* James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2008-09-24 14:19]:
> Jason King writes:
> > The problem is, as far as I can tell, with Indiana (aka OpenSolaris)
> > there's no real concept of a 'full' install. You get a base set of
> > packages, and then install whatever else you want as needed. This
> > ba
Peter Memishian writes:
> > I think asking for random projects to shout their package requirements
> > out into the dark is an insufficient solution to the problem.
>
> Hmm, I thought we currently did the "shout their package requirements"
> approach. At least, I've seen discussions with the ON
> I think that's basically the wrong angle of attack. We need to have
> ON builds on the OpenSolaris distribution supported first (they're not
> now). Once that's done, we need some way to manage the group of
> packages that are required to be installed in order to build --
> including not
John Plocher writes:
> ON has the concept of a common build environment, which
> is change-managed more strictly than the ON-Gate itself.
> Maybe there is inspiration to be found there...
It's precisely this common build environment that the original poster
is complaining about. He wants ON's CBE
James Carlson wrote:
> Jason King writes:
>
>> I'm curious to know if there has been any consideration made to the
>> external dependencies for building ON (and specifically keeping the
>> dependencies limited) when things are integrated. I know ON is not
>> self contained, but for example, the
Jason King writes:
> I actually filed the bug the other day -- but it still leaves the rest
> of the world with basically on their own to discover any new
> dependencies. I was just suggesting perhaps someone could at least
> say 'btw, I just integrated X and it requires /bin/foo' when
> integrati
Jason King wrote:
> That's just ridiculous
> IMO. What next? Where is the line drawn (if at all)?
It's a sign that people are more focused on creating their
individual parts of the system than they are in building a
system out of all those parts. It is an predictable result
of a system that i
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 12:32 PM, Alan Coopersmith
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> James Carlson wrote:
>> Jason King writes:
>>> There are bits required that aren't redistributable (thus needing the
>>> packages off an SXCE iso). I know there are plans to create a
>>> repository hosted by Sun for th
James Carlson wrote:
> Jason King writes:
>> There are bits required that aren't redistributable (thus needing the
>> packages off an SXCE iso). I know there are plans to create a
>> repository hosted by Sun for those bits, but even once that's there, I
>> don't think the issue goes away. The cur
Jason King writes:
> There are bits required that aren't redistributable (thus needing the
> packages off an SXCE iso). I know there are plans to create a
> repository hosted by Sun for those bits, but even once that's there, I
> don't think the issue goes away. The current solution would be to
>
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 8:55 AM, James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jason King writes:
>> The problem is, as far as I can tell, with Indiana (aka OpenSolaris)
>> there's no real concept of a 'full' install. You get a base set of
>> packages, and then install whatever else you want as neede
Dan Mick wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
>> sreenatha wrote:
>>> Hi all,
>>> I am porting linux application to Solaris 10.
>>> Here I am facing the problem to find an equivalent of iopl() (Inpu /
>>> output privilage) function of Linux to Solaris 10.
>> Why does the application use iopl() on Linux
Jason King writes:
> The problem is, as far as I can tell, with Indiana (aka OpenSolaris)
> there's no real concept of a 'full' install. You get a base set of
> packages, and then install whatever else you want as needed. This
> base set does not contain everything needed to build ON. I'm not su
On Wed, Sep 24, 2008 at 7:30 AM, James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Jason King writes:
>> I'm curious to know if there has been any consideration made to the
>> external dependencies for building ON (and specifically keeping the
>> dependencies limited) when things are integrated. I know O
Jason King writes:
> I'm curious to know if there has been any consideration made to the
> external dependencies for building ON (and specifically keeping the
> dependencies limited) when things are integrated. I know ON is not
> self contained, but for example, the integration of mms into ON mean
>Hi all,
>
>I am currently porting a driver from Linux to Solaris. The driver code
>makes use of the likely macro that is defined on Linux to tell the
>compiler that the code inside the likely call is the most likely code
>path to optimize it.
>
>Does someone know if it is available on Solaris
My company's experience is that "likely" is not available on
the GCC compiler that we have for Solaris sparc.
So, somewhere in our headers we have something like...
#ifndef likely
#define likely(x) (x)
#endif
wr
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi all,
I am currently porting a driver from Linux to Solaris. The driver code
makes use of the likely macro that is defined on Linux to tell the
compiler that the code inside the likely call is the most likely code
path to optimize it.
Does someone know if it is available on Solaris as well a
Hi All,
I have some doubts in usage of kstat framework (kstat_open; kstat_lookup)
regarding SCTP statistics:
Do we have option to reset the kernel statistics in our program?
When I run the command "kstat sctp 10" on my Solaris system, it provides me
the statistics in every 10 seconds. So c
19 matches
Mail list logo
