Thank you kindly for the information, I'll go bark up the correct tree now.
Cheers,
David
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 12:48 AM, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED]wrote:
David Orman wrote:
Greetings,
I'm sure this has been discussed before, but I was unfortunately not able
to dredge up this
On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 10:07 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
It seems that many of the images are in PNG format. Given this, it is
worth investigating to see if these PNG files may be optimized for
smaller size using 'pngcrush' or a similar tool. I picked a file at
random from the themes
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 16:09 -0700, Stephen Hahn wrote:
I'd encourage that project to think carefully about how it can minimize
its dependencies.
Well, we could ship our own copy of the *.xsl stylesheets but that's
more or less the limit of what we can
Sven Herzing wrote:
Hi,
I have a question about installing updates to the stable version of
opensolaris 200805.
When I use pkg image-update, I would get the packages of the latest release
installed (update from snv_86 - snv_9X). But that's not what I want to do.
On this site:
Hi!
The ksh93 update tarballs announced below seem to work for Indiana
installations (not the LiveCD itself since the media is read-only; other
distributions are likely working, too), too. Have fun... :-)
Bye,
Roland
Original Message
Subject: [Annoucement]
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 16:09 -0700, Stephen Hahn wrote:
I'd encourage that project to think carefully about how it can minimize
its dependencies.
Well, we could ship our own copy of the *.xsl stylesheets but that's
more or less the limit of what we can do in this
Philip Antoniades wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi,
Is it possible to compress the ZFS instance during install of
opensolaris (and if so, how)?
See Glenn's blog entry:
http://blogs.sun.com/glagasse/entry/howto_enable_zfs_compression_when
Dave
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Wed, 2008-08-13 at 10:07 -0500, Bob Friesenhahn wrote:
It seems that many of the images are in PNG format. Given this, it is
worth investigating to see if these PNG files may be optimized for
smaller size using 'pngcrush' or a similar tool. I picked a file at
Sven Herzing wrote:
I have a question about installing updates to the stable version of
opensolaris 200805.
- wasn't opensolaris supposed to have a stable version that will get
new releases every 6 month(200805, 200811 ...), and I would be able
to run this stable version in a sense that
The OpenSolaris development package repository
http://pkg.opensolaris.org/
has been updated to reflect the changes in snv_95 including major fixes
to the Caiman Slim Install and the Image Packaging System (IPS).
Users who wish to update their system to the development build can do
so
Calum Benson wrote:
On 13 Aug 2008, at 21:34, Mark Phalan wrote:
Can't a single full theme be delivered minus all the redundancy? If
Nimbus doesn't have some icons then beef it up with icons from the
others and drop the rest.
Technically possible I would think, yes-- would need to check
Any suggestions as to where I went wrong here??
~# beadm create opensolaris-b95
~# beadm mount opensolaris-b95 /mnt1
~# pkg -R /mnt1 image-update
DOWNLOADPKGS FILES XFER (MB)
Completed578/578 5055/5055 842.28/842.28
Sven Herzing wrote:
For me, it's the question, if I would need to buy support only to get some
updates, so why not use directly Solaris 10. Yes, I know there are features
in OpenSolaris which are not (yet) in Solaris 10, but at least I would have a
stable version and I would get security
Sven Herzing wrote:
For me, it's the question, if I would need to buy support only to get some
updates, so why not use directly Solaris 10. Yes, I know there are features
in OpenSolaris which are not (yet) in Solaris 10, but at least I would have a
stable version and I would get security
* Seymour Krebs [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 16:13]:
Any suggestions as to where I went wrong here??
OSError: [Errno 2] No such file or directory:
'/mnt1/opt/DTT/Code/Python/func_abc.py'
You didn't do anything wrong. This outcome comes from a known bug in
the boot environment (BE)
* Seymour Krebs [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 16:19]:
~# pfexec pkg refresh
~# pfexec pkg install [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is BUILD in the above line? I would have expected
pfexec pkg install SUNWipkg
or
pfexec pkg install [EMAIL PROTECTED]
T raceback (most recent call last):
BUILD was a typo, ie $BUILD should have evaluated to 95. I found typo after
my post and did subsequently discover the b95 version of ipkg.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
indiana-discuss mailing list
indiana-discuss@opensolaris.org
Brilliant!
thanks, this is just what I needed.
P
Philip Antoniades
MySQL Inc
718-909-4549
-Original Message-
From: Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Thursday, Aug 14, 2008 10:29 am
Subject: Re: [indiana-discuss] Compressed install of OpenSolaris 08.05?
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
CC:
BUILD - must be evaluated into 94 (if you updating from 94)
I've updated my solaris into 95 five minutes ago, and everything works
perfectly - pidgin now could connect to icq and two new icons on desktop :)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
does not appear to be 'legacy'
~# more /etc/vfstab
#device device mount FS fsckmount mount
#to mount to fsck point typepassat boot options
#
/devices- /devicesdevfs - no -
/proc -
i had a similar issue, but after reboot
at boot fs-local wanted to mount rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-1/opt/sartek
but of course it failed.
