Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Re: any way to install solaris express with 512mb ram
On 28/02/07, brad kelley [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: froze again at exact same spot...109.64 installed 3487.76 remaining...hmmm. 9 gb drive 500mb ram and 2x600 processors...and a working install of 2003 server so I know the drive/mem etc is ok...hmmm :( The developer edition currently requires 768MB of memory I believe. You may want to try Solaris 10 Update 3 instead. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal :: Google's Sumer of Code
On 01/03/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey there, I'd like to propose a new project for OpenSolaris' Google SOC involvement this year, to coordinate the various activities including specific task/project creation, proposal submission and selection from the students, along with tracking them during the couple of months. FWIW, I've been asked by Jim Grisanzio to manage SOC this year on behalf of Sun, and I'm probably coming a little blind to this (though have been very loosely involved with GNOME) - if anyone would like to help, please feel free to contact me. What is clear though is that we need to get organized relatively quickly, set up some basic infrastructure that can be used each year - this is what this proposal aims to achieve. Glynn +1 and you are one of the right people to do it (this response didn't go to the list the first time) -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: [install-discuss] About Solaris (mistakes) and future
On 01/03/07, Girts Zeltins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hello, Why I am writing this text, I am writing to talk about mistakes which is founding in Solaris in its future. I see two prototypes of installation system and I want to say all two are bad, sorry bad. Why? Because these graphical GUI which will need lots of memory to use. As we know that there are millions of people who wants to use Solaris on their machines but they cannot run it because it now need more memory than long time ago when there was Solaris 8. Sorry Sun guys, developers, you are making big mistake and this is bad for Solaris popularity and this is why people will prefer Linux!!! Actually, there are many Linux distributions that also require a lot of memory during installation. However, I too would like to see the requirements lowered if possible. These install projects will be working to address the memory requirements I believe, and I know that there will still be a text-based installer available because of headless systems, serial console, etc. JDS which is now in Solaris Express Community Build 57 and Solaris Express Developer need more memory to run and there is no need such GUI as JDS (Java GNOME) but there is need clean GNOME where can be two Sun Microsystems created themes which can be used if you have very fast computer. I'm not sure what you're speaking of here. JDS is just as much of a clean GNOME as many of the distributions of GNOME that are shipped with various Linux distributions. The Java part of the name is just marketing, it doesn't use more memory magically because of it :) The one of correct ways is to use Anaconda (Text, Graphical) installer and incorporate GParted technology for partitioning. I'm also not certain what this has to do with GNOME or JDS. If you're talking about the installer in general, not every Linux distribution uses Anaconda either. I think there are many correct ways to make a great installer. There must be no need to use other partitioning tools to resize, delete partitions which are already on computer (QNX, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, BeOS, Linux, Windows,...) I'm certain that is an eventual goal of the installer project. I know that many people would like to see this. There is need to rename project JDS to GNOME SUN marketing has chosen to keep this name. Many of us would like to see the name not be JDS, but the name really doesn't mean that much, people will still know it's GNOME. That's obvious even from the startup dialog a user sees the first time they login. and allow people of community to work on improving GNOME I have good news then! You can join the JDS project and help work on improving GNOME now: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/jds/ http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/desktop/ and there must be new KDE project where people of community can work on discussing and recommendations for KDE in Solaris. I have good news then! It was recently announced that a KDE project for Solaris will be started soon: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=84502#84502 Although KDE for Solaris was originally announced almost two years ago here: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=1586#1586 and you can find the official KDE solaris website here: http://solaris.kde.org/ This must be for CDE too and special community opened for CDE. While many people would like to see this, the copyright holders for CDE (other than SUN) are not currently interested in this from what we know. Currently, CDE users are welcome to discuss CDE in the desktop community. As far as a special community, I believe you mean list or forum, and that would be up to others. I want to ask developers to think again about Solaris future. Thanks for taking the time to communicate your thoughts on Solaris and the desktop. Sorry Sun Microsystems, please think about people which don't have fast computers and think how to improve CDE!!! SUN cares a lot about performance. You can discuss performance here: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=26 As far as CDE goes though, I believe most people would agree that it is a dead-end for future development. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Project Proposal: Enable/Enhance Solaris support for Intel Platforms
On 02/03/07, Oliver Jones [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I also think that focusing on the Xeon platform alone would be an error. Good support needs to be there for the Bearlake and Bearlake-X when they arrive, as well as the Santa Rosa laptop chipset. Certainly, and I think that will happen. I don't think this project is in any way implying that other platforms won't be supported, I think it's just trying to find a specific focus. The vast majority of people who are interested in running Solaris x86 on non-Sun hardware will *NOT* be doing it on a Xeon platform. I think it is important that Xeons are supported, for the corporates and high-end users - but it is worth remembering that if we need to shell out thousands of pounds/dollars/euros just to have a system capable of running Solaris x86, we may as well defect to Linux or BSD now. I wouldn't be concerned about it though given that SUN engineers have been very open to working on support for the x86 architecture in general (Intel and AMD). We can't expect SUN to do everything we want, the community does need to step up and assist in certain areas too. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project: Writing code for closed binaries
On 02/03/07, Vivek Joshi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Motivation? : A few CS engineering students of third/final year had shown their interest in working on opensolaris projects. IMO, implementing these utilities shouldn't be a difficult task. They just need to look at man page for specs and write C code adhering to the manuals. Though, it's NOT that simple but it's a good start. What do you say? Queries : - Is it a good/feasible project we should implement in opensolaris? - If yes, is anyone already working on the same? You may be intersted in Project Emancipation which was recently launched, find out more here: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/emancipation/ and here: http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/Project_emancipation -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Sun joins the Free Software Foundation
On 03/03/07, James C. McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Richard Nekus wrote: ...something smells in Denmark... :) Yeah ... probably the whole concept of putting one's money where the mouth is. Shocking, that. I'm sure it will never catch on with all the cool kids. Personally, I think SUN already did that a few years ago, but it was a very commendable thing to do nonetheless. Given the increasing involvement that Sun has had with the FSF I've been wondering how long it would be before this happened. Though I personally am still not fully decided about whether the new license the FSF is developing is a good thing, I was very happy to see SUN at FOSDEM. Simon Phipps' keynote was was great! For those that are interested, you can watch his keynote, Liberating Java, (338mb) here: http://www.fosdem.org/2007/media/video/ ...and yes, it plays just fine with the version of RealPlayer included with Solaris Express for me. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Errror in OpenSolaris Device Detection Tool
On 03/03/07, James C. McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gary Gendel wrote: I was surprised to find that the ddtool said everything except my modem was supported on my laptop. Then I looked further... The broadcom wireless a/b/g miniPCI card was supported by the aac driver. Isn't that a driver for a RAID disk controller? Yup Sounds like the ddtool needs a little more smarts to ferret out conflicting information. I agree totally. I've got a cheapie dual-port pci serial card which self-identifies with a pci compatible property of pci9710,9835.1000.12.1 The question is, why does it do that? What is the intent of the dual-port pci serial card that makes it list that PCI ID? -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Last Day for Nominations
On 06/03/07, Martin Bochnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Why should JamesD not be considered a core contributor? And - if not - at least have a right to vote? p.s. The whole thing really begins to disappoint me. Maybe I'm not the only one. Martin, I agree that the current process for contributor recognition is quite different than what I have seen in other communities. However, this is also the first community I have been involved with that had a formal voting process, governance, and so on. I myself sent a request for contributor status to cab-discuss several days ago, had a few positive responses, and then never heard one way or another about what would happen from there. I suspect though that this entire process is still being worked out. Specifically, it would appear the process for obtaining contributor status is defined in a document (charter / constitution?) that has yet to be finalised so it seems like it is a fluid process at the moment. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [cab-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Last Day for Nominations
On 06/03/07, Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: have very many contributors. In the long run, this suggests that per-Community representation may someday be needed a la the United States Senate. In the short run, it suggests that some communities are poorly organised and led, and those communities will be the ones who are left without a voice, leaving interested parties to petition for replacement or dissolution of those ineffective communities. This is something that has concerned me as well. Related to this particular problem, I think, is also the perception of activity within the OpenSolaris community as a whole. While having these separate communities makes for a far better signal-to-noise ratio, it also has the unintended side effect of making some communities appear vibrant and alive while others do not. While this may accurately reflect the activity of an individual community, it can have some unintended consequences. One of those unintended consequences is that it is much harder to perceive the level of activity that is occurring within the OpenSolaris community as a whole since the activity within each community is filtered to a particular level. With this in mind, it is not surprising, to me, that individuals are left wondering about their status or role within the community. Some individuals participate in many different communities on a frequent basis, but never enough to be recognized in any individual one. As a result, we may miss out on opportunities to recognise people that bring great value to the OpenSolaris community as a whole because of the reliance on individual community leadership to provide recognition. Recent comments regarding Projects are a good example of this particular scenario in my view. I also completely support the idea of a unified set of contributors. To me, a contributor is a contributor to the entire OpenSolaris community and project, not just one part of it. Because of that, I don't think that a status that affects the community as a whole (voting, etc.) should be a status granted on a per-community basis. I also think that listing people as contributors in some official capacity for each specific community will only serve to embitter some individuals. To me, almost every contributor contributes to every individual community in an indirect fashion. Is the OpenSolaris community not the result of all contributors instead of a specific part? On Tue, Mar 06, 2007 at 09:55:37AM +1300, Glynn Foster wrote: While I can appreciate how it on a local level within the various OpenSolaris sub-communities, so that you build up a web of trust when technical issues need to be tackled, I'm still really struggling how it fits with the wider global OpenSolaris Likewise. A lot of this depends on exactly what role the OGB will claim for itself. The proposed Constitution gives vast, dare I say unconscionable, power to the OGB and to my way of thinking relies far too much on the goodness of its members and the vigilance of the electorate to ensure proper use of that power (rather than placing stricter limits on the OGB but giving its members greater independence to act within those limits). The requirement for such widespread and intimate participation in government may well turn out to be a serious handicap in a community in which many or most participants would rather engineer software, especially if such an unbalanced situation arises. That's doubly true given that, so far, the balance of power is firmly against those who just want to write code. If this situation persists, the OGB may need to consider structural changes to the Constitution, assuming it's ratified. What shape those changes might take would depend on the nature of the imbalance and the rulemaking areas into which the OGB chooses to wade. I cannot possibly agree more with this statement. This only further supports Stephen Lau's post about why the OGB shouldn't be intimately involved in the day-to-day processes of the community (please read the full blog post here: http://whacked.net/2007/02/26/why-i-hope-the-ogb-wont-accomplish-much/). As an example, I would like to see the OGB not have to be involved in the recognition of contributors. As far as the OGB's powers: I think that the OGB's powers should be limited unless they are acting as an arbiter to resolve conflict, or to help guide the community to a decision where there is deadlock. I am heartened to see someone within SUN expressing these concerns because it continues to prove that people within SUN care very much about a genuine, vibrant community existing around this project. (Not that I have ever been given reason to believe otherwise...) -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Why libc.so.1 mounted?
