Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 1/30/06, Cyril Plisko [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any ideas why there is no source drop for b32 and no ISOs for b31/b32 ?
I was thinking the same.
In any case .. I have a new mirror site ready to go .. I think I will
post that just as soon as all is synced up.
Is Jonathan Schwartz going to repeat the License mistake (made
with OpenOffice) with OpenSolaris?
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan
Thinking about GPLv3
While this may sound nice, it would open the new problem that
contributors may license new stuff for OpenSolaris under the
GPLv3 only making
Is Jonathan Schwartz going to repeat the License mistake (made
with OpenOffice) with OpenSolaris?
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan
Thinking about GPLv3
While this may sound nice, it would open the new problem that
contributors may license new stuff for OpenSolaris under the
GPLv3 only
Has anyone heard if there will be any SuperG conference this spring? No word on
the homepage http://www.sun.com/datacenter/superg
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Is Jonathan Schwartz going to repeat the License mistake (made
with OpenOffice) with OpenSolaris?
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan
Thinking about GPLv3
While this may sound nice, it would open the new problem that
contributors may license new stuff for
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:59, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Friday 27 January 2006 11:26 am, Dave Miner wrote:
It's also only supported for installing from flash archives at this time.
But we allow a network install, no matter what the protocol.
Over
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:59, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Friday 27 January 2006 11:26 am, Dave Miner wrote:
It's also only supported for installing from flash archives at this time.
But we allow a network install, no matter what the protocol.
Over
On 1/30/06, Bill Rushmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Dennis Clarke wrote:
It just so happens that I have a VMWare 5.5 setup here and I need to
create a S10U1 install as well as a SX install. So .. I can help with
this by getting some pictures.
I'll convert then to
Hello Joerg,
Monday, January 30, 2006, 2:34:38 PM, you wrote:
JS Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 13:59, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Friday 27 January 2006 11:26 am, Dave Miner wrote:
It's also only supported for installing from flash archives at this time.
On 1/30/06, Bill Rushmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Dennis Clarke wrote:
It just so happens that I have a VMWare 5.5 setup here and I need to
create a S10U1 install as well as a SX install. So .. I can help with
this by getting some pictures.
I'll convert then to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While this may sound nice, it would open the new problem that
contributors may license new stuff for OpenSolaris under the
GPLv3 only making it impossible for Sun to include the stuff
in Sun Solaris.
But isn't it the case that GPLv3 has far fewer restrictions (is
Joerg Schilling wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While this may sound nice, it would open the new problem that
contributors may license new stuff for OpenSolaris under the
GPLv3 only making it impossible for Sun to include the stuff
in Sun Solaris.
But isn't it the case that GPLv3 has far
Richard Lowe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But isn't it the case that GPLv3 has far fewer restrictions (is more CDDL
like) than GPLv2?
It has fewer restrictions, but it still does not explicitly allow to merge
code that is under another OSI aproved license. And even iff, one important
As some of you know, we publish a monthly newsletter:
https://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=5456tstart=0
For now, we put it on the program-team alias, but we're looking for a
higher profile place for it to live as it grows and improves. Also, we'd
like to expand the newsletter,
Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 1/30/06, Bill Rushmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 29 Jan 2006, Dennis Clarke wrote:
It just so happens that I have a VMWare 5.5 setup here and I need to
create a S10U1 install as well as a SX install. So .. I can help with
this by getting some pictures.
I'll
Is Jonathan Schwartz going to repeat the License
mistake (made
with OpenOffice) with OpenSolaris?
Sure looks like it, doesn't it?
While I believe Jonathan had some truly reovlutionary ideas, like open sourcing
Solaris, this is starting to turn into marketing insanity.
I studied the GPL v3
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, UNIX admin wrote:
Yes, this may very well turn out to be the case. The GPL v3 license
expressly states that, when a product with a different license is
bundled with a GPL'd product, the whole MUST be licensed under the
GPL.
That's not true.
These are the old GPLv2
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 10:15 -0800, UNIX admin wrote:
While I believe Jonathan had some truly reovlutionary ideas, like open
sourcing Solaris, this is starting to turn into marketing insanity.
To be honest, I think you /sometimes/ have to take what Jonathan blogs
about with a pinch of salt...
Darren J Moffat wrote:
On Fri, 2006-01-27 at 12:37, Stephen Potter wrote:
How much of the WAN boot code is directly in software and can be released?
Other than what is in the OBP itself the code is already
on opensolaris.org. There are some missing bits form the package
and install
Zhisong Jin wrote:
new to solaria 10, I would appreciate somebody could help clarify this
1. is there a upgrade path from solaris 9 to solaris 10 ? any tips and
traps? any documentations?