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 8:23 PM, Ethan Quach [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The libbe bug you might be referring to is
1333 - libbe creation and rename of BEs
I doubt these are related and to be able to tell what went wrong we'd need the
output from beadm list and zfs list. It could also be helpful to see what's
in your /etc/vfstab.
Thanks,
-evan
Andras Barna wrote:
i had a similar issue, but after reboot
at boot fs-local wanted to mount
Evan Layton wrote:
It appears that all of your BE's at one time or another have been manually
mounted but never unmounted using beadm unmount be_name. Once you've
mounted
you must unmount before rebooting or you'll run into errors such as this.
Doing the beadm unmount should clean up
Based on what was sent in the opt thread I suspect that the issue is that
BE's
were manually mounted but never unmounted. It appears that most of the BE's on
this system have temporary mount points.
-evan
Ethan Quach wrote:
The libbe bug you might be referring to is
1333 - libbe
BEActive Active on Mountpoint Space
Name reboot Used
-- - -- -
opensolaris-1 no no- 64.78M
opensolaris-2 yesyes / 10.35G
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~# zfs list
NAME
USED AVAIL REFER
BE Active Active on Mountpoint Space
Name reboot Used
-- - -- -
opensolaris no no- 4.88M
opensolaris-1 no no- 102.41M
opensolaris-2 yesyes /
dont know if it matters, but
my image-update failed with pkg: unable to activate opensolaris-2
i tried manually, unmounted it then activate, another failure
Gman suggested to free up some space, and works
On Thu, Aug 14, 2008 at 9:20 PM, Andras Barna [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
BEActive
Andras Barna wrote:
well, i destroyed rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-1/opt/sartek as a workaround.
and rollbacked rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-2/opt/[EMAIL
PROTECTED]:-:2008-08-14-16:37:33
Make sure these datasets have their 'canmount' properties
set to 'noauto'. This ensures they only get mounted when
Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Evan Layton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 18:12]:
It appears that all of your BE's at one time or another have been
manually mounted but never unmounted using beadm unmount be_name.
Once you've mounted you must unmount before rebooting or you'll run
into errors such as
Evan Layton wrote:
Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Evan Layton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 18:12]:
It appears that all of your BE's at one time or another have been
manually mounted but never unmounted using beadm unmount be_name.
Once you've mounted you must unmount before rebooting or you'll run
* Evan Layton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 18:40]:
Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Evan Layton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 18:12]:
It appears that all of your BE's at one time or another have been
manually mounted but never unmounted using beadm unmount be_name.
Once you've mounted you must unmount
thanks for the info evan, Im sure you are quite correct. however, as i
upgraded zfs ver.
zpool upgrade -v
This system is currently running ZFS pool version 11.
I now have only the b94 (BE named opensolaris-2) that is bootable. the other
versions dont like the rpool anymore. Ill check them
Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Evan Layton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 18:40]:
Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Evan Layton [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 18:12]:
It appears that all of your BE's at one time or another have been
manually mounted but never unmounted using beadm unmount be_name.
Once you've
There's potentially a bug or RFE looming here to make this work a little
better. Leaving a BE mounted and then rebooting to it seems like an
error thats prone to happen.
Something we can look at in libbe is to try to detect this case as
best we can when cloning a BE the already has faulty
Is it possible to set PKG_CLIENT_TIMEOUT persistently so I don't need to
specify it each time I do an image-update? I know I could just add this to my
shell config file, but is there an option I can add to /var/pkg/cfg_cache for
example? Google came up empty.
Thanks
Andrew.
--
This message
Jive, which shows the mailing list on the opensolaris website as forums, has
a bug in it where it scans for http links in the subject line of posts. This
means that if you post messages with subjects line http://pkg.opensolaris.org
updated then you can't click to see the actual message,
so, first off, thanks a lot for the help from everyone. It s great to have
such a high quality community for Solaris and I predict a brilliant future. I
am just a no-good scientist (ie. end user) and really appreciate the help from
those who probably have more important stuff to be doing.
I
The IPS repository has not reappeared. CSW (which is what most people recognise
as Blastwave) now lives at www.suncsw.de .
Cheers
Andrew.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
indiana-discuss mailing list
indiana-discuss@opensolaris.org
* andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 20:36]:
Is it possible to set PKG_CLIENT_TIMEOUT persistently so I don't need
to specify it each time I do an image-update? I know I could just add
this to my shell config file, but is there an option I can add to
/var/pkg/cfg_cache for example? Google
I'm not seeing timeouts - but I'm setting PKG_CLIENT_TIMEOUT to 220 each time
just to be on the safe side. ;-)
pkg version prints this:
093ca22da67c
I'm guessing that is the build number (093) then some sort of checksum. (The
man page gives no clue as to the format of this string). That is
clarification below, for the archives...