On 07/03/07, Raju Alluri [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I installed nv_58 (and nv_41 in the past) and I see that /lib/libc.so.1 is a mount. Why is it so? Is there a reason to do so specifically for this file? Please see this blog post for an explanation: http://blogs.sun.com/darren/date/20041116 -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Four OS booting in GRUB
On 08/03/07, Frank Hofmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 7 Mar 2007, Girts Zeltins wrote: Hello all, I am sorry, but is there possible to give me solution what is need to write in configuration file? That depends not so much on _what_ you install, but rather on _where_ (which partition) you install it. I.e. for your config, which disk/partition are the windows installs on ? How do you install two versions of Solaris on the machine (there's more than one way to do that ...) ? Once a bit more about your setup is known, the lines to be put into GRUB's menu.lst can be given. Generically, it's a: root (hdX,Y) chainloader +1 for a Windows installation - with X/Y being disk/partition of the windows install. For Solaris 10 Update 1 and above, it's a: root (hdX,Y,Z) kernel /platform/i86pc/multiboot module /platform/i86pc/boot_archive With X/Y/Z being disk/partition/slice of the Solaris root filesystem. For Solaris = 9 (and S10 FCS), use the syntax for Windows above. For Linux, it's usually: root (hdX,Y) initrd /boot/initrd kernel /boot/vmlinuz (plus a dozen of parameters - that aren't crucial to boot, but necessary for the eyecandy during boot to appear properly). As said, figure out your installation details (what/where) and fill in X/Y/Z as matches your setup. Best wishes, FrankH. Thanks. Regards, Girts It's also important to note that (at last check) you can only have *one* Solaris partition per drive. The installer will not allow you to have seperate Solaris partitions. So that means you will have to create many slices on one of the Solaris partitions and possibly share some of them between different versions of Solaris. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] just for confirm about partition before installing solaris 10
On 13/03/07, vuthecuong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have a single hard disk with following OS and partitions: partition1: NTFS, primary, windowsXP installed. parttition2: primary, Freebsd 6.2 installed. partition3: primary, Sunsolaris 10 will be installed here. Could anyone quicly confirm me is this correct partitions assignment or not? This is very important for me. Tnx in advanced That should work. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] which iso is for production server
On 14/03/07, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: On 13/03/07, vuthecuong [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Solaris have many editions: - Solaris Express, Community Edition - Solaris Express, Developer Edition - etc -etc So wich version is mainly for critical mission server? Neither. The version you want for that is here: http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp I very very strongly disagree, it is up to each individual to choose what risks they want to take. Do they want a newer release but with less official 7x24 hour support or do they want a big vendor providing 7x24 hour support they can shout at ? Yes, I know all that, but when someone says mission critical I tend to assume that means the production release of Solaris only. In addition, Sun even says on their own webpages that Solaris 10 is a Fully supported distribution for production deployments. Whereas the description for the other distributions is for developers. Inside Sun we run Community Edition on the server that is the home directory server for almost all of the Menlo Park California campus. It gets updated to each Community Edition of Solaris Express as they come out. It doesn't get much more production than that. If this machine goes down it impacts engineers, marketing, managers home directories and email, basically no work gets done. It is not good for the community suggest that it is only a Sun Solaris 10 distribution that is good for production use. Depending on your needs for production Nexenta or some other OpenSolaris distribution might be a much better choice. I'm not implying that it is not ok to use SXDE, SXCE, etc. for production use. I was merely responding to the key phrase mission critical. Production use is not always mission critical use. I also question how you can recommend SXDE or SXCE for production use given that security fixes and other updates are not available for them? Would that not be important in a production environment? In addition, I personally am not comfortable with using SXCE, for certain, in a production environment. I upgrade on a fairly regular basis, and I often have problems with new builds of SXCE on my 3rd party or custom x86 hardware. As such, I can only speak based on my own experience in this area. While I am usually fairly happy with the SXCE and SXDE releases, I question recommending them for a production and especially mission critical environment. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Why should I vote for you?
On 09/03/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 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? I answered that question in my position (election?) statement: http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/2007/03/opensolaris-2007-ogb-election-statement.html For those that are curious, -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Fire!! core dumped!
On 19/03/07, eric wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: It is on solaris 5.8. Is there any other information useful for this?? You are more likely to find help on the SUN bigadmin forums here: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/home/index.html -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Solaris version of Flash Player 9
On 18/03/07, W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: There is a beta of Flash Player 9 for Solaris at Adobe Labs http://labs.adobe.com/technologies/flashplayer9/ I have been able to install flashplayer9 into Builds 55b/56 (I am waiting for Build 62)) and 10u3. This is a very painless process; all you need to do is move the existing libflashplayer.so to a backup file (say libflashplayer.so.7) then copy the extracted libflashplayer.so into the same directory. Re-start firefox. Done. Seems to work great for me on S10U3 as well... Except I just copied to ~/.mozilla/plugins/ -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Web Stack NG Project: Questions for the Community
On 21/03/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Stefan Teleman wrote: 2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in /usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_ the existing Apache 2.0.x. Valid arguments have been made pro, and against this approach, with the suggestion that Apache 2.2.4 installs in /usr/apache2.2, thereby preserving the existing /usr/apache2. However, this alternate location would *not* alter the EOF/EOL timeout announced for Apache 2.0.x. What are the community's views on this ? Overwriting the /usr/apache2 that comes on the Solaris media is a no-no, in my opinion, and /usr/apache2.2 just pollutes the /usr namespace even more than it is already. IMHO, the correct place for this is under /opt. I have no strong feelings either way, but I would prefer /opt/apache2 over /opt/apache2.2. I strongly agree with this particular approach. This makes the separation clear and easy. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Web Stack NG Project: Questions for the Community
On 21/03/07, Stefan Teleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
On 21/03/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Overwriting the /usr/apache2 that comes on the Solaris media is a no-no,
in my opinion, and /usr/apache2.2 just pollutes the /usr namespace even
more than it is already. IMHO, the correct place for this is under /opt.
I have no strong feelings either way, but I would prefer /opt/apache2
over
/opt/apache2.2.
I strongly agree with this particular approach. This makes the
separation clear and easy.
Please keep in mind that, there are two additional locations for Apache, in
addition to the location of the actual binaries [/{usr,opt}/apache2]:
/etc/apache2
/var/apache2
These additional two locations *must* exist.
Personally, I don't have a problem with that. Apache configuration can
usually be shared between versions (at least within 2.x versions in
this case) without a problem. It is the binaries that are the bigger
issue (in my view).
I never liked the /etc/opt/apache2, and so on that some distributions
did as sometimes it wasn't clear which apache2 read what configuration
from where, it also made greps by lazy admins (like me) painful ;)
--
Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright
Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
[EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Web Stack NG Project: Questions for the Community
On 21/03/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Rich Teer wrote: Overwriting the /usr/apache2 that comes on the Solaris media is a no-no, in my opinion, and /usr/apache2.2 just pollutes the /usr namespace even more than it is already. IMHO, the correct place for this is under /opt. I have no strong feelings either way, but I would prefer /opt/apache2 over /opt/apache2.2. These ARC cases are for integration to Solaris, so /opt is inappropriate, and /usr is correct. That is something that wasn't clear to me. I was under the impression that these were going to be frequently updated packages provided optionally to the community. I didn't think that Sun was going to update the version in Solaris that often... Apparently I have misread the entire proposal. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] joining Sun
On 22/03/07, Thomas De Schampheleire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another thing that came to mind: the fact that Solaris needs a primary partition to install on is a big problem in my view. I had set-up my disk so there were 3 logical partitions of about 15GB for operating systems (linux and I hoped OpenSolaris as well). Obviously, Solaris couldn't install and I am not keen on repartitioning my whole disk. Adding a new disk isn't a real option either since this is a laptop. I know the install folks are working with others to eventually support installing Solaris in an extended partition. In the meantime, a program like PartitionMagic, gparted, qtparted, etc. can help you re-arrange your partitions (non-destructively, though you should BACKUP YOUR DATA FIRST). This a known issue, but one that didn't matter so much in the past, since, as others pointed out, Solaris is used to being the only one on the drive. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] joining Sun
On 22/03/07, Thomas De Schampheleire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What I personally find important in Linux is: - the user experience, mostly embodied by the KDE desktop environment. I don't like Gnome, so I don't like the default Solaris desktop environment. I heard that there is a KDE project for OpenSolaris, so that is great. If most of the GUI programs would run on OpenSolaris as well, then the biggest challenge has been overwon I think. The challenge has been essentially met then, I believe. KDE was on Solaris a few years ago thanks to the stoic efforts of Stefan Teleman and others (see http://solaris.kde.org/). I would never expect sun to ship KDE in the main distribution though or as a default. On the companion software CD or something like that, sure... - then there are the command line programs. There might be a good reason for this, but I feel that some of the Solaris-shipped tools are inferior to the GNU tools. For example, I don't see a reason why a simple recursive grep with 'grep -R' does not work on Solaris. Why Because -R doesn't fit with the UNIX philosphy. It fits with the GNU philosophy. Remember, GNU stands for GNU's NOT UNIX :) there are two greps is something I do not understand either. I do not get the way man works either. On Linux, you would just do man cat or man vi, and it would just give you the correct man page. Even 'man man' doesn't work here. (I'm beginning to wonder whether this may be because the man pages are not installed... could this be? man man should work, right?) Your manpath probably isn't set correctly. The default manpath for Solaris does *not* include all of the man directories for all installed software; it is up to you set it appropriately. Setting your manpath to include /usr/sfw/man, /opt/SUNWspro/man, etc. would probably alleviate most of these. As far as I know, Sun requires a man page for almost every binary, even if the software is 3rd party. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] joining Sun
On 22/03/07, Thomas De Schampheleire [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Another annoyance is that most tools do not accept --help. This is common with GNU tools, and I prefer it over -h, because some tools might use -h for a real thing. In case -h means remove all files, then you're screwed... That is a matter of preference. I always hated the -- options GNU utilities use since they were so much more to type. I will admit GNU/Linux systems get you used to typing cmd --help instead of man cmd which I think is a bad habit. I think most people got used to doing this since documentation is something that was usually completely overlooked on most GNU/Linux distributions... -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] joining Sun
On 23/03/07, Brian Nitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Your manpath probably isn't set correctly. The default manpath for Solaris does *not* include all of the man directories for all installed software; it is up to you set it appropriately. Setting your manpath to include /usr/sfw/man, /opt/SUNWspro/man, etc. would probably alleviate most of these. As far as I know, Sun requires a man page for almost every binary, even if the software is 3rd party. This was broken on some OpenSolaris Nevada builds (possibly Solaris 10?) on X86 and is a perfect example of a gotcha which seems trivial to Solaris old-timers but would convince almost any newcomer into thinking Solaris sucks. It appears to be fixed in SXDE, but if it rears its ugly head again, please log a bug! I'm not an old-timer by any means, but in years past I used Gentoo, FreeBSD, DragonFly BSD, Linux From Scratch, Slackware and others. As such, I'm rather used to the arcane things... -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Update to B60 ?
