On Tuesday 20 March 2007 11:11 am, Matt Ingenthron wrote:
Agreed, and at some level or another, this project will just be
packaging what the community around the given component develops, bug
for bug complete. I suspect users will understand that already, though
it doesn't obviate the need to
Is it possible to look IPTV with Opensolaris.
(wwitv.com)
Martti
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tuesday 20 March 2007 08:17 pm, P SRINIVASA RAO wrote:
its very nice, to see u here, I am also new to solaris, now I am assured to
get a stable version of solaris, under your supervision.
Ouch, many of my colleagues will most likely be hurt by that comment.
Considering that Solaris is
Martti Hamunen wrote:
Is it possible to look IPTV with Opensolaris.
(wwitv.com)
It depends which format is being streamed. If real player can play it,
you should be OK.
Ian
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Martti Hamunen wrote:
Is it possible to look IPTV with Opensolaris.
(wwitv.com)
Martti
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I will assume you are referring to the
On Tuesday 20 March 2007 11:43 pm, James Mansion wrote:
Shuttleworth has illustrated how much value there is in
strong mangement and leadership, and my concern is
that by trying to join the 'developer lead' ranks of
'just show me the code' cowboys Solaris will lose.
You don't give Solaris any
Just installed SXCE 59 on a nVidia/Athlon64 system. (I know there are quite a
few problems, but I wanted to check this build out mainly to see whether the
Chinese locale problems have been corrected). Keep getting video out of range
message-- thus no screen. Booted into failsafe mode, tried to
The next big bang may be: Jörg Schilling is joining
Debian.
Everything seems possible ;)
Somehow I seriously doubt that. Jörg showed Debian on number of occassions how
crappy the Linux code was, especially the SCSI implementation, delivered
patches... instead of embracing him with open arms,
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, UNIX admin wrote:
The next big bang may be: Jörg Schilling is joining
Debian.
Everything seems possible ;)
Somehow I seriously doubt that. Jörg showed Debian on number of occassions how
crappy the Linux code was, especially the SCSI implementation, delivered
patches...
Just installed SXCE 59 on a nVidia/Athlon64 system.
(I know there are quite a few problems, but I wanted
to check this build out mainly to see whether the
Chinese locale problems have been corrected). Keep
getting video out of range message-- thus no
screen. Booted into failsafe mode, tried
Now back to my main issue. The derogatory language associated with
the traditional Chinese locale has not been corrected. I went back to
Build 55b, it was OK there. Apparently someone sneaked in this
change in Build 56. As it stands now, Solaris Express will be banned
in Taiwan ( Sun will be
嗯，买了Solaris Internals 2nd 正在看，确实很有用，不知Solaris Performance and Tools
国内什么时候出，去年好像听说ERI在翻译？
This message posted from opensolaris.org___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Ryan Chang wrote:
嗯，买了Solaris Internals 2nd 正在看，确实很有用，不知Solaris Performance and Tools
国内什么时候出，去年好像听说ERI在翻译？
Hi Ryan,
Thanks for your concerns.
The Chinese edition of Solaris Internals 2nd will publish by this June
in Mainland China. Please keep tuned with the book list on
Jason Ozolins writes:
Blastwave package upgrade == package remove followed by package install. Not
like, say, RPM's handing of upgrades at all. The service stops while the
upgrade happens. Not to mention, some of our config files got creamed (this
is really the packager's problem rather
Hi all,
I installed opensolaris SunOS unknown 5.11 snv_59 i86pc i386 i86pc
everything seems to work except when I try register the update manager seem to
freeze. I checked the user and password everything is correct and should work.
Pardon me for any mistakes since I'm new to Solaris.
This
On Mar 21, 2007, at 04:46, Artem Kachitchkine wrote:
Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Tuesday 20 March 2007 02:59 pm, Nicolas Linkert wrote:
That's really good news.
The next big bang may be: Jörg Schilling is joining Debian.
