Hi Marc,
Marc Hamilton wrote:
There has been lots of discussion this week in the press and on this
forum about Project Indiana.
...
THANKYOU for sending this email. I particularly appreciate
the acknowledgement of the importance of our OpenSolaris
community in your reply.
best regards,
Jam
There has been lots of discussion this week in the press and on this
forum about Project Indiana. As I said in my blog last Sunday, albeit
somewhat buried in a long entry, Sun is not making any big Solaris
related announcements this week at JavaOne. What Ian did do this
week, during the Co
> Also, I do hope that Solaris will not be GPL'd.
> Everything would be ported to Linux and Solaris
> would be left sitting in the moonlight.
not going to happen. besides, it is already happening
with zfs if you are worried about this but i'd only
touch zfs on fuse under linux with a ten foot pol
> Where did I say I had a problem with the CLI?
Oh, gui tools. sorry.
>
> > Send instant messages to your online friends
> http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
> >
> >
> Why?
Ask yahoo :D. Sorry, using yahoo account...maybe i
should change unsubscribe and use another email address...
Send ins
Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
Have you sent files that demonstrate this problem to the oo.o folks?
Unfortunately, since these are all from work, all the cases I've seen
contain proprietary info that can't be shared. So I'd need to spend
time trying to debug why it fails and then create a fake t
> I think the problem is with the approach. Instead of
> saying "Make
> Solaris Linux Like" it should have been, "Focus on
> User Experience." A
> good user experience should be the focus, not to
> make one OS "just
> like another." Honestly, if you make Solaris just
> like Linux, then it
> become
Chung Hang Christopher Chan wrote:
>> If we want to make the transition easier, forget
>> user land and target
>> Solaris's main perceived weakness - system
>> administration tools, go for
>> GUIs if we have to. Better still, make the tools
>> better than those on
>> Linux and even port them over
--- Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Seems like lots of people are bitching and moaning
> about this.
>
> I for one am all for this. (It seemed at times I was
> the only one for
> it at times).
Well, I cringe at the make Solaris a better linux than
linux part.
>
> The fact of the matt
> If we want to make the transition easier, forget
> user land and target
> Solaris's main perceived weakness - system
> administration tools, go for
> GUIs if we have to. Better still, make the tools
> better than those on
> Linux and even port them over so admins can use the
> same on both.
Hu
--- Gueven Bay <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Maybe the Solaris people should adapt some things
> from Linux. But I vote for staying in the "Solaris
> way". I don't vote as the linked press articles say
> for bringing more Linux-isims into (Open)Solaris.
>
> For example a better package manager: O
> the SUNW is part of the package name, it's also what the pkg commands
> expect[s]
But does that matter for a graphical app like this? I haven't used it yet, but
almost every package having SUNW on the front in the GUI doesn't help me at
all, I'm pretty sure.
This message posted from open
> Anyway. What bothers me is not that there will
> apparently be an effort
> to make the transition from Linux easier, providing
> the features that a
> Linux user is used to, especially on the desktop.
> Nothing wrong with
> that. What does bother me is that articles like
> this, and their
>
Honestly, these arguments have floated around for years. I am not a bash
lover either, but lets be honest - changing the default root shell from
/sbin/sh to something like bash is well... silly.
That doesnt mean that sh could not be modernized a bit.
Bash is and most likely always will be an o
On Fri, 2007-05-11 at 01:02 +0100, Michal Pryc wrote:
> > I don't like the way it strips the SUNW prefix off the package
> > names. This makes it very hard to see what's actually
> > going on.
> This was Idea that Alberto Ruiz bring up. For "normal" users SUNW
> doesn't mean too much, and having a
James C. McPherson wrote:
frank wang wrote:
Sun will keep two universes, 1 is "Linux" alike, the other "Solaris"
alike. User can just pick what they like or are familiar with. But it
can't replace the efforts to scale the train coverage on everyting about
Solaris/UNIX.
"will" ??? I doubt it.
frank wang wrote:
Sun will keep two universes, 1 is "Linux" alike, the other "Solaris"
alike. User can just pick what they like or are familiar with. But it
can't replace the efforts to scale the train coverage on everyting about
Solaris/UNIX.
"will" ??? I doubt it.
The ATT and BSD universe
On Thu, 10 May 2007, UNIX admin wrote:
colorls here we come!
