible to help in the booth is good. I'll plan to be there for the full show, but its a good ways away and who knows what'll come up and its always nice to have another body there, makes it seem less like work. When you've got the passes available let me know and I'll swing by MPK17 to grab a stack. In my experience its nearly impossible to give out all the passes they give you, but having them a little before hand we could possibly give them out at a local user group, namely SVOSUG and BayLISA. So, about 40 or so should cover that. Lastly, if there are any other Sun events occuring at or around the show, as much forewarning as possible is good. BOF's or grip-and-grins, etc. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Patricipation in the .org pavilion at Linuxworld SF
Teresa Giacomini wrote: Hi folks, The OpenSolaris community has been invited to participate in the .org pavilion at Linuxworld San Francisco. Anyone out there interested in taking the lead on this? I'm happy to help out with logistics and such, but I'd love to see some local folks get involved too. We'll need a leader, and people to hang out in the booth - it must be staffed at all times. Here's the info I have: Dates: August 14-17, 2006 What do we get as part of our participation? - 10' x 10' space on show floor in designated area - 500 watt electrical drop - One internet drop - 200 kbs shared service - One 6' draped table - One 6' draped counter - Two stools - One wastebasket - Carpet in show colors - Booth cleaning - Overnight perimeter security - Exposure in future print and Web marketing materials - On-site identification signage - Access to press lists and attendee lists - 100 free Expo passes for our community/customers Very kool. I'll be there. I can take the lead if no one else wants it, I've done the .Org pavilion at LinuxWorld before. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Percentage of Solaris now open source ?
Richard L. Hamilton wrote: A third metric (arguably as silly) is the percentage of bytes in files in the whole Solaris distro derives entirely from open-sourced source files (counting shared libraries separately from what links to them). Perhaps you just need to: * think about what metric is most acceptable to the audience for this info (whoever that will be, but keeping in mind that it will probably have to look reasonable in public one day too) * be sure to describe what metric(s) you used along with the raw numbers. That way, at least there would be truth in advertising, and less excuse for someone disputing the figure (assuming it was accurate according to your chosen metric) I'd oppose such a metric. The underlying bits (Nevada) should be as small as possible, so a metric doesn't look good for just Nevada. Even if you loop in all things open source, JDS, Nevada, etc, it still requires explanation. The problem with supplying one number (a percentage in this case) is thats all they want and all they need. No explanation will be read, by and large. We'd just be setting ourselves up to look bad. When that percentage hits 100% I'll feel diffrent, but even Solaris is 98% Open Source! looks bad when your looking for something to harp on. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Wiki: Community SketchPads
Hello All, Several communities have had a need for a general purpose Wiki-space where they could sketch out various ideas, concepts, docs, proposal, etc, in a easily accessable and collaborative way. The Genunix Wiki was created (www.genunix.org/wiki/) at the request of the OGB for this purpose (namely for working on the governance drafts). The Wiki, however, is useful far beyond this origonal intent and as a member of the OpenSolaris Docs Community I built out the Wiki to server a variety of purposes. But just having a Wiki isn't enough. Despite it being available its still not used to its potential, namely because its unclear as to where you should put your stuff. In an attempt to solve this problem I've created the concept of Community SketchPad's (http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/SketchPad, or see the Wiki's front page). A top level SketchPad entry exists to index SketchPad's created for varoius OpenSolaris communities, projects, and other OpenSolaris-releated efforts. Anyone is free to create a SketchPad of their own by simply editing the list on that index page. The SketchPad concept is simple, a general purpose dumping ground for collaberation. These pages can be as structured or unstructed as you prefer and are ideal for TODO lists that can be edited by anyone that wishes. This frees up Community and Project leaders from constantly needing to manually update static pages on the OpenSolaris.org site and allow people to communicate more quickly and efficiently. For further questions or comments reguarding the Wiki at Genunix.org please contact the OS-Docs community by way of the discussion list. This is just one of a number of ways that we think we can contribute in a positive way to all of OpenSolaris and we hope to provide more in the future. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: Nevada Companion Software
Dennis Clarke wrote: Dennis Clarke wrote: The Solaris Community has something for you : See : https://lists.blastwave.org/mailman/listinfo Simply join the users list. It has existed for quite some time. Then you can begin a discussion on the topic of open source software that may be installed as options to Solaris. Given the reactions on this discussion so far, it appears discussions of anything other than blastwave would result in vehement attacks, so I'll pass on that. Sadly this discussion has only served to lower my previously high opinion of the people behind the blastwave project. Then change the topic to Community Software for Solaris and continue. After all, the objective is to deliver a solution to the Solaris user and the Solaris customer. Possibly even each other. That was always the idea from the beginning. The idea from the beginning was a proposal by Keith to take a process that is currently closed and to open it. It was never about Blastwave v SFW v CCD. The arguments seen in this thread are based on personal emotion and feelings of resentment, not whats best for the end users, Sun customers, or even the community at large. The discussion has been unproductive since 12:25pm PST yesterday when Jim accepted the seconded proposal and asked Eric to setup the project space. The appropriate course of action is to be involved in the forth going project and to help guide it such that Blastwave and SFW don't compete, but complement each other to such an extent as that is possible. Personally, I believe that an apology is owed to, at the minimum, Keith and Steven. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: Nevada Companion Software
