Re: [osol-discuss] slight RFE for beadm
Dennis Clarke wrote: It would make more sense to output This action cannot be undone and then a CR before Are you sure you want to destroy opensolaris-3? -bash-3.2# beadm list BEActive Active on Mountpoint Space Name reboot Used -- - -- - opensolaris no no- 53.45M opensolaris-1 no no- 8.05M opensolaris-2 yesyes / 7.37G opensolaris-3 no no- 53.5K -bash-3.2# beadm destroy opensolaris-3 Are you sure you want to destroy opensolaris-3? This action cannot be undone (y/[n]): y Please file bug reports or enhancement requests at http://defect.opensolaris.org Thanks! -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] no verbose option for /usr/bin/pkg refresh
Dennis Clarke wrote: Is there no easy way to place progress statements into /usr/bin/pkg refresh ? At the moment pkg refresh is a blackbox that does stuff but with no progress statements or anything that tells the user what it is doing. Bug 1406 covers this concern. http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=1406 Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] how to find the source code for command /usr/sbin/df
wan_jm wrote: I want to find the source code for /usr/sbin/df , but I don't know to search, use which key word and what project is it in? could you please help me? thanks. http://src.opensolaris.org/source/search?q=defs=refs=path=dfhist=project=%2Fonnv -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] bash line wrapping
Matt Harrison wrote: I connect to my SXCE box regularly over ssh and I've got a bash line wrapping problem that is driving me mad. I googled about this for 2 weeks and haven't found any solution. If I type a command that exceeds 65 characters (including the shell prompt), it causes the line to wrap to the beginning of the same line, and if I go back to change the command, it litters up the entire terminal. Apart from making a mess it makes it really hard to work in the console. This problem manifests when connecting over ssh from either a linux machine with Konsole, or from Windows with PuTTY. I have tried various things, including changing terminal types, and using the shopt internal. In linux this problem occurred now and then but merely setting my term type to linux always sorted it out. Does anyone have any information relating to this, if I can find a solution it would make my life so much easier. On a side note, i have \w in my PS1 prompt to display the CWD. This is supposed to abbreviate the CWD with a tilde if working inside the home directory. Unfortunately, if working as any user other than root, the path is always displayed in full, as if outside the home directory. This makes the prompt very large and adds to the 65 character limit problem. Any ideas? I've seen this behaviour as well -- it's annoying to no end. Especially since if you use the backspace key to backup beyond the second line of text, the display of the command line is corrupted and you can't actually see what was typed before. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] bash line wrapping
Brent Jones wrote: On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 6:03 PM, Matt Harrison [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Matt Harrison wrote: I connect to my SXCE box regularly over ssh and I've got a bash line wrapping problem that is driving me mad. I googled about this for 2 weeks and haven't found any solution. If I type a command that exceeds 65 characters (including the shell prompt), it causes the line to wrap to the beginning of the same line, and if I go back to change the command, it litters up the entire terminal. Apart from making a mess it makes it really hard to work in the console. This problem manifests when connecting over ssh from either a linux machine with Konsole, or from Windows with PuTTY. I have tried various things, including changing terminal types, and using the shopt internal. In linux this problem occurred now and then but merely setting my term type to linux always sorted it out. Does anyone have any information relating to this, if I can find a solution it would make my life so much easier. On a side note, i have \w in my PS1 prompt to display the CWD. This is supposed to abbreviate the CWD with a tilde if working inside the home directory. Unfortunately, if working as any user other than root, the path is always displayed in full, as if outside the home directory. This makes the prompt very large and adds to the 65 character limit problem. Any ideas? I've seen this behaviour as well -- it's annoying to no end. Especially since if you use the backspace key to backup beyond the second line of text, the display of the command line is corrupted and you can't actually see what was typed before. Exactly, if you do backspace too far and loose what you were typing, you end up counting the characters you typed in your head to get to the right point :P I'm glad I'm not the only one having this problem, hopefully someone will have an idea for a workaround and we can get back to typing commands without a backslash every 20 chars :) Matt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org mailto:opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org I see this occur in Putty often, not sure why, but it happens across all my systems (Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris). Try to manually size the Putty window to something else. Don't hit the maximize button or minimize, but drag the corners around. Doing so makes bash recognize the terminal width again, and I'm able to type long lines after that (for a while). I see this happening just using gnome-terminal *on* OpenSolaris 2008.05. So, there is definitely something broken here. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXDE
John wrote: Ken, That is pretty much my impression as well, that even SXCE is a walking dead man. I am okay with the SXDE/SXCE branches getting pruned as long as Sun provides a method to live upgrade from them to OpenSolaris. If they fail to do that, then SXDE/SXCE users were abandoned. The machine with SXDE is in use as a development server -- I can't just wipe it and reinstall openSolaris 2008/05 (or /11) As has been noted in the past, the SXDE and SXCE releases were *development* releases. That means that they were not fully supported releases. That's my understanding anyway... -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] diskless client
Christian Kaiser wrote: Christian Kaiser wrote: Hi all, I want to setup a diskless OpenSolaris client. Chapter 7 of the Solaris System Administration Guide (Basic Administation) explains how a client can be installed with the help of PXE (not what I am interested in) and later how a client can be booted with PXE, pxegrub in my case as it is a x86 machine. I wonder if I can follow the instructions of the guide and if the packages are available in OpenSolaris because the guide is for Solaris users and not OpenSolaris, right? Can't believe that nobody knows to answer this question... The short answer is No; you can't use that guide for OpenSolaris 2008.05. You might be able to use it for SXCE builds, but I wouldn't expect that to hold true in the coming months. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] diskless client
Christian Kaiser wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Christian Kaiser wrote: Christian Kaiser wrote: Hi all, I want to setup a diskless OpenSolaris client. Chapter 7 of the Solaris System Administration Guide (Basic Administation) explains how a client can be installed with the help of PXE (not what I am interested in) and later how a client can be booted with PXE, pxegrub in my case as it is a x86 machine. I wonder if I can follow the instructions of the guide and if the packages are available in OpenSolaris because the guide is for Solaris users and not OpenSolaris, right? Can't believe that nobody knows to answer this question... The short answer is No; you can't use that guide for OpenSolaris 2008.05. You might be able to use it for SXCE builds, but I wouldn't expect that to hold true in the coming months. But I read of some people that have been booting OpenSolaris of a NFS. Is that possible? With Solaris Express Community Edition, as far as I know, yes. And what about using pxegrub to boot the OpenSolaris Kernel? Is that possible? As far as I'm aware, pxe support, etc. is still in its early stages for the OpenSolaris 2008 distribution. You might ask on install-discuss. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] diskless client
Shawn Walker wrote: Christian Kaiser wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Christian Kaiser wrote: Christian Kaiser wrote: Hi all, I want to setup a diskless OpenSolaris client. Chapter 7 of the Solaris System Administration Guide (Basic Administation) explains how a client can be installed with the help of PXE (not what I am interested in) and later how a client can be booted with PXE, pxegrub in my case as it is a x86 machine. I wonder if I can follow the instructions of the guide and if the packages are available in OpenSolaris because the guide is for Solaris users and not OpenSolaris, right? Can't believe that nobody knows to answer this question... The short answer is No; you can't use that guide for OpenSolaris 2008.05. You might be able to use it for SXCE builds, but I wouldn't expect that to hold true in the coming months. But I read of some people that have been booting OpenSolaris of a NFS. Is that possible? With Solaris Express Community Edition, as far as I know, yes. And what about using pxegrub to boot the OpenSolaris Kernel? Is that possible? As far as I'm aware, pxe support, etc. is still in its early stages for the OpenSolaris 2008 distribution. You might ask on install-discuss. This may prove helpful as well: http://blog.buttermountain.co.uk/2008/05/24/pxe-net-booting-open-solaris-200805-release/ -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Townhall meeting
Dennis Clarke wrote: The orignal intent, the message and the soul of OpenSolaris way back in the days of the pilot group and even before, was to have a community which operates and feels like an open source group. With input and valuable contributions being *possible* from a world of people. With ease. A lot of people outside of the OpenSolaris operation feel we have missed the target. Projects/communities like docs, sfw, sfe, pkg and others are very easy to contribute to and have a very low barrier to entry. Last year, I found the pkg project, and I can tell you right now that it felt like and still feels very much like an open source project. Patches go to the mailing list, discussions happen there, and all the bug tracking is done on defect.opensolaris.org. There are many great community groups and projects to contribute to with relative ease for those that are truly interested... As far as I'm aware, the only project that is onerous to contribute to is ON. As you might have noticed, ON finally transitioned to Mercurial, and direct, external commits are coming soon (if not already here for a limited number of individuals?). Sure, there's still quite a few things that need to happen, but I'd say we're on the road to victory. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] Townhall meeting
Garrett D'Amore wrote: ON commits are still, AFAICT, internal only. This is because the repository still lives inside the SWAN firewall, so you need to have internal access to Sun's network. (The RTI tools involved are also still Sun-internal only.) That said, its fairly easy for someone internal to take a changeset from an external contributor and integrate it. The onerous parts of the process for integration (test, SCA/CDDL verification, ARC approval if appropriate) still apply, and I don't see *those* portions of the problem going away anytime soon. (I don't think anyone seriously wants them to -- the various sanity checks play an important role in assuring the quality of the Solaris product is not compromised.) By onerous, I'm primarily referring to the fact that there are still some steps that your sponsor has to perform that you could perform if you knew how or had the access to and that it was a tedious process. I haven't done any integrations since the sponsor program was revamped, so I can't speak for what it's like now. But before, it took a very long time to get anything done at all. I don't see testing, SCA/CDDL verification, or ARC approval as onerous. Those were the least of my worries in my own experience. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] unix file encryption
Cj wrote: I ran into a problem of not having the gcc on my system. Looks like my office system wont install in due to the firewall. I was able to get it installed and ran the config for gpg. Anyone see this type of msg when compiling a program? Did you install SUNWgcc, or did you install SUNWgcc SUNWhea, etc.? It's better to install the gcc-dev package as it will install all of the basic headers and other items you need along with gcc. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Minmal install CD?
