Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
integrating more GNU
Hi,
now, as I'm back to Germany,I've got access to my
machine at home with ZFS, so I could test my binary
patch for multi-threading with tar on a ZFS
filesystems.
Results look like this:
.tar, small files (e.g. gcc source tree), speedup:
x8
.tar.gz, small files (gcc sources tree),
Well, the GNU/UNESCO list has 5300 packages.
The FSF/UNESCO directory has 5300 packages. Of these,
only 365 are GNU packages (last time I counted).
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
I guess what I'm asking is: what is the rationale for
/usr/gnu?
See:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=20197tstart=
and the thread referenced in Laca's original post. I don't think it
makes sense to repeat those discussions here.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Well, consolidations are useful for software that has the same build
procedures. In other words, unless there's a workload issue, I don't
see anything wrong w/ the JDS team delivering Python, libpng, libogg,
etc.
I think JDS would continue to deliver these pkgs, and new pkgs that
get added
On 2/23/07, Kuldip Oberoi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Here's the link:
http://sun.com/solaris/freemedia
Basically, it was so successful, we quickly hit a supply issue as well.
It has taken longer than we would have like to be addressed (internal
funding, manufacturing, etc.) and we could have
Dermot McCluskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, the GNU/UNESCO list has 5300 packages.
The FSF/UNESCO directory has 5300 packages. Of these,
only 365 are GNU packages (last time I counted).
And the FSF/UNESCO directory includes cdrtools e.g. and my ved.
Both are listed as GPLd but ved ist
On 2/16/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Girts Zeltins wrote:
Sorry, but I am talking again about CDE.
I want to know if founded CDE errors will be reported to bug database, will
they be fixed? Is there any chance to see them fixed?
If they are serious bugs, then they may be
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:10 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
I'm nor sure I see the point of exchanging /usr/foo for /usr/bar.
I mean what problem will /usr/gnu solve that /usr/sfw doesn't?
And doesn't that name preclude open source software that doesn't
use a GNU license?
You are asking
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 23:05 -0700, Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
Ideally, desktop should be desktop, X should be X, ON should be OS
and networking.
There is also no reason why all the GNU tools should follow the
GNOME schedule, which JDS currently does.
This is actually a big beef at my
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 2/16/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Girts Zeltins wrote:
Sorry, but I am talking again about CDE.
I want to know if founded CDE errors will be reported to bug
database, will they be fixed? Is there any chance to see them fixed?
If they are serious bugs,
Laszlo (Laca) Peter writes:
It's not a workload issue. We can handle more packages (as long as
our nightly build completes in 24 hours ;) But it doesn't seem
logical.
It does seem logical to me: the consolidation with the closest ties to
a given bit of software is the one that delivers it.
On 2/23/07, Ghee Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 2/16/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Girts Zeltins wrote:
Sorry, but I am talking again about CDE.
I want to know if founded CDE errors will be reported to bug
database, will they be fixed? Is there any
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 19:08 -0800, Bart Smaalders wrote:
...
I agree that a pkg-build based open source build consolidation is
a great idea. I see no reason to limit it to stuff from GNU, though.
Well, the GNU/UNESCO list has 5300 packages.
Dermot McCluskey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, the GNU/UNESCO list has 5300 packages.
The FSF/UNESCO directory has 5300 packages. Of
these,
only 365 are GNU packages (last time I counted).
And the FSF/UNESCO directory includes cdrtools e.g.
and my ved.
Both are listed as GPLd
Eric Boutilier writes:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
Well, the GNU/UNESCO list has 5300 packages. But I guess you're
right, there is no reason to exclude packages because they are not
on the list. How about defining the universe as packages with an
OSI approved open
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 2/23/07, Ghee Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 2/16/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Girts Zeltins wrote:
Sorry, but I am talking again about CDE.
I want to know if founded CDE errors will be reported to bug
database, will they be fixed?
James Carlson wrote:
So, unless there's a clear need for a new consolidation, and complex
_technical_ ties between the packages delivered there, consider this a
-0 from me. I still need to see a proposal that defines what those
natural groupings are.
Putting this as a separate OpenSolaris
Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 19:08 -0800, Bart Smaalders wrote:
...
I agree that a pkg-build based open source build consolidation is
a great idea. I see no reason to limit it to stuff from GNU, though.
Well, the GNU/UNESCO
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 10:42 -0500, James Carlson wrote:
Laszlo (Laca) Peter writes:
It's not a workload issue. We can handle more packages (as long as
our nightly build completes in 24 hours ;) But it doesn't seem
logical.