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Here I am in 2006 with people upset and outright angry with me. I have a guy sending me an email that tells me to issue an apology to Kieth and Steve C. I see another guy wants to run around to all his clients and tell them to avoid blastwave. We're not angry or upset; we're just surprised that you seem to be. Since I'm noted I'll follow up as well. I know I'm not angry or upset. I thought that using Kieth's proposal as a catalyst for this larger argument which I personally think is separate from the proposal was unfair to Keith, and several pokes are being made indirectly at Steve which seems kinda unfair, but its not against me, I have no reason to be bothered one way or another except that I'd rather we were all happy and working together. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: Nevada Companion Software
Dennis Clarke wrote: Hi folks, I was informed there was a bit of a broohaha over here, about packaging up open source binaries for solaris and opensolaris. So, as the author of pkg-get, and the creator/leader of the CSW packaging efforts living on blastwave.org, I thought I'd poke my head in and wave. This is a great explanation of the problem with bloat. The issue at hand is the creation of a new project whick will allow for a discussion on how to proceed with the Companion CD that installs into the /opt/sfw area. Or even to discuss a whole new plan of attack for the problem. The software repository and release procedures we have at Blastwave are a current successful model that addresses the open source needs of Solaris users. However, it is far from perfect. Can we open discussions that will allow us to explore other possibilities or perhaps apply what we have learned ? This is exactly what I think one of the primary focuses of this new project will be. The SFW and Blastwave minds have been apart far too long and this project, being in the open, finally brings everyone together at one table, with equal ability to provide input and guidance. I would propose that both Steve and Phil be made leaders of the new project. I think everyone can agree that all involved parties bring a lot to the table, but everyone can think of trade offs between them. Having the combined experience involved in this effort would finally put us on the right track to having a solution that, if not solves these problems, at least allows everyone to more cleanly interact. I can think of several possible new ways of implementing things that would provide a better freeware platform for everyone, in which Blastwave and Sun both have distinct advantages and no one is made inferior, just off the top of my head. I know that others have plenty of ideas themselves. Clearly, Blastwave has the delivery and selection nailed, hands down. The CCD has a reputation that many customers trust and solely rely upon. There has got to be a multitude of ways of making these two come together in a productive way but still provide distinction between them so that everyone can win. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal: RENO
Nicolas Williams wrote: The goal of Project RENO [0] is to facilitate interoperability with Active Directory (see project WINCHESTER [1]), as well as with any directory that requires self-credentialed lookups [2] for information relevant to the login process, and the DCE model of distributing such information with authentication tokens. Project RENO involves a revamp of the Solaris login infrastructure, specifically: - providing a link between network authentication frameworks and PAM, and - providing a subject object output from PAM by which PAM modules may describe Unix user accounts. Support for use of these facilities by Solaris PAM modules and Solaris PAM applications in the ON consolidation is included. Backwards compatibility is preserved for all PAM applications in environments where they currently function properly. Initially only network authentication through the GSS-API will be linked into PAM. PAM items will be added by which applications may pass GSS-API mechanism OID, remote principal name and delegated credential objects to PAM modules. Closely related to project RENO is Per-User PAM Configuration [3] which allows for canned PAM configurations to be selected according to user's user_attr(4) entries, with defaults provided by profiles listed in policy.conf(4). I'll second. Is a project plan currently in the works or available? I'd like get a better idea of what this would entail. Great detail as to how Winchester depends on this project would be of great interest to me. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: RFE: Mailman list for genunix Wiki diffs / was: Re: [osol-discuss]Changes to the Genunix Wiki
Roland Mainz wrote: Erm... I was proposing a mailinglist for the diffs of the Genunix.org Wiki commits, not something for the OpenSolaris main repository... Ah, I misread it... doing too many things at once. Anyway, same answer, if you want to implement it, let me know and I can arrange to put it in place. Build it and they will come. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: RFE: Mailman list for genunix Wiki diffs / was: Re: [osol-discuss] Changes to the Genunix Wiki
Roland Mainz wrote: Ben Rockwood wrote: If there are any further issues, annoyances, requests or general Genunix comments please, as usual, address them to Al Hopper and/or myself. Is it possible to get a mailman list to which the diffs (gdiff -u) of the changes are posted (similar to a CVS commit list most opensource projects have) ? Yes, I know... there is the RSS feed - but that requires special machinery (e.g. RSS client), has no archive (mailman has all the postings archived) and does not allow easy searching (mails from mailman can simply be searched in your local mail folder (or GMail)). This could greatly help tracking down malicious changes, allows quick reactions when the spambots attack again (well... emails from commit lists are usually near realtime... :-) ) and even allow better communication within the community (e.g. it would be possible to comment on diffs and debate them...). This sort of thing will be more plausible in the future when a proper SCM is in place and each individual putback/commit is made, rather than the current en mass drops. A variety of mechanisms will grow up around the infrastructure. That said, in the meantime, your free to undertake such a task as you propose now, yourself. This is a community, feel free to contribute. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: iSCSI Target implementation?
Nigel Smith wrote: Yes, please could you check report back if any work or progress is being made on 'iSCSI target' support for Solaris. If it were possible to team-up an SCSI target with the ZFS filesystem, it would be really useful, and get lot's of new people using Solaris. A good iSCSI target is available for Linux (http://iscsitarget.sourceforge.net/), so it is very disappointing that Solaris is not currently able to do this. You wouldn't be so disappointed if you used it. Yes, Linux technically has a target implementation, but its not perfect by any means. I want Sun's iSCSI target badly myself... but I wouldn't lay on the Linux's got one guilt trip. :) benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Getting ON 35 - mirrors?