Paul Harper wrote: Could there be a minimal install cd in time for OpenSolaris 2008.11 for people setting up servers, older PC's, installing on the eeepc, etc and otherwise have space requirements? I have seen a few requests on Help and I have suggested Milax Server. But Milax is not based on IPS. So you cannot upgrade it. As others have pointed out, it's too late in the development cycle for any big projects like this. But the good news is that everything you need to do this is available! I would suggest discussing this on distribution-discuss with the Milax project members and finding out how you can help make this a reality. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE b100 release date?
MC wrote: Wouldn't making this information available on regular basis and in timely fashion provide a a valuable service to all the OpenSolaris developers ? There are opensolaris developers outside of sun?!?! Yes, there are. Rich Lowe, Jurgen Keil, Jorg Schilling, and many others... -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] image-update hung?
Gary Barker wrote: After issuing the [i]pkg image-update -v [/i] command, the updated packages appear to have been downloaded within 1/2 hour (version 5.11-0.99), but after 3 hours, it still shows [i]Creating Plan[/i]. The hard drive is continually running and 98% of the memory is in use along with 17% of the swap. Is there a problem here? How much memory do you have in your system and what build are you upgrading from? -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] image-update hung?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Gary Barker wrote: After issuing the [i]pkg image-update -v [/i] command, the updated packages appear to have been downloaded within 1/2 hour (version 5.11-0.99), but after 3 hours, it still shows [i]Creating Plan[/i]. The hard drive is continually running and 98% of the memory is in use along with 17% of the swap. Is there a problem here? How much memory do you have in your system and what build are you upgrading from? -- Shawn Walker Shawn: I have 512 M of RAM and am upgrading from 5.11-0.0 That could certainly explain it. However, when I asked which build, I meant snv_xx, as found in the output of cat /etc/release. Your system is going to take a long time to complete the update because of the low amount of memory in your system unfortunately. We're working to address this issue, but in the meantime, things will be painful. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The future of the IPS system
The most likely implementation will probably be what the pkgbuild folks are providing, which is very much like rpmbuild. Fredrich Maney wrote: I'd much rather see a ports type implementation than an rpm implementation - particularly if it includes the sources. fpsm On Mon, Oct 20, 2008 at 6:24 PM, Mike Meyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 20 Oct 2008 23:16:41 +0100 Calum Benson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 19 Oct 2008, at 13:11, Duncan Paterson wrote: What are the chances that this will one day rival apt for selection, frequency of updates and speed. It will happen a lot quicker once we have repositories in place to which everyone can contribute packages. I get the feeling that'll be a pretty high priority once 2008.11 is out the door, and with a bit of luck it'll be in full swing in time for the 2009.04 release. Yes, but is it going to be like the rpm/apt packaging systems, which are fine so long as you want exactly what the builder felt like providing, or more like bsd-ports inspired systems, which provide enough flexibility so that people don't wind up having to build them from scratch in order to get applications that meet their needs - and which at the older end are much better than apt for selection and frequency of updates? -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The future of the IPS system
Mike Meyer wrote: On Wed, 22 Oct 2008 11:49:36 PDT Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd much rather see a ports type implementation than an rpm implementation - particularly if it includes the sources. Sources available? Darn right - some of the licenses require that, too. Sources is one thing. Being able to build it is quite another. Build from source as the normal method of installation? That, I think is too slow for most people (who would have trouble spelling C, and wouldn't be interested anyway). True. And most people don't care much about having lots of unused code around or the security implications of doing that, either. So things like apt rpm make them happy. However, the various ports systems demonstrate two things: 1) Given a good package manager that handles dependencies properly, you can provide binaries packages that let the user configure only what they need (assuming, of course, that this is reasonable for the software in question). 2) If you provide a mechanism that lets people set compile-time configuration options, package developers will provide them, and end users will put up with compiling from source to take advantage of them. Both of these are important. The first because, as you say, compiling is to slow for most people and most packages. The second because it's more important to get critical packages configured *right* than it is to get them installed immediately. Having a system that makes rebuilding from sources as simple as installing the binary (and the various ports systems do that, whereas as far as I can tell none of the rpm or apt-based systems come anywhere near it) makes the latter possible. That doesn't mean building from source has to the only - or even the primary - way to install a package. Just that it's shouldn't be a second class citizen. I would venture to guess that a significant majority of users will never need to or want to recompile or alter the software as you suggest. They're going to want a stable, tested version of the software, and that means a pre-built, pre-configured binary that's been signed by their vendor. Since you need or want a more flexible system, I'd suggest you discuss it with the pkgbuild folks. It is highly unlikely that the IPS team will focus resources on a build system as it won't help us reach our primary goals and the resources spent developing are better spent on improving the primary user experience. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] [OT] was Re: The future of the IPS system
Fredrich Maney wrote: I would submit that in the desktop realm, you would be correct. However, in my experience in the server realm, custom builds are pretty common. For example, until very recently (like the last 2 years), I've rarely seen anyone run the Sun provided BIND, Sendmail or Apache daemons on production servers and most have made significant changes to what was installed and where it went. Partly that is due to fact that most (corporate) servers are required to meet corporate standard builds that span operating systems and OS versions. It is also due to the fact that many servers are still (rightly in my mind) built with minimized configurations that do not include most of the fluff needed to run the latest gee-whiz GUI based management tools - I should not have to run a web server and java just so that I can use SMC to manage a DNS or mail server. First of all, with OpenSolaris 2008.x, I think you'll see far more software packaged, and secondly, far more of it will be up-to-date. Second, given the prevalence of support contract attach rates from vendors such as Sun, RedHat, SuSE, and others, it's easy to conclude that even in the server market, pre-packaged binaries are the norm for most of the base operating system. Finally, I stand by my comments that most users don't care about being able to recompile vendor software (as that would imply it is no longer supported by the vendor once they do so). Regardless, this is now way off-topic. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE b100 release date?
Martin Bochnig wrote: Sun *is* talking to the community, simply because they consider themselves (their exclusive employees) to constitute the community. So YOU or I have no right to complain. See my distro generator, THEY DON'T CARE. NO INTEREST whatsoever. 0xFF other examples. I'm a stupid developer and sysadmin who had believed in the propaganda. You are not a stupid developer, a bit errant in presentation perhaps, but you should be commended for your efforts no doubt. With that said, what you have stated simply isn't true. From day one of my involvement in the OpenSolaris community as an external contributor, those members of the community that also *happen* to work for Sun were helpful and have always listened. I've found that, in general, if you present your points in a reasonable fashion or have a legitimate concern, you'll get a reasonable response. Any member of the community has an equal voice within the bounds of the governance of this community. What some of the corporate sponsors for the community choose to do with their products and trademarks is their rightful decision and community members should not expect to have control over them. As Belenix and Nexenta (and others) have proven, if time is spent producing great things rather than simply wishing that they occurred, success can be achieved. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE b100 release date?
Moinak Ghosh wrote: On Thu, Oct 23, 2008 at 8:57 PM, Stephen Lau [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 10/23/08 8:06 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: What some of the corporate sponsors for the community choose to do with their products and trademarks is their rightful decision and community members should not expect to have control over them. Very true... however I don't think Matt was expressing desire to control SXCE. I believe he just wanted some insight as to why it was delayed. As long as SXCE is the only way to build consolidations like ON (maybe Indiana is now self-hosting? if it is, then I stand corrected) - then I think community members external to Sun could at least be extended the courtesy of knowing why (even if it's something as vague as someone sued us - we have to delay it, can't say why - sorry would be fine). Yeah. Even a one-line update is 100x better than no update at all! I'm pretty sure that one-line update would be, it hasn't been released because it's not ready yet. :-) -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE b100 release date?
Stephen Lau wrote: On 10/23/08 8:06 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: What some of the corporate sponsors for the community choose to do with their products and trademarks is their rightful decision and community members should not expect to have control over them. Very true... however I don't think Matt was expressing desire to control SXCE. I believe he just wanted some insight as to why it was delayed. I don't think so either, I was just responding to another poster's implications that somehow community members should be able to control sponsor products. As long as SXCE is the only way to build consolidations like ON (maybe Indiana is now self-hosting? if it is, then I stand corrected) - then I think community members external to Sun could at least be extended the courtesy of knowing why (even if it's something as vague as someone sued us - we have to delay it, can't say why - sorry would be fine). I know that many projects use OpenSolaris 2008.x (almost exclusively) to develop and maintain their project. I don't know if it's self-hosting yet... -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE b100 release date?