Let me add that if colorls becomes the default and
needs to be undone,
I will hunt down and kill the person responsible.
And this is one of the reasons why I love Solaris. No other community has such devotion
to quality. "80/20
As for a "better shell experience", my stomach turns when I see people
executing `bash`. It's disgusting. `tcsh` is light years ahead in user friendliness and
features as compared to `bash`, but rest assured, every user that I saw execute `bash`
did so because THEY HAD NO CLUE what `tcsh` is an
Sun will keep two universes, 1 is "Linux" alike, the other "Solaris" alike.
User can just pick what they like or are familiar with. But it can't replace
the efforts to scale the train coverage on everyting about Solaris/UNIX.
Frank (speak for myself)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Peter Tribble wrote:
>> > Interesting! The focus is rather different, but there's some
>> > overlap with what I've been hacking into solview recently:
>> >
>> > http://www.petertribble.co.uk/Solaris/solview.html
>> >
>> > when I get onto a real computer I'll definitely have a play with it.
>
> Def
Christopher Frost wrote:
'Who writes the outline, goals, and product tree for OpenSolaris?'
Right now, no one really.
'Who makes the decisions of what goes in/out of OpenSolaris?'
The OpenSolaris communities and ARCs.
Is it too much to ask for the community 'behind' the future ope
On 5/10/07, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The fact that I had the "Schily userland", did allow me mostly forget
about the platform I was working on.. using my editor, my shell, my
"match" insteas of *grep, my tar, my make, did give me the same
behavior for > 80% of the task
Oh, well I went and did it..
I normally don't reply here, but I felt the need to ring in with a
question.
I read through all the discussions and couldn't figure what this was the
best reply to, but can someone jog my memory?
'What does this have to do with OpenSolaris?'
'Who writes the
On May 10, 2007, at 5:31 AM, Brian Gupta wrote:
...
Would you rather spend your time maintaining a system, or would you
rather have a feature rich system that has a large number of building
blocks included out of the box?
I prefer the second, and that is the Linux approach. Solaris has much
r
On May 10, 2007, at 1:46 AM, Frank van der Linden wrote:
...
OpenSolaris is a great OS, technically very advanced, and we have
the community and engineers to do make it the best in the areas
where it is not already. We should not talk in terms of being "more
like Linux", but instead talk
Joerg Schilling wrote:
> UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>>> It would give us a chance to pick better colours than
>>> are generally used
>>> as defaults, too. =P
>>>
>> Quite right you are. Like finally getting `colorls` output to be that
>> *perfect* DEC VT220 Amber on Black
On May 9, 2007, at 10:27 PM, Gueven Bay wrote:
http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/-Sun-hopes-for-Linux-like-
Solaris/0,130061733,339276057,00.htm
http://news.com.com/Sun+hopes+for+Linux-like+Solaris/
2100-1016_3-6182526.html?tag=nefd.lede
http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_id=17881
htt
On 5/10/07, Michal Pryc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> I would like to announce a new project called JPack, which will provide
>> a GUI application for managing different types of packages for Solaris
>> Operating System.
>>
>> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/jds/tasks/jpack/
...
> Inte
Error: The disc you inserted is not a solaris OS CD/DVD
[b]Here is what iam trying to do :[/b]
1) Dwnloaded Sun Solaris 10 from www.sun.com
2) Created DVD / Cds as per instructions (tried both CD and DVD)
3) Boot system using DVD (also tried with CDs)
4) Takes me through system configuration (net
UNIX admin wrote:
>
> So Solaris is THE perfect OS for the mom 'n' pop firm, on an appliance,
> provided there is a knowledgeable consultant to set up the "fire
> up-and-forget" Solaris appliance humming somewhere in some closet.
>
>
That last point is often overlooked, I've set up Solaris s
Dennis Clarke wrote:
You forgot to add that the Bearded Man has a 72 processor super
computer class machine running while the young man has a Dell PC.
Yeah, but that young guy actually went out on a date
instead of spending the might with a computer...
Ha! All you Unix eunuchs take /that/!
On 5/10/07, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Artem Kachitchkine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BEARDED MAN
> What do you need blastwave for?!
> Don't you know pkgadd(1M) accepts http URLs? Geez, get a clue.