Everything seems possible ;)
Ah, now it's all making sense...I did note he
James Carlson wrote:
Jason Ozolins writes:
Blastwave package upgrade == package remove followed by package install. Not
like, say, RPM's handing of upgrades at all. The service stops while the
upgrade happens. Not to mention, some of our config files got creamed (this is
really the
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Monday 19 March 2007 05:13 pm, David Lloyd wrote:
Joe,
Indeed, apt-get for Solaris would be quite useful :P
Isn't that Nexenta? Had to say it.
I don't want the Ubuntu Userland on an OpenSolaris code base. I'd prefer
a distribution as close to
Moinak Ghosh writes:
A Solaris upgrade (as opposed to patches) uses packages. The
difference is that the upgrade process uses SVr4 'admin' files when
necessary. Blastwave could do this with instance=overwrite, and
probably should, but it doesn't.
But overwriting with new
Jason Ozolins writes:
Blastwave package upgrade == package remove followed by package install.
Not like, say, RPM's handing of upgrades at all. The service stops while
the upgrade happens. Not to mention, some of our config files got creamed
(this is really the packager's problem rather
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Jason Ozolins writes:
Blastwave package upgrade == package remove followed by package install.
Not like, say, RPM's handing of upgrades at all. The service stops while
the upgrade happens. Not to mention, some of our config files got creamed
(this is really the
Yes; that's what the 'package history' mechanism is about in Solaris
upgrades.
It is more complicated than I suggested, and I think there's likely an
RFE or two buried in here.
In any event, it's not really why we use patches. Patches represent
an atomic change to objects in multiple
Dennis Clarke writes:
So now we have some new binaries, some data files that have not changed,
some binaries that are the same again.
Patch or Package ?
It can be either.
The current method we employ is to remove the whole collection and use the
standards compliant SVR4 tools to achieve
Martin Bochnig writes:
Everyone who thinks he can improve something should go ahead and JOIN
BLASTWAVE.
Or build up his own stack.
Rather than complaining on public lists.
If we can't even discuss the issues on a public list, how exactly do
you propose that we end up working together on
Dennis Clarke writes:
The other issue that arises here is that a patch has a dependency tree also.
If I have a package that requires only a few small changes then a patch
makes sense. If I then make another release with a few more changes then we
have yet another patch. However these patches
Dennis Clarke writes:
The other issue that arises here is that a patch has a dependency tree
also.
If I have a package that requires only a few small changes then a patch
makes sense. If I then make another release with a few more changes then
we
have yet another patch. However these
James Carlson wrote:
Martin Bochnig writes:
Everyone who thinks he can improve something should go ahead and JOIN
BLASTWAVE.
Or build up his own stack.
Rather than complaining on public lists.
If we can't even discuss the issues on a public list, how exactly do
you propose that we
Dennis Clarke writes:
Do you feel or even think that we can come up with a way to maintain the
contents database file as well as perhaps design a better way to roll out
software packages?
Yes.
I think it'd be helpful to have a check pkgmap diffs mode for
pkgadd, so that can remove stray
James Carlson wrote:
And btw, I already did say something to that topic, at least a bit:
http://www.guug.de/veranstaltungen/osdevcon2007/abstracts.html#4_4_1
http://www.guug.de/veranstaltungen/osdevcon2007/slides/marTux___OSDevCon2007.pdf
And Damien Carbery has held a beautiful talk about
The same happens for me and I think others as well. Blame it on a bad build, I
think :)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I had a problem with video on NV_59 also. I fixed it by downloading and
installing the driver from Nvidia. Can you please provide a link to the svccfg
command per Alanc's tutorial.
Thanks,
Ron Halstead
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
Martin Bochnig writes:
http://www.guug.de/veranstaltungen/osdevcon2007/slides/marTux___OSDevCon2007.pdf
[...]
http://www.osdevcon.org/2007/slides/pkgbuild-osdevcon07.pdf
We were talking about in-place updates of packages, not the means by
which packages are constructed. I don't see in either
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 08:18 -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Mon, 19 Mar 2007, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Monday 19 March 2007 05:13 pm, David Lloyd wrote:
Joe,
Indeed, apt-get for Solaris would be quite useful :P
Isn't that Nexenta? Had to say it.