Stephen Lau wrote: On 10/23/08 8:58 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: Thomas Maier-Komor wrote: Shawn Walker schrieb: I'm pretty sure that one-line update would be, it hasn't been released because it's not ready yet. :-) And what about a schedule? Something like 'We hope to have it ready by next Friday.'? There is a schedule: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/on/schedule/ That's a schedule for when the ON consolidation closes, but isn't a schedule for when SXCE builds are made available. Yes, which is why I also linked the downloads page. However, given that SXCE builds are wholly dependent on ON builds, they do follow closely together, right? :-) -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best place for installation of add-on apps
Paweł Tęcza wrote: Hello People, I've googled a lot and I'm confused, because I still don't know what the best place for installation of add-on apps under OpenSolaris is. For example, I want to compile and install some free software/open source like OpenVPN or memtest86+. What prefix should I type for configure script? /usr/local? /opt/local? /opt/sfw? /opt/appname? What do you recommend me? Is it something like OpenSolaris way? My best regards, From man filesystem: /usr/local Not part of the SVR4-based Solaris distribution. The /usr directory is exclusively for software bundled with the Solaris operating system. If needed for storing machine-local add-on software, create the directory /opt/local and make /usr/local a symbolic link to /opt/local. The /opt directory or filesystem is for storing add-on software to the system. If this is unpackaged software, that's where I'd put it. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best place for installation of add-on apps
Paweł Tęcza wrote: Shawn Walker pisze: Paweł Tęcza wrote: Hello People, I've googled a lot and I'm confused, because I still don't know what the best place for installation of add-on apps under OpenSolaris is. For example, I want to compile and install some free software/open source like OpenVPN or memtest86+. What prefix should I type for configure script? /usr/local? /opt/local? /opt/sfw? /opt/appname? What do you recommend me? Is it something like OpenSolaris way? My best regards, From man filesystem: /usr/local Not part of the SVR4-based Solaris distribution. The /usr directory is exclusively for software bundled with the Solaris operating system. If needed for storing machine-local add-on software, create the directory /opt/local and make /usr/local a symbolic link to /opt/local. The /opt directory or filesystem is for storing add-on software to the system. If this is unpackaged software, that's where I'd put it. Hi Shawn, Thanks a lot for your reply! Do the rest of you agree that /opt/local is the best location for that kind of software? ;) Yes, if it isn't packaged. If it's packaged, I'd build it to install into /usr. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Using NWAM to connect to secured wifi networks
Roman Strobl wrote: Hi, is there a way to connect using NWAM to a secured wifi network that doesn't broadcast it's SSID? I've tried connecting using Join unlisted wireless network and I am not prompted for any password, the connection just fails. I have here WEP, WPA nad WPA Personal networks, but none of them works using NWAM because SSIDs are not broadcasted. Have you tried connecting from the command line first using dladm, and then adding the network to /etc/nwam/known_wifi_nets ? The line in known_wifi_nets should look like: network ff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ...where the second value is the BSSID/IBSSID. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Using NWAM to connect to secured wifi networks
Roman Strobl wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Have you tried connecting from the command line first using dladm, and then adding the network to /etc/nwam/known_wifi_nets ? The line in known_wifi_nets should look like: networkff:ff:ff:ff:ff:ff ...where the second value is the BSSID/IBSSID. I will try. To provide some context, I am doing an install fest for OpenSolaris. People who will come will have doubts about OpenSolaris. If I tell them they need to use the command line to connect to provided wireless network, they'll probably think OpenSolaris is not ready for them yet :( Agreed, but everyone is going to have something that makes it not ready for them yet. I was just trying to suggest possible ways to debug / workaround it. Hopefully, it'll be sorted soon. The dladm command should work for now. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pkg.opensolaris.org is down
Bill Shannon wrote: pkg.opensolaris.org seems to be down. Is this on purpose? Did I miss the announcement? Isn't this site run on our high availability infrastructure? It's being worked on; don't know why it's down. Is there another site, perhaps an internal Sun site, that I can use to upgrade to the latest build? http://ipkg.sfbay/release/ Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pkg.opensolaris.org is down
Shawn Walker wrote: Bill Shannon wrote: Is there another site, perhaps an internal Sun site, that I can use to upgrade to the latest build? http://ipkg.sfbay/release/ Actually, *latest builds* would be: http://ipkg.sfbay/dev/ Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] upgrade from 101a to 101b?
Bill Shannon wrote: The instructions on http://opensolaris.org/os/project/indiana/resources/relnotes/200805/image-update/ don't work for a build number of 101a. How do I upgrade from 101a to 101b? Actually, someone has corrected the release notes so it should work fine now. The line that was fixed was this one: $ BUILD=`uname -v | sed -e s/snv_// -e s/[a-z]//` ...note the change to strip a-z from the build number. However, Stephen's right, you shouldn't need to do this any more. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SUNWgnome-im-client breaks beadm
robs wrote: I'm trying ot update pidgin 2.1.1. It updates, but gives errors, and breaks beadm. Cannot reboot with the updated pidign. It looks as though you have two separate bugs here. One that looks similar in nature to bug 5597, and the beadm problem I've filed bug 5719 for. If you could update each of those bugs with a comment about which build of OpenSolaris you are running and the output of pkg version; that would be very helpful. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [on-discuss] New community based development list
C. Bergström wrote: Hi all.. Apologies for cross posting this, but for those interested in an entirely community driven OpenSolaris technology development effort please feel free to subscribe to: http://lists.scsys.co.uk/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/osunix-dev Summary: This list provides a place for new and old OpenSolaris technology developers to collaborate, share ideas, patches and peer review entirely free of constraints. Our major goal is to bring together the pockets of developers to create a sustainable community and drive innovation. Personally, I believe Sun is doing a great job in general with OpenSolaris technology and very thankful. On the other hand I'm hoping a more agnostic place where people can share even crazy ideas, patches or progress on interesting projects will build a stronger community network. If have no idea why you think you can't do all of that using opensolaris.org, but good luck. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [on-discuss] New community based development list
C. Bergström wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: C. Bergström wrote: If have no idea why you think you can't do all of that using opensolaris.org, but good luck. I emailed about having the ml created here and was told I needed to start a project. I read the instructions at [1] and in all honestly probably should have used opensolaris.org infra, but either way we'll be self hosting in the near future. A leader from the Perl community who has shown interest in our project thankfully set it up within minutes. I can think of reasons why not use opensolaris.org || sun.com , but maybe there's some reason I should that I missed? There are a number of community groups here that would be more than happy to sponsor such a project, but you may not be aware that we already have a group of people working hard to ensure that the barriers to contribution are low, and that the process goes as quickly as possible. I would invite you to share your concerns with John Sonnenschein as he is one of the members of that team working to ensure community contributions happen quickly and efficiently. Discussing your concerns and project goals with him will either help you discover where your goals overlap or give you an opportunity to work with the team he is on to help the community. Ultimately, I think the best reason to not set up another mailing list or website somewhere else is to avoid the fragmentation of community efforts. However, this is an open project, so you are completely free to pursue your own dreams and goals as you desire to. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [on-discuss] New community based development list
C. Bergström wrote: 1) I've had some brief discussions with those involed on the tonic team and while I hear lots of things about bugzilla being able to accept patches blah blah.. When will it happen? I think in general you guys really miss the boat on what it means to build a community. While I have no idea if Ian M. is the best person to help with this effort I wonder who would be... There is nothing stopping someone from sending a patch to a mailing list and walking away. However, as you are probably aware, there is still a lot of work to be done, regardless of project, before that patch can be used. As such, I don't think it's realistic to expect that sort of process for a few reasons: * Legal: I would never expect Sun to blindly accept patches to the project through bugzilla. For various legal and other reasons, it isn't safe to accept anonymous code contributions. That's why the SCA is a necessary part of the initial contribution process. It protects our community, it protects the code, and it protects our sponsors (such as Sun). * Review: The primary constraint in the past for contributions was people to review and commit contributions. As you might have noticed, the ON gate moved to mercurial not long ago, and community members outside of Sun should have commit access soon (if not one or two already?). Dropping a patch on someone's doorstep and then expecting someone else to cleanup their work isn't very nice. * Testing: there are always going to be developers that don't want to take the extra time and effort to test their code or don't have the necessary resources. The test farm and build farm now at opensolaris.org help alleviate this a great deal, but this is where a contributor needs to ask for help from others. The standards for integration into OpenSolaris are high, but they are there for a reason. 2) I think community fragmentation under the current system is unavoidable. If it wasn't there wouldn't be.. Belenix, ShilliX, Milax, Nexenta and gosh... the list seems to grow every day.. I've talked withs some of the lead developers in great depth and noticed a common thread between them all. My gut feeling is that any attempt to solve the problem would piss more people off than accomplish anything. It depends on what your definition of community fragmentation is. First of all, Milax is hosted here on opensolaris.org. Second, some of those projects grew their userbase outside of the opensolaris.org community. Finally, most of those projects directly contribute and interact with the opensolaris.org community on a regular basis, so I don't count any of them has contributing to fragmentation. 3) Based on who I see already subscribed to the new list I'm guessing those who != @Sun thought it wasn't too bad of an idea. I don't have a problem with the idea, but the implementation, in my view, is somewhat less desirable. From what you write I see it like saying genunix is bad because it causes fragmentation.. I hope in the very near future to be able to offer custom developer zones, blogging platform and overall something more than just an easy place to drop a patch, but something people can watch grow and be a part of. Unfortunately, for the reasons I outlined above, it's unlikely that a project that just lets people drop patches and run will be successful. I'm not referring to you at all Shawn, but in general It seems those in power are more worried about staying in power than actually being supportive in some cases. I'm not certain what your in power reference is referring to here. All of the CGs on opensolaris.org control their own projects, have their own project gates, and get to decide the direction of their projects. There is nothing stopping someone from starting a kernel janitor or kernel newbie style project here on opensolaris.org with the right CG sponsorship. In fact, it's something I'd wanted to do for a long time but simply don't have the time to do so. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [on-discuss] New community based development list