Once, pkgadd(1) includes the tsort(1) code to order lists of p
Artem Kachitchkine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> BEARDED MAN
> What do you need blastwave for?!
> Don't you know pkgadd(1M) accepts http URLs? Geez, get a clue.
Once, pkgadd(1) includes the tsort(1) code to order lists of packages
_and_ is able to modify the bas URL for the first
UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > It would give us a chance to pick better colours than
> > are generally used
> > as defaults, too. =P
>
> Quite right you are. Like finally getting `colorls` output to be that
> *perfect* DEC VT220 Amber on Black!
colorls is one of the most ugly thjings
> "Marion" == Marion Trompeter <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Marion> unfortunately, I currently do not have Nevada systems. I
Marion> requested some feedback when this library appeared
Right, Eric Schrock refactored the disassembler in March 2006. So
Nevada build 36 or later will use libdisas
BEARDED MAN
What do you need blastwave for?!
To get all those dependencies sorted out. Automatically and free.
Dennis
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 10/05/07, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And what's the default? Oh yeah that shell
> that's still stuck in
> the first century?
I don't see anything wrong with `exec tcsh -l`. That's only in root's case
anyway, and hopefully not much time should be spent working as root anyway
> And usually with Linux. However, Even though I prefer
> tcsh, I don't think it's "light-years" ahead of bash.
> I've seen arguments on both sides.
Did you read `tcsh`s man page?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss maili
> And what's the default? Oh yeah that shell
> that's still stuck in
> the first century?
I don't see anything wrong with `exec tcsh -l`. That's only in root's case
anyway, and hopefully not much time should be spent working as root anyway.
If a more permanent customization for root is nee
Peter C. Norton wrote:
You may continue to be snarky if ls -h became a common solaris
invocation, but I doubt your users would be upset at no longer having
to multiply by 2 to get K, and to get the size rounded to MB, GB,
etc.
I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you talking about making -h the
> I prefer the second, and that is the Linux approach.
Incorrect. Solaris lots of reach features, it's just that the Linux folks don't
know about them and don't bother asking.
> Solaris has much
> room for improvement in the "out of box" usefulness
> category. We are
> talking 15000+ packages in
As for a "better shell experience", my stomach turns when I see people
executing `bash`. It's disgusting. `tcsh` is light years ahead in user friendliness and
features as compared to `bash`, but rest assured, every user that I saw execute `bash`
did so because THEY HAD NO CLUE what `tcsh` is
It is possible that one has a personal preference for GNU. However, it is
technically impossible for GNU tools, in their current incarnation, to be
superior. And if you have a whole bunch of professional engineers (me excluded
this time!) sticking to, developing with, and working on those tools
> If we want to make the transition easier, forget user
> land and target
> Solaris's main perceived weakness - system
> administration tools, go for
> GUIs if we have to. Better still, make the tools
> better than those on
> Linux and even port them over so admins can use the
> same on both.
If
> Dude,
First of all, I'm an engineer both by trade and profession; and although I
don't live in a city, I don't work on a farm. So I don't qualify for being a
"dude", and I take exception to being called one. Please don't do that in the
future.
> now you're whining. If we didn't care about
>
>
> As for a "better shell experience", my stomach turns
> when I see people executing `bash`. It's disgusting.
> `tcsh` is light years ahead in user friendliness and
> features as compared to `bash`, but rest assured,
> every user that I saw execute `bash` did so because
> THEY HAD NO CLUE what `
UNIX admin wrote:
As for a "better shell experience", my stomach turns when I see people
executing `bash`. It's disgusting. `tcsh` is light years ahead in user friendliness and
features as compared to `bash`, but rest assured, every user that I saw execute `bash`
did so because THEY HAD NO CLU
> It would give us a chance to pick better colours than
> are generally used
> as defaults, too. =P
Quite right you are. Like finally getting `colorls` output to be that *perfect*
DEC VT220 Amber on Black!
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
>
> >colorls here we come!
>
>
> Let me add that if colorls becomes the default and
> needs to be undone,
> I will hunt down and kill the person responsible.