On 23/03/07, Horvath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I should correct myself. Where can I get the dvd iso images of b60 or b61? I thought the iso's would be updated every other friday but when I checked the web site I saw only b59 there. They are not necessarily updated every other Friday. It depends somewhat on how the build turned out. As someone said in the past some people prefer the bleeding edge to the hemmoraging one (Casper?). I suspect it will be out sometime between now and March 27th, if not it may be that b60 will be skipped and we should expect something the first week of april. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Update to B60 ?
On 24/03/07, Cyril Plisko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 3/24/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 23/03/07, Horvath [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I should correct myself. Where can I get the dvd iso images of b60 or b61? I thought the iso's would be updated every other friday but when I checked the web site I saw only b59 there. They are not necessarily updated every other Friday. It depends somewhat on how the build turned out. As someone said in the past some people prefer the bleeding edge to the hemmoraging one (Casper?). I suspect it will be out sometime between now and March 27th, if not it may be that b60 will be skipped and we should expect something the first week of april. I just downloaded b60 from here http://javashoplm.sun.com/ECom/docs/Welcome.jsp?StoreId=7PartDetailId=Sol-Express_b60-x86-SP-G-BTransactionId=try I didn't see an announcement, so I assume someone was waiting for mirrors to sync. Sweet! Thanks for the heads-up, -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: RE: Solaris on Intel's Classmate PC?
On 24/03/07, Moinak Ghosh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: UNIX admin wrote: One thing I noticed is that the HW platform described only has 256MB of memory. When I tried to install an OpenSolaris build the other day on a machine with 512MB, the install failed due to my machine not having enough memory - wanted 796MB or some such. I always install Solaris in text mode, for which 256MB is enough, so I never hit the RAM limits above. It's faster to install in text mode anyway. True. Slightly OT for this thread, But a good graphical installer increases the coolness factor :) and I believe is quite possible to implement in 256MB RAM. I think a good graphical installer should be possible in even less than that, but I admit I don't know the technical reasons why we have the requirements we have today to begin with. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Update to B60 ?
On 24/03/07, Martin Bochnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cyril Plisko wrote: I just downloaded b60 from here http://javashoplm.sun.com/ECom/docs/Welcome.jsp?StoreId=7PartDetailId=Sol-Express_b60-x86-SP-G-BTransactionId=try Those are the CD iso's, are the DVD iso parts also available from above location (I cannot see one, needed the original link from where you got above URL please). http://javashoplm.sun.com/ECom/docs/Welcome.jsp?StoreId=7PartDetailId=Sol-Express_b60-DVD-x86-SP-G-BTransactionId=try -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] lofiadm'ing DVD.iso WAS: Re: Re: Update to B60 ?
On 24/03/07, Martin Bochnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: John Sonnenschein wrote: Incorrect. The site just sometimes doesn't update properly for some reason. Latest is always here: http://opensolaris.org/sxce_dvd The latest available is always there, but releases are sometimes skipped. This means that sometimes a build might be available as bfu, but not as an iso. That has happened at least two or three times that I can remember since the project started. I don't know what is incorrect since you didn't quote what you were talking about... -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: joining Sun
On 26/03/07, Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [i]There are some interesting connections to Linux here as well. If you think about it, what do people want when they say they want Linux? The Linux kernel? Or the Linux distribution (i.e., GNU)? Could Solaris become a better Linux than Linux by following that line of thinking? And if you following that line of thinking, where does that lead the company in terms of Linux strategy? Some interesting parallels open up with the way Sun masterfully embraced x86 a few years ago...[/i] Please, no entrenched GNOME or gcc. What does that mean? -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: joining Sun
On 26/03/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Please, no entrenched GNOME or gcc. What does that mean? It means please do not take it down the Nexenta road of using gcc built packages and fat unstable GNOME. It fat unstable GNOME -- you realise that Sun chose GNOME as the desktop a long time ago for Solaris? I also think that your description of GNOME is rather unfair, and rather inaccurate. You seem to not like GNOME very much or the most capable open source browser we have available for the platform. It might be better if you proposed alternatives. is a real pity that firefox and thunderbird use gtk. I am not saying everything gnome is bad but the underlying gtk stuff is something that I have not had a very nice experience with. Of course, the nexenta choice of deb packaging is very nice. What else would they use? I'd want sun cc compiled packages and stable sun libraries with gcc and glibc stuff available separately. That's what we have right now at last check. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] polls are closed !
On 27/03/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Now comes the really hard part .. the waiting ! Was somebody able to do a real OGB voting after he did finish the prevoting on March 12th? I was. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: joining Sun
On 27/03/07, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: have more potential, I think KDE is a lot slicker and faster feeling right now; and from what little I've seen of either, the apps typically with KDE seem more to my liking as well. But on We can argue preference all day, but in the end that doesn't mean much. And as browsers go, firefox isn't bad; it works on more pages than anything except probably IE. But on some sites (like myspace.com), if left up on those pages for a few days, it eats memory like crazy; and is likely to crash before much longer. (I prefer the integrated mozilla or seamonkey myself, but they tend to have similar problems of course.) I hear people complain about memory usage all the time with FireFox. I used FireFox every day for hours for my web development and for browsing as well. I can recall a bare handful of times where it was causing any problems, and almost always a plugin was involved (Flash, Acrobat, etc.). By comparison, Opera doesn't work right on an occasional page here and there, but I can have 20+ tabs up on all sorts of pages for _weeks_ without problems and without it growing absurdly. If Opera could handle everything that Firefox can, I probably wouldn't use anything else. (FWIW, I have gotten Flash and Acrobat Reader plugins to work under Opera; and they finally fixed awhile back a problem where it wouldn't reparent Java applet windows.) My problem with Opera is that it doesn't feel right. Notably, I don't like how its tabs work. I much prefer how FireFox's work. thought was best when they made the choice. As for GNOME, I recognize there's been a big investment, in building skill and cooperation as well as in $$. And Opera isn't open source, which makes it up to its distributors rather than voluntary participants when it well get better in the areas it's still weak. Still, those aren't arguments on the merits of the choice so much as on the cost or risks of switching. Yes, but they are deal breakers. Opera has its own fair share of bugs too, at least with FireFox we have the source to fix them. Not only that, I personally find most of the sites I use to be incompatible with Opera in one way or another (minor and major). Would I like it if Opera were bundled? Sure, but as long as I use it so that it appears in server logs and summaries thereof, that's all I can do to encourage it to stick around, and it's usually not too difficult to install or update. Sure, I'd use opera if bundled with Solaris, but I don't think it is an appropriate choice as a default browser. Maybe the Wii and other consumer platforms will increase the usage of Opera to a point where it will be a viable choice. For now, it remains an even smaller market share browser than FireFox on the desktop. So I guess if one doesn't want to use the favored flavor of the day, one has to do some things oneself, or use a different distro than Sun's. Fine by me, I suppose. People can easily install Opera, KDE, and other software if they so choose. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] xpg/bin/tr unexpect output on Sparc?
On 28/03/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Casper, I did try it. It works perfect! Howerver, the issue is not about case convert. It's tr sending unexpected output. sometimes even core dumped. I 'm not sure SUN would take it as a bug or not. e.g echo EFG|/usr/xpg6/bin/tr '[EFG]' '[pBC]' Well, the fact that I get: Segmentation fault (core dumped) is pretty bad, I'd say. (And a bug). Unexpected output, OTOH, is not necessarily wrong. tr [A-Z] [a-z] only works in the C locale. Which I don't think is true on Linux. I think it works on Linux, which explains the porting trouble I've had. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXDE Install Screenshots (dhcp'ed, w/ dual-boot)
On 28/03/07, W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Mitsuru Sasanuma of Sun's Japan team posted a set of SXDE installation slides that I feel are closest to what I have been doing. (Perhaps there are other equivalent screenshots available, but I am just not aware of.) It started with resizing the Windows partition with qparted (as part of the Knoppix LiveCD), then went on to show how to set up the hd partitions to allow for multiple booting. These slides are in Japanese, but I think the graphics should be self-explanatory: http://blogs.sun.com/sasanuma/entry/sxde_207_install_guide I do have two questions. First, the slide says this procedure does not apply to Windows Vista (Vista は対象外). Does this mean that the qparted program does not work with Vista? Or that Vista and SXDE cannot exist on the same hd? (probably the former.) The former. Many users have posted on the web that any partition resizing program they've tried has corrupted Vista partitions or rendered them unbootable. That includes Partition Magic and other programs. I suspect it has something very special it does to the partition table. Second, how do I take screenshots during Solaris installation? Thanks. VMWare :) -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-mktg] RE: [osol-discuss] Solaris on Intel's Classmate PC?
On 23/03/07, Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, You can run a text installer, which is similar to the old Windows NT/2000/XP setup proceedure; which isn't too bad. The bigger problem is how much of the hardware is proprietary and unsupported on either Linux or some other operating system - with that being said, I assume its got all the Intel goodies; HD Audio, Integrated Video, Intel Pro/Wirelss combo - basically its a walking billboard for Intel technology. As for Sun; depends on how much money they would need to spend; 99% of the hardware is probably supported out there via *BSD licenced drivers, it would be a matter of porting it over, then stablising a build of OpenSolaris to base it on, then ontop of that - everyones favourite, testing. Adding drivers to any project is not a matter of simply porting them. Legal review has to be done to ensure the origins of the code, that the license applied is really the one, that the copyrights are correct, that the people contributing the code, etc. If it were as a simple as porting the drivers, Sun would have done it a long time ago. It's always dangerous just picking up drivers from some unknown source. Significant review, testing, etc. all has to be done before they are suitable for release. Especially since kernel driver APIs tend to vary wildly between operating systems. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-mktg] RE: [osol-discuss] Solaris on Intel's Classmate PC?