Stephen Lau wrote: Eric Ziegast wrote: The Announcements forum listed this URL to get ON35: http://dlc.sun.com/osol/on/downloads/b35/ I've been trying to access that page for over 2 hours with no response. Perhaps it's overloaded or overwhelmed. It's not my network connection, because I even try raw HTTP request from several places around the net and see that it does not respond to any of them. Does anyone serve mirrors of the ISOs? Are there other ways to get b35? For example, if I got b34 from the quick-responding main download page, how to I upgrade to b35? I'm sure there's an FAQ somewhere in someone's blog, but I haven't found it in opensolaris.org's FAQ list. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org The download center (dlc.sun.com) has been experiencing problems this morning/early afternoon. It looks like it should be up and running now. Indeed it is. Additionally, both the current code (3/13 - www.genunix.org/mirror/) and B35 (www.genunix.org/mirror/b35) are available via Genunix. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: [networking-discuss] Crossbow OpenSolaris Project Proposal
Kais Belgaied wrote: Sebastien Roy wrote On 03/14/06 18:27,: Carol Gayo wrote: The Crossbow project (http://opensolaris.org/os/community/networking/crossbowpreso.pdf) is a network virtualization technology that greatly improves resource control, performance and network utilization needed to achieve true OS virtualization, utility computing and server consolidation. Crossbow will be the foundation for future innovation in network security (DDOS, IDM, etc.), consolidated appliances, and end-to-end resource control. We propose to make Crossbow an official OpenSolaris project. The initial project leaders will be: - Sunay Tripathi - Kais Belgaid - Nicolas Droux I second that. ditto Definately... two big thumbs up!! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] AMD 64 X2 processor support
Ken wrote: anyone have experience using solaris 10 with the amd 64 x2 processors? I am looking to build a rather cheap low end server. TIA Yes. ;) [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~$ psrinfo -vp The physical processor has 2 virtual processors (0 1) x86 (chipid 0x0 AuthenticAMD family 15 model 43 step 1 clock 2211 MHz) AMD Athlon(tm) 64 X2 Dual Core Processor 4200+ [EMAIL PROTECTED] ~$ uname -a SunOS aeon 5.11 snv_33 i86pc i386 i86pc benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Bi-weekly roll-up report experiment (Was: Seeking an OpenSolaris Celeb)
Eric Boutilier wrote: This sort of data definate answers the age old questions Where is everyone? very well. The data would need to be generated on a weekly basis though, any longer than 1 week and the data isn't terrably useful because all the discussions are too old to get involved in, and I see this as being a great way to more properly channel interest around the hot topics and perhaps more importantly, around the neglected topics. What I'm not clear about is how this report was generated. Was it by hand or by some application? It's actually just done via some rather crude mbox/header munging using tools such perl, uniq, sort, and the formail (comes with procmail) header munging/extraction tool, and then finished off with some (too much actually) manual touchups. E.g. filtering which original posts are made by leaders and also the flagging of leaders in the last part of the report is currently almost 100% manually done. The mbox format of the forums is available from the mailman archives. I'll see how much further I can automate it to try and get the frequency down to weekly instead of bi-weekly. This is genius Eric! I had figured that if someone was going to do everything by hand the easiest way would be to just sign onto all the lists, filter them, and then using an advanced mail client like Thunderbird, oraganize them, search them, etc but, I never considered the option of simply automating that whole process. This presents a very wide range of options that could be really handy. Frankly, we could end up creating a small project just for such a thing. Very kool indeed. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal: ZFS Cryptographic Support
Darren J Moffat wrote: I'd like to add a project as part of the ZFS community for adding encryption support to ZFS. It would also be affiliated with the security community. The project will cover the architecture, design and implementation of encryption support for ZFS and the key management. It is intended that this be a multi phase delivery project and when each phase (I envisage 3 at the moment but that could change based on consensus) we would determine if continuing as a project makes sense or if this is just rolled into the ZFS community as a whole. I _definately_ second this proposal! Talk about a fun project, thats gonna be excellent! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: NWAM project proposal
John Beck wrote: Michael Network Automagic Michael (http://opensolaris.org/os/community/approachability/nwam/) has Michael been working as part of the approachability community for a while. Michael Recently we put out ... the first revision of our architecture. Michael We are interested in creating a project around NWAM. Seconded. Third. Sounds like a good project. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Seeking an OpenSolaris Celeb
Jim Grisanzio wrote: Hello All, The OpenSolaris Project is a monster of a project. t. By my count we've got 38 communities, 5 projects, 93 mailing lists (many of those are the OSUG lists), and hundreds of blogs. This is absolutely no way to stay informed about whats happening in the project, and where people are needed at any given time, especially for those of us trying to work in multiple areas of the project. I think that was we really need to keep people le informed is a weekly report on the project as a whole. This is the sort of thing done by a lot of the larger open source projects out there. For an example, check out The Linux Documentation Project Weekly News: http://www.tldp.org/ldpwn/20051102.html I put this out as a request because this is is undoubtedly a full time job. The idea would be to produce a weekly spot that outlined, in a very condensed form, everything thats going on. Ultimately, it would be neat to have both a web eb based report but also an OpenSolaris PodCast to go along with it, perhaps picking up Richard Giles torch and building upon what he started. This would be a great opportunity for someone who ho isn't sure how to contribute but is really enthusiastic. I'd like to fill this role myself but just don't have the time. If you're interested respond to this thread, or or even better yet, just go for it and lets see how things go! Good idea. Happy to help. I think you'll need several people to collaborate on this, though. It's just too big (and will only get bigger and move faster) for one person to speak authoritatively about. It would be great to have some summaries of the mail lists, too. Summarising the mailing lists would be the primary goal. Aggrigation via RSS can only go so far, at some point you need an intellegent and informed human being to summarize mailing list threads, point out references to work being done, etc. If such an effort were successful we'd all be in the know on a weekly basis. Right now many of us are only aware of a fraction of whats underway and where things stand. As a perfect example, the recent confusion and frustration reguarding SX:CR B33 could have been avoided is we'd all been working off the same sheet of paper. Currently, we are welcoming community contributions to the newsletter, which is monthly at this point. We'd like to grow it substantially. And in