C. Bergström wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: * Review: The primary constraint in the past for contributions was people to review and commit contributions. As you might have noticed, the ON gate moved to mercurial not long ago, and community members outside of Sun should have commit access soon (if not one or two already?). Dropping a patch on someone's doorstep and then expecting someone else to cleanup their work isn't very nice. * Testing: there are always going to be developers that don't want to take the extra time and effort to test their code or don't have the necessary resources. The test farm and build farm now at opensolaris.org help alleviate this a great deal, but this is where a contributor needs to ask for help from others. The standards for integration into OpenSolaris are high, but they are there for a reason. Ok.. So lets use a real example... What should I do with this? Of course I could clean it up, but before that... where does it go? configd/object.c 326 //v = (uint32_t *)((caddr_t)str + TX_SIZE(*v)); 327 v = str[(v[0]+3)~3]; 646 /* bp += sizeof (uint32_t) + TX_SIZE(value_len);*/ 647 bp += sizeof (uint32_t) + (value_len+3)~3; You follow the instructions here: http://opensolaris.org/os/communities/participation/ I don't have a problem with the idea, but the implementation, in my view, is somewhat less desirable. How? Why? Simply put: a project that doesn't have a process for contribution is one subject to the winds of fate (legal, bugs, etc.). Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Porting and Package Creation Question
Chad Kellerman wrote: Good Morning, Good Afternoon, Good Evening, (depending on where you are) With documentation on opensolaris.org http://opensolaris.org, opensolaris.com http://opensolaris.com, sun.com http://sun.com, blastwave.com http://blastwave.com, sunfreeware.com http://sunfreeware.com, and about a have a dozen other great sources, it's tough to find a definitive answer on the proper way to port and package software for OpenSolaris 2008.11. With the /contrib repository coming on line yesterday I took a look at some of the packages and I see that they are being installed with '/' as the root directory, Blastwave was always in /opt/CSW/, and sunfreeware was /usr/local. If I were to create packages to submit for inclusion into /contrib, I am assuming I would use '/' as the install directory, correct? What about Compilers? I see perl was built with cc not gcc, so any subsequent perl modules should be with cc, and installed in '/'? Or is the etiquette to install blastwave's perl and create perl modules for that distribution? I remember reading, that on Solaris you should not install perl packages for the default install of perl, that is for the system, use another perl and install there I am assuming that does not hold true anymore. I realize these questions are probably basic, but I think there are a lot of people 'green' to OpenSolaris and find these types of questions, hurdles to getting involved in creating more packages, and making OpenSolaris a more viable alternative to other OS's. The folks on the sw-porters-discuss list should be able to help you better. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SRP target project
Dan Maslowski wrote: Folks, We have posted preliminary binaries and documents to the http://opensolaris.org/os/project/srp web page. We are in the process of stepping though the code and compiling for sparc etc We are currently unhiding the web page, but you can see it now by pointing directly to the URL. We invite active participation, comments, unit testing or other wise. I expect another drop of the source in the next couple of days and will post source by the end of this year. OpenSolaris Project: SCSI RDMA Protocol ...for those of you mystified as I was. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] A stupid bug reporting question
Jon Trulson wrote: Forgive me for the potentially stupid question below, but: About month ago I submitted a bug on bugs.opensolaris.org (6780852). I received an email from the 'bug' system advising me that the engineer was requesting more data. So, onto the question - How exactly am I suposed to edit, add to, or respond? I've gone to the bugs.opensolaris.org site, searched for the bug (http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6780852). But I cannot find any way to edit/change or do anything else with it, other than gaze upon it's bleakness. Someone want to toss me a clue? You can't, at the moment. If you need to add more information, you can either email the requesting engineer firstname.lastname AT sun.com or you can email someone here and they can add it for you. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] why gnu chmod in os2008.11?
solarg wrote: hello all, i'm surprised that gnu chmod is installed, what are the advantages comparing to solaris chmod? It's very annoying when using ACLs. Familiarity; put /usr/bin first in your path if you'd prefer to use /usr/bin/chmod instead of /usr/gnu/bin/chmod. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] why gnu chmod in os2008.11?
casper@sun.com wrote: solarg wrote: hello all, i'm surprised that gnu chmod is installed, what are the advantages comparing to solaris chmod? It's very annoying when using ACLs. Familiarity; put /usr/bin first in your path if you'd prefer to use /usr/bin/chmod instead of /usr/gnu/bin/chmod. You mean I want a chmod that works. It's not quite the same thing. For single-machine users (which I suspect many will be) I'm not aware of anything that doesn't work in GNU chmod. In short, I don't use ACL or anything that's broken in GNU chmod, so I don't really care which tool I'm using. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] why gnu chmod in os2008.11?
Fredrich Maney wrote: I think you meant single user machines, not single machine users. Those are two very different scenarios. I can see not using ACLs in single user machines, of which I suspect there are far fewer than you think, but in a multi-user single machine, I certainly see ACLs being used quite extensively. Also, one thing to mention, GNU chmod and ls won't have any problems with UFS ACLs, only ZFS ACLs. Semantics, but yes, basically. But as for OpenSolaris 2008.x, I suspect there are far more single user machines as you put it then multi-user machines. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] why gnu chmod in os2008.11?
Fredrich Maney wrote: On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 4:16 AM, Mark R. Bowyer mark.bow...@sun.com wrote: casper@sun.com wrote: The problem is making sure that you do not alienate the audience that you currently have. Making non-Solaris compatible binaries the default is a rather good way to do that in my view. I completely agree. And it's important that your vote counts. For me it is very difficult to use Indiana (doesn't install my shell) so I avoided it except when I need to. pkg install tcsh didn't take long. For an experimental distribution in a sea of Linux I think it does pretty well. If we keep it like this when we get around to shipping Solaris Next, it would be a different issue. But changing the default PATH is an easy fix. This is one of the reasons I haven't moved to Indiana yet. I shouldn't have to go find core Solaris packages to add to OpenSolaris. That's just broken. tcsh is not a core Solaris package and media is not of an infinite size. Software has to be selected to fit on the core media based on certain goals. Everyone has their own favourite software that probably isn't installed by default. I don't understand why pfexec pkg install SUNWtcsh isn't sufficient. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] New packages added to the /pending repository
Doug Leavitt wrote: Another round of 9659 software packages have been delivered to the /pending repository: http://pkg.opensolaris.org/pending/en/index.shtml Bringing the total to 11367 unique packages in the /pending repository. In this delivery, the majority of these packages are perl modules built against the OpenSolaris 2008.11 release. The list of packages added by this delivery can be found here: http://opensolaris.org/os/project/pkgfactory/pkgports/ Suggested changes: * Use lowercase names for packages since the package system is case-sensitive; you'll save users a lot of grief. * perl packages should be prefixed with perl- to avoid namespace collisions and to make it a lot more obvious what the package is. Things that need fixing: * The actual license text needs to be present for each package; many packages have something like: This is an open source package. Use and redistribution subject to license terms as described in the documents included in the sources. That really isn't going to work long-term. * Many packages don't have a summary. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Video Decode and Presentation API for Unix (VDPAU) [PSARC/2009/059 FastTrack timeout 02/05/2009]
Darren J Moffat wrote: John Martin wrote: Are there any plans for integrating this with any actual applications, or with gstreamer or other desktop video apps? NVIDIA already provides patches to the ffmpeg library and the mplayer application to enable VDPAU. A pity OpenSolaris doesn't have ffmpeg or mplayer though. I would hope that the fluendo folks can make the necessary changes to their codecs to take advantage of this; paired with their upcoming dvd player, we might finally have a first-class DVD playback experience on OpenSolaris. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Phoronix Linux vs OpenSolaris benchmark
Rich Reynolds wrote: Greg - thanx for the clarification... my intent was only to suggest that the old BWOS train model that Sun has used for MANY years many no longer hold them in good stead and that should a better distro model come about, which finally views a distro as nothing more than an integrated base set of code, a simple and granular repository, and an easy to use install/upgrade method, OpenSolaris.org based systems could truly compete for the desktop with the likes of a Ubuntu Intrepid Ibex. Dont get me wrong, I am a dyed in the wool SunOS guy, from SunOS3.2 on, but the release engineering world and the nature of the customer base has changed and we as a community need to help all the opensolaris.org based distros compete more effectively or perish under our own weight... I have to ask, haven't you noticed how significantly the model has already changed and is continuing to change with the OpenSolaris 200x releases? -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Phoronix Linux vs OpenSolaris benchmark
Rich Reynolds wrote: shawn - while things have changed... the fact that a IPS upgrade from b106 to b107 involved 600+MB of download tells me that the model is still substantially a WOS. I can understand that in a substantial upgrade like 2008.05 to .11, but a basic two week development effort results in 600+ MB of new code??? so if you hadn't guessed im still not a huge fan of the IPS repository model... my base system is SXCE 101, with LU's back to 88, and I keep hoping I can migrate to IPS and BE, because it has the potential for substantially smaller bandwidth requirements, but... its potentially better than SXCE, but nowhere near as atomic as BFU... You're confusing shortcomings in the build and upgrade process with a perceived lack of change when it comes to download size. Those download sizes will be significantly reduced in the future. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] 107 in Vbox graphics issues
Rich Reynolds wrote: Hi all - i IPS upgraded my 106 Vbox environmen to 107 and the new one will not boot to a graphics login, in fact if the console=graphics entry exists I dont even get -v messages from the kernel... so it seems to be in that never-never land of whose issue is it Vbox or OS107??? worked fine in 106... Are you running VirtualBox 2.1.2? If so, upgrade to 2.1.4. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Basic questions about pkg
Harry Putnam wrote: what does an `authority' designation look like (the URL). An authority is just the name of a source of software. A repository is a location to retrieve software from, such as http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev. Where is that set if not command line (pkg -a AUTH)? There is no interface intended for end users other than the command line or GUI. However, if you look at /var/pkg/cfg_cache, you'll see where this information is currently stored. Be aware that this can and will change so you should not rely on this file or its contents. Also was not at all clear (to me) how to add a new addon authority. See set-authority in man pkg. I mean in a configuration... not from command line. I did see the Again, there is no documented interface for doing this other than through the command line or the GUI. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] dmesg?
Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: Hi Is there a tool like linux dmesg for opensolaris? See man dmesg /usr/bin/dmesg Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Updating 11/2008 to build 108 with Package Manager
Dennis Keane wrote: Marcelo M. Garcia wrote: Dennis Keane wrote: I'm currently running OS 11/2008 and would like to upgrade to build 108. I'm trying to add in the development repository into Package Manager and can't. I'm using this URL: http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev The Add button remains Greyed Out. Do I need to add a port number like the SunFreeware repository? http://pkg.sunfreeware.com:9000/ Or do I have to specify which version I want? The pkg.opensolaris.org/dev page shows 0.5.11-0.108 as the current release. If I was to select this as the repository, if I could, and then click on the Update All button wouldn't this do the trick? AND also create a new BE so I could roll back? Thanks in Advance Dennis Hi I think you are having the same problem I had. What is output of pkg authority? This was the recipe to solve the issue: It's because, although you've added dev/, you've not made it the preferred authority for your opensolaris.org packages. pfexec pkg unset-authority Dev pfexec pkg set-authority -O http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev opensolaris.org pfexec pkg refresh --full should get you onto the development builds. Regards mg. Here's how I'm set: -pkg authority AUTHORITY URL SunFreeware http://pkg.sunfreeware.com:9000/ opensolaris.org (preferred) http://pkg.opensolaris.org/release/ In my case I can't add /dev at all. If I could then I'd make it the preferred repository... Funny thing as I'm reading your e-mail I decided to try again and it seems to work now... -pkg authority AUTHORITY URL SunFreeware http://pkg.sunfreeware.com:9000/ opensolaris.org (preferred) http://pkg.opensolaris.org/release/ OpenSolaris.org.Dev http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev/ - It looks like it's being finicky about the NAME... I had been using 'Open Solaris Dev' There are a set of rules about what characters are allowed in the name. Spaces are one of the characters that are not allowed. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Updating 11/2008 to build 108 with Package Manager
James Mansion wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: There are a set of rules about what characters are allowed in the name. Spaces are one of the characters that are not allowed. I seem to remember being bitten by that too, albeit briefly. I seem to remember cursing the lack of clarity of diagnostic. And to be honest, if I'm going to supply an URL and a name, then I really expect the name to be for my benefit and somewhat free-form. The limitation seems out of place. Authority names are supposed to be a forward or reverse domain name representing a publisher of packages. It's a necessary limitation by design because authority names are designed to be placed in a pkg fmri: pkg://authority_name/package_name ...the above syntax allows a precise definition of what authority is being referred to when referencing a package. There are some major changes coming that will make it clearer why this restriction is necessary. One of those restrictions will also remove the ability to change the name and only allow the actual publisher to set it. This is the first step in many to allow package signing and verification. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Blastwave pkgutil
Mike DeMarco wrote: /opt/csw/bin/pkgutil --catalog Fetching new catalog if available... --14:08:06-- http://blastwave.network.com/csw/unstable/i386/5.11/catalog = `/var/opt/csw/pkgutil/catalog.i386.5.11.0' Resolving blastwave.network.com... 64.79.150.209 Connecting to blastwave.network.com|64.79.150.209|:80... connected. HTTP request sent, awaiting response... 200 OK Length: 376,470 (368K) [text/plain] 100%[] 376,470 303.88K/s 14:08:07 (303.03 KB/s) - `/var/opt/csw/pkgutil/catalog.i386.5.11.0' saved [376470/376470] /opt/csw/bin/pkgutil -install stellarium ^ There's your problem. '-install' should be '-i' or '--install'. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] vim doesn't source ~/.vimrc
Harry Putnam wrote: Setup: OS=Opensolaris 2008.11 vim=See full `:version output at the end When I start vim on a file it does not source the ~/.vimrc file. That file is actually a symlink to the hard file elsewhere. Permissions are on both slink and hard copy: ls -l ~/.vimrc: lrwxrwxrwx 1 reader staff 35 [...] /export/home/reader/.vimrc - \ /cvsb/zfs/export/home/reader/.vimrc ls -l /cvsb/zfs/export/home/reader/.vimrc: -rw-r--r-- 1 reader wheel 8649 [] \ /cvsb/zfs/export/home/reader/.vimrc user reader belongs to both staff and wheel groups. If I souce ~/.vimrc manually after opening a file it works fine: vim .bashrc :so ~/.vimrc Then all the setting I have in ~/.vimrc show up. Obvious because syntax highlignting suddenly comes on. What might cause ~/.vimrc to be ignored on vim start It works fine on my system, but the file is owned by me, and it's not a symlink. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Full Root? - I think Not
Dave Miner wrote: Note that the transfer sizes displayed by pkg are compressed size, so you actually got closer to 150 MB of executables and so on, which is more accurate for comparison purposes vs. the old native zones. We fixed that; that shouldn't be true as of several builds ago. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] vim doesn't source ~/.vimrc
Harry Putnam wrote: Brandon Hume hume...@bofh.ca writes: On Wed, 2009-03-11 at 15:47 -0500, Harry Putnam wrote: It worked for me for a while too. But now it doesn't. To test, I moved the actual actual file into ~/ and as I showed in OP it belongs to me. What does truss tell you is happening? ie: truss -o vim.truss -f vim testfile grep vimrc vim.truss Thanks for the help with the command. I´m completely unfamiliar with truss but here is the output: truss -o vim.truss -f vim BASHRC grep vimrc vim.truss 1798: xstat(2, /usr/share/vim/vimrc, 0x08046F60)Err#2 ENOENT 1798: open(/usr/share/vim/vimrc, O_RDONLY) Err#2 ENOENT 1798: xstat(2, /export/home/reader/.vimrc, 0x08046F60) = 0 1798: open(/export/home/reader/.vimrc, O_RDONLY)= 4 1798: xstat(2, /export/home/reader/.vimrc, 0x08047070) = 0 It looks like it's opening it just fine. So maybe there's a syntax error in the file or something causing vim to ignore its contents? What makes you believe it's being ignored? -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] vim doesn't source ~/.vimrc
Harry Putnam wrote: Shawn Walker swal...@opensolaris.org writes: It looks like it's opening it just fine. So maybe there's a syntax error in the file or something causing vim to ignore its contents? What makes you believe it's being ignored? You'd think it might be but if so then :so .vimrc would find the same problem but it does not... It just works if I do a manual source. Can you post the contents of your .vimrc somewhere (like pastebin) ? Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] liveCD login and password
Ché Kristo wrote: When it comes to usability its sometimes good to think...what would Apple do? I suspect Apple wouldn't let you login or do anything that doesn't have a shiny button it, so login information wouldn't even be necessary (it's a joke folks, laugh) Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Free CD
Hartmut Krafft wrote: Hi all, recently, someone gave me an Ultrasparc5 workstation, and I decided to give it a try. Right now, it's running Debian Lenny quite nicely. But as there are some annoyances with Linux on Sparc (some proprietary software not ported to the platform), I tought about installing a newer version of Solaris. The Solaris 9 that came with the computer is way out of date and I would have to download a lot of patches (and I'm not even sure if all of them are accessible w/o a service contract). Being condemned to a slow Internet connection (64 kb/s), I refrained from this for the time being and decided to apply for a free Opensolaris CD instead. This was a fortnight ago, and since then, I didn't hear anything from Sun. So, is anyone here who recently ordered such a CD and knows how long it might take, or if I should give it another try? Please be aware that the opensolaris sparc live cd cannot be booted from for installation. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Free CD
Thomas Maier-Komor wrote: are you aware of the fact that OpenSolaris is currently x86 only? SPARC support seems to be planned for later this year, but is not there yet. No longer true: http://blogs.sun.com/dminer/entry/opensolaris_build_106_now_with Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Free CD
Hartmut Krafft wrote: Hi, sorry for the delay and thanks a lot for the answers. They were slightly overwhelming, I've to say ;-) I'll try to sort out what I understood (please correct me if I'm wrong): 1) the Free CD is a live CD, not for installation - it is possibly still x86-only (oh well, should it arrive, I could use it on a x86 box, too) No, it's a Live CD and an install CD. However, you can only use it for gui-based installations, and you can't yet get one for SPARC. I had been planning (as I use to do with Linux) to start from a basic minimal system and try adding as much software as possible, but not too much. (I think I read somewhere that you could run the XFCE desktop on Opensolaris, for example.) So I gather ZFS is actually replacing UFS and you cannot choose the latter instead? Yes, zfs is replacing ufs, and you cannot choose ufs when installing OpenSolaris 2008.x or 2009.x. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Error in pkg install
Spoorthy H.S wrote: Hi All, I am trying to install the package as pkg install IPSmc. I'm getting the errors as below when I try to install it. $pkg install IPSmc Refreshing Catalog 2/2 opensolaris.org Could not operate on /var/pkg/state/installed because of insufficient permissions. Please try the command again using pfexec or otherwise increase your permissions. Did you try running the command again using pfexec as indicated in the error message? pfexec pkg install IPSmc -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Error in pkg install
Spoorthy Shankarmurthy wrote: I tried pfexec pkg install IPSmc also ... Then also it gives the same kind of error. The same kind of error? Can you please provide the exact output you receive when you type pfexec pkg install IPSmc ? -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Error in pkg install
Spoorthy Shankarmurthy wrote: Hi Shawn, Here's the output of the command. $pfexec pkg install IPSmc Creating Plan - pkg: The following pattern(s) did not match any packages in the current catalog. Try relaxing the pattern, refreshing and/or examining the catalogs IPSmc Well that's not the same kind of error :) What's the output of pkg authority ? -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] vim doesn't source ~/.vimrc
Harry Putnam wrote: Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes: Setup: OS=Opensolaris 2008.11 vim=See full `:version output at the end I think parts of this thread stayed on gmane.editors.vim or at least I thought I saw a post here somewhere that asked me to post my vimrc. In case anyone is still willing to help figure this out. When I start vim something in .vimrc or a plugin is apparently turning off my syn settings. If I do `vim .bashrc' I see no syntax highlighting. Yet if I manually source ~/.vimrc then my syntax highlight appears. The last setting in .vimrc is `set ruler' and the ruler does appear so I know vimrc is being sourced on startup. All this is discussed in the thread of course but that is a short summary. Here is the vimrc file: http://www.jtan.com/~reader/exp/vimrc.html The problem is that you're setting syntax on *before* you set the value of t_Co. Move this: Switch syntax highlighting on, when the terminal has colors Also switch on highlighting the last used search pattern. if t_Co 2 || has(gui_running) syntax on endif ...to the very bottom of your vimrc, and it will work (it did for me). Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [on-discuss] Emergency project to rescue Opensolaris fr