I don't want the Ubuntu Userland on an
James Carlson wrote:
Martin Bochnig writes:
http://www.guug.de/veranstaltungen/osdevcon2007/slides/marTux___OSDevCon2007.pdf
[...]
http://www.osdevcon.org/2007/slides/pkgbuild-osdevcon07.pdf
We were talking about in-place updates of packages, not the means by
which
Dennis Clarke writes:
Dennis Clarke writes:
Do you feel or even think that we can come up with a way to maintain the
contents database file as well as perhaps design a better way to roll out
software packages?
Yes.
Excellent .. me too. :-)
However I can not write up a
What if we do something like this:
1. Add parameters to pkgmaps going forward that define certain files as
configuration files. These files would normally not be touched during a
package upgrade.
2. Add parameters to the pkgmaps that highlight SMF manifests.
3. When a newer version of a package
Hi.
The ARC Cases for the WebStack NG Project have been submitted for review (and
hopefully approval), and i would like to ask our community's input regarding two
important questions which have come up during our discussions:
1. Should the initial components released for this project include
Ron Halstead wrote:
I had a problem with video on NV_59 also. I fixed it by downloading and installing the
driver from Nvidia. Can you please provide a link to the svccfg command per Alanc's
tutorial.
The svccfg command is only needed if you haven't installed the
new driver from nvidia. It
W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
Now back to my main issue. The derogatory language associated with the traditional
Chinese locale has not been corrected. I went back to Build 55b, it was OK there.
Apparently someone sneaked in this change in Build 56. As it stands now, Solaris Express will be
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Stefan Teleman wrote:
1. Should the initial components released for this project include the 64-bit
bits in the initial Integration ?
Desirable, but not mandatory.
2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in
/usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_
Martin Bochnig wrote:
James Carlson wrote:
Man, okay.
I didn't hit the nail.
Let me finally sllep now, good night!
Regards,
Martin Bochnig
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Hi all,
New man pages for nv_61 are available, we have released in bzip2 archive format
AND gzip archive format based on your feedback. 62 new files and 300 changed
files for this build.
http://dlc.sun.com/osol/man/downloads/current/
Thanks,
Michelle
This message posted from
On 21/03/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Stefan Teleman wrote:
2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in
/usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_ the existing Apache 2.0.x. Valid arguments
have been made pro, and against this approach, with
Shawn Walker wrote:
On 21/03/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Overwriting the /usr/apache2 that comes on the Solaris media is a no-no,
in my opinion, and /usr/apache2.2 just pollutes the /usr namespace even
more than it is already. IMHO, the correct place for this is under /opt.
I have
Stefan,
2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in
/usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_ the existing Apache 2.0.x. Valid
arguments have been made pro, and against this approach, with the suggestion
that Apache 2.2.4 installs in /usr/apache2.2, thereby preserving the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stefan,
2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in
/usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_ the existing Apache 2.0.x. Valid
arguments have been made pro, and against this approach, with the
suggestion that Apache 2.2.4 installs in
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Stefan Teleman wrote:
Please keep in mind that, there are two additional locations for Apache, in
addition to the location of the actual binaries [/{usr,opt}/apache2]:
/etc/apache2
/var/apache2
These additional two locations *must* exist.
Right, if the Apache on the
I had a problem with video on NV_59 also. I fixed it
by downloading and installing the driver from Nvidia.
Can you please provide a link to the svccfg command
per Alanc's tutorial.
Thanks,
Ron Halstead
First, to boot into the 32-bit kernel (per Casper's instruction):
change the grub
Rich Teer wrote:
Overwriting the /usr/apache2 that comes on the Solaris media is a no-no,
in my opinion, and /usr/apache2.2 just pollutes the /usr namespace even
more than it is already. IMHO, the correct place for this is under /opt.
I have no strong feelings either way, but I would prefer
On 21/03/07, Stefan Teleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
On 21/03/07, Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Overwriting the /usr/apache2 that comes on the Solaris media is a no-no,
in my opinion, and /usr/apache2.2 just pollutes the /usr namespace even
more than it is already.
On 21/03/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Rich Teer wrote:
Overwriting the /usr/apache2 that comes on the Solaris media is a no-no,
in my opinion, and /usr/apache2.2 just pollutes the /usr namespace even
more than it is already. IMHO, the correct place for this is under /opt.