the content project, I'd love to do some multi-media stuff with podcasts (would love some equipment for that, too :)). I can easily see representatives from multiple communities/projects getting involved with an idea like this. Another great example, I have no idea which of Sun's gazillion newsletters your refering to. :) There are several ways to approach this, several of which we discussed this afternoon in IRC: 1) A single individual keeps informed on everything and reports weekly via report (HTML) and possibly a PodCast. I like this solution only because it gives everything a single voice and a singular style. However, its far too big a job for one person unless they really are willing to take it on as a full-time (in the open source sense) job. 2) A centralized report thats updated throughout a given period by everyone, aka: the wiki solution. In this method we'd create a new Wiki page every week, which everyone could add to, update, and modify for that weeks period. On a certain day the page would be closed and locked out. This relieves the burden from a single individual but allows things to fall through the cracks. There is no guarrentee that _everything_ will make it in. 3) The beaurocratic method, weekly reports from every community leader. Forcing every community to report back to the mother ship every week would really be a burden I think and asking far too much, plus you'd have to enforce it and police the reports. Its just a bad idea, but it should be noted in a list such as this. 4) A small commitee of sorts. This is something of a combination of #1 and #2. You centralize the information on a wiki for everyone to contribute but assign a group of volenteers as over-seers to check things and makes sure the cracks are filled. There are other ideas, but I'll leave it at that for now. There are several options. Given that this isn't the sort of decision that can be laid in stone so easily, perhaps we'll start with the wiki solution and see if it sinks or swims. In the meantime it'd be great to hear other ideas or find out if any specific members of the community would have a desire to contribute in this way. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Bi-weekly roll-up report experiment (Was: Seeking an OpenSolaris Celeb)
Very nice indeed! Highly complementary. This sort of data definate answers the age old questions Where is everyone? very well. The data would need to be generated on a weekly basis though, any longer than 1 week and the data isn't terrably useful because all the discussions are too old to get involved in, and I see this as being a great way to more properly channel interest around the hot topics and perhaps more importantly, around the neglected topics. What I'm not clear about is how this report was generated. Was it by hand or by some application? And could we expand it to aggrigate information across all the discussion groups or just one at a time? Either way, putting this information into the hands of a group of people maintaining the weekly news, and then tacking it to the report for breakout purposes would be absolutely invaluable! benr. Eric Boutilier wrote: tools-discuss 02/01 - 02/14 Threads or annoucments originated by leaders during the period: - Source code hosting implementation, draft by sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) - Initial DSCM experiences by Frank.Vanderlinden at Sun.COM (Frank van der Linden) - Distributed SCM status by sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) Size of all threads during period: Thread size Topic --- - 19 Source code hosting implementation, draft 19 Initial DSCM experiences 11 Distributed SCM status 2 Distributed SCMs and OpenSolaris 1 Mercurial and OpenSolaris Posting activity by person for period: # of posts Ldr By -- --- 12 * sch at eng.sun.com (Stephen Hahn) 10 oxygene at studentenbude.ath.cx (Patrick Mauritz) 7* Frank.Vanderlinden at Sun.COM (Frank van der Linden) 4 sommerfeld at sun.com (Bill Sommerfeld) 3 Glynn.Foster at Sun.COM (Glynn Foster) 2 john.levon at sun.com (John Levon) 2 jblack at merconline.com (James Blackwell) 2 dermot.mccluskey at sun.com (Dermot McCluskey) 2 cyril.plisko at gmail.com (Cyril Plisko) 2 bos at serpentine.com (Bryan O'Sullivan) 2* Bonnie.Corwin at Sun.COM (Bonnie Corwin) 1 richlowe at richlowe.net (Richard Lowe) 1 peter.memishian at sun.com ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) 1 james.d.carlson at Sun.COM (James Carlson) 1 al at logical-approach.com (Al Hopper) Discussion URL: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=9 Main URL: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Seeking an OpenSolaris Celeb
Hello All, The OpenSolaris Project is a monster of a project. By my count we've got 38 communities, 5 projects, 93 mailing lists (many of those are the OSUG lists), and hundreds of blogs. This is absolutely no way to stay informed about whats happening in the project, and where people are needed at any given time, especially for those of us trying to work in multiple areas of the project. I think that was we really need to keep people informed is a weekly report on the project as a whole. This is the sort of thing done by a lot of the larger open source projects out there. For an example, check out The Linux Documentation Project Weekly News: http://www.tldp.org/ldpwn/20051102.html I put this out as a request because this is undoubtedly a full time job. The idea would be to produce a weekly spot that outlined, in a very condensed form, everything thats going on. Ultimately, it would be neat to have both a web based report but also an OpenSolaris PodCast to go along with it, perhaps picking up Richard Giles torch and building upon what he started. This would be a great opportunity for someone who isn't sure how to contribute but is really enthusiastic. I'd like to fill this role myself but just don't have the time. If you're interested respond to this thread, or even better yet, just go for it and lets see how things go! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: genunix wiki online
John Brewer wrote: http://wiki.opensolaris.org is not found when I try to open it up, as of this morning ! The real address is www.genunix.org/wiki/. A redirect from wiki.opensolaris.org may be avalible in the future but isn't currently. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Jonathan Schwartz and OpenSolaris GPLv3
UNIX admin wrote: I always take what Jonathan writes about with a pinch of salt. To be sure, the man's got some great ideas and he's got some vision. But unfortunately, he's becoming more of a marketeer then he ever was before, in the most negative sense. That's such a pity. Sure, one should look for new ways to bring the word out. But going to extremes just to get attention? What about collateral and long term damage that GPL could cause to Sun? Show at least a little faith in Jonathan. He watches us, meets with folks all over the world, talks with press people directly, and is atop the various divisions of Sun... he's got a much better view of the world than we do in the trenches. Did you consider the fact that prior to that blog entry Linus virtually lit the GPLv3 on fire and shot it into space? Linus's simple No. was a massive setback for the FSF. Jonathan's blog entry just contemplating the idea of using it at Sun suddenly brought a little hope back to things over there. Jonathan is a smart guy, and even though Scott seems to have all the visability theses days lets not doubt Jonathan's wisdom untill we have a reason to question him. Frankly, I'm standing behind Jonathan and won't bother sweating the small stuff. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another delay in release cycle ?