Miles Nordin wrote: You wish to talk to Roland Mainz, Glenn Fowler and Jennifer Pioch then. They have opensource replacements for /usr/bin/sed, /usr/xpg4/bin/sed, /usr/bin/tail, /usr/xpg4/bin/tail, /usr/bin/tr and /usr/xpg4/bin/tr. is this a joke? Wherever could they find such precious and novel work? maybe, from the GNU project, fifteen years ago? oh, o sorry my mistake they want *XPG4* versions. seriously, WHO CARES? We are talking about this source: The XPG4 environment matters for compatibility and UNIX certification purposes. A significant number of users still rely on those environments; the GNU equivalents would break them. However it's worth remembering there are two binary licenses, the one used by OpenSolaris and the SXCE license. The former is redistributable, and the latter isn't. so, AIUI, if Sun decided tomorrow to stop offering SXCE downloads on the website, we would not be allowed under copyright to copy SXCE CD's and give them to our friends. But for OpenSolaris CD's we'd be allowed. so, the OP's ``emergency'' should be focused on binaries that you need to do development, but which are not included on the osol LiveCD, such as Sun Studio 12. It is only non-redistributable binaries that give Sun the wedge to kill the project. Other binaries could be re-implemented at leisure after the project is already dead. Please note that the entire contents of pkg.opensolaris.org is redistributable; this also means that the Sun Studio Express release there is as well. That's why a public rsync service for mirroring is provided. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris-based CD/DVD Distributions as of March 26, 2009
Alexander Vlasov wrote: OpenSolaris pkg-mgt repositories review: - pkg.opensolaris.org (b101 release,2008-12-09): 22,863 packages 1431 package(s) for OpenSolaris 2008.11 pkg.opensolaris.org (b109 dev, 2009-03-06): 30,719 packages 1594 package(s) for build 109. Please note that overall number you see on first page is total number of packages for ALL builds present in repository (what doesn't make much sense anyway) Yes, and that's a known thing I'd like to change soon. Then again, I just love the poorly-researched press articles I see that make comments about all the packages we have :) -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris-based CD/DVD Distributions as of March 26, 2009
Lurie wrote: +1 the packages count is useless in its current form. should just say, e.g. (not real numbers): - 15 builds - 1,500 packages for b109 It is not useless for repositories that are not build based as as /pending, /contrib, etc. Please remember that the depot software is generic and attempts to handle a number of cases. With that said, there are plans to attempt to account for this for repositories that use a build-based approach. The primary reason this hasn't been changed yet is because there hasn't been enough resources to create an efficient way for the depot server to query and obtain package information such as this. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Performance issues
Paul Nichols wrote: Really do not care about the grapihics performance. This is a server. However, what I do care about is performance. The earlier version of Open Solaris for X64, was quite a bit faster on the same hardware. My point was, yes the graphics and GUI look more polished in this release, but the kernel has changed enough to cause the overall performance has taken a serious hit. I wondered why? No, I have not done very much to tune the OS or work on it in any great detail. I have not had time. The reason I wrote about this basically, is to inquire if this was a known issue with this release. The version prior to this equaled RedHat EA 4 and 5, but this release is about half the speed of RHat. half the speed doesn't mean much unless have a reference point and know what specific things you're referring to. For example, do programs now take twice the time to launch? Does this performance degradation only seem to apply to GUI programs? Have you tried using the nVidia Legacy Driver on this system and removing the provided one? Do you have any conclusive numbers giving exact performance differences? Without more specifics, it's difficult to assist you. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Laptops was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Martin Bochnig wrote: On Tue, Mar 31, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Fredrich Maney fredrichma...@gmail.com wrote: I don't believe the issue is that he is using a Mac laptop, but that he is using OSX instead of Solaris/OpenSolaris. Sun (sadly) doesn't make laptops, so he is obviously going to use another vendor's product for that. However Sun does make operating systems that can run on other vendor's laptops, so he should be using them. fpsm Oh, they did resell re-branded SPARC Laptopts until not so long ago (only for a short time) : http://www.sun.com/desktop/workstation/ultra3/ http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/06/30/HNsparclaptop_1.html And during all the years before, they could have used non-re-branded Tapdole Laptops, an then also Nature Tech ones for a couple of years. Ahem: http://www.opensolaris.com/toshibanotebook/index.html -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Offline install of IPS packages (not a joke)
C. wrote: I'm not sure when I'll get to this, but I've started to brainstorm on how to solve the offline install problem for IPS.. I've had a wrapper shell script that is capable of pulling packages directly from pkg.osol.o for a while. Yesterday I took that and updated it to handle the current manifest format and integrated it into our packaging system. I must say there's a lot of inconsistencies in the manifest which I'm not sure where are coming from and had to work around. (Mostly to do with symlink creation) Off-line capability is being discussed, but it isn't as simple as putting the existing package files into a tarball. As for inconsistencies in the manifest, that's pretty vague. Care to discuss the specifics on pkg-discuss? all the others using debs and various other benefits. IPS is really still a pre-alpha tool with lots of features missing, slow and under heavy development. With minimal effort I'm pretty sure I could plug in almost any package format so if you prefer SuSE flavor rpms that's fine as well. This is of course missing out on source packages, but I handle that in another way. If you have performance concerns, you need to file bugs at http://defect.opensolaris.org or discuss them on pkg-discuss. I believe you'll find the build 111a version of pkg (or the one currently in the gate) to be significantly faster than the build 109 and prior versions. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Laptops was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Alexander Vlasov wrote: Martin Bochnig wrote: On Wed, Apr 1, 2009 at 12:07 PM, Alexander Vlasov alexander.vla...@sun.com wrote: Currently there are lots of open issues with those notebook models. With those? Which? The Toshiba ones? Exactly. 6820704 6820111 6820128 6818475 6772156 6818462 bugzilla 7785 So basically all the same problems I have with my Sony Vaio and OpenSolaris :) None of those (except for the SSD bug possibly) would prevent me from using the laptop. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] IPS Performance was Re: Offline install of IPS packages (not a joke)
[moving to pkg-discuss] C. wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: As for inconsistencies in the manifest, that's pretty vague. Care to discuss the specifics on pkg-discuss? Look at the manifest.. You'll see that that some target= are trying to create a symlink against a file which isn't there. (I confirmed against the pkg.osol.o database that it's *supposed* to be in that manifest as It's possible you'll find some packages with bugs, but those aren't inconsistencies, those are just bugs. Package issues have nothing to do with the packaging system so much as the tool or individual that created them. If you find packages that have issues, feel free to file bugs at http://defect.opensolaris.org under packaging. well) I also noticed you're combining sparc/i386 stuff in the same manifest and beyond two arches I don't really see this being so scalable. (ok. that works for now since osol isn't so portable..) SPARC/i386 is combined by design. I'm not certain why you believe this isn't scalable. And yes, the number of arches wasn't a concern, because realistically, OpenSolaris will only support two architectures for a long time. In terms of performance I doubt that it'll be fast with 2k packages.. We're already pretty close to 2000 packages (about 1800?). or fast around update time every couple weeks or under various other conditions. If you had read what I wrote clearly I never said anything Again, various other conditions, etc. is rather vague. If you have some specific performance concerns, with reproducable steps, we'd like to hear about them. So far though, it sounds more like your concerns are more about design than implementation. For the benefit of many users, I'm sure they'd appreciate that you file bugs at http://defect.opensolaris.org so that we can resolve these issues. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
C. wrote: Lurie wrote: and in the end, we have yet-another-package-manager. while I agree with you on some of the points, I have to say that I love IPS and how it uses ZFS, if the code would have been based off some Linux package manager then the changes would never go upstream due to the lack of bootable clones/snapshots. Do you have any clue how many patches Sun maintains for packages in onnv-gate that never go upstream? Anyway.. they say love is blind so it all seems fitting.. Do you know how many patches Sun maintains for packages that are never accepted by upstream because they don't agree with the design or implementation? I can tell you with certainty that Sun works hard to ensure contributions go upstream, it's ultimately less work for them and less code to maintain. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
C. wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: C. wrote: Do you know how many patches Sun maintains for packages that are never accepted by upstream because they don't agree with the design or implementation? I can tell you with certainty that Sun works hard to ensure contributions go upstream, it's ultimately less work for them and less code to maintain. Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches. Did someone tell you this or did you The right tool for the right job is a common saying; none of the existing packaging tools were right for the job. Hence, a new tool was needed. come up with this on your own? Knowing you're a contributor to the pkg5 team makes you a bit biased, but try to separate your job from reality and stay on the point here.. If you follow the lists and read various comments about upstream history, you can find this out for yourself. Ask the desktop team about the various patches they've had to fight to get upstream or had to continue to maintain themselves for a while. My project affiliation has nothing to do with the reality of the situation. Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Packaging Systems was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