On 30/03/07, Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I can understand the chicken and the egg scenario, however, one has to look at this; I went down the road today, window shopping, every laptop I had a look at down at the computer retailers had the Intel 3945 A/B/G wireless chipset - it is the most popular chipset out there, and normally coupled with the e1000g wired NIC - why, considering how wide spread the device is, is it left completely unsupported given that there is a *BSD licenced driver for it? As mentioned before, just because some random piece of code is available for a device doesn't mean that there is not a good reason for a driver to be available. Just as OpenBSD supports many wireless devices that Linux does not yet support, Solaris does not yet support many devices as well -- even the common ones. Just as others have talked about during the GPL driver debate, if Solaris were suddenly under the GPLv2, it wouldn't magically make thousands of drivers available for instant use. Porting drivers is hard work, and many times its easier to write a new one with well documented specs than to try to port one that is poorly documented, friendly license or not. Sure, I can understand that Sun can't support *every* device that is out there; that would be unreasonable, but given that there is currently a working relationship between Sun and Intel, just as there is a working relationship between AMD and Sun, there should be absolutely *NO* reason for Solaris not supporting all the Intel product line, just as there should be no excuse for Sun not to support the full AMD/Ati product line. Given that the ATi division is still incredibly secretive about the hardware specs, even with business that have a relationship with them, there are reasons for not having full support. One of those reasons is ATi. As I've mentioned to others before, I know of one company in particular that even offered money to ATi to write a closed source driver under nda driver and they refused to offer the necessary specifications. I can only hope AMD will slowly change that behaviour, but until it does, there are reasons. The wheels of the corporate world move *very* slowly, especially when exchanging what each company perceives as trade secrets (legitimately or not). -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-mktg] RE: [osol-discuss] Solaris on Intel's Classmate PC?
On 31/03/07, Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 31/03/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 30/03/07, Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I can understand the chicken and the egg scenario, however, one has to look at this; I went down the road today, window shopping, every laptop I had a look at down at the computer retailers had the Intel 3945 A/B/G wireless chipset - it is the most popular chipset out there, and normally coupled with the e1000g wired NIC - why, considering how wide spread the device is, is it left completely unsupported given that there is a *BSD licenced driver for it? As mentioned before, just because some random piece of code is available for a device doesn't mean that there is not a good reason for a driver to be available. Just as OpenBSD supports many wireless devices that Linux does not yet support, Solaris does not yet support many devices as well -- even the common ones. Just as others have talked about during the GPL driver debate, if Solaris were suddenly under the GPLv2, it wouldn't magically make thousands of drivers available for instant use. Porting drivers is hard work, and many times its easier to write a new one with well documented specs than to try to port one that is poorly documented, friendly license or not. But given how easily that the OpenBSD drivers have been ported to NetBSD and FreeBSD, the 'documentation' red herring is an old wives tale. That was between BSDs. Not to Linux, Solaris, etc. If you have any experience porting drivers, you would know it isn't that easy. Documentation isn't a red herring either. If the driver peeks and pokes the hardware but doesn't tell you why, you're putting yourselves and your customers at danger by trusting that it's doing the right thing. You're also going to have a lot of egg on your face when you can't explain why something doesn't work and you've committed to support the device / driver. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: [osol-mktg] RE: Solaris on Intel's Classmate PC?
On 02/04/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: With respect to many kernel features, Mac OS X is stuck in the early 1990s. Em, yep! As a Mac OS X (l)user, I can testify that OS X is about as dumb as a doornail underneath the slick Aqua GUI. They perverted the nice FreeBSD UNIX by crossing it over with a braindead MacOS 9 and the experimental CMU Mach kernel and created a genetically mutated monster, that is neither MacOS nor FreeBSD UNIX. However, they advertise it as FreeBSD. Makes me really feel guilty that I bought a Mac. And here I thought that it would be UNIX (which is why I bought it to begin with). Supposedly Leopard will have UNIX certification according to Apple's advertising materials. That will be interesting to see... -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal : busybox-ksh93
On 02/04/07, gns [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Project proposal : busybox-ksh93 Busybox on OpenSolaris is about providing a busybox equivalent for OpenSolaris. This will help in making possible small sized distros and distros(exp LiveCD) with better bootup time and run-time performance. This should also be useful in the appliance domain. The project would have 2 outputs: 1. Shell integration of stand-alone commands in a modular manner. ksh93 will be the shell of choice for the same. 2. All the identified commands housed in a stand alone executable. ksh93 design would be reused here (by providing a wrapper around libcmd) The set of built-in commands will be configurable. The set of commands that will be made as the default integration set will be identified based on commands frequently used in the startup and smf scripts of solaris distros. The modularity of the setup will ensure addition/removal of commands is possible at buildtime. The project would use the code-base of ON. Where multiple command sources are present (ex: /usr/bin,/usr/xpg4/bin,etc), the project would choose the source code base that is most standards compliant and aware of multibyte characters. A related piece of work has been done for the belenix project(sh integration) and code has been contributed to belenix. This will become available with the belenix release that is scheduled for this month(April-2007). Future possibilities not considered in the current scope include : 1. Optimizing libc for size and resources, generating customized libc with reduced functionality. 2. Ability to customize the set of features included in the commands in the interest of minimization. The initial leaders of this project would be: Moinak Ghosh Roland Mainz Shivakumar GN +1 from me, I've been toying with the idea of getting the original BusyBox up and going on Solaris among the many projects I have on my mind as of late. I think this project is an important step towards getting Solaris used in embedded and tiny pc environments. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Unable to register or update
On 02/04/07, Shawn Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am running the latest version of opensolaris CE. I built the DVD last friday and every time I attempt to register or update it simply hangs and does nothing, to be honest the only way to kill the process is by ising the init command to restart the system. Is there an issue or does anyone know how to force registration via the command line? Is there anyway to register the system from the SUN site or am I SOL. I am new to the opensolaris product, and any help would be appreciated. The updater is non-functional for all Developer and Community edition builds. If you want to upgrade, you have to download the new version and then use live upgrade or run the install program from the install media. Don't worry about the registration or updater, just tell it you will never register. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal : busybox-ksh93
On 03/04/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruno Jargot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg, We discussed this beforehand. The Bourne shell does not support internationalisation, localisation, This is definitely wrong. If it is wrong, state how and why please. Missing POSIX conformance is not a problem, missing /bin/sh compatibility may be a problem for Solaris scripts... Maybe it is for them? Maybe they want portable scripts, not Solaris scripts... The way you defoine minimal requirements causes your project to enhance the total size of a minimal OpenSolaris installation insteaf of reducing it. Jörg It is impossible to know that it will be that much bigger until the project is done. At this point, they haven't even started yet and you are saying they can't succeed. Give them a chance to prove it works before implying it will fail. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal : busybox-ksh93
On 03/04/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 03/04/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Bruno Jargot [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg, We discussed this beforehand. The Bourne shell does not support internationalisation, localisation, This is definitely wrong. If it is wrong, state how and why please. I thought this should be a well known fact. Please look at the source to verify. Joerg, many of us don't have the experience you do with shells or Solaris. Thererfore, it would be easier if you could give a summary of why it has localisation problems. I could read the code, but I would not necessarily come to the same conclusions you have. Thanks. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: joining Sun
On 04/04/07, Jason J. W. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Its a question of preference. Solaris is a far superior OS in the kernel etc. Userland it just isn't. Nexenta is a really nice bridge between the two. Frankly, if you need to get hot around the collar about this issue its alright. I think the point being made is that some things in GNU land aren't necessarily better, they're just what some folks are used to. I started using Linux in 1996 from what I remember, and honestly, there isn't much difference between GNU land, the various BSDs, and Solaris. While I think the existing Solaris userland could be improved in some areas, I don't think it is nearly as bad as some people make it out to be. Sometimes there are more better ways of doing things that don't involve a convenient command-line option and fit with the UNIX philosophy. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Problem with install Solaris CD (sol-9-905hw-ga-sparc-v2)
On 05/04/07, Jan Fredriksson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, When I try to install Solaris CD (sol-9-905hw-ga-sparc-v2) I get , These lists are for the discussion of OpenSolaris. You should post to the Sun bigadmin forums or the solaris-x86 yahoo group. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Best option for upgrading a liveupgrade environment?
I'm looking for the easiest way to get to b61 from b60 for one of my Live Upgrade environments. I have three Solaris root slices. One has S10U3 One has SXDE b55 One has SXCE b60 If I do an luactivate on the b60 one, can I just boot from the installer DVD and do a clean upgrade *or* clean install on it? If I do that, will that prevent me from using luactivate to switch to b55 or S10U3? Is my best option to do the whole liveupgrade process over again for the b60 slice? Is there another? Just asking for best option here. I obviously know how to redo the environment for SXCE completely and get to b61, I'm just looking for a shortcut to b61 from b60. Thanks, -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best option for upgrading a liveupgrade environment?
On 05/04/07, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: However you shouldn't need to luactivate to switch between them anyway just select them from the GRUB menu (or if this is sparc use devaliases entries for each slice) No, x86. I was wondering if I actually needed to use luactivate given that all the entries showed up on my Grub boot menu. If so, that would be great. Is my best option to do the whole liveupgrade process over again for the b60 slice? boot the b60 slice and do this: 1. Install the b61 live upgrade packages from the install image 2. lumake -n b55 3. luupgrade -n b55 -u -s /path/to/install_image This leaves you with S10u3, b60 and b61 which isn't what I think you want. So try this. No indeed :) boot the b55 slice and do this: 1. Install the b61 live upgrade pacakges from the install image 2. luupgrade -n b61 -u -s /path/to/install_image I haven't actually tried this second style in quite a while but it did work for me in the past and I believe it should work just fine. Will do later tonight. The key is that you will have to have the b61 lu packages installed on your b55 image though. Thanks for the response. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The shell project now open...
On 05/04/07, Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Just a quick announcement that the shell project is now open. Awesome! This is great news Roland. Thanks for sharing. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] joining Sun
On 05/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Seriously, many people have talked about this in the past, and there are some solutions today such as pkg-get which blastwave uses, and apt was ported with Nexenta...but I don't think it would matter as long as people got their packages and were able to have a network enabled install. I beleive we're moving in that direction, and several projects are in progress that will facilitate some of this, possibly with SysV packaging as Solaris uses today (which would require changes of course). It would nice to have more than just a network enabled install possible. In nexenta, you can live upgrade to the next release with apt. I've had many a live upgrade go awry over the years with Linux distributions. I'd be more impressed with a reliable upgrade system, even if it requires a reboot with media or special boot mode that is faster than the current process. live upgrade in the linux context strikes me as a shiny rather than practical thing in my personal experience. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] joining Sun
On 05/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've had many a live upgrade go awry over the years with Linux distributions. I'd be more impressed with a reliable upgrade system, even if it requires a reboot with media or special boot mode that is faster than the current process. live upgrade in the linux context strikes me as a shiny rather than practical thing in my personal experience. The ONLY Linux distribution where you can do a live upgrade is Debian. On anything else you are asking for Bzzzt. You have also been able to do it on Fedora since at least release 3, and of course Gentoo, Ubuntu, and others. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] joining Sun
On 05/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The ONLY Linux distribution where you can do a live upgrade is Debian. You missed Gentoo! okay okay. Live upgrade sans compiling :P Gentoo has binary packages available too, so... -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] xpg/bin/tr unexpect output on Sparc?