Dennis Clarke wrote: On 1/30/06, Cyril Plisko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Any ideas why there is no source drop for b32 and no ISOs for b31/b32 ? I was thinking the same. In any case .. I have a new mirror site ready to go .. I think I will post that just as soon as all is synced up. There will be all the necessary bits there for build 25 up to build 31. But no ISO's or tools that can not be redistributed. As far as I'm concerned B31 still hasn't happened. If it isn't mentioned on the downloads page its not official, imho, and thus why Genunix isn't mirroring it yet. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenGrok Firefox toolbar
Stephen Lau wrote: The OpenGrok Firefox toolbar extension is now up for download in the OpenGrok Files section: http://opensolaris.org/os/project/opengrok/files/ This is a fairly simple toolbar that is just a quick interface to searching cvs.opensolaris.org and bugs.opensolaris.org. It should be noted that you must be using Firefox 1.5. If you not already using it, nab it here: http://ftp.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/1.5/contrib/ benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenGrok Firefox toolbar
Stephen Lau wrote: The OpenGrok Firefox toolbar extension is now up for download in the OpenGrok Files section: http://opensolaris.org/os/project/opengrok/files/ This is a fairly simple toolbar that is just a quick interface to searching cvs.opensolaris.org and bugs.opensolaris.org. Just a reminder for those who want to search OpenGrok but may not want a full toolbar, my (unofficial) search plugins are still avalible: http://cuddletech.com/opensolaris/search.shtml benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] X4200 + build 28/30?
Rich Teer wrote: Hi all, I'm having problems (SCSI timeouts) installing SXCE on my X4200. I've tried builds 28 and 30 without any success (will try Solaris 10 1/06 later tonight), so as a sanity check I thought I'd check here to make sure that there are no known problems. I haven't tried OpenSolaris but I've got S10 U1 running on it. She purrs like a kitten. I can get SX:CR on it tomorow if you'd like. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Proposal: OpenSolaris Articles Project
Jim Grisanzio wrote: Here is a proposal to form a project to produce article content for opensolaris.org. OpenSolaris Articles Project Community members have been asking if they can write articles for opensolaris.org and what the process would be to produce those articles. Yes, we'd love the content, and no, there's no process right now. The website guidelines say that individual communities are responsible for their own content -- for accuracy, adherence to TOU, etc -- but we don't have any process for developing community-wide content. This proposed Articles Project would develop the necessary processes for article generation and solicit contributors. We'd have to decide what content is needed, who'd write/edit/produce that content, how it would be reviewed for accuracy, in what form it would be published, and where it would be published. So, let's start a project to: * implement an article content review and publishing process * solicit and publish articles from the community * grow that process into a peer-reviewed, community-led system Initially, the project will provide support for community members interested in writing, editing, and reviewing OpenSolaris content for the Articles page: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/articles/. These articles could also be used as content for conferences, journals, and other forums. We could develop all kinds of community-wide content, including feature articles, community profiles, technical articles, commentaries, and QAs. Over time, the project could expand the Articles page to include more multi-media content such as artwork, podcasts, screencasts, and videos. I suppose we'd need a list. How about [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's it. What do you think? I think this is duplication. There already exists at Documentation community, such an effort should be coordinated through that effort. An articles project is fine, but it should be done in lock step with the OpenSolaris Docs team. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Proposal: OpenSolaris Articles Project
Alan DuBoff wrote: On Monday 23 January 2006 02:44 pm, Jim Grisanzio wrote: I'll look at BigAdmin for this and for any overlap (and for borrowing of any ideas, too). Jim, What you'll find is that the bigadmin folks want to control any and all content on the site, and that content published there is said to not be allowed to be put on other sites, only a link. We could in theory link to them, but wouldn't it be better to just come up with our own content? I don't think their view is the proper way to share this information. I would be more than happy to modify the documents I have on there, even update them, and publish the new content on opensolaris. I doubt anyone outside of those at Sun who work on bigadmin would have a problem putting that site out of business. Most of the stuff could be resubmitted, and all the content that is linked to BigAdmin from other sources certainly isn't property of BigAdmin. I've got a couple things up there and I'd also happily resubmit. BigAdmin has been a dead resource for a long time, imho. If we all formed the last year worth of our blog entries into articles we'd easily surpass the amount of content BigAdmin current provides. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Proposal: OpenSolaris Articles Project
To be formal Speaking on behalf of myself, with the honorable Docs community in mind, I do hereby Second the proposal forwarded by Mr Grisanzio from the Great State of California. Great idea Jim. This is something the docs community has wanted very much to do but the rubber hadn't quite hit the road yet. All the enthusiasm around the idea is wonderful and I'm 110% behind it. I yield the remainder of my time to the Honorable Mr. Hahn. benr. Jim Grisanzio wrote: Here is a proposal to form a project to produce article content for opensolaris.org. OpenSolaris Articles Project Community members have been asking if they can write articles for opensolaris.org and what the process would be to produce those articles. Yes, we'd love the content, and no, there's no process right now. The website guidelines say that individual communities are responsible for their own content -- for accuracy, adherence to TOU, etc -- but we don't have any process for developing community-wide content. This proposed Articles Project would develop the necessary processes for article generation and solicit contributors. We'd have to decide what content is needed, who'd write/edit/produce that content, how it would be reviewed for accuracy, in what form it would be published, and where it would be published. So, let's start a project to: * implement an article content review and publishing process * solicit and publish articles from the community * grow that process into a peer-reviewed, community-led system Initially, the project will provide support for community members interested in writing, editing, and reviewing OpenSolaris content for the Articles page: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/articles/. These articles could also be used as content for conferences, journals, and other forums. We could develop all kinds of community-wide content, including feature articles, community profiles, technical articles, commentaries, and QAs. Over time, the project could expand the Articles page to include more multi-media content such as artwork, podcasts, screencasts, and videos. I suppose we'd need a list. How about [EMAIL PROTECTED] That's it. What do you think? Jim ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] New Community Proposal: Naming Services