C. wrote: 5) a secure package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts Ok.. so wait a second.. Let's first of all define secure because last I checked the IPS authorities aren't signed.. Are they? You're only They are not currently, but this is definitely planned functionality. looking at it from one angle.. If a package is signed and trusted by the authority then the script isn't arbitrary. It was designed and created with a sole purpose. If it *is* arbitrary I don't think I'd There are a significant number of packages from third-party vendors and from Sun itself that were created for a sole purpose that often don't work right because of incorrect assumptions made in the pre/post install scripts. So, arbitrary in the sense that it made arbitrary assumptions would be correct. backing it. When the IPS repo is handling 10k+ unique pieces of software lets talk. Those scripts are there to add *robustness* to the The other day, you threw out the number of 2,000 unique pieces of software. Well, I have good news for you, if you combine the primary opensolaris.org repository (about 1800 unique packages), and the contrib repository (about 11,505 unique packages), you'll easily be over that 10k+ unique number you're talking about. And you'll find that the pkg(5) system can manage it. think some features are *good*.. Does removing pre/post scripts warrant a new package manager.. Bluntly put.. No.. it sure hell doesn't.. This is why people who have a clue are so pissed off.. Because good people have been fired before, but there's still this rogue team wasting cycles on stuff which could ultimately be spent elsewhere.. So forgive me and other when we are a bit rude and aggressive.../rant I'm sorry if you think this is a rogue team; but it isn't. The pkg(5) system was not designed solely to eliminate scripting, Rather, it was designed to create a packaging system that fully integrated with OpenSolaris and took advantage of its significant, unique technologies (such as ZFS) and satisfied the needs of a target audience. As you point out, many packaging systems have been around for a significant number of years. However, what you didn't point out is how stagnant the design of these systems has been, and how they've all stayed rather generic instead of trying to uniquely innovate for a given platform. 7) is very easy to use... ok. you got me there... they were able to make a cli interface that is at least comparable to things which have been around for 15 years.. :) In some areas yes, the pkg(5) system is merely comparable to other packaging systems. However, in other areas, such as the pkg(5) search interface, (especially as of build 110) it is significantly advanced compared to that provided by deb, rpm, or other systems. It also offers a remote search interface that none of those other systems have, allowing users to search for packages without downloading large metadata blobs from package repositories. 8) upgrades the whole system at once, versus just the packages, which ensures you won't have any conflicts ... b) because of the way manifests are created from entire packages just like any normal or sane packaging system you're still just as likely to have unresolved dependencies or blockers. (I don't know for certain a missing file can't pull for *any* manifest even one which provides the same package at a different version) The way dependencies are declared in IPS manifests is not different (as far as I remember) from rpm, deb or other popular packaging formats. So, I fail to see the issue with that. The existing dependency resolution mechanism in pkg(5) is due to be replaced soon with a SAT-solver based mechanism. c) if you argue that is saves bandwidth.. I'll argue that it has delayed being able to easily establish a mirroring system, it forces a It is very easy to create a mirror, and this functionality has been there for several months now. custom daemon, there's no on-disk format (maybe this was resolve To provide the sort of rich, remote functionality that our packaging server provides, you have to have custom software of some sort running on the remote package depot server. The on-disk format was seen as less important than other, significant pieces of functionality and is planned to be implemented at a later date. 10) I've been using IPS since its inception, for how long have you been using it ? This is you just trying to discredit what I've said. As you can see above I think you're just an end user that isn't really clear on what's going on or slightly mistaken in some points. *If* you have used IPS for as long as you say you have I think you'd be a bit more empathetic to certain facts. Did it allow you to cleanly migrate from the original 05/08 release until today? I'm sure at some point you've had to do a fresh install or skipped many updates. There's been a
Re: [osol-discuss] Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Moinak Ghosh wrote: On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Lurie y...@gmx.co.uk wrote: ... The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no different from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception of ZFS features). From a developer point of view these qualities could have been got by far less effort and far less code/complexity. Actually, it is very different (especially as of build 110) with respect to search capabilities. None of the other, existing packaging systems feature the rich interface that pkg(5) now has for search. In addition, none of the systems feature remote search capability. There are differences in other areas as well, but those won't be as apparent until later functionality is implemented. Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Martin Bochnig wrote: many other benefits. And you don't need to employ 50 engineers for 2 years to get a written-from-scratch monster like IPS going. I'm not sure where you got this number from, but I think it's about 10x greater than the reality :-) I'm sure the pkg(5) team would love to have had those 50 engineers for two years... :) Your fellow wheelwright, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
casper@sun.com wrote: DTrace ZFS SMF FMA BootAr IPS IA-Install Incompatible? N N N N N Y Y I think the many people screaming about quota support when it debuted a few years ago, among many other decisions would beg to differ about the incompatible nature of ZFS :) Not that I disagree with the decisions that have been made, but I think your high level summary has smoothed out the comparison a bit too much. -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Alexander Vlasov wrote: Lurie wrote: Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches. This is called moving forward, IPS is based on new novel ideas, a secure package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts, That's why lots of packages deliver their own SMF service which runs only once. ...which is better because those SMF scripts: * can run at boot, which fits correctly with a zfs-based rollback setup * run in the correct context of the system being installed on * are at least restricted by the bounds of SMF Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Packaging was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Moinak Ghosh wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Shawn Walker swal...@opensolaris.org wrote: Alexander Vlasov wrote: Lurie wrote: That's why lots of packages deliver their own SMF service which runs only once. ...which is better because those SMF scripts: * can run at boot, which fits correctly with a zfs-based rollback setup Which means those packages will require system reboot not unlike Windoze! First, how else can you ensure the scripts correctly run without having the new environment loaded? (i.e. account for newly added users, hardware, etc.) Second, they could be in a zone, so no physical reboot is needed. Finally, we're also discussing special actuators for user images as well. Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] pkg(5) was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Moinak Ghosh wrote: On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Lurie y...@gmx.co.uk wrote: So modern Linux package managers do not have any of these qualities ? Some of them ? Of course. All of them ? No. Just a few points: 1. They usually upgrade a live system (and while it's possible for some to do a non-live upgrade, the live upgrade is exactly how pretty much all of them operate by default). Yes. But the separate boot environment pieces is what is delivered by ZFS + Caiman Installer, not a package manager feature per-se. Yes, but without integration with the package management system, they would be rather cumbersome to use. Relative. If one wants to benefit from open-sourcing then in the longer run, for some stuff, it is better to work with the community and try to utilize synergies with community run projects rather than doing everything in own way. The pkg(5) team has worked with the OpenSolaris community directly and invites any members that want to participate in its development to do so. The source code has been hosted on opensolaris.org publicly for a long time, and almost all discussions surrounding its design occur on the public pkg-discuss mailing list. Your primary gripe about IPS seems to be why didn't they just enhance another packaging system. You could ask that same question about thousands of other open source projects. There's a saying, when all you have is a hammer, everything looks like a nail. You seem to be looking at things the same way... Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Packaging was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Moinak Ghosh wrote: On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Shawn Walker swal...@opensolaris.org wrote: Moinak Ghosh wrote: Which means those packages will require system reboot not unlike Windoze! First, how else can you ensure the scripts correctly run without having the new environment loaded? (i.e. account for newly added users, hardware, etc.) That is very true for OS upgrades, but not necessarily for applications or some other layered software. Of course sw can be changed to do some Right, but then you have to leave it up to the package creator to determine whether it can run in the current context, and that is where most SVR4 packages failed (think diskless clients, etc.). By not allowing the package creator to determine the context, new contexts can be created (xvm, zones, etc.) without having to change the package to account for them, by allowing the packaging systems itself to do so. config at first start but it is not always possible to do that practically unless the sw was designed with such things in mind. If scripting was being totally banned (I do find arbit scripting messy) then an alternative configured state should have been in the package design and facilities to do common config tasks should have been of priority. Depending on SMF IMHO is simply bad practice. There are numerous avenues for configuration being researched, but by forcing no scripting, it has allowed the discovery: * of a significant number of packages didn't need any custom scripting at all (including SMF) to deliver the software * of gaps in provided action functionality * of areas that still need to be accounted for Remember that the focus is on delivering OpenSolaris, so some things like advanced custom configuration handling have not been a priority because they are not necessary to deliver OpenSolaris. Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] uname -a ... 32bit vs 64bit