And this is one of the reasons why I love Solaris. No other community has such
devotion to quality. "80/20" just doesn't cut it; it's ei
On 5/10/07, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
We have one Linux whiner or another whining here just about every five minutes how
something in Solaris is "missing" (it's not missing, you just don't know it's
there and didn't bother asking!), and how Solaris is really inferior to Linux in X
> Why shouldn't Solaris learn from, adopt or even
> co-opt some of the
> things that make Linux successful where it is
> successful?
>
> What exactly is wrong with:
>
> 1. Improving packaging by observing what has worked
> in another
> environment
> Rethinking the way a shell is used or what
Peter Tribble wrote:
> On 5/10/07, Michal Pryc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Hello,
>>
>> I would like to announce a new project called JPack, which will provide
>> a GUI application for managing different types of packages for Solaris
>> Operating System.
>>
>> for more information:
>>
>> http://w
>
> One thing to keep in mind is that most folks reading
> a high volume,
> general purpose mailing list on opensolaris.org are
> probably already
> interested in OpenSolaris. My wild guess is that's
> not the kind of
> audience the "making Solaris more Linux like" pitch
> is targeted at.
We h
Richard L. Hamilton schrieb:
Have you sent files that demonstrate this problem to the oo.o folks?
Improving the compatibility as much as possible would take away excuses,
I think, and the more samples of problematic files (minimal if possible,
no private data, and accompanied by a description of
On 5/10/07, Michal Pryc <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hello,
I would like to announce a new project called JPack, which will provide
a GUI application for managing different types of packages for Solaris
Operating System.
for more information:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/jds/tasks/jpack
>
> Yes, bash is crap as a shell and should be avoided
> :-)
Actually it gets much worse. There is no "sh" on Linux. It is bash. When I want
to write a portable script that works correctly on Solaris and Linux, I get
stuck because even if I ask for sh, I get bash, which is not completely upward
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 10:46:30AM +0200, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> To quote the news.com article:
>
> "Basic operations, such as the "ls" command to see a listing of files in
> a directory, behave differently in Solaris"
>
> colorls here we come!
You may continue to be snarky if ls -h beca
> I think the problem is with the approach. Instead of
> saying "Make
> Solaris Linux Like" it should have been, "Focus on
> User Experience." A
> good user experience should be the focus, not to make
> one OS "just
> like another." Honestly, if you make Solaris just
> like Linux, then it
> becomes
For that matter, the userlands aren't that different. Solaris has a little less
comfort in that it doesn't imply parameters or helps you with everything (e.g.
useradd on Solaris vs. Linux). Anything that runs under X11 is virtually the
same between the operating systems.
Also, I do hope that S
Eh, someone from the Linux world sets foot into Sun, and bam, the annoying
LINUX! LINUX! LINUX! trend starts all over. For ditching Windows, one reason I
chose Solaris was to stay away from this and these annoying politics.
Anyway, if they're going to Linuxify the system, I hope they're going to
Ian,
We are all trying to figure out what exactly you had in mind when you said:
"Sun wants to embrace some Linux elements so "we make Solaris a better
Linux than Linux""
and
"It's too unfamiliar. There's a gulf ... We need to make it familiar
to people who know Linux inside and out."
"As we
Agreed. From the articles in question:
"As we make Solaris more familiar to Linux users, we don't (want to)
lose what makes it more compelling and competitive," Murdock said
MC wrote:
I like to believe that Sun's aim is to make Solaris a better operating system. You must keep your
head
I like to believe that Sun's aim is to make Solaris a better operating system.
You must keep your head pointed in the right direction. "Linux" and "Best OS"
are not the same direction.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discu
Shawn Walker wrote:
On 10/05/07, Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would you rather spend your time maintaining a system, or would you
rather have a feature rich system that has a large number of building
blocks included out of the box?
I think the problem is with the approach. Instead o
I think the problem is with the approach. Instead of saying "Make
Solaris Linux Like" it should have been, "Focus on User Experience." A
good user experience should be the focus, not to make one OS "just
like another." Honestly, if you make Solaris just like Linux, then it
becomes "yet another L
On 10/05/07, Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Would you rather spend your time maintaining a system, or would you
rather have a feature rich system that has a large number of building
blocks included out of the box?
I think the problem is with the approach. Instead of saying "Make
Solari
David Lloyd wrote:
Guavan.