Boot the install media, it'll offer the opportunity to upgrade if you
have the space and so on. It
NexentaOS (elatte) Alpha 2 is now available for download at:
http://www.gnusolaris.org/Download
This is a major release, with 84 bugs fixed and 829 packages added since Alpha
1.
In particular, Alpha 2 provides:
* New Installer.
The new Installer is ncurses/dialog based, user-friendly, and
In metastat comand out I have output below. What can I do ? The advice of command says that I have to invoke metasync d10, etc.Is need umount the disk before to invoke metasynk ?Thanks,# metastat | more
d10: Mirror Submirror 0: d11 State: Needs maintenance Submirror 1: d12 State: Needs
On 1/29/06, Bill Rushmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have posted a draft article on installing Solaris on VMware on my
blog. I would really appreciate any feedback any of you might have.
http://brushmore.blogspot.com/2006/01/installing-opensolaris-on-vmware-draft.html
I am going to start
The OpenSolaris Content Project is open:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/content/
Sign up to content-discuss here:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/content/discussions/
Jim
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
On 1/26/06, Jim Grisanzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thanks for all the discussion and interest around this project. If anyone is
specifically interested in being a co-lead on the project, let me know. I'll
start writing up some ideas for the page. I'll let you know when we can open
it along
Hi,
I am interested in being a co-lead, and/or reviewer,
and/or occasional contributor. I have been following
the discussion about an articles project. I am
concerned about quality and making sure articles
are up-to-date.
I don't think there is a good way to control quality, but
I would hope
On Monday 30 January 2006 02:37 pm, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I am interested in being a co-lead, and/or reviewer,
and/or occasional contributor. I have been following
the discussion about an articles project. I am
concerned about quality and making sure articles
are up-to-date.
I
Thanks for a wonderful OpenSolaris distro. i only have
two concerns right now:
1. Mesa 6.4.1
2. LiveCD ?
I'm concerned that Mesa 6.4.1 is not at least in
Nexenta-unstable, moreso that it is not on this CD
either. I was hoping to evaluate Xorg 6.9/7.0 and the
latest Freedesktop work but it seems
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 15:36 -0800, ken mays wrote:
Thanks for a wonderful OpenSolaris distro. i only have
two concerns right now:
1. Mesa 6.4.1
If you do not see it at http://packages.ubnutu.com than we don't have it
yet... We are planning to move on Xorg 7.0 in the next few months or so
as
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 17:15, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Things are progressing well on the screen shots finally. I lost my
NT4 PDC but gained a Solaris 10 virtual machine. More than a fair
trade I guess.
http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/stuff/VMWare/VMWare_006.jpg
I am still grabbing
On 1/30/06, Bill Rushmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 2006-01-30 at 17:15, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Things are progressing well on the screen shots finally. I lost my
NT4 PDC but gained a Solaris 10 virtual machine. More than a fair
trade I guess.
Build 31 should be available soon, as well.
is there any update on this release?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 1/30/06, Peter Lees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Build 31 should be available soon, as well.
it has been a week ... maybe some lawyer got in the way ?
Dennis
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I would just like to make the general point that I think th eestablishment of a
content project for OpenSolaris is a fantastic step in the right direction.
There is a whole load of Solaris knowledge out there on the web in blogs and so
on, and it would be really useful to have somewhere where
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Dennis Clarke wrote:
So .. let's assume infinite memory and zero response time IO with near
infinite CPU speed and we hit some internal limit in the VMWare
product at 96 or so ? Or is it possible to get a massive Galaxy box
and install RHEL ( or what? ESX on top of ?
On 1/30/06, Bill Rushmore [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 30 Jan 2006, Dennis Clarke wrote:
So .. let's assume infinite memory and zero response time IO with near
infinite CPU speed and we hit some internal limit in the VMWare
product at 96 or so ? Or is it possible to get a massive
Hey Jim,
Just a very small point wrt:
Naming Services Community
* Proposed 1/20/06 by Anup Sekhar
* Community consensus: yes
* CAB vote: no +/- vote yet
* Opening date: not currently scheduled
On 1/20, John Beck suggested that this should in fact be
named (sic) Name Services Community, and
That's not true.
These are the old GPLv2 'aggregation' / 'system
libraries' argument
held against Nexenta by some. Groundless even
according to Eben
Moglen, the FSF chief counsel. The v3 draft has
modifications to
explicitely make these 'issues' in v2 clear to all.
This is what I am
To be honest, I think you /sometimes/ have to take
what Jonathan blogs
about with a pinch of salt... part of his job (and
hence part of the
reason for his blog's existence) is to get people
talking about Sun, and
Sun's software in particular. And if there's one
surefire way to get
the
39 matches
Mail list logo