Edward Ned Harvey wrote: When I run uname -a it says: SunOS hostname 5.10 Generic_137138-09 i86pc i386 i86pc In the past, I've seen the system say x86_64 when you're 64bit. And I've also seen it say 32bit when you're 32bit. But now it says nothing, so I'm left confused. How can I know if my system is 64bit or 32bit anymore? Use: $ isainfo amd64 i386 or: $ isainfo -v 64-bit amd64 applications ssse3 cx16 mon sse3 sse2 sse fxsr mmx cmov amd_sysc cx8 tsc fpu 32-bit i386 applications ssse3 ahf cx16 mon sse3 sse2 sse fxsr mmx cmov sep cx8 tsc fpu Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] pkg(5) Search was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Alexander Vlasov wrote: That's really strange. Have you read /usr/share/doc/aptitude/README? currently pkg has very rudimentary search ability, like you can't ask `which packages were installed only to satifsy other packages' dependencies', `show me all games' or `which packages has arrived into repository since last update'. Some search abilities of aptitude aren't even applicable in pkg since pkg doesn't have appropriate concepts (like priorities; pkg only supports `preferred' and `other' repos, no arrangement by-priority) Rudimentary is relative. For example: * can you search in aptitude for the package that contains the a specific architecture version (sparc, i386, etc.) of a specific file? * can you search for packages that depend on the C++ runtime library and deliver a file to /usr/lib? As for show me all games, yes you can do that assuming those packages have been marked with the correct metadata. As for which packages has arrived into the repository since last update, it is true that search can't show you this, but the depot server provides an RSS feed that shows you which packages have been updated and which ones have been added. -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Packaging was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Sebastien Roy wrote: I was under the impression that an IPS package manifest contained the set of services to be automatically imported and started as part of package installation, or temporarily disabled during package upgrade, etc. Where does one get the idea that a reboot is required for a package installation or upgrade? I don't get that idea by reading documentation: http://opensolaris.org/sc/src/pkg/gate/src/man/pkg.5.txt http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/2008.11/IMGPACKAGESYS/ipsdev.html#createipspkg It depends on whether you're updating the live system or not, and what you're trying to do. -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pkg(5) was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Moinak Ghosh wrote: end ?. Do the benefits really outweigh the costs ? Even today the codebase is significantly large and complex. We simply have to agree to disagree here. Some things you'll never know unless you try; that's the cost of innovation. We will indeed have to agree to disagree. Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pkg(5) was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Ignacio Marambio Catán wrote: beadm is not hard to use even outside pkg(5), i've used it in the past to for example have an alternate BE that is xen able I never said it was hard to use, but obviously having a single command to upgrade your entire system instead of a sequence of them is less cumbersome. For example, compare this example using beadm to upgrade from build 110 to 111: export BE_NAME=snv111 pfexec beadm create $BE_NAME \ pfexec mkdir /tmp/mnt$$ \ pfexec beadm mount $BE_NAME /tmp/mnt$$ \ pfexec pkg -R /tmp/mnt$$ image-update -v pfexec beadm unmount $BE_NAME pfexec beadm activate $BE_NAME ...to this example using the pkg command: pfexec pkg image-update -v --be-name snv111 Cheers, -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pkg(5) Search was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Alexander Vlasov wrote: Rudimentary is relative. For example: * can you search in aptitude for the package that contains the a specific architecture version (sparc, i386, etc.) of a specific file? Besides of OpenSolaris, OsX is the only system where application being delivered as one package for all supported architectures, AFAIK. So concept is not applicable here; however, you can search for a package which contains specific file for your architecture. * can you search for packages that depend on the C++ runtime library and deliver a file to /usr/lib? No; you can only make those two searches separately. However this usage pattern is quite uncommon, especially comparing to `get list of strategic games' or `list of qt-based IM clients' You can do either of those with pkg(5) as well if the proper metadata exists. So, as I said before, rudimentary is relative. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] network autocomfiguration daemon question
I've found that I sometimes have to perform a pfexec svcadm restart nwam to get it to work, though I haven't had to do that since build 110. Claudia Hildebrandt wrote: Alex, is your nwam service running ( nwam stands for network automat.. something and enables your network interfaces automatically ). Check it with svcs -av |grep nwam claudia On 04/09/09 19:45, Alex wrote: I have an acer aspire one laptop running OpenSolaris 111 that I connect to the internet via ethernet at work. Is there anyway to re-request a DHCP lease via the network autoconf daemon? For example, i have an ip of 0.0.0.0 without a cable plugged in, I plug an Ethernet cable and it remains at 0.0.0.0. I've tried switching between auto and wired networks without success. I know how to configure things manually, but I would prefer to do it automatically. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] network autocomfiguration daemon question
Alternatively, you can try running Applications - System Tools - Device Driver Utility to see what hardware is missing drivers on your system. Claudia Hildebrandt wrote: It is also possible, that your network interface is not recognized by opensol. I have an acer aspire X1700 and I experienced that the onboard chip ( RTL 8211B) is not recognized - so I had to install a e1000g0 ( Intel ) network card. Please can you send the output of #ifconfig -a , please. On 04/09/09 19:45, Alex wrote: I have an acer aspire one laptop running OpenSolaris 111 that I connect to the internet via ethernet at work. Is there anyway to re-request a DHCP lease via the network autoconf daemon? For example, i have an ip of 0.0.0.0 without a cable plugged in, I plug an Ethernet cable and it remains at 0.0.0.0. I've tried switching between auto and wired networks without success. I know how to configure things manually, but I would prefer to do it automatically. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Updating snv_98
Anon Y Mous wrote: pkg set-authority -P -O http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev dev pkg image-update I take this to mean that there are no longer any more bizzare gotchas in upgrading to the builds after snv_98 ? No, and if there were, they would be in the release notes. You know the kind of thing where if you forget to type in something like pfexec /mnt/boot/solaris/bin/update_grub -R /mnt with only your left hand during a lunar equinox while hopping up and down on one leg and simultaneously scratching your head and chewing gum at the same time *BEFORE* doing the pkg image_update from snv_86 to snv_92, the zpool won't boot up? The issue you speak of was a result of changes in the underlying boot management libraries / grub and not of the pkg system. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Duplicative Documents Entries in Nautilus
W. Wayne Liauh wrote: This seems to point to a sad fact that very few people use non-English versions of OpenSolaris. But this is no excuse for us to be so sloppy--and so unprofessional. I probably speak a bit too hastily. My comment was only togarding zh_locales users. To my best knowledge, not even Sun's own employees use OpenSolaris, unless, of course, when it is required by their jobs. There are many Sun employees that *choose* to use OpenSolaris when not required to. I'm not certain where you get your information for such general statements, but it is not accurate nor constructive. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Duplicative Documents Entries in Nautilus
W. Wayne Liauh wrote: In fact, I believe, if any of the top bosses there had the courtesy to install a copy of OpenSolaris in the Zongwen (Chinese, or zh_) locale and run it at least for a while on a daily basis, this problem would have been immediately identified and solved--unless s/he has an insultingly low expectation. Even the simplest of fixes can take time simply because the fix to something may be in a much later build and so you will not see it publicly for a while, or because other, higher priority tasks are currently being worked or existing work is being finished. Quite frankly, your condescending tone and various, continued wild assumptions whenever something doesn't work the way you want are unhelpful. I would encourage you to find better usage of your time. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Apps of Steel Challenge!
Anon Y Mous wrote: Also, does flar create not work well with the ZFS version used in 2008.11 and that's why it's not in there? Or is flar supposed to be replaced by some feature in ZFS? Or is the flar code owned by a third party that won't allow free redistribution of it? I haven't heard any hints from anybody at Sun yet as to why it's impossible to have a flash archive package for Indiana. From what I remember being told, there were various problems surrounding flash archives. And finally, the was a possibility of a third-party license issue among them. I'd like to see something zfs-centred myself... Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] compile pidgin - configure successfully, make with no luck
Alex Smith (K4RNT) wrote: If you're using gcc, I'm assuming you installed the gcc-dev pkg image? Double-check that, and perhaps try executing gmake instead of make - perhaps pidgin requires GNU make. Also, pidgin may already be in the IPS system. It is; version 2.5.5 even: SUNWgnome-im-client Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Packaging was Re: Possible IBM aquisition of Sun
Alexander Vlasov wrote: Have you tried aptitude? Yes, but it is neither a cli nor a gui. It's more of a terminal program. In addition, it exposes the internal of the underlying packaging system, something I tend to disagree with. However, it might be nice to have a similar terminal program like that for pkg(5) for users that don't want a gui, but don't want to have to type everything out (cli). aptitude, however, is limited in what it can do by the underlying package system. As such, it's search functionality is not as expressive as pkg(5). The three things I see in it that would be nice to have for pkg(5) are: * changelog view (this is already needed for OpenSolaris supported releases; already filed as RFE 7923) * purging of configuration files for packages (I've filed RFE 8269 for this) * ability to show reverse dependencies (packages that depend upon a specific package; already filed as RFE 2713) Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] migrando a opensolaris 2008.11
Alejandro Sánchez Martínez wrote: Yo no sé mucho de computadoras. Al saber de Open Solaris, me pareció un SO muy interesante que me gustaría probar, quisiera saber si alguien me puede aclarar algunas dudas. 1.-La computadora que tengo es Pentium III, con procesador Intel con 256 MB de RAM. (realmente un anticuario). Mi idea es utilizarla, como conejillo de indias e instalarle el Open Solaris, para cuando compre otra más moderna. ¿Se podrá hacer la instalación? Su computadora no tiene bastante memoria. La computadora necesita por lo menos el mb 512. Apesadumbrado. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] migrando a opensolaris 2008.11
Alejandro Sánchez Martínez wrote: Tengo una notebook con 1024 en RAM y 120 gigas en disco duro, en esa si he de poder instalar el SO Open Solaris, sólo que me preocupa hacerlo mal y perder mis archivos, ¿qué podré hacer para instalarlo sin riesgos? Sé que existen las particiones y ciertas configuraciones, pero realmente tengo miedo de equivocarme. También supongo que se deben hacer discos de respaldo. Hay siempre riesgos. Usted debe guardar siempre las copias de sus datos. Esto es muy verdad al instalar sistemas operativos. Si usted quiere intentar OpenSolaris con seguridad, instale VirtualBox, y después instale OpenSolaris dentro de él: http://www.virtualbox.org/ Lea más sobre OpenSolaris aquí: http://es.opensolaris.org/ -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] migrando a opensolaris 2008.11
Alejandro Sánchez Martínez wrote: Instale la virtual box, pero lo más seguro es que me haya equivocado al seleccionar el SO base, por lo que me marca un error. Para volver a empezar, desinstalé la virtual box y después la volví a instalar; sin embargo aparecen las anteriores máquinas virtuales que había instalado, con sus respectivos errores. ¿Cómo se podrá corregir esto? http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=87892tstart=0 -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] gvim?
Shawn Protsman wrote: In my effort to get comfortable with opensolaris I've not been able to find gvim. I've installed the aap version but it will only compile without GUI (-X11), even after editing the configure options in vim/src/config.arg. So where do I find a package for gvim, if one exists? $ pkg search -r gvim INDEX ACTIONVALUE PACKAGE basename file usr/bin/gvim pkg:/sunwg...@7.2.84-0.111 basename file usr/bin/gvim pkg:/sunwg...@7.2.84-0.111 description set gvim pkg:/sunwg...@7.2.84-0.111 Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