Anup Sekhar wrote: The Network Repository team would like to propose a Naming Services community dealing with our codebase. We are primarily responsible for developing and maintaining naming and directory services and fit under the umbrella of approachability and interoperability. These include Native LDAP, Name Service Switch (NSS), Active Directory interoperability, user identity and authentication, NIS (YP), and legacy naming services such as NIS+. The goal of this proposed community would be to engage users, sys admins, developers and others to contribute to developing interoperability solutions and improving the existing naming infrastructure in OpenSolaris. The leaders of this community will participate and observe the approachability, security, sysadmin and networking communities as well. We will also cross post any discussion pertinent to any of the above communities. I'm complete agree. I think its time that such a community existed. I'm planning to start writing a bunch of documentation on the topic of LDAP and Kerberos shortly. A community where people could be directed to and become more involved would be a great compliment. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Idea for Sysadmin community for OpenSolaris
Octave Orgeron wrote: Hi Everyone, I think there should be a community on the OpenSolaris site for sysadmins to join. It should be focused on the following: 1. Enhance OpenSolaris to be easier to deloy and manage. 2. Help direct efforts for the manageability of OpenSolaris(Webmin, N1 Systems Manager, etc.) 3. Enhance documentation and procedures for management tasks. 4. Help create standards and guidelines for other communities to follow for a consistent management experience. These are just some basic ideas, but I think it's something worth talking about and exploring. Octave I think its an excellent idea! Frankly, I think that SA's should realize that there isn't such a divide between developers and admins anymore, but plenty of SA's would be scared off from the current communities for fear that their for developers only. Besides that, SA's would tend to be far more cross community oriented than other groups of users. Add to that the fact that SA's are one of the largest groups that we want to reach out to. Having a group just for them (myself included) would be a great way to attract people that otherwise might pass us by. Great idea Octave! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris X86/Amd64 and chipsets
Lars Tunkrans wrote: Ben Rockwood wrote: You said it, the HCL is the answer. The problem is that not enough of us (myself included) are actually contributing enough to it. If we'd all pitch in it'd be a much more useful resource. While the HCL may have some limits, I don't think we can think about reimplementing or duplicating it untill there is a decent reason other than the fact that very few people are putting in their share of information. benr. Hi, Yes I agree that the HCL should be the focal point of this effort. However that a look at this way of presenting what works: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/6.0R/hardware-amd64.html If we could have this format of the information instead of having to look at each and every one of some PC that someone tested to find out if a particular chipset works or is supposed to work. I belive that this would make many users more confident and able to make good desicions about what PC hardware they can use for Solaris. That is a nice list. :) If this is what you want, I think you should do it! Its definately a kinder gentler list than the HCL and once the list started to fill out we could backport some of that data into the HCL so that everyone wins. I've got plenty of contributions if you decide to do it. Its a good idea. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Fun Bay Area OpenSolaris Opportunity
Alan DuBoff wrote: On Sunday 18 December 2005 03:19 pm, Ben Rockwood wrote: Thursday night, after I presented at Bay Lisa... I brainfarted and missed it. You did mention to me you were doing this, but didn't announce it that week or anything...:-( Oh well... I didn't make much noise about it. I mentioned it in my blog and it was on BayLISA's website but thats it. I was nervous enough about the presentation that I didn't want to build up any expectations or hype it up. The room was packed anyway. I can't seem to get to the mail.opensolaris.org to free up messages for our mailing list...:-( Can you? Mail is supposed to be down today untill 3pm. I'll check later. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Fun Bay Area OpenSolaris Opportunity
Thursday night, after I presented at Bay Lisa, the President of LinuxCertified, Inc (www.linuxcertified.com) came up to me about the possibility for his company to get involved with OpenSolaris. Along with education (as implied by the name) they also sell Linux Workstation Replacement laptops. You can imagine what types of workstations they might be replacing. He's interested in supplying laptops that are also avalible for OpenSolaris, preloaded and all that. He wants to find someone in the Bay Area that would be interested in helping him get this going. Sounds like he's prepared to lend or give a laptop to whoever is going to help. No doubt the point would be to work out or around any driver issues on the laptops and provide a suitable OpenSolaris image to be pre-loaded on 'em. If your in the Bay Area and interested in this come forward and reply to this mail on list. We'll organize and see who can help out and then hook up with him to get things rolling. That way we don't have 4 or 5 people mailing him seperately and confusing the whole thing. There was no word about cash, so figure that if you get anything out of this it would be a free laptop loaner for a while. Don't expect anything more. You can see the laptops they sell here: http://linuxcertified.com/linux_laptops.html Most of them are Intel, both 32 and 64 bit, but they do have a nice Athlon64 2800+. These things are Ferrari's, but they are well price, and won a nice award recently: http://www.tuxmagazine.com/node/1000151 Let me knows interested. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Genunix Nexenta Mirror
Fast mirror is up: http://www.genunix.org/distributions/gnusolaris/ Both images (LiveCD and Install) are there. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Geunix Mirror Updated
Genunix is mirroring B26 now. Also, FYI, Genunix is also mirroring SchilliX and BeleniX. We plan to be mirroring Nexenta shortly as well. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] OpenSolaris and the Helix (RealPlayer) Community
Last night at the Silicon Valley OpenSolaris Users Group meeting we had a very special treat, Scott Nelson (Dir. of Business Development, Helix Community from Real Networks) spoke to us about Real, the Helix Community, and answered questions regarding Solaris development efforts. At this meeting many of us learned that more activity is already active that we know. Here are some notes: 1) Sun has a dedicated engineer to the Helix Community for Solaris support: /Margot Miller. She's been working on Helix/RealPlayer support for Solaris (both X86 and SPARC) since December! There are many challenges she's had to face but she's made tremendous progress. 2) Anyone who's interested can work together with Margot and the Helix Community on the Helix Community Porting-Solaris mailing list: http://lists.helixcommunity.org/mailman/listinfo/porting-solaris (You can find a list of all the Helix mailing lists here: http://lists.helixcommunity.org/mailman/listinfo) 3) Much of this work is being done with the hopes of packaging Helix/RealPlayer with JDS in future builds (S10 U2 or U3); we're going to be seeing a lot of RealPlayer/Helix in the future. 4) A large effort has been underway by both Sun and Real to make this happen for some time now, the effort has simply gone unnoticed by most of us. I highly recommend that you read through the archives of the Helix Porting-Solaris mailing list to catch up on where things are at. I leave it at that for now. The big take away here is that we have a small community headed by Margot at Helix working on Solaris/OpenSolaris support and we need to provide some linkage between their efforts and OpenSolaris. Claire/ Giordano was present at the meeting last night as well and we all talked over ways to bring our efforts together; this mail is the first step. In the coming days I think we should try and get some links up on OpenSolaris.org and make sure that anyone in the OpenSolaris community thats interested in helping out with Helix has the resources they need to hook up with Margot and the others working on the effort. Now if only Adobe would be so proactive. :) Tremendous thanks go to Scott Nelson and Margot Miller for all their continued efforts that will benefit us all. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris 10 book?
