--- MC [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
+10 thanks for the summary :)
+10 too. Been waiting :)
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
-snip-
Just barely managed to read that simplified chinese
sentence (the translation helped...:D)
As of SXCE 63, I don't seem to be able to
find signs of inclusion of any Cantanese-PinYin
input method.
I did not know that a Cantonese pinyin input method
exists. Most people here use input
--- W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I cannot read Chinese so I do not muck about with
chinese stuff...but can you get use localized
character sets (eg: Hong Kong character set) in
OpenSolaris?
Yes, you can log into the Traditional Chinese (Hong
Kong) locale as if you are
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Agreed. But won't you have a VT100 terminal lying
around in the lab ...
Sure, but I said remotely. It's hard to put a DVD
in the drive
if the server is on another continent, being
accessed via an RSC
or serial console server.
Build a
Because those guys *expect* /usr/bin/sh to be a
bash.
???
This whole thing about shells in /usr/bin is weird.
Who are 'those guys'?
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Works great on a desktop; not so good on a server
whose
console is being accessed remotely (unless a
suitable CD/DVD
remains in the drive at all times). Actually, with
planning ahead
(how often does _that_ actually happen?),
I'd want _4_ bootable copies of the root filesystem:
2 active
(And that has been possible since Solaris supports
PXE
boot which must be around 7 odd years now)
So what is all the noise about using CDs/DVDs in
remote servers all about?
If you can perform rescue via pxe...why the noise
about having to put in a CD/DVD?
Send instant messages to your
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
(And that has been possible since Solaris
supports
PXE
boot which must be around 7 odd years now)
So what is all the noise about using CDs/DVDs in
remote servers all about?
If you can perform rescue via pxe...why the noise
about having to put in a
Build a rescue image that supports serial console.
This has been available on linux for quite a while.
This works just fine on Solaris also, as long as you
are able to remotely
reboot the system (and/or power cycle it)
What about when the system does not come up after
POSTing?
In a
Legal issues appear to favor GNU/Linux drivers:
The average user probably doesn't care why device X
works on GNU/Linux
but not on OpenSolaris, but when I find that DVD
players and the
built-in SD-Card reader on my laptop work on Linux
but not Solaris and
then I learn that IP and Legal
It's generally also a case of does the person to be
sued have enough $$ in
the bank; true for Sun, not true for Joe Blow's
disstro.
You can easily tell I have never lived in the US :P.
But I can play DVDs on Solaris just fine :-)
:)
Send instant messages to your online friends
You mean like the Solaris failsafe entry on the
GRUB menu (either
locally or the one gathered using PXE) of Solaris
Express installs and
the similar entries on Nextena and Belenix ?
So that is what that is?
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
--- Martin Bochnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It does require the server to be in an
environment
were there
are PXE servers available; that is not a given
for
colocated
equipment.
haha. well, that is not an excuse for crying about
a
CD/DVD rescue. ( people who encounter
--- Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan wrote:
You mean like the Solaris failsafe entry on the
GRUB menu (either
locally or the one gathered using PXE) of Solaris
Express installs and
the similar entries on Nextena and Belenix ?
So that is what
During my recent trip to China and Taiwan, I sensed
a definitive increase in willingness in governmental
officials to move away from Windows. Most of them
seem to have only Linux in mind, but the timing of
the recent drive to make Solaris more Linux-like,
the opening of the China
--- linuxPA [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm thinking about getting a home server. I'm not
sure what distro I should get. Should I go with
Solaris or CentOs? Whats the advantage of Solaris?
More fun? What do you want to do on your home server?
Send instant messages to your online friends
--- Boris Derzhavets [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
When want any linux distro to dualboot with Solaris:
install linux grub onto linux /boot or /root
partitions.
Copy /boot/grub/grub.conf to usb key under linux
reboot into Solaris and cat and paste corresponding
entry from linux's grub.conf
--- Gerard Nualla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can I make BASH the root's default shell?
you are new to unix are you?