It does seem logical to me: the consolidation with the closest
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, James Carlson wrote:
Eric Boutilier writes:
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
Well, the GNU/UNESCO list has 5300 packages. But I guess you're
right, there is no reason to exclude packages because they are not
on the list. How about defining the universe as
Alan Coopersmith writes:
James Carlson wrote:
So, unless there's a clear need for a new consolidation, and complex
_technical_ ties between the packages delivered there, consider this a
-0 from me. I still need to see a proposal that defines what those
natural groupings are.
Putting
Josh Hurst wrote:
WIll Sun FIX dtksh? Both experts in this field - David Korn and Roland
Mainz have complained about dtksh being utterly broken because Sun
used an unofficial alpha code as ksh basis.
It depends on how you define broken. Trying to be precise, several
potential definitions of
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 08:31 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Putting this as a separate OpenSolaris project does make sense to me
though, since someone looking to fix a bug in the delivery of
/usr/gnu/bin/ls isn't going to think they should look under the
Desktop community for it.
Projects
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 08:33 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
+1 on OSI-approved being a better boundary than the (rather arbitrary)
GNU/UNESCO list.
Seems too wide a boundary, since it would then include everything in
every other part of OpenSolaris too.
The point wasn't to include
Laszlo (Laca) Peter writes:
In other words, if your consolidation depends on foo-1.2.3 and you
need to upgrade to foo-1.2.4, things are simple if you can do that as
an atomic 'putback' or 'commit' to a single consolidation's
repository. You (and your customers) are in a world of hurt if
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 11:39 -0500, James Carlson wrote:
Yes, but the original proposal was for a new consolidation as well in
order to get these things out of JDS.
https://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=24856tstart=0
I proposed a project and had consolidation with a question
Hi Laszlo,
A bit OT, but it's glib 2.0, and it really is part of the GNOME
project. The reason why you need it for HAL is because HAL uses
dbus (both of them are freedesktop.org projects) and dbus uses
glib.
I guess I brought it up as an example of what we run into as a
systemic packaging
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 11:52 -0500, James Carlson wrote:
I doubt it. These sound like the most trivial of fast-tracks to
me. Most are probably closed-approved-automatic.
You mean if the fast-track only deals with the name space and not
with the technology itself?
No. That's not
Laszlo (Laca) Peter writes:
This covers the case where we already have N of something, and N+1
comes along. Provided that N+1 follows all the norms for such
things (it isn't deliberately doing something 'unusual'), it can be
self-reviewed.
Hmm... I don't think I can word the initial
Josh Hurst wrote:
WIll Sun FIX dtksh?
If customers escalate bugs, yes. I know it annoys Roland, but
there aren't actually a whole lot of dtksh users out there reporting
bugs on it.
Both experts in this field - David Korn and Roland
Mainz have complained about dtksh being utterly broken
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-22 18:29]:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
integrating more GNU packages into
Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
Hi Laszlo,
A bit OT, but it's glib 2.0, and it really is part of the GNOME
project. The reason why you need it for HAL is because HAL uses
dbus (both of them are freedesktop.org projects) and dbus uses
glib.
I guess I brought it up as an example of what we run
Hi,
I just browsed Solaris RDS code. I was surprised to see that the code copies
data between user space and kernel. It seems to me that wastes one of the most
useful features of Infiniband - RDMA. Is there a reason that RDS can not do
zero-copy? How does Solaris RDS implementation compare to
Hi Alan,
I do apologize for the typo. I do mean glib. It is part of the GTK
project, but its used by quite a few things that don't need GTK. On
Solaris eject is a key example.
-J
On 2/23/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason J. W. Williams wrote:
Hi Laszlo,
A bit OT, but it's
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 11:52 -0500, James Carlson wrote:
I doubt it. These sound like the most trivial of fast-tracks to
me. Most are probably closed-approved-automatic.
You mean if the fast-track only deals with the name space and not
with the technology itself?
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-22 18:29]:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps
Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-22 18:29]:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 09:36 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
I'm puzzled why it wouldn't be appropriate to just adjust SFW to take
either classic-SFW or pkgbuild spec files as part of its build
process.
It would be very appropriate, but I doubt it would be just an
adjustment.
There's a
Jason J. W. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
la Linux distros (http://packages.gentoo.org/search/?sstring=glib). In
this case, would be nice if SUNWgtk depended on SUNWglibc2 instead of
just munging the libraries in.
Do you really propose to use a C-library that is not fully functional
for
Hi Joerg,
As corrected earlier, it was a typo. Meant glib2. I believe I did link
to glib though.
-J
On 2/23/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jason J. W. Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
la Linux distros (http://packages.gentoo.org/search/?sstring=glib). In
this case, would be
* Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-23 09:56]:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-22 18:29]:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 09:36 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
I'm puzzled why it wouldn't be appropriate to just adjust SFW to take
either classic-SFW or pkgbuild spec files as part of its build
process.
