[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For ksh88 there is no legal source and from my understanding there is not
even the possibility to redistribute binaries.
I am surprised that ksh88 isn't part of the ATT deal
(Toolchest origin is separate, perhaps?)
I was on the other side surprized to see
Joerg Schilling wrote:
The Debian people don't port to Solaris but to Linux.
They even usually apply patches that cause the the software to
fail on any other platform because they don't care about other
platforms.
They only care about Linux because it is the only well supported
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If all all OSS users were enthusiasts, we had more free software. The big
problem is that the OSS motion did create a lot of lazy people who just wait
for things to happen and who demand for new solutions istead of creating
solutions.
I of course
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 12:19:29PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
But as ksh88 cannot be included in OpenSolaris, Sun needs to either deviate
from other OpenSolaris based distros or convert to ksh93 too.
What Alan was saying is that once a
Roger A. Faulkner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It occurred to me that, since cpio doesn't overwrite any
files (it creates new files and renames them into place),
I could do this operation to a running system. I tried
it and it worked (for some definition of 'worked'), but
the configuration
John Beck [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The first is that all the mechanisms which you rail against are in fact
how things work now. Your statement of how things should work matches my
understanding of how things ought to work in the *long* term, but we have
a lot of short- and medium-term work
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, Jul 25, 2005 at 03:48:52AM -0700, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
Why does it have to be 100% compatible? That is a serious question.
What breaks so bad that not having access to the source is considered
a viable solution?
100% compatibility
Hi,
We have just launched an OpenSolaris User Group in Bangalore, India.
If you are interested in joining the group, please subscribe to the
Google Group here:
http://groups-beta.google.com/group/bosug/
Venky.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Is there a way to specify comment in /etc/driver_aliases?
According to the source, # can be used for comments in /etc/driver_aliases
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/usr/src/uts/common/os/modsysfile.c#make_aliases
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Brian Cameron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Within Sun, certain processes are defined by the ARC (Architectural Review
Committeee) to help ensure interface stability. Over the past year, I have
been working with the Sun ARC chairs to determine how free software,
OpenSolaris, and interface
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roy Solaris cannot be placed in a position where it determines the contents
Roy of OpenSolaris. That is a dead-end exercise of tossing code over the
Roy wall whenever Sun sees fit, which is the antithesis of what we are
Roy trying to do with the
John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can imagine two different proposals coming out of this discussion:
A) We should develop an extension to ksh93 that allows it to be used
as a Stable replacement for ksh88 in places where backwards
compatibility is required (i.e,
Is there a way to specify comment in /etc/driver_aliases?
According to the source, # can be used for comments in /etc/driver_aliases
But it's unlikely that the # comments will stick with the entries
they're meant to comment.
Casper
___
Jürgen Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to specify comment in /etc/driver_aliases?
According to the source, # can be used for comments in /etc/driver_aliases
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/usr/src/uts/common/os/modsysfile.c#make_aliases
Mmmm I was asuming it does
Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a way to specify comment in /etc/driver_aliases?
According to the source, # can be used for comments in /etc/driver_aliases
But it's unlikely that the # comments will stick with the entries
they're meant to comment.
On Mon, 25 Jul 2005, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
[ ... ]
My participation in OpenSolaris is conditioned on a number of
statements by Sun regarding the nature of this project...
Could you elaborate, please? I think we should ensure that Sun's
current policy towards the the OpenSolaris project still
It's not my notebook but I think I could try again.
Now, how can I make crashdump over the network during boot?
but of course as you pointed it could crash before it's possible to
core over the net...
Turns out that this is a *lot* more complicated with newboot because
the kernel doesn't have a
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Max Bruning [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If the space is mapped by the kernel, you can use /dev/allkmem
so, if the kernel maps the APCI tables, they should be visible there.
(If they're not mappable, then /dev/mem should not give access).
If /dev/allmem allows to map
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 04:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am surprised that ksh88 isn't part of the ATT deal
As was I.
However, I was recently reminded that there's a pdksh which is a ksh88
clone (with a few admitted incompatibilities).
It might be less effort to fix those bugs in pdksh than
Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 04:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am surprised that ksh88 isn't part of the ATT deal
As was I.
However, I was recently reminded that there's a pdksh which is a ksh88
clone (with a few admitted incompatibilities).