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
All of my linux partitions are reiserfs... Would
that matter?
yes, grub will need to be able to read the filesystem
used. not sure if the grub that comes with solaris has
reiserfs support.
btw, you have to make sure that your /boot or whatever
reiserfs filesystem you keep your linux kernel on
--- Frank Hofmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 23 May 2007, Chung Hang Christopher Chan
wrote:
--- Boris Derzhavets [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
When want any linux distro to dualboot with
Solaris:
install linux grub onto linux /boot or /root
partitions.
Copy /boot/grub
yes, grub will need to be able to read the
filesystem
used. not sure if the grub that comes with solaris
has
reiserfs support.
It does. Check out the /boot/grub directory on
SX. So you can
directly add your Linux distro boot entries in
Solaris Grub
menu.lst.
Let me tell you a true story:
Replace Solaris guy with debian guy in a Redhat shop.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Okay, so grub that comes with solaris distros =
normal
grub + solaris ufs support (any zfs support? what
will
happens in a root on zfs scenario)? are the
changes
also in upstream?
Booting from ZFS Root is supported from build 62
onwards.
I do not know what is the plan for
Nice. All this for a guy who apparently does not even
know how to admin a unix system (developer?).
I can see application developers flying over in
droves.
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Gerard Nualla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How can I make BASH the root's
--- Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Let me tell you a true story:
Replace Solaris guy with debian guy in a Redhat
shop.
I meant there is a another true story like this only
with a debian guy in a redhat shop.
Send instant messages to your online friends http
Yup, new to Unix.. I started with linux, that's why
I'm soo used to BASH.. Im getting used to the bourne
shell too... :D
Thought so. usermod is a common command on Linux and
Solaris and coupled with the fact that you have
problems getting your linux to boot shows that you
have not had much
--- Gerard Nualla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hello guys, Im trying to figure out how to manage
packages on my Solaris Express.. Something like
pkgadd, or pkgtool in linux... So how do i do that?
pkgadd, pkg* on solaris...i don't know about slackware
but there is not any repository for solaris
man pkgadd.
It will also give you a list of other related
commands:
eg:
pkginfo(1), pkgmk(1), pkgparam(1), pkgproto(1),
pkgtrans(1),
installf(1M), pkgadm(1M), pkgask(1M), pkgchk(1M),
pkgrm(1M)
--- Gerard Nualla [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, what I meant was how to add, remove, view,
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For system performance and sometimes stability in
certain scenarios due to bug fixes. We do not care
too
much about API/ABI stability. Much of what we need
either comes with the distribution or needs to
have a
internal package made.
Such
What, Slowlaris still exists?
Well, I sure was blown away by the incredible
difference between Solaris 8 find and gnu find.
Some of those guys will only come around if their
sitting penguin OS is beat to a pulp by Solaris.
Like when somebody needs a good whack to come around
to their
gtar xvfz filename.tar.bz2
gtar jxfz ;)
which will not even work (GNU, implementing tools
inside of other tools, stifling flexibility)
or
gtar xvfz filename.tar.gz
which is directly dependent on the GNU toolchain
(aka a perfect example of your if all I have is a
hammer...
--- Bryan Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On May 22, 2007, at 1:44 AM, Chung Hang Christopher
Chan wrote:
How do apt and yum know not to overwrite your
sendmail?
My package version trumps distro provided
package.
How does that work?
distro sendmail 8.13.x, own modified
Rolling out updates can be a lot easier (in my
experience) on Linux systems -- it may be that it
got
that way because they needed more updating, but it
doesn't change that it's better.
I guess that would depend on one's idea of
productivity. To me, it's a waste of my time and
Besides, gtar was in /usr/sfw/bin since at least
Solaris 10; with the /usr/gnu
thing, I suppose it would end up in there as tar
(vomit) with a link in /usr/bin
as gtar. So you can have your perversion, as long
as you don't expect anyone
else to use it.
now if i can just get my apt/dpkg
My doubt is to what degree mere numbers of those
whose experience
or knowledge is limited to Linux are worth
attracting. In the long run,
maybe numbers are needed for mind-share. But in the
short run, unless Solaris
meets their expectations out-of-the-box by default
(a disgusting
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is fine for installation of new OS. I do not
see
how that would beat thousands of systems grabbing
the
latest package, updating and then continue to run
as
normal whereas flar would require those systems to
reboot for a mere
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What, Slowlaris still exists?