I
I agree completely. Using /etc/opt/apache2 is confusing and seems overly
complicated to me personally. If we assume that the whole concept behind
the web stack project is ease of use, I think that the whole point is
being missed by adding this much complication to it.
Shawn Walker wrote:
On
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
These ARC cases are for integration to Solaris, so /opt is inappropriate,
and /usr is correct.
Oh in that case, I agree. *Provided* that the CoolStack stuff will replace
the current stuff on the Solaris distribution media.
--
Rich Teer, SCSA,
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 08:18 -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote:
But that just brings us back to Joe's original point:
Isn't that Nexenta?
Note the Nexenta project is by all rights and intentions (Erast, correct me
if I'm wrong) a project of and by the
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:
I never liked the /etc/opt/apache2, and so on that some distributions
did as sometimes it wasn't clear which apache2 read what configuration
from where, it also made greps by lazy admins (like me) painful ;)
Agreed, which is why the docs actually
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 12:22 -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 08:18 -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote:
But that just brings us back to Joe's original point:
Isn't that Nexenta?
Note the Nexenta project is by all rights and
Stefan Teleman wrote:
2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in
/usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_ the existing Apache 2.0.x.
Having recently gone down the path of installing/upgrading Apache
on OS-b56, the current scheme is confusing at best. With 2
versions
[responding to my own post - sorry]
John Plocher wrote:
Stefan Teleman wrote:
2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in
/usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_ the existing Apache 2.0.x.
As much as I would like to be able to run both
old and new side-by-side, it isn't
John Plocher wrote:
I should have been clearer - I like this overwrite proposal (as
opposed to a the counter of having /usr/apache, /usr/apache2 and
/usr/apache2.2), as long as the svc manifest names are the same
as used by the current apache2 installation (svc:/network/http:apache)
and not,
These ARC cases are for integration to Solaris, so /opt is inappropriate,
and /usr is correct.
Oh in that case, I agree. *Provided* that the CoolStack stuff will replace
the current stuff on the Solaris distribution media.
Just for clarification, the integration that Stefan is working on
The ARC Cases for the WebStack NG Project have been
submitted for review (and hopefully approval), and i would
like to ask our community's input regarding two important
questions which have come up during our discussions:
1. Should the initial components released for this project
Correct. Existing configuration files will *not* be
overwritten.
How do you propose handling Apache modules? The module API changed between 2.0
and 2.2, and it is not possible to load 2.0 modules under 2.2 .
Cheers
Andrew.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Martin Bochnig wrote:
###
###
##
## Cosmic thanks and regards to Menno Lageman !!
##
Octave Orgeron wrote:
What if we do something like this:
[details ellided]
At the risk of repeating myself for about the 50th time in the past
year, I'd encourage these packaging-related discussions to occur with
the community list specifically devoted to them,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] Those in
On Wednesday 21 March 2007 09:28 am, Stefan Teleman wrote:
2. The currently proposed Apache 2.2.4 integration installs Apache in
/usr/apache2, thereby _overwriting_ the existing Apache 2.0.x. Valid
arguments have been made pro, and against this approach, with the
suggestion that Apache 2.2.4
On Wednesday 21 March 2007 05:59 am, Simon Phipps wrote:
Now, y'all boys realize what this leads to. Simon joining MSFT.
Don't make me say it! Wait, I just said it... Owh.
They stopped calling a year or so ago...
That does give you some credence, they stopped calling me close to 20 years
Eric Boutilier wrote:
At the risk of repeating myself for about the 50th time in the past year, I'd
encourage these packaging-related discussions to occur with the community
list specifically devoted to them, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Those in
the community with ideas can actually start working on
Alan DuBoff wrote:
Stefan,
Your suggestion above might be the best.
The other thing is, what about having 2 seperate directories, keeping the old
and adding the new, and using a symlink to point to the desired version.
This was one of the other suggestions made on the ARC discuss list. My
On 3/19/07, Dale Ghent [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 19, 2007, at 11:53 AM, Ian Murdock wrote:
Hi all,
Hi, Ian, welcome to the community!