On 06/04/07, I. Szczesniak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/3/07, Steven Xie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Is this mean We should use Solaris original utilities under /usr/bin instead of posix ones under /usr/xpg/bin. It's really surprising. Well, we can live with it. We can barely live with it. Solaris is a very delicate platform when you try to rely on standards in your products. Many details which are standard on other operating systems are optional (especially POSIX and multibyte locale support) which makes it difficult to maintain a Solaris port. What other platforms are you speaking of? Linux isn't POSIX compliant, and most of the BSDs aren't. So which ones? -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best option for upgrading a liveupgrade environment?
On 05/04/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 05/04/07, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I haven't actually tried this second style in quite a while but it did work for me in the past and I believe it should work just fine. Will do later tonight. Just to confirm: it worked just fine! That is, after I removed all my icon cache files for GNOME. They somehow got corrupted during the process. Thanks, -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 06/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The functionality of apt to perform a dist-upgrade (Chung, is that what you're talking about?) is nothing of the sorts where Solaris allows you to perform an upgrade to a seperate partition/slice and move your configuration and/or changes to the new boot envirionment. Yes, well, a network enabled dist upgrade or package upgrade are the two things I would be looking for. Unless there are tools to help maintain hundreds of servers which are divided into different groups available... Yes, Sun has tools available to manage updates (such as Sun Update Connection, etc.). Plus there are a few community ones available such as Bruce Riddle's: http://www.riddleware.com/~patchman/PATCHDB/ Being able to do an dist-upgrade to get that latest driver for a cluster of boxes is a major plus especially if the boxes are remote (as in another country) and you would rather not have to call some dumb data centre operator and feed the operator instructions. Doing a dist-upgrade for a new driver seems a bit of an overkill and highly unlikely. Do you have a better example? -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: joining Sun
On 06/04/07, MC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Ian Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: isn't true at all, but many potential users will never get past When I hit backspace, I get ^H--Linux hasn't done that since 1995! This kind of nonsense was what I did see after I did publish Schillix, the first OpenSolaris based distro. These people are just to uninformed to know that they are talking about a property of bash and not one of the OS. Is it really nonsense? If you build a product for a user, and the user doesn't like it, is it their fault or yours? If I buy a Hyundai Elantar (small four-door sedan) and try to use it to haul four tons of rock, it is my fault or Hyundai's? Not to be too silly, but I have never bought the argument that because software doesn't do what a user expects it to, that it is somehow the designer of the software's fault. Good software is designed with specific goals and needs, just because it doesn't meet everyone's goals and needs does not make it broken or faulty. Solaris was designed to meet specific goals and needs, just because it doesn't meet someone else's specific goals or needs does not mean it is faulty :) -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: joining Sun
On 06/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Have you tried the Linux branded zones? You can run unmodified Linux binaries on Solaris. What is the point of Solaris if it is only to run Linux binaries? Exactly, and what is the point of Solaris if it is only to make it just like GNU/Linux? That's what Nexenta is for ;) -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Fresh Install Problems
On 06/04/07, Richard Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm new to Solaris 10. Downloaded and installed fine. Login screen accepts my user name but password box will not accept anything from keyboard, like I wasn't typing. Just a blinking cursor. Well, thats as far as I've progressed with Solaris in 3 days and 2 reinstalls. I am just trying to learn about this OS. I have windows only background. IT student There may be a graphics issue with your hardware, possibly. Did you try selecting command line login from the options menu? Do you know what video card or video chipset you are using? -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: joining Sun
On 07/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Exactly, and what is the point of Solaris if it is only to make it just like GNU/Linux? That's what Nexenta is for ;) Yup. Which is why I am asking that there be no gcc + gnome (okay maybe gnome is stretching it given that Sun is behind the GNOME band wagon) entrenchment in nevada. A standard desktop that does not depend on gcc or glibc is necessary imho. I'm not sure how GNOME depends on gcc or glibc...what am I missing? Besides, what other desktop option do we have right now? GNOME is the best for accessibility, etc. KDE isn't an option due to licensing, C++, etc. XFCE and others aren't mature enough yet, and CDE is dead, long live CDE. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 07/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Doing a dist-upgrade for a new driver seems a bit of an overkill and highly unlikely. Do you have a better example? Haha, well that was what I could come up with because that is how I got the si3124 driver on Nexenta. Is there a source tarball or a binary package for the si3124 driver? Is it possible to just plug a si3124 driver into the version of the Solaris kernel that comes with b50 on which nexenta alpha6 is based? That is, does the b50 kernel have the sata framework available? How am I supposed to find out this kind of information besides bugging people on a list? Yes. In fact, it's usually possible to use drivers that were created for Solaris 8 or 9 with the newest versions of Solaris. *Unlike* GNU/Linux, Solaris has a very stable and well-documented driver API. This means that when your kernel changes, generally speaking, your drivers don't have to either. For example, the OSS drivers I installed on Solaris 10 Update 3 were copied directly over the Solaris Developer Express b55, Solaris Express Community Edition b60, and Solaris Express Community Edition b61, and it worked on all of them... But then, I do not know much about what is in a certain Solaris kernel let alone how to compile one or a driver (i guess this is documented on docs.sun.com?) It depends on the individual driver. Usually it's as simple as make; make install and maybe an update_drv run or two -- *if* it has be compiled. If it's already compiled for you, it's usually as easy as something like running pkgadd -d MYdriver.pkg. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Fresh Install Problems
On 07/04/07, Richard Raymond [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Invidia 256 mb grahics. Root login gave me enough time once. Got incorrect. Seems to me if you create a username and password during install, it should work. Yes I am a microsoft user from the beginning. many years with old dos all the way to XP and Vista. If a login is stopping me because things are so different with Solaris 10, I must be an idiot. I actually thought that you typed your user name in the box, and then your password in the password box. I agree, something is wrong, maybe during the download something got corrupted, but there was no indication in SDM of that. There is an outside chance that something went sour during the iso burn, but again, there was not any indication of that either. I am considering a drive format and a fresh download, start from scratch. If I have to try tricks to log in, I'm sure there will be more problems beyond that, and I care to deal with any work arounds of a brand new install. The PC and hardware were not an issue at any time during the install. Thanks for the suggestions, I must find out what is wrong before I go any further. Unfortunately, nVidia 256mb graphics doesn't tell me what video card you are using, though it helps somewhat. Unfortunately, the information you have provided is not yet enough to determine the real issue. However, this may provide us with more information that will help a lot: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/hcts/device_detect.html Run the detection tool under Windows or Linux, then post the output of it here or somewhere we can get to it. That will tell us what specific hardware you have, and hopefully help shed some light on this issue. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Fresh Install Problems
On 07/04/07, Andrew Pattison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Passwords on Solaris are not limited to 8 characters, but the default password hashing algorithm only looks at the first 8 characters, with the result that passwords which have the same first 8 characters are treated as being identical. That's slightly disturbing, though not terribly surprising. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SNV_59 doesn’t recognize linux partitions existing on second SATA HDD
On 07/04/07, Boris Derzhavets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: SNV_59 doesn't recognize already existing CentOS 4.4 (openSUSE 10.2 ) partitions on second (not bootable SATA HDD). Attempt to load CentOS 4.4 (openSUSE 10.2) instance modifying /boot/grub/menu.lst under Solaris failed. SNV_52 didn't experience such kind of problems on old IDE system with Pentium 3GHZ (Prescott),Elite Groupe 865PE,2 Seagate Barracuda IDE drives (80 GB) Hardware for SNV_59: CPU Core2duo E6400 ASUS P5B Deluxe 2 SATA HDDs atached to INTEL ICH8R (in AHCI mode) Could be for any number of reasons. However, have you trained using a chainloader +1 style boot if you have grub installed on your Linux partition's MBR? -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Fresh Install Problems
On 07/04/07, Jason King [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/7/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 07/04/07, Andrew Pattison [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Passwords on Solaris are not limited to 8 characters, but the default password hashing algorithm only looks at the first 8 characters, with the result that passwords which have the same first 8 characters are treated as being identical. That's slightly disturbing, though not terribly surprising. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org That is the traditional behavior on most UNIX platforms, so it's nothing new. If you want to enable passwords that can have more than 8 significant characters, just update /etc/security/policy.conf and change the default crypt algorithm to something other can the traditional UNIX crypt ( i.e. md5 or blowfish). I believe both of those allow for up to 256 (or 255 somewhere around that) character passwords. Also, if you would prefer something other than md5 or blowfish, it appears the implementation is modular (though I do not know if it is a public interface or not). Perhaps it might be worthwhile to add the ability to specify the default encryption algorithm or encryption policy as part of the install or sysidcfg? Most GNU/Linux distribution installers *used* to ask if you want to use a more secure method of password encryption. I believe slackware used to ask if you wanted to use the default, or md5/blowfish. Most of the ones I've seen these days default to md5. Is there any reason why it is bad to default to md5? I assume it causes system upgrade / migration issues... -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 07/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 07/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Doing a dist-upgrade for a new driver seems a bit of an overkill and highly unlikely. Do you have a better example? Haha, well that was what I could come up with because that is how I got the si3124 driver on Nexenta. Is there a source tarball or a binary package for the si3124 driver? Is it possible to just plug a si3124 driver into the version of the Solaris kernel that comes with b50 on which nexenta alpha6 is based? That is, does the b50 kernel have the sata framework available? How am I supposed to find out this kind of information besides bugging people on a list? Yes. In fact, it's usually possible to use drivers that were created for Solaris 8 or 9 with the newest versions of Solaris. *Unlike* GNU/Linux, Solaris has a very stable and well-documented driver API. This means that when your kernel changes, generally speaking, your drivers don't have to either. Yes, I know this. You still have not however answered my question about where do I find a binary package or a source tarball for the si3124 driver. Maybe this is an edge case but I would not rule out a dist-upgrade for a driver especially one that comes with open solaris and is not third-party. It depends on the hardware. Since I don't personally have the si3142, I would search for it. Chances are that if the driver isn't included, it either isn't supported by Solaris directly yet, and the driver is available somewhere on the web. In this particular case, it looks like the SUNWsi3124 package contains the driver you want. However, that driver is not yet part of older versions of solaris (as far as I can tell) and apparently depends on the new SATA framework that Solaris Express builds feature. Not everyone wants to maintain their own kernel or what not. You mentioned Sun Update Connection previously...are you referring to that wget script for patches? Is not there a problem with dependecies or No, see here for more about Sun Connection: http://www.sun.com/service/sunconnection/gettingstarted.jsp