Carlos wrote: Does anyone.. and i mean anyone have a book they would recommend for a person new to Solaris 10? I have searched but could not find any books that cover the newer features of 10. I was thinking of just settling for a Solaris 9 book to bridge the gap until i can find something on the newer features.. For Solaris general stuff, I recommend PTR's Solaris Boot Camp. It covers all the general stuff really well (NIS, User management, networking, etc); that'll get you comfortable with Solaris if your coming from another OS or haven't spent alot of time with Solaris. (And I believe a Solaris10 version is in the works.) For S10 stuff, the docs on docs.sun.com are great but also read the blogs. Many of us are blogging about S10 functionality, everything from DTrace, to Zones, to SMF, to Kerberos and Crypto. We're filling in the gaps, so don't ignore the blogs. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] OpenSolaris rsync
What are our prospects of making OpenSolaris distributables avalible to mirrors via Rsync? Right now the reason Genunix updates are taking so long is because of the time involved; due to the monster URLs used by SDC I'm having to download each file manually via a browser, then upload to genunix and update the HTML. I'd like to be able to automate the process. Rsync would make mirroring way easier and facilitate additional mirrors in the future. Any chances on this one? benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] PlanetSolaris and PlanetSun
Does anyone know whats up with PlanetSolaris and PlanetSun? Both are redirected to gbnet.net. Looks like perhaps a bill didn't get paid. I don't recall who owned the sites (sorry) but they were of great use and if there is a hosting problem I'd like to help out. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] PlanetSolaris and PlanetSun
Great. Thanks guys. Without PlanetSolaris blogs would eat up twice as much time as they already do. :) benr. Simon Phipps wrote: I checked with Dave Edmondson and he told me there had been a DNS outage at his ISP - all fixed now. S. On Sep 11, 2005, at 07:36, Ben Rockwood wrote: Does anyone know whats up with PlanetSolaris and PlanetSun? Both are redirected to gbnet.net. Looks like perhaps a bill didn't get paid. I don't recall who owned the sites (sorry) but they were of great use and if there is a hosting problem I'd like to help out. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Porting ReiserFS to Solaris?
Kool. Thanks Christoph. :) benr. Christoph Hellwig wrote: On Sun, Sep 04, 2005 at 01:35:54PM -0700, Ben Rockwood wrote: Christoph Hellwig wrote: You don't seem to have any expertise about linux filesystems, and what you're writing is both totally offtopic here and completely wrong. Please let this sub-thread die. Since you are the expert why don't you give us some details on where we're wrong? [1] My observations are from the standpoint of a long time user, I never got involved in ReiserFS directly, so there is plenty that I don't know. I think you're pretty right on the track. It's Felix who's spreading rather doubios half-informed stuff around. The thread got off topic, the only real point I cared to make was that if ReiserFS was made avalible for OpenSolaris it would be pretty kool, reguardless of any opinions on the project of the filesystem itself. The more the merrier. Of course. There's a reiserfs port for freebsd which might be used as a start by anyone who cares enough. Ext2/ext3 are probably more interesting, as they have a wider userbase and support for them is much simpler. I wouldn't recommend using the existing Solaris ext2 driver, as it's has various problems: it's read-only, based on a very old ext2 codebase that lacks features used by default on modern Linux installation and has many known bugs, the Solaris glue isn't exactly nicely written, and it's licensed under the GPL [1]. But given that ext2/ext3 is so similar to UFS allows for a much nicer implementation anyway, either by allowing different filesystem format personality for a common UFS layer as NetBSD did it in their BSD licensed ext2 implementation or as by takin the UFS codebase and chaning it to support the ext2 ondisk format, I did something like that for a never released [2] ext2 driver for UnixWare7. I took the UnixWare sfs [3] code and modified it to support the ext2 ondisk format. This would cover access to ext3 support aswell as ext2 and ext3 are the same basic ondisk format [4], the ext3 driver just supports a few additional features over the ext2 driver, thus you can access a cleanly unmounted ext3 filesystem as if it were ext2. Note that the ext2/ext3 userspace code (e2fsprogs) is ported to Solaris already. [1] The GPL's intention is to not allow linking into programs with incompatible licenses. Whether this is actually enforceable in court for the case of kernel modules is a different question, but the module at least has licensing problems because of that. [2] And there's no chance it could be release, sorry [3] In UnixWare 2 the ufs code grew support for security attributes and was renamed to sfs. The ufs driver is a tiny wrapper that calls into common code with just a single different flag from sfs [4] ext2/ext3 has three feature bitmaps in the superblock, the compat, ro_compat and incompat flags. The compat features are supported by newer kernels for r/w transparently, only fsck and other userspace utilities need to be updates, ro_compat are supported read-only by older filesystems and incompat flags not at all. An ext3 filesystem is indicated by having EXT2_FEATURE_COMPAT_HAS_JOURNAL set, and on an unclean unmount that needs log recovery EXT3_FEATURE_INCOMPAT_RECOVER is set aswell. There's also some new flags only supported by the ext3 driver but not the ext2 driver in Linux. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Genunix Mirror Updated
I've updated the Genunix mirror. Sorry it took so long. Genunix has some changes coming. I'm planning on implementing Drupal and providing some Genunix mailing lists and forums. I also want to start doing some Metablogging over there, where we can index and organize existing blog entries into a useful document set in a centralized location. I'm just involved in too many projects right now and so it keeps getting pushed back, but its coming soon I swear. For questions or comments on Genunix please contact Al Hopper and/or myself. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris on Fujitsu gear