It might be less
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 02:43:02PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
Please take time out and think about what you're suggesting.
Intentionally breaking compatibility with Solaris has the following
implications:
Beginning immediately,
* Bruno Filipe Marques [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-07-26 07:03]:
Hello to all
I would like to contribute to OpenSolaris Development.
Since i'm from Portugal, and make my PhD Research in IP Network Management,
working with Sparc Solaris, Linux and Windows, i feel like need to have a
I18N in
Laszlo Peter wrote:
Hi Rod,
Thanks for the detailed response.
Of course I agree that it's better to avoid the problem by
carefully controlling public interface changes. However more
and more software in Solaris comes from external sources ...
So we can't break the interfaces we'd shipped
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roy Solaris cannot be placed in a position where it determines the
contents
Roy of OpenSolaris. That is a dead-end exercise of tossing code over the
Roy wall whenever Sun sees fit, which is the
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 02:43:02PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
Please take time out and think about what you're suggesting.
Keith -- when Joerg says OpenSolaris here, I think he's
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
[ ... ]
Any discussion where people try to enforce a way that is not possible
with freely distributable systems is a useless discussion...
Decisions pertaining to the development of the commercial derivative
(e.g. Sun Solaris) of open-source
On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 15:30, Roy T. Fielding wrote:
What exactly is blocking us from creating a
directory containing ksh93 code
Nothing. We should probably import ksh93 as ksh93
sooner rather than
later.
and making it the current ksh for OpenSolaris?
One of the goals for
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
On Tue, Jul 26, 2005 at 02:43:02PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
Please take time out and
On Mon, 2005-07-25 at 15:30, Roy T. Fielding
wrote:
But I went googling for differences and found a
pretty significant one:
It looks like ksh88 uses dynamic scoping while
ksh93
Opps I appologize for the missing data in the last message.
To get an idea of the significant numbers
Keith -- when Joerg says OpenSolaris here, I think
he's actually
referring to SchilliX.
No. He does not do so.
BTW: I'm a little confused about things like to discuss ksh for OpenSolaris: if
it's not available as source, take the open source variant. People that need
101% compatibility can
Joerg:
Within Sun, certain processes are defined by the ARC (Architectural Review
Committeee) to help ensure interface stability. Over the past year, I have
been working with the Sun ARC chairs to determine how free software,
OpenSolaris, and interface stability process will all get along.
Brian Cameron wrote:
it will probably take a bit of time for the processes to be worked
out. It's probably better than OpenSolaris is working out the
process now with community involvement rather than trying to
simply dictate what the process should be.
Please check out the
Hi Markus -
There are only some bits of Kerberos currently available in the
source tarball. The rest is coming soon - I'm hoping in the
next build.
Kerberos and GSS are both on the list of what's not currently
available as source but is coming soon (check out the no_source
list on the website).
On Tue, 2005-07-26 at 08:43, Joerg Schilling wrote:
We have either _no_ ksh in OpenSolaris or we have ksh93.
or we have pdksh, which is a lot closer to ksh88.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tue, 26 Jul 2005, Brian Cameron wrote:
Joerg wrote:
Brian Cameron wrote:
I think there are a number of paths that you can take to get
software in OpenSolaris. One method may work better for you:
1) Work to get the application into a SFW package. etc..
[ ... ]
OpenSolaris does
Heya,
Please check out the OpenSolaris:CAB-discuss discussion list/alias
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=17
where the initial governance proposal is out for comment.
I am setting the followup to this email to the cab-discuss alias.
So, this is interesting to me,
As of last week, the CAB's discuss list is open. I'll update the CAB
page to reflect this change.
Jim
Glynn Foster wrote:
Heya,
Please check out the OpenSolaris:CAB-discuss discussion list/alias
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=17
where the initial governance
Several people have tried to post to CAB-discuss in the last few minutes
and it's still boucing. Derek can check the list in the morning.
Jim
Glynn Foster wrote:
Hey,
As of last week, the CAB's discuss list is open. I'll update the CAB
page to reflect this change.
Awesome - thanks
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Several people have tried to post to CAB-discuss in the last few
minutes and it's still boucing. Derek can check the list in the morning.
Sorry, it should working now.
Derek
Jim
Glynn Foster wrote:
Hey,
As of last week, the CAB's discuss list is open. I'll update
39 matches
Mail list logo