something with patches? Is this available for Open Solaris? No. Sun Connection is currently only supported for released versions of Solaris 10. Besides the kernel, what if I want to maintain my own set of packages for my servers? With apt or yum, one can create one's repository and even using Debian or Centos as the base, one can combine the OS repository with one's custom packages and manage your servers that way. Say Open Solaris/Solaris comes with a certain version of sendmail but I need the features that come with a newer version or I am patching sendmail to get those features. On Linux with apt/dpkg or yum/rpm, you can build your package and then deploy it by adding that package to your repository and running an update on servers concerned. The whole thing could be such that a single command will get all those servers to come and get it. I do not see anything that will provide this kind of functionality for Open Solaris/Solaris deployments. You can build your own packages using easy scripts such as gnutopkg from Philip Brown: http://www.bolthole.com/solaris/gnutopkg or: http://icculus.org/~eviltypeguy/pkg/gnutopkg I have several examples of Solaris packages here that I made myself: http://icculus.org/~eviltypeguy/pkg/ You could even use OpenPKG to build your own entire software stack or use the one they provide: http://www.openpkg.org/ The nice thing about OpenPKG is that it works on more operating systems than just Solaris. If it's already compiled for you, it's usually as easy as something like running pkgadd -d MYdriver.pkg. Great. Not much different from Linux for binary drivers. Now if you can tell me the same for those that come with Open Solaris no matter what release you are running... In this case, you probably can't get the si3124 package working on older versions of Solaris. From what I understand, drivers that worked on b16 of Solaris Express should still work on b61. This means that yes, even between OpenSolaris releases, drivers should work *going forward*. Going backward may not be true. There are some special exceptions at the moment such as things that use the GLDv3, and so on, but for the most part, yes. Someone correct me if this is no longer true or there are further caveats. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Express Developer Edition (build 59) on ASUS P5B Deluxe AHCI mode
On 08/04/07, Boris Derzhavets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Issues:- 1.OS has not detected Marvell Youkon Gigabit Ehernet Adapter integrated on MB. Correct. This hardware is not yet natively supported by Solaris. Instead, you must obtain a driver from SysKonnect: http://www.syskonnect.de/e_en/support/driver_searchresults.html?navanchor=term=bs.SUN_Solaris+produkt.SK-9E21produkt=produkt.SK-9E21typ=system=bs.SUN_Solaris -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 08/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: packages and repositories are too different things. apt and yum are repository tools. Yes, I know that, but I don't see how that is relevant. There goes your dist upgrade for a driver being overkill and highly unlikely when there does not appear to be a kernel package available to let you just upgrade the kernel. I fail to see how you can reach that conclusion, and yes, a dist-upgrade is still overkill. A dist-upgrade implies more than just a kernel upgrade. Your connections and conclusions make no sense. A dist-upgrade would be like going from Solaris 10 GA - Solaris 10 Update 3; not just upgrading the kernel for a new driver, which is rarely necessary (from what I've seen). Shawn, you have provided absolutely no information that comes close to what you can get with apt + dpkg or yum + rpm. Is there any '???' + pkg? I didn't know I was trying to. If you are asking, is there a tool *exactly* like apt-get that comes with the release version of Solaris 10? No, there is not. However, there is an update management tool. Is there a tool like dpkg? Yes, since dpkg is just a package manager; Solaris has package management tools. Most of your confusion seems to stem around not understanding the updates are handled differently for the Community and Developer releases of Solaris than the official release. The official release has an update manager that provides new driver, fixes, patches, etc. The Community and Developer releases do not; if you want to upgrade with those, you use the upgrade functionality provided by the installer with each new release. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Installing PHP on SunOS 5.8
On 09/04/07, Abdul Halim A. Aziz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi. I'm new in SunOS. i have an existing SunOS 5.8. i've been searching for a way on how to install PHP on the meachine and how can i know which webservice is running Apache / tomcat These lists are for the discussion of OpenSolaris. Versions of Solaris prior to 10 are out of scope. Please discuss this topic on the Sun bigadmin forums. You can probably find PHP for SunOS 5.8 on www.sunfreeware.com or www.blastwave.org. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Workspace tools
On 09/04/07, Manoj Joseph [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Teamware is Sun's internal code management tool. wx, wx, workspace, bringover are all internal Sun tools. You don't need them to build OpenSolaris. wx and ws are no longer internal only. It is part of SUNWonbld and is available for download and use. My apologies then, I could have sworn they weren't when the project first started, as you seemed to have indicated, they must have been added later. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] no CDDL on /bin/which
On 09/04/07, James Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes: On Mon, 9 Apr 2007, James Carlson wrote: Not all things in Solaris are under the CDDL. Only the things that Sun has licensed under CDDL are marked that way. Some things have different owners who've given different licenses. Seems that having the license in the man page would be helpful, with all the various licenses we have in the system. The issues are complex, and there are notable exceptions, but in general, I suspect the licenses are not meaningful for people who need to know how to use the system. I really don't like finding ersatz advertising in the documentation. Indeed, and some programs may have files that fall under multiple licenses. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 09/04/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: You could even use OpenPKG to build your own entire software stack or use the one they provide: http://www.openpkg.org/ The nice thing about OpenPKG is that it works on more operating systems than just Solaris. You could, and it sounds nice, but it's a trap. Sooner or later whoever does that runs into compatibility and integration problems with the OS/OE himself. Which compatibility and integration problems? Exactly! If you don't know or can't answer that question now, it's a sign of impending trouble. The point is, that if you're maintaining your own stack, you don't need to integrate with the base OS's packaging system. In fact, you usually don't want to mess with or touch the base stack at all! Similar to how blastwave works actually, and why it works relatively well... -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 09/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Most of your confusion seems to stem around not understanding the updates are handled differently for the Community and Developer releases of Solaris than the official release. Thanks Shawn. I was trying to point that the current methods available do not fly against what is available elsewhere. This is not a case of doing it the linux way...it is a case of doing it in a way that is practical and manageable. People have been managing quite fine for years, so I think your definition of practical and mangeable must differ quite a bit from what others define. The official release has an update manager that provides new driver, fixes, patches, etc. The Community and Developer releases do not; if you want to upgrade with those, you use the upgrade functionality provided by the installer with each new release. So Open Solaris/Solaris 10 is not quite ready for production then? I guess it is hard to You are confused. Solaris 10 is an official release of Solaris, and has the update manager I mentioned. It is quite ready for production, is in production, and is used by companies everyday that depend on it for mission critical applications. The *testing* releases such as Solaris Express Developer / Community Edition, are not officially intended for production though many people find they are more than stable enough to use in production. tell...unsupported version don't have the tools, supported version has tools but I am not sure that they are quite what I would want to manage clusters of boxes or maybe even a single box if i am paranoid... I encourage you to read up more on Sun Connection about the tools that adminsitrators have for managing updates: Sun Connection is a Solaris and Linux life cycle management tool that allows customers to provision new systems, manage their updates and configuration changes, and eventually re-deploy systems for new purpose. http://www.sun.com/service/sunconnection/index.jsp What is open solaris' goal I wonder...to be everywhere on servers...desktops...or ??? I encourage you to read the General FAQ on the OpenSolaris.org website to learn more and have a better understanding of what OpenSolaris and Solaris is and the differences between them: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/about/faq/general_faq/#whatis -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Marc Hamilton, Introduction
On 10/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Plugging in card, turning on box and then plugging in the sata drives and running cfgadm twice and then a zpool command without any 'echo magic /proc/scsi' as you do on Linux was a really nice experience. At least this is what you have to do with hotswap stuff in Linux 2.4. Not sure what happens with the latest 2.6.18 kernels that will come with RHEL5 which may even things. I'm not familiar with the support on Linux, but how does a company like Red Hat support such practice? I mean, give us something to laugh about so we can pee our pants! They don't. You are supposed to reboot the box. http://kbase.redhat.com/faq/FAQ_79_3655.shtm Oh, FYI, there are a lot of companies/admins out there that do not subscribe to Redhat support. If Sun Microsystems has no interest in this field then I guess the whole packaging/server maintenance for Open Solaris is a moot point and I would be sorry that I raised this point here. The RHEL license prevents use of the software without a subscription (thanks to control of their trademark). So, I assume you are talking about Fedora Core, in which case, that's bleeding (hemmoraging)? edge, or CentOS. Both of those projects are nothing like the Solaris official release. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Noob with a couple questions
On 10/04/07, Mike [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, how is OpenSolaris different to Solaris? http://www.opensolaris.org/os/about/faq/general_faq/#opensolaris-solaris By the way what's 'Looking Glass'? Is it available on KDE or Xfce? Or can it run on any environment? Looking Glass is an experimental desktop environment project by Sun. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] limit number of sftp/scp sessions
On 10/04/07, Ben [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm looking for a way to limit the number of authenticated sftp/scp sessions that are allowed to connect to my box. I've searched the sunsolve forums and docs.sun.com, but I'm not seeing any config that would give me the ability to limit active sessions. Does something like this exist? This is all being attempted on Solaris 9. Hi welcome to our community. However, this community is focused on OpenSolaris (and Solaris 10 partially). As a result, your question would best be answered on the Sun BigAdmin forums here: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin or the Solaris x86 Yahoo Group mailing list here: http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/solarisx86/ -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] xpg/bin/tr unexpect output on Sparc?
On 11/04/07, I. Szczesniak [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I don't think this will happen without a major shift to a more customer-friendly policy at Sun. When is break my customer's stuff seen as friendly? -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Need help getting audio driver to work
On 12/04/07, N. L. Barna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi friends, I just received and installed Solaris Express, Developer Edition, and I don't know what I'm doing. I'm on an x86 system and converted from XP. Everything seems fine except now I don't have sound. The sound card is a Sound Blaster Audigy 2. I found this site http://www.tools.de/opensource/solaris/audio/beta/ for a possible driver (likely audioemu in my case). It says I need to unpack and download the file with bunzip2, which I didn't think I had so I went to this site http://www.bzip.org/downloads.html and downloaded the source tarball. The problem is I don't know what I'm doing when I'm extracting these things. When I think I've extracted something, then there are all these files from which I don't comprehend and so don't know how to execute or install [i]the[/i] program. I'm probably lost due to my poor conditioning with automated installers. I deeply appreciate any help. I suggest using the OpenSound driver instead, not because the one you have won't work, but because the OpenSound driver has a better mixer, etc.: http://www.opensound.com/ Plus, the install is dead easy. It's free for personal use. As far as decompressing that file, you should be able to do something like: bzcat filename.tar.bz2 | tar -xf - -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [osol-discuss] Spam mails...