Seymour Krebs wrote:
thanks for the info evan, Im sure you are quite correct. however, as i
upgraded zfs ver.
zpool upgrade -v
This system is currently running ZFS pool version 11.
A zfs version is not the same as zpool version. In other
From the zfs list and beadm list output I can't see anything wrong. If
possible
try the following and see if we can get a bit more information on why the
activate is failing:
# export BE_PRINT_ERR=true
# beadm activate opensolaris_b95
Thanks!
-evan
Seymour Krebs wrote:
so, first off,
~# export BE_PRINT_ERR=true
~# beadm activate opensolaris_b95
set_bootfs: failed to set bootfs property for pool rpool: property 'bootfs' not
supported on EFI labeled devices
be_activate: failed to set bootfs pool property for rpool/ROOT/opensolaris_b95
beadm: Unable to activate opensolaris_b95
* andrew [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2008-08-14 21:03]:
I'm not seeing timeouts - but I'm setting PKG_CLIENT_TIMEOUT to 220
each time just to be on the safe side. ;-)
Ah. You shouldn't need to do this any longer. pkg(1) knows how to
retry now.
pkg version prints this:
093ca22da67c
I'm
This error is coming from ZFS. Did you change out one of your disks in the
mirror recently? If so you may want to run format on that disk and see if it
has
an EFI label on it. If it does you'll have to break the mirror and remove that
disk from the mirror, re-label it and add it back into the
Hi guys,
Does anybody know how to install Mplayer in OpenSolaris? (I`m running
snv_94, but I`m upgrading to 95).
Thanks
PS.: All tutorials that I saw is using Blastwave as a repository.
TaP
___
indiana-discuss mailing list
check: http://pkgbuild.sourceforge.net/spec-files-extra
On Fri, Aug 15, 2008 at 2:01 AM, Thiago Pereira [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi guys,
Does anybody know how to install Mplayer in OpenSolaris? (I`m running
snv_94, but I`m upgrading to 95).
Thanks
PS.: All tutorials that I saw is using
On 14 Aug 2008, at 16:34, Dave Miner wrote:
I tend to agree with this reasoning, and am not inclined to push for
copy-paste engineering in themes anymore than I would anywhere
else. I
would ask, though, that space considerations be a part of the
calculation in constructing the themes
I have upgraded to snv_95. I don't have to turn off the ACPI support
anymore (to avoid the kernel panic). However I notice that my battery
status applet is still not working. Does anyone run snv_95 on bare metal
and get battery status applet working?
Thanks -
Praveen
Which laptop?
James
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 17:21 -0700, Praveen Kumar wrote:
I have upgraded to snv_95. I don't have to turn off the ACPI support
anymore (to avoid the kernel panic). However I notice that my battery
status applet is still not working. Does anyone run snv_95 on bare metal
James Cornell wrote:
Which laptop?
Lenovo Thinkpad T60
James
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 17:21 -0700, Praveen Kumar wrote:
I have upgraded to snv_95. I don't have to turn off the ACPI support
anymore (to avoid the kernel panic). However I notice that my battery
status applet is still not
Are you running the latest BIOS revision?
James
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 18:07 -0700, Praveen Kumar wrote:
James Cornell wrote:
Which laptop?
Lenovo Thinkpad T60
James
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 17:21 -0700, Praveen Kumar wrote:
I have upgraded to snv_95. I don't have to turn off the
Hi guys,
I'm trying to update my OpenSolaris snv_94 and I'm getting this error. I've
already tried more than one time and from different Internet connections.
bash-3.2$ pfexec pkg image-update
Checking that SUNWipkg (in '/') is up to date...
PHASE ITEMS
What's the output of 'lshal | grep battery'?
Regards,
Jedy
On Thu, 2008-08-14 at 17:21 -0700, Praveen Kumar wrote:
I have upgraded to snv_95. I don't have to turn off the ACPI support
anymore (to avoid the kernel panic). However I notice that my battery
status applet is still not working.
Thiago Pereira wrote:
Hi guys,
I'm trying to update my OpenSolaris snv_94 and I'm getting this error.
I've already tried more than one time and from different Internet
connections.
bash-3.2$ pfexec pkg image-update
Checking that SUNWipkg (in '/') is up to date...
PHASE
On Thu 14 Aug 2008 at 03:37PM, Evan Layton wrote:
This error is coming from ZFS. Did you change out one of your disks in
the mirror recently? If so you may want to run format on that disk and
see if it has an EFI label on it. If it does you'll have to break the
mirror and remove that disk from
On Thu 14 Aug 2008 at 01:41PM, andrew wrote:
Jive, which shows the mailing list on the opensolaris website as forums,
has a bug in it where it scans for http links in the subject line of posts.
This means that if you post messages with subjects line
http://pkg.opensolaris.org updated
57 matches
Mail list logo