You know what, I totally disagree with this move: Don't make Solaris
Linux like, BUT teach us Linux guys the Solaris way. As I read here
again and again the "POSIX way" - what ever that means, at least I
don't know, and I am sure many "young"(as in age and as in n
How long has this been kept a secret ;)
Looking good, glad to see work done in this area!
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> If you have a pure-StarOffice/OO site then this may
> be OK. But not for
> others.
That would be me, right here!
We don't use Windows for anything desktop-like or critical, and use strictly
UNIX (Solaris / HP-UX / MacOS X) and StarOffice OpenOffice.org.
It's great. It makes you realize that
On Thu, 10 May 2007, Eric Boutilier wrote:
...
Good point. Even though that document is not official policy yet, it's
really close. So in addition, I'd like to suggest that Gavin work with the
FM Community Group leaders to pull together the information outlined in
section 2.2.
Just to clarify.
cindi writes:
> Your message is not clear here. Are you saying that Gavin is required
> to pull together the items in section 2.2 of the not yet ratified
> project creation policy or is it just nice to have those items? If the
> former, are you saying that this is the official policy now?
I kn
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> colorls here we come!
>>
>>
>> Let me add that if colorls becomes the default and needs to be undone,
>> I will hunt down and kill the person responsible.
>>
>> (colorls only works for PFY in dimly lit rooms with gnome-terminals using
>> a black background; not in
>Sorry - I've never heard of IEEE 1295.
This is the industrial standard of Motif. See http://tinyurl.com/ja3l4
A lot of companies are using IEEE nomenclature inside their documentation base -
>No - much like we removed the OpenWindows DeskSet tools but still
>have the Xol & Xview libraries, we ex
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
colorls here we come!
Let me add that if colorls becomes the default and needs to be undone,
I will hunt down and kill the person responsible.
(colorls only works for PFY in dimly lit rooms with gnome-terminals using
a black background; not in any other setting)
I n
Brian Gupta wrote:
Does this mean we are going to have to scrap the Brand-Linux Zones,
and make a Brand-Solaris Zone? (For old-school Solaris admins)
Anyway, could someone from Sun please give us more details?
You see the stories posted? Now you know as much about Ian Murdock's
plans as most
+1 from me.
Eric,
Your message is not clear here. Are you saying that Gavin is required
to pull together the items in section 2.2 of the not yet ratified
project creation policy or is it just nice to have those items? If the
former, are you saying that this is the official policy now?
I do
> I'm all for positive thinking. But don't delude
> yourself -- OpenOffice (and StarOffice for that
> matter) is not better than Office 2007.
Sorry, but unlinke Microsoft Office, OpenOffice / StarOffice documentation is
truly context-sensitive and simply excellent.
And the templating in OOo / S
Casper said "Let me add that if colorls becomes the default and needs to be
undone,
I will hunt down and kill the person responsible."
I'll hold him while you hit him.
Ron
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing lis
On 05/10/07 14:22, Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Thu, 10 May 2007, James Carlson wrote:
Gavin Maltby writes:
The Project
This project proposes improving the generic support of x86
CPUs that implement the Machine Check Architecture (MCA). It
*whew* PS/2 flashback ...
+1 on the idea, but
Stefan Parvu wrote:
removed or not supported ?
Removed.
Isn't Motif 2.x part of Opengroup, IEEE 1295 specification ? Many commercial
companies still use that - Sun currently certifies it, I think.
Sorry - I've never heard of IEEE 1295.
So do we expect to see the runtime of Motif removed i
It should probably be pointed out here that Michal is
announcing (I'm pretty sure) a development effort, JPack,
that exists within the JDS Project (that exists within the
opensolaris.org Desktop Community Group); as opposed to
seeking official opensolaris.org Project status for JPack.
(Sorry to
thank you
another thing
I believe that I have badly to configure "named.conf"
you can give me an example of this file with the zones
thank you
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensol
I've set up a script which will be kicked off when a mail arrives for a user on
the system. This goes via sendmail and procmail. The script is run by the user
in a privileged shell, but I'm getting a different permissions result if the
script is run from the commandline or via procmail.
If the
Hello,
I would like to announce a new project called JPack, which will provide
a GUI application for managing different types of packages for Solaris
Operating System.
for more information:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/jds/tasks/jpack/
and
http://blogs.sun.com/migi/entry/jpack_install
On Thu, 10 May 2007, James Carlson wrote:
Gavin Maltby writes:
The Project
This project proposes improving the generic support of x86
CPUs that implement the Machine Check Architecture (MCA). It
*whew* PS/2 flashback ...