Thanks! (SOrry for the delay weighing in--it's been a bit hectic these
past few days..)
You laid out a general outline of what you'll be doing at Sun,
great stuff snipped
I AM a newcomer here, which means I come with
fresh ideas and a lot of experience (both in what to do and what not to
do), but which also means I need to earn my voice. Let the earning begin!
You're the real honest to goodness community type person that we need around
here
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007, Brian Cameron wrote:
Richard:
I think gaim 2.0beta_whatever (maybe from blastwave) uses GStreamer,
but I never got it to work (although ISTR some email archives in which
that was a known problem not fully resolved). I ended up using NAS
(can't remember where I got that)
On Mar 21, 2007, at 04:46, Artem Kachitchkine wrote:
Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Tuesday 20 March 2007 02:59 pm, Nicolas Linkert wrote:
That's really good news.
The next big bang may be: Jörg Schilling is joining Debian.
Everything seems possible ;)
Ah, now it's all making sense...I did note
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 16:38 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Really .. its so great to see Mr. Debian here. :-)
+1 :-)
--
Erast
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Alan DuBoff writes:
The other thing is, what about having 2 seperate directories, keeping the old
and adding the new, and using a symlink to point to the desired version.
That's what we do with Java, and it's not nice with sparse zones. I'd
expect Apache to be used commonly with zones, so I'd
Jason Ozolins writes:
Blastwave package upgrade == package remove
followed by package install. Not like, say, RPM's
handing of upgrades at all. The service stops while
the upgrade happens. Not to mention, some of our
config files got creamed (this is really the
packager's problem rather
James C. McPherson wrote:
Hi Martin,
this is excellent news. I just wish that I had a T2000 to play
with so I could explore MarTux in style.
Makes me wonder, though - has anybody tried booting MarTux on
a StarCat (F15K/25K) or StarKitty (F12K/20K) ?
cheers,
James C. McPherson
--
Solaris
Martin Bochnig wrote:
Hi, good morning,
marTux_0.2 for sparc was pre-mature.
Please don't use it.
Especially its SMF had been sick.
Please don't try it out, before marTux_0.2 for sparc is released
(April 30th).
err, _0.*3*
Regards,
Martin
On Wed, 21 Mar 2007, Dave Miner wrote:
...
Hey, if it would help get people directed in the right place I'd split off a
packaging-discuss list for the SVR4 packaging project, but I tend to doubt it
would have any real effect, since these conversations (as was the case here)
all too often are
Jason Ozolins wrote:
Umm, I think we're writing at cross purposes here... you don't do a
Solaris _upgrade_ to a running OS instance. Live upgrade,...but in
either cases, you aren't running services from the OS instance that
is being upgraded, which is the case I'm interested in. If I want
to
snippage
Jason, it would have been helpful if you had just simply contacted me.
I'm generally real real busy but I take things like this quite seriously
and so do the team of guys that work on these sort of packages. The list of
people involved in Apache and OpenSSL etc at Blastwave is
n.b.: I think we need a new subject header.
Jason Ozolins wrote:
Umm, I think we're writing at cross purposes here... you don't do a
Solaris _upgrade_ to a running OS instance. Live upgrade,...but in
either cases, you aren't running services from the OS instance that
is being upgraded,
On Wednesday 21 March 2007 01:23 pm, Stefan Teleman wrote:
This was one of the other suggestions made on the ARC discuss list. My
primary concern about keeping both 2.0.x and 2.2.4 around (albeit
temporarily) is that it creates the possibility of a huge disaster:
application X links againsr
On Wednesday 21 March 2007 02:32 pm, Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 16:38 -0400, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Really .. its so great to see Mr. Debian here. :-)
+1 :-)
Thanks Dennis, you have seconds. I'll contact you offline to setup your Debian
fan club community.:-/
Seriously, I
*** REMINDER *** REMINDER *** REMINDER *** REMINDER ***
SVOSUG has what I consider a special meeting this month.
John Beck will be giving a presentation on his OpenSolaris project, Network
Auto-Magic. You can read about this project on the OpenSolaris webpage at:
84 matches
Mail list logo