It would be very appropriate, but I doubt
* Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-22 18:39]:
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
integrating
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-23 09:56]:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-22 18:29]:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 10:59 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
That is, why not just merge CCD, SFE, and SFW into a freeware
consolidation that delivers appropriately to /usr, /usr/gnu, and
elsewhere, and allow multiple build approaches?
Knowing both build approaches, I simply don't
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-23 11:31]:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 10:59 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
That is, why not just merge CCD, SFE, and SFW into a freeware
consolidation that delivers appropriately to /usr, /usr/gnu, and
elsewhere, and allow multiple build
A few days ago I was having a meeting with a couple of (traditional Chinese)
Linux developers/executives who are making their living bidding on government
projects to help schools and governmental agencies at various levels to move
their desktops and servers from Windows to open-source
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-23 11:31]:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 10:59 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
That is, why not just merge CCD, SFE, and SFW into a freeware
consolidation that delivers appropriately to /usr, /usr/gnu, and
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 11:51 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
Building against an alternate root has some serious disadvantages:
- you can't be really sure that the build doesn't pick up stuff
from the real root
- you need to force autotools to work in a way they weren't designed
to and
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:23 -0600, Eric Boutilier wrote:
Help, I must be missing something: SFW make-built components can't
currently be dependent on components outside the SFW make system? I
guess I thought they could...
You can't build a sandwich of SFW - spec - SFW - spec without
* Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2007-02-23 12:22]:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 11:51 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
Building against an alternate root has some serious disadvantages:
- you can't be really sure that the build doesn't pick up stuff
from the real root
- you need to
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:23 -0600, Eric Boutilier wrote:
Help, I must be missing something: SFW make-built components can't
currently be dependent on components outside the SFW make system? I
guess I thought they could...
You can't build a sandwich of SFW - spec -
Richard Lowe wrote:
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 14:23 -0600, Eric Boutilier wrote:
Help, I must be missing something: SFW make-built components can't
currently be dependent on components outside the SFW make system? I
guess I thought they could...
You can't build a
From [EMAIL PROTECTED] Fri Feb 23 12:43:46 2007
You can't build a sandwich of SFW - spec - SFW - spec without
potentially breaking something. For example samba (in SFW) linked
against gnutls (in JDS) by mistake and when JDS updated gnutls,
it broke samba. If they were built together, this
Due to some changes planned in the way install images are built
for Solaris Nevada, we've been having an internal discussion this
week about whether it would be okay to drop CD images for the
future Nevada builds (which the community sees as Solaris Express:
Community Edition) and only have DVD
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 12:32 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
Okay. So what's wrong with starting to build a spec file base
separately and when SFW is ready to use them, we merge the 2
together?
If changes need to be made to pkgbuild for this to happen, I'm
happy do so.
It depends on your
I run Solaris Nevada on two machines: a W1100z with a DVD drive, and an Ultra
10 that only has a CDROM. I could do a netinstall, but I also appreciate the
CD iso's.
Brett
ps. I'm guessing you are going to get a lot of people that either due to not
having DVD burners or not having DVD drives
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Due to some changes planned in the way install images are built
for Solaris Nevada, we've been having an internal discussion this
week about whether it would be okay to drop CD images for the
future Nevada builds (which the community sees as Solaris
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Unfortunately, Sun did not sell DVD drives for the v20z.
Are there many v20z owners who don't have another machine to netinstall
from? I'm much more concerned about community members with a single
Ultra 10, or older PC without a DVD burner than any rack-mounted server.
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Unfortunately, Sun did not sell DVD drives for the v20z.
Are there many v20z owners who don't have another machine to netinstall
from? I'm much more concerned about community members with a single
Ultra 10, or older PC
Hi!
General note: The email below contains some of the old history of dtksh
in Solaris and some background why the ksh93-integration project was
created. I would prefer to take this as a page in a history book and
_not_ as opportunity to come up with the old flamewars about dtksh,
support
I'm trying to get the comand line expanding to work
For example:
if I type
ls utl*
utl_control.ctrl utl_control.par
It will expand all files/dirs that start with utl
I had this setup at another job, but can't remember how we did it. We could
hit the Esc twice, and it would expand out on the
ps
PID TTY TIME CMD
13228 pts/3 0:00 ksh
and I've added this to my .profile
export EDITOR=vi
stty -a
speed 38400 baud; rows 40; columns 145;
intr = ^C; quit = ^\; erase = ^?; kill = ^U; eof = ^D; eol = undef; eol2 =
undef; swtch = undef; start = ^Q; stop = ^S; susp = ^Z;
dsusp
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 12:32 -0800, Stephen Hahn wrote:
Okay. So what's wrong with starting to build a spec file base
separately and when SFW is ready to use them, we merge the 2
together?