On 14/04/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sat, 14 Apr 2007, gns wrote: Posting - Allow for members only Non-member postings - Should either get rejected or should go into a message queue and await the moderator's approval Are the spams inspite of the above !? Very probably. People who are tactful in the unfortunate position /tactful of using Windoze but are subscribed to the mailing list could well have their computers acting as a spam bot without their knowledge. :-( It's more likely that people subscribe and then spam. I suspect Casper's theory is true based on my own observations. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 16/04/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, 6 Apr 2007, Thomas Rampelberg wrote: Now, onto packaging (and this is gonna sound a lot like emerge on gentoo, I like it!), I'd like to see something that by default has generic binaries that are compiled in the normal manner. However, there are times that I'd like to select specific features of the binaries. In gentoo these are called USE flags and let you easily get some optimized binaries that will do only what you want. Not everyone is interested in that much flexibility, but when you're trying to get that extra 10% of performance out of a system, it's priceless. I think this is the very problem that blastwave faces, as does all other distributions, just that blastwave is easy to use as an example as they exist now in a given state. One tries to add what they will people will need or want, so that in essence you get one-stop-shopping. Then it becomes apparent that joe user didn't want xxx feature which bill user wanted, and tom user's company won't let him install anything that has feature xxx included in it...I have not used Gentoo very much, only once or twice in the past, but the USE flags sound interesting, the only problem I see is that it requires more work on the packaging side to issolate that stuff. My gut feeling is that things such as USE flags are for a very small minority of the community. I don't think pre-configured packages are going away anytime soon. They are the only sane way for a company to establish a base guideline for support, documentation, and so on. I have worked with and know of very few enterprise environments where they needed that level of customisation. Besides, once you do customise that to that level, it is essentially an unsupportable configuration. That isn't to say that there can't be some 3rd party easy way of doing this, such as ports for Solaris -- but I wouldn't expect it to be part of the base OS. On an RHEL system, you can of course download the srpms, alter the spec file, and rebuild the packages and then deploy as you see fit, but there are many caveats to that method. The current method that Blastwave, OpenPKG and others employ is the most hassle-free and least-likely-to-cause-a-package-nightmare way of doing things in my experience. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 16/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: That isn't to say that there can't be some 3rd party easy way of doing this, such as ports for Solaris -- but I wouldn't expect it to be part of the base OS. On an RHEL system, you can of course download the srpms, alter the spec file, and rebuild the packages and then deploy as you see fit, but there are many caveats to that method. Huh? What caveats may I ask? Whether apt+deb or yum+rpm, both handle this in a most trivial manner. You point apt or yum at the main repository and your own repository that has your customized packages. Setting up your own repository is simple too so the whole thing is quick and easy to setup. The caveats are that Vendors like RedHat often have a significant number of patches included with their builds. I maintained packages for a set of RHEL system for a few years, trust me, it is not as easy as it sounds to customise and rebuild packages. It's especially painful if you want to say, update the version of perl included with RedHat to the newest version. The dependencies involved, plus the fact that you're replacing a package the entire base system relies on is not fun to deal with. You can deviate to a certain extent from RedHat's configuration, but much beyond that and suddenly parts of the system will just break. The whole thing is not quick and easy to setup when you are deploying a set of systems for the first time without having done it before. The RPM spec file formats were poorly documented when I was working with it, and RedHat's perl dependency generator was wrong most of the time. Updating to a newer version of software for a package often meant finding which vendor supplied patches could still apply or fixing them so that they did so that you wouldn't be left with bugs, or without the customisations specific to the distribution they applied that made it a RedHat-style package. The only relatively easy part was setting up the repository with apt4rpm. Everything else was a rather painful experience for me. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] was something else, now Packaging
On 16/04/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 16 Apr 2007, Shawn Walker wrote: The only relatively easy part was setting up the repository with apt4rpm. Everything else was a rather painful experience for me. I've never messed with the rpm formats at all, but apt4rpm sounds similar to alien (written by Joey Hess), I think alien handles going both ways. Alien is a package translator last check, while apt4rpm is just a port of apt-get, etc. for RPM-based systems. apt-get has super cow powers, Alien does not, or something like that ;) -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: MPxIO problem with metadb !!!
On 17/04/07, shay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: what it the best way to upgrade from solaris 10 (update 3/05) to solaris 10 (update 11/06) ? liveupgrade, or boot from the CD and choose the upgrade option. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2. Ease of use Now, I know that most of you old school UNIX guys laugh at this, but usability is important. You've tuned me into a cool way to do something along the lines of USE flags in Solaris, but it sure sounds like it's not gonna be easy. Using Ubuntu for an example, the reason it's become so popular so fast is not at all because it's superior. In fact, I can't stand quite a few things about it. It's become so popular so fast, because it's *EASY*. Without ease of use, no matter how awsome the feature set is, you're just gonna end up being the thing people use only when they absolutely have to. Thank you. Easy of upgrades/updates is just what I feel will give Open Solaris a big push. Please don't give me the Solaris 10 + Sun Connection. Sun Connection is very easy to use to manage updates and is all you're likely to need in a *production* environment. So I don't understand your compliant. Given that you have never indicated actual usage of it, I think it is unfair for you to be critical of it. Upgrades are easy right now, especially using liveupgrade or flash archives. Heck, even running the upgrade option from the installer is pretty easy. I'm fairly certain you're still talking about updates in a *non*-production environment. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you. the concept of apt/yum repositories seems to be very alien here. No, it is not. You just have a hard time believing that we don't embrace it as the one true way of doing things. I think the point most people have been trying to raise is that flash archives, etc. are a far better way to mass manage and deploy systems than apt-get or yum repositories. It is especially not a foreign concept for me, considering I managed and deployed servers using apt4rpm for a few years. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 17/04/07, Christopher Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Also, a html-browsable (like http://docs.python.org/) would be fantastic. This lets google index them all for easy searching. (I don't search on local pc (ever)) Google indexes PDFs now, and I have gotten hit results from google searches that were from docs.sun.com many times. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: --- Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Thank you. the concept of apt/yum repositories seems to be very alien here. No, it is not. You just have a hard time believing that we don't embrace it as the one true way of doing things. I think the point most people have been trying to raise is that flash archives, etc. are a far better way to mass manage and deploy systems than apt-get or yum repositories. It is especially not a foreign concept for me, considering I managed and deployed servers using apt4rpm for a few years. Geez, Redhat, Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Centos must all be doing the wrong thing then deploying updates to their thousands of users whether they are individual desktops or people who keep their own local repository for their servers. I didn't say they were doing a *wrong* thing, I just implied it was not as good. Besides, I bet if you talk to people who use advocate one of those distributions, they would claim their particular distribution's update management system was better than any other one's system. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: GVIM 7.0 with GTK: is a .pkg available? (not blastwave)
On 18/04/07, Manish Chakravarty [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi All, I downloaded the tarball and it got built in SXDE with any modifications (using the bundled Sun Studio 11) It has pretty looking GTK fonts and icons. Now my question is: how do i make a .pkg out of it? (it is clear the vim7.0 has no extra dependencies. a base SXDE install is enough) See http://icculus.org/~eviltypeguy/pkg/ -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 18/04/07, a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I can be critical of the Sun Update Connection because I was a paying customer for one year. To be fair and objective (and not be a Sun PR channel, as some feel) Sun Update connection never worked right. It shows patches for Solaris 8 on a Solaris 10 system. This problem is not related to the update manager from what I know. Instead, this seems to be a problem with Sun's patch database (which continues to have issues). It shows patches for Solaris 10 for packages which are on the system and which subsequently fail installation. Which is not a problem with the update manager in any case that I know of, and is generally a problem with the update itself. It shows patches for Sun Studio which fail installation. It is slow. Seems no slower than Windows update to me. Subjective. It is written in Java. Sorry, that doesn't matter one bit, and is a subjective unrelated complaint. There are many great programs out there that people use that are written in Java today (such as Azureus, etc.). Being written in Java has absolutely no bearing on the quality of a product. It is ugly. Subjective. Depending on which theme you're using it can look just fine. I don't know why anybody ever cared if an updater was pretty though... And guess what? I did not renew my subscription. Having timely updates and support obviously did not matter to you. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 18/04/07, MC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As soon as Ubuntu supported click this button to upgrade your entire OS flawlessly from the internet, that feature became a standard for everyone to meet. I take it as a given that Solaris/OpenSolaris will eventually support such a feature. I hope I am not wrong! Solaris 10 already supports that feature if you use Sun Update Manager, if you're talking about updating. If you're talking about *ugprading* between releases, it is not flawless for Ubuntu. I should know, that's the only Linux distribution I run. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 18/04/07, xiaoming zhu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 4/18/07, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Solaris 10 already supports that feature if you use Sun Update Manager, if you're talking about updating. I have a question please: Does Solaris 10 support to boot directly from ZFS now? How can I update to this feature with Solaris 10? I've waited for this feature for so long time. Because I've learned that OpenSolaris has this feature now. Actually, it doesn't support it quite yet at last check. It wasn't fully integrated into the installer, etc. Debian has different releases/branches for different users: Stable (for server), unstable and testing . its stable version is equivalent to Solaris 10, its testing/unstable version may be equivalent to Open Solaris Developer/Community version (right?), for normal users, one big difference between both is: updating on Debian -like system is very easy, but updating on OpenSolaris is quite difficult. Using liveupgrade to go from Update 3 - testing releases works unless otherwise noted and is easy. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 18/04/07, xiaoming zhu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes, I'd like to play the Solaris Express, but I cannot spend much effort/time to debug the kernel, I just want to have a simple tool/way to update/recover the system. If you install Solaris Express, that's exactly what you're opening yourself up for. You're *testing* an uncertified release that is also unsupported. I think it is unreasonable to expect all of the update management and other tools that you have in a production environment to be available in a testing environment given that the resources needed to make those things happen are not free and are better spent on the production release. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: solaris 9 with xp
On 18/04/07, John Brewer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I will agree with creating two partitions, The Solaris installer only seems to see the FAT32 file system correctly, from when it calls fdisk from what I can tell the code is not still not yet there, and there should be a RFE for including NTFS. and so if you do not setup even just a small partition the XP for FAT32 and then Solaris fails the install to see the XP on boot menu. http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6223894 -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [i18n-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Virtual Console new release available NOW!
On 19/04/07, Ken Frank [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I didnt see on the vconsole page about what it is and usually used for and how its used. Are there any pointers to this kind of information ? http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/vconsole/ Also, Is it in current solaris 10 ? No. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: was something else, now Packaging
On 18/04/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2007-04-18 16:55:44: If you want to develop on Solaris for Solaris (and other UNIX and UNIX-like systems), or just keep up and play with the latest, cutting edge technology in Solaris, then Solaris Express is for you. Otherwise you have to wait about six months till the backports make it into the next Solaris 10 update. That's exactly my problem: It left me dozens of CDs after several times of upgrading. Someone said liveUpgrade is a choice, but it still needs CD, Network installation/upgrade is even more complicated. Is it _so_ difficult to provide a tool for online upgrade from Internet? Wrong. You can perform liveupgrade using an ISO image. You do not need CDs, DVDs, or any other media. lofiadm -a /path/to/my.iso mount -f hsfs /dev/lofi/1 /mnt Then follow the normal liveupgrade process... I've done it myself a couple of times. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Binary compatibility between OpenSolaris and Sun Solaris? Cross-compile?