+1 on the idea, but the currently proposed project cre
> >> Have you looked at
> >> http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/hcl/data/sx/ ?
> >>
> >
> > I did. Did me no good in the case of Open Solaris.
> > That only covers Solaris 10. Not Open Solaris
> which
> > has more hardware support and features.
> >
> >
> No, read the URL again.
Ah, missed the sx
carlos antonio neira bustos wrote:
Im totally against this aproach , why be like that other OS ?? ,for start being
like linux , we need some more bugs and profanity in the source code ...
is enough to say that im horryfied with this news.
I might tend to agree with this sentiment but ha
Stefan Parvu wrote:
removed or not supported ?
Isn't Motif 2.x part of Opengroup, IEEE 1295 specification ? Many commercial
companies still use that - Sun currently certifies it, I think.
So do we expect to see the runtime of Motif removed in Nevada or future builds ?
Not even likely go
Seems like lots of people are bitching and moaning about this.
I for one am all for this. (It seemed at times I was the only one for
it at times).
The fact of the matter is that most of the gnu/Linux command
equivalents are, for the most part, more feature rich and easier to
use.
Would you rath
Gavin Maltby writes:
> The Project
>
> This project proposes improving the generic support of x86
> CPUs that implement the Machine Check Architecture (MCA). It
*whew* PS/2 flashback ...
+1 on the idea, but the currently proposed project creation policy
requires endorsement from one
removed or not supported ?
Isn't Motif 2.x part of Opengroup, IEEE 1295 specification ? Many commercial
companies still use that - Sun currently certifies it, I think.
So do we expect to see the runtime of Motif removed in Nevada or future builds ?
Im thinking here for companies which currently
Im totally against this aproach , why be like that other OS ?? ,for start being
like linux , we need some more bugs and profanity in the source code ...
is enough to say that im horryfied with this news.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
colorls here we come!
...
(colorls only works for PFY in dimly lit rooms with
gnome-terminals using
a black background; not in any other setting)
Which makes it an accessibility issue for those with less than
perfect eyesight, too.
I would agree that it shouldn't be the default (at lea
Gurus,
The following prompts always appear when create services such as
vds,vcc,vsw and etc.:
---
Notice: the LDom Manager is running in configuration mode.
Configuration and resource information is displayed for the
configuration under construction;not the current active configuration.
The conf
Thanks Darren. Sorry for not being clear in my earlier message. I was aware of
the fact that pfil is going to be replaced by the "Filtering hooks". I wanted
to get information on the filtering hooks so that i can plug in a hook to
intercept all the network packets.
Am in the process of writing
The Project
This project proposes improving the generic support of x86
CPUs that implement the Machine Check Architecture (MCA). It
also proposes to create a model-specific plugin interface whereby
model-specific MCA implementation may supplement and extend
>
> >colorls here we come!
>
>
> Let me add that if colorls becomes the default and
> needs to be undone,
> I will hunt down and kill the person responsible.
Metaphorically speaking, of course. :-)
> (colorls only works for PFY in dimly lit rooms with
> gnome-terminals using
> a black backgrou
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> Maybe the Solaris people should adapt some things from Linux. But I vote
>> for staying in the "Solaris way". I don't vote as the linked press articles
>> say for bringing more Linux-isims into (Open)Solaris.
>>
>
>
>> For example a better package manager: Okay.
On Wed, May 09, 2007 at 10:27:44PM -0700, Gueven Bay wrote:
> http://www.zdnet.com.au/news/software/soa/-Sun-hopes-for-Linux-like-Solaris/0,130061733,339276057,00.htm
> http://news.com.com/Sun+hopes+for+Linux-like+Solaris/2100-1016_3-6182526.html?tag=nefd.lede
> http://osnews.com/comment.php?news_i
>Maybe the Solaris people should adapt some things from Linux. But I vote
>for staying in the "Solaris way". I don't vote as the linked press articles
>say for bringing more Linux-isims into (Open)Solaris.
>For example a better package manager: Okay. But build it on top of
>the pkg_* commands whi
1 - 100 of 113 matches
Mail list logo