If changes need to be made to pkgbuild for this to happen,
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Would you have a problem with DVD-only images for SX:CE? Do you have
systems you use for OpenSolaris that don't have DVD drives and that
you can't netinstall from another system or Live Upgrade from a mounted
image?
Speaking personally, no I
I've Added set -o vi my your .profile
Still not working
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Use bash.
Sherry
On Fri, Feb 23, 2007 at 02:44:12PM -0800, Mike wrote:
I'm trying to get the comand line expanding to work
For example:
if I type
ls utl*
utl_control.ctrl utl_control.par
It will expand all files/dirs that start with utl
I had this setup at another job, but can't
I have used this feature in ksh before for many years. But I'm unable to get
it working here. I would rather stay in the same shell that everyone is using
here so that we all are on the same page. Since I'm the new guy, I don't want
to make too many changes. I'm already requesting to get
On 2/23/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Would you have a problem with DVD-only images for SX:CE? Do you have
systems you use for OpenSolaris that don't have DVD drives and that
you can't netinstall from another system or Live Upgrade from
just for kicks, I tried bash, it didn't work there either
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I would think that build recipes
are far more useful. Be they in any machine-readable format.
Definitely. And in the same vein they are more conducive to
the appliance foundary concept too -- e.g. the kind of
thing that Jason Williams said (earlier in this thread) that
his company needs.
On 2/23/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Ignacio Marambio Catán wrote:
On 2/23/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Would you have a problem with DVD-only images for SX:CE? Do you have
systems you use for OpenSolaris that don't
Hi Alan,
We've removed all of our v20z's so its not an issue for us...but if we
still had them it would be painful in extreme circumstances. The ILOM
and ELOM both support remote ISO mounting, and the basic BMC on the
v20z doesn't. So in an emergency you're stuck with CDs.
Best Regards,
Jason
Getting rid of CDs is not a good idea at least for a while. I deal with
users from around the world everyday and there are many who do not have
either DVD reading or writing capabilities. (Some don't have CD burning
hardware either, but that is getting to be rare.) Surely many of these
will
What's the functional difference to the user between getting a dvd
image that's split into 5 parts and 5 iso images first of all? if the
dvd image is going to be split anyways, why not make each image able
to be burnt independently? With the present dvd image split up into
5 files, I see no
On 2/23/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Due to some changes planned in the way install images are built
for Solaris Nevada, we've been having an internal discussion this
week about whether it would be okay to drop CD images for the
future Nevada builds (which the community sees as
James Dickens wrote:
On 2/23/07, *Alan Coopersmith* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Due to some changes planned in the way install images are built
for Solaris Nevada, we've been having an internal discussion this
week about whether it would be okay to drop CD
We've got some statistics which show downloaders seem to prefer
let's see the numbers.
DVD images over CD at about a 2:1 ratio - but we don't know if those
downloading CD images could use DVD images instead.
The data you have in hand clearly says that you have a pile of people
that do
Dennis Clarke wrote:
The data you have in hand clearly says that you have a pile of people
that do actually download the CDROM images. This is the same as the large
pile of people out there running Solaris 8. I don't think we can simply
shut the door on them without fair warning. Well, some
Thanks for your feedback - the people proposing this are taking it
into consideration, and the current proposal was not approved.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
February 2007 Selection: LSARC Chair
Due to some changes planned in the way install images
are built
for Solaris Nevada, we've been having an internal
discussion this
week about whether it would be okay to drop CD images
for the
future Nevada builds (which the community sees as
Solaris Express:
Community Edition) and only
Due to some changes planned in the way install
images
are built
for Solaris Nevada, we've been having an internal
discussion this
week about whether it would be okay to drop CD
images
for the
future Nevada builds (which the community sees as
Solaris Express:
Community Edition)
Use the Tab key instead of the Escape key. I have never used the Escape key
personally, but the Tab key has always worked for the auto-completion feature.
-Shawn
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Ignacio Marambio Catán wrote:
On 2/23/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Would you have a problem with DVD-only images for SX:CE? Do you have
systems you use for OpenSolaris that don't have DVD drives and that
you can't netinstall from
Dennis Clarke wrote:
The data you have in hand clearly says that you have a pile of people
that do actually download the CDROM images. This is the same as the large
pile of people out there running Solaris 8. I don't think we can simply
shut the door on them without fair warning. Well,
It sounds like the answer is probably along the lines of
don't do this right now; come back in 6 to 12 months and
ask again...
-John
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
87 matches
Mail list logo