On 19/04/07, Lucky Forumer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: BTW, can it mount ReiserFS? No. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Contributor Agreement
On 19/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: True, and I don't have a problem with that. However, I will also grant an irrevocable license to everyone who receives my contribution to do whatever they like with it, and that presumably includes any patch that I may post to an OpenSolaris list. This license doesn't seem to be the CDDL; it's just a license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer... and to sublicense the foregoing rights and it doesn't even provide for a requirement to retain credit; i.e., I'm essentially placing the contribution in the public domain. Secondly, I grant Sun a right to sue for infringement, not that there seem to be many ways to infringe the above, and if I'm doing that by mailing the list then I'd like to know up front [1][2]. Finally, if I sign up as part of a company, then I potentially need to get clearance just to send email to the lists as a result of the above. Now presumably some people here have signed the thing, so I really am canvassing for what they thought about it - did they interpret it differently, did they not care, were they happy with these clauses? I promise that I am not trolling here. I'm one of those that signed the agreement. In my understanding, (I am not a lawyer, etc.), it essentially gives Sun joint copyright for my contribution. As a result, they have the right to license, distribute, etc. that contribution however they see fit. Essentially, every right that I have as a copyright holder, they do too now. Your contribution is only available under the terms that Sun gives it someone else under, not whatever. Yes, it isn't restricted to the CDDL so that Sun can incorporate changes into older versions of Solaris, not worry about current licensees, etc. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: sshfs for solaris
On 19/04/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I am trying to get sshfs compiled for solaris, but I can't get it to work. Has anybody had any success doing this? Does it even work since it relies on FUSE? I would prefer to use NFS via ssh, but my server does not support NFSv4 (Mac OS X). I guess the question to start with is, is there FUSE on Solaris? I seem to remember someone working on a port, but what I don't remember is seeing an anouncement that it's been completed. FUSE is in progress; it isn't yet ready for primetime. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Contributor Agreement
On 20/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 06:13:16PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: On 19/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: True, and I don't have a problem with that. However, I will also grant an irrevocable license to everyone who receives my contribution to do whatever they like with it, and that presumably includes any patch that I may post to an OpenSolaris list. This license doesn't seem to be the CDDL; it's just a license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer... and to sublicense the foregoing rights and it doesn't even provide for a requirement to retain credit; i.e., I'm essentially placing the contribution in the public domain. Secondly, I grant Sun a right to sue for infringement, not that there seem to be many ways to infringe the above, and if I'm doing that by mailing the list then I'd like to know up front [1][2]. Finally, if I sign up as part of a company, then I potentially need to get clearance just to send email to the lists as a result of the above. Now presumably some people here have signed the thing, so I really am canvassing for what they thought about it - did they interpret it differently, did they not care, were they happy with these clauses? I promise that I am not trolling here. I'm one of those that signed the agreement. In my understanding, (I am not a lawyer, etc.), it essentially gives Sun joint copyright for my contribution. As a result, they have the right to license, distribute, etc. that contribution however they see fit. Essentially, every right that I have as a copyright holder, they do too now. Agreed. However, the agreeement goes further with the grant of rights. Your contribution is only available under the terms that Sun gives it someone else under, not whatever. The way I read it, the license is granted to everyone who receives the contribution, which necessarily means everyone subscribed to the mailing list or who finds the post via Google and so forth. It's not just Sun. Of course, that assumes that a post to the mailing list constitutes submission to the Project and that's where I'm somewhat nervous. I don't read it that way, nor do I think that is right. The contributor agreement gives you and *Sun* joint copyright. Not any random person on the mailing list. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Contributor Agreement
On 25/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:55:55PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: On 20/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 06:13:16PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: On 19/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: True, and I don't have a problem with that. However, I will also grant an irrevocable license to everyone who receives my contribution to do whatever they like with it, and that presumably includes any patch that I may post to an OpenSolaris list. This license doesn't seem to be the CDDL; it's just a license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer... and to sublicense the foregoing rights and it doesn't even provide for a requirement to retain credit; i.e., I'm essentially placing the contribution in the public domain. Secondly, I grant Sun a right to sue for infringement, not that there seem to be many ways to infringe the above, and if I'm doing that by mailing the list then I'd like to know up front [1][2]. Finally, if I sign up as part of a company, then I potentially need to get clearance just to send email to the lists as a result of the above. Now presumably some people here have signed the thing, so I really am canvassing for what they thought about it - did they interpret it differently, did they not care, were they happy with these clauses? I promise that I am not trolling here. I'm one of those that signed the agreement. In my understanding, (I am not a lawyer, etc.), it essentially gives Sun joint copyright for my contribution. As a result, they have the right to license, distribute, etc. that contribution however they see fit. Essentially, every right that I have as a copyright holder, they do too now. Agreed. However, the agreeement goes further with the grant of rights. Your contribution is only available under the terms that Sun gives it someone else under, not whatever. The way I read it, the license is granted to everyone who receives the contribution, which necessarily means everyone subscribed to the mailing list or who finds the post via Google and so forth. It's not just Sun. Of course, that assumes that a post to the mailing list constitutes submission to the Project and that's where I'm somewhat nervous. I don't read it that way, nor do I think that is right. The contributor agreement gives you and *Sun* joint copyright. Yes, that's the copyright grant, clause #2. So far as copyright goes, we are in agreement. Not any random person on the mailing list. Not a grant of copyright, but clause #3 reads: You hereby grant to Sun, and to any party who receives Your Contribution, a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide, no-charge, royalty-free, license under any patents owned or licensable by You at any time without payment to third parties, to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer Your Contribution in whole or in part, alone or in combination with or included in any product, work or materials arising out of the Project to which Your Contribution was submitted, and to sublicense the foregoing rights to third parties through multiple tiers of sublicensees or other licensing mechanisms at Sun's option. There's not much grey there. The question I have is just whether an email to an OpenSolaris mailing list constitutes a Contribution. The clause above states pretty clearly that if it does, anyone who receives the mail can do pretty much what they like with the contents. Again, I don't agree with your interpretation. However, if you wish to pursue this further, I suggest consulting legal council. No one here can provide you the information you seek. -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Contributor Agreement
On 25/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Wed, Apr 25, 2007 at 12:43:14PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: On 25/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Tue, Apr 24, 2007 at 11:55:55PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: On 20/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Apr 19, 2007 at 06:13:16PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: On 19/04/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: True, and I don't have a problem with that. However, I will also grant an irrevocable license to everyone who receives my contribution to do whatever they like with it, and that presumably includes any patch that I may post to an OpenSolaris list. This license doesn't seem to be the CDDL; it's just a license to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer... and to sublicense the foregoing rights and it doesn't even provide for a requirement to retain credit; i.e., I'm essentially placing the contribution in the public domain. Secondly, I grant Sun a right to sue for infringement, not that there seem to be many ways to infringe the above, and if I'm doing that by mailing the list then I'd like to know up front [1][2]. Finally, if I sign up as part of a company, then I potentially need to get clearance just to send email to the lists as a result of the above. Now presumably some people here have signed the thing, so I really am canvassing for what they thought about it - did they interpret it differently, did they not care, were they happy with these clauses? I promise that I am not trolling here. I'm one of those that signed the agreement. In my understanding, (I am not a lawyer, etc.), it essentially gives Sun joint copyright for my contribution. As a result, they have the right to license, distribute, etc. that contribution however they see fit. Essentially, every right that I have as a copyright holder, they do too now. Agreed. However, the agreeement goes further with the grant of rights. Your contribution is only available under the terms that Sun gives it someone else under, not whatever. The way I read it, the license is granted to everyone who receives the contribution, which necessarily means everyone subscribed to the mailing list or who finds the post via Google and so forth. It's not just Sun. Of course, that assumes that a post to the mailing list constitutes submission to the Project and that's where I'm somewhat nervous. I don't read it that way, nor do I think that is right. The contributor agreement gives you and *Sun* joint copyright. Yes, that's the copyright grant, clause #2. So far as copyright goes, we are in agreement. Not any random person on the mailing list. Not a grant of copyright, but clause #3 reads: You hereby grant to Sun, and to any party who receives Your Contribution, a perpetual, irrevocable, non-exclusive, worldwide, no-charge, royalty-free, license under any patents owned or licensable by You at any time without payment to third parties, to make, have made, use, sell, offer to sell, import and otherwise transfer Your Contribution in whole or in part, alone or in combination with or included in any product, work or materials arising out of the Project to which Your Contribution was submitted, and to sublicense the foregoing rights to third parties through multiple tiers of sublicensees or other licensing mechanisms at Sun's option. There's not much grey there. The question I have is just whether an email to an OpenSolaris mailing list constitutes a Contribution. The clause above states pretty clearly that if it does, anyone who receives the mail can do pretty much what they like with the contents. Again, I don't agree with your interpretation. However, if you wish to pursue this further, I suggest consulting legal council. No one here can provide you the information you seek. It's Sun's wording, so I think that someone from Sun could probably make the intent here crystal clear and possibly reword the thing to make it clear in future versions of the agreement, as it happens. Sun's legal council doesn't read this list as far as I know. I suggest contacting them. I don't intend to pay for legal counsel so that I can contribute to an open source project when I can personally avoid the issue by not signing the agreement and not contributing, but I consider that somewhat suboptimal. Yet, if you really care about the legal interpretation of an agreement, you will always seek legal council. Sun is not the only organisation to have an open source project that requires joint copyright attribution. The Free Software Foundation and many others do as well. In every case, it is your personal
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Multimedia on Solaris?
On 30/04/07, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OSS is in the pipeline and should be in Nevada sometime soon. GStreamer currently only supports SunAudio, but should also support OSS when it becomes available in Nevada. what do you mean? nevada might ship this: http://www.4front-tech.com/solaris.html? If so, it sure would be great to see it fixed up to work well on SPARC; equalization plus anything else is unusable on my Sun Blade 2000 (2x 1.015GHz); Logitech 20 (or similar Logitech) headphones are sometimes noisy compared to the native Solaris drivers, and an otherwise nice Audigy NX USB is stuck in muted status with the latest OSS drivers on SPARC. And the native compatibility doesn't work, and the MIDI support is still missing. But if all that were fixed, it would be quite nice, esp. if it could also support the native audio hardware (CS4231, in my case). And that might ease porting Linux audio or MIDI apps too. MIDI was purposefully left out from the initial OSSv4 release. http://4front-tech.com/hannublog/?p=6 -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Multimedia on Solaris?
On 29/04/07, Ignacio Marambio Catán [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: OSS is in the pipeline and should be in Nevada sometime soon. GStreamer currently only supports SunAudio, but should also support OSS when it becomes available in Nevada. what do you mean? nevada might ship this: http://www.4front-tech.com/solaris.html? Looks like it: In addition some companies like Sun and SCO have already licensed OSS for their operating systems. http://4front-tech.com/hannublog/?p=7 -- Less is only more where more is no good. --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst [EMAIL PROTECTED] - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