I've been wanting to do some Sun vs Fujitsu PrimePower testing but hadn't gotten around to it. If someone can hook me up with Fujistu eval equipment I could spend some time working on it. Anyone got friends at Fujitsu? benr. Jim Grisanzio wrote: Felix Schulte wrote: Will Fujitsu join the OpenSolaris project some day? This is an interesting point in how it is phrased, and it comes up occasionally. For me, anyway. Fujitsu engineers are certainly welcome to join, as is anyone from Sun's partners, ISVs, customers, etc. When we ran the pilot program, we tapped many sources for people to get going -- but we were looking for individuals to build a community, not specifically big companies Sun had relationships with. Sure, some of those guys were invited and some came along (and are coming along now). But we wanted to engage the individual developers within those companies (and elsewhere) who were interested in future community co-involvement. Many were, many were not. We did this intentionally so that the project would be characterized as a developer program that would grow into a community of equals, not a Sun ISV/partner/customer program. It may not seem like a big distinction, but from where I sit here at Sun it's actually a pretty significant difference. Thanks for bringing it up. Jim ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Whats the current arrangement for CAB meetings? benr. PS: The Discussions link on the CAB page (http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/) points to the tools discussion, not cab-discuss. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CAB Meeting Notes
Jim Grisanzio wrote: Rich Teer wrote: On Tue, 23 Aug 2005, Ben Rockwood wrote: I haven't seen CAB meeting notes since the 6/15/05 meeting. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/cab_meeting_notes/2005/cab_meeting_notes_20050615/ Hmm. We should rectify that, even if it is to post the notes from our meetings at OSCON. I'm happy to post Teresa's notes. Thanks Jim and Rich. BTW, just re-checked the proposal which states: There will be weekly con-calls pre-launch and at least monthly post launch. OSCon takes care of August, so I guess we'll have a CAB call/meeting in Sept then. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Tech Lead
stephen o'grady wrote: On Mon, 2005-08-22 at 16:48 -0700, Jim Grisanzio wrote: Stephen Harpster wrote: I'm proud to announce that effective immediately, Stephen Hahn http://blogs.sun.com/sch will be Sun's OpenSolaris tech lead. Stephen is highly familiar with open source issues, and was one of the engineers involved with starting the OpenSolaris program. He is returning after focusing on delivering, with the project team, SMF http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/content/selfheal/ into Solaris 10 and exploring the idea of approachability as a design principle. Stephen's responsibilities will include helping Sun prioritize their work on OpenSolaris, be a technical advocate for OpenSolaris to Sun's customers, provide technical assistance to the open source community, and grow the developer community. Please give Stephen a big welcome! Welcome, Stephen. Nice to have you around. :) motion seconded. welcome, Stephen. Way to go Stephen. :) benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: fcinfo libHBAAPI
Has anyone had success yet building the HBAAPI (and using) source on Nevada? I'm split between giving it a shot now and just waiting... you guys have a much better idea of the issues involved and getting the implementation worked out than I do. benr. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Release date of build 18
Joerg Schilling wrote: Is there any chance that build 18 will be made available? It has been announced to become ready 3 weeks ago.. Jörg What was the build number on the July 1st release? It seemed to have rolled out silently. I've built it but didn't BFU yet. benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: OpenSolaris World Wide!
Alan Hargreaves wrote: For those folk in Australia, http://life.csu.edu.au/geo/findlatlong.html is a good site. They bought the stuff from the Bureau of Stats from the 1996 Census; so it is pretty comprehensive and accurate (gawd, it found the suburb that I live in up on the Central Coast [Mardi]). alan. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org And for the rest of us... http://www.lat-long.com/ Go All Blacks! benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Articles
Jim Grisanzio wrote: I did a little blog pointing to the articles on opensolaris.org: http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris?entry=some_articles_on_opensolaris We'll eventually have to link to these from the front page. There are few more articles written and in review (Solaris on laptops, a 3rd driver article, a kernel comparison, and a piece on portability. We'll release those as soon as they are done. For those of you who are new to the community: we had some articles written (some light technical, some community profiles, etc) during the pilot program, and we'd like to continue that function if you are interested. Are you? If so, what publishing model is best for this community? Who are the writers out there? When I say that I mean are you interested in contributing articles, and how would you like to be recognized for that contribution? And if so, would you like to help work on an editorial plan to get us going past what we already have? I think we need to figure out a way to incent people to contribute (to write/edit/review) things like how-tos, profiles, case studies, opinion pieces, feature articles, news, etc. In terms of style, I'm thinking that the more magazine-like the better to distinguish this editorial from documentation. We are working on a website editorial policy to sort of outline who does what and where on the site generally. This articles section I'm talking about is just one part of that, but we really began it back in the pilot program. It'll all come together over time. Opinions? Question... did Sun pay for those profiles? If so, why? Reguarding the rest, I can write when time permits. Plenty of us are producing useful information, but articles in the traditional sense conflict directly with technical blogging. Many of our blog entries could be slightly reformed and presto-change you've got an article. The Driver Programming articles by Max are awesome, I'd love to see more of those. Didn't Rich have some articles in the pipe too? benr. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