Well, I sure was blown away by the incredible
difference between Solaris 8 find and gnu find.
This would be the gnu find that needs one to use a
nonstandard option
-noleaf to tell it _not_ to
--- Joerg Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
What, Slowlaris still exists?
Well, I sure was blown away by the incredible
difference between Solaris 8 find and gnu find.
Well, GNU find does not work correctly. This is why
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
gtar xvfz filename.tar.bz2
gtar jxfz ;)
Did you miss my point? (;-)
The other side of things is: Windows users like
Windows because they are used to the thing. I do not
really care for the Unix world vs Gnu world. I have
really only asked for
The (perhaps) interesting question is why.
Different environment.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Convert to apt and dpkg :P
Use a non-native software management subsystem? An
unsupported subsystem?
those packages probably don't register in any existing
system anyway and you can always populate the dpkg
section with information from the existing
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
RIGHT...for a modified sendmail that does not
change
at all save for security exploits...hmm...you
really
have a closed mind. The only 'engineering' needed
here
would be how to quickly replace the OS with a more
efficient one and making sure
What, Slowlaris still exists?
Well, I sure was blown away by the incredible
difference between Solaris 8 find and gnu find.
Well, GNU find does not work correctly. This is
why
it seems to be fast.
'find queue/mess/* -print | wc -w'
What does solaris 8 find and gnu find
Did you forget the old do one thing and do it well
mantra?
truly spoken.
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
GNU find does not call stat on any of the leaf
files because it believes
that when a directory has only 2 hard links to
it,
no entries in the
directory other than . or .. will be
directories
so requiring stat
is not necessary to find more sub
Solaris find calls stat(2) on all files to
determine
whether they are
directories; this requires *all* inodes to be
brought into memory.
GNU find does not call stat on any of the leaf
files because it believes
that when a directory has only 2 hard links to
it,
no
--- Brian Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Keep an eye on these:
http://www.theregister.co.uk/2007/05/21/ibm_power6_p570/
Wow, wouldn't it be great if Sparc/Opteron had
access to IBM silicon
processeses. (4.7 GHz)
AMD has access to IBM silicon tech does it not?
Send instant messages
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well, from your description of the differences,
there
being no subdirectories under queue/mess/*/, around
500k is the total number of files under
queue/mess/*/
Try ls next time or just echo :-)
So you ran:
find queue/mess/*
and not
--- Ignacio Marambio Catán [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
O
I assure you that I feel far more differently
about
this. This is not a mere 5x speedup. 24 hours
versus
say one minute is already way beyond 5x.
yawn, this is getting really boring, have you ever
considered that you
might have
I assure you that I feel far more differently
about
this. This is not a mere 5x speedup. 24 hours
versus
say one minute is already way beyond 5x.
It depends on the balance between the number of
directories
and the number of files in them.
24 hours sounds unreasonable. What kind of
How do apt and yum know not to overwrite
your sendmail?
My package version trumps distro provided
package.
How does that work?
distro sendmail 8.13.x, own modified package
sendmail
make it version 8.14.x or whatever works for that
particular piece of software.
--- a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
ROTFL. No. But that is what I would have to do
with
OpenSolaris at the moment. Where is this flar?
Who's your information supplier?
You can get Solaris Express, community edition. It's
a ready to install distro based on OpenSolaris.
Since you seem
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i'd fire any of my sysadmins if i ever catch them
using fedora in any
production server. you dont use unsupported
software
there. do not
ever underestimate the value of blaming someone
else
when things
break. And people have used solaris
I've worked in places where system administrators
hacked source code
which was available (BSD Unix, source licenses).
Invariably, it is a *bad* idea; but that point is
never driven home
until one of the administrators does leave or is hit
by a truck.
Well, there must be a reason why we
--- a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
No worries. I am sure open positions in your
respective companies are few.
Not sure what you meant by that. There are tons of
open positions in my company, worldwide to boot.
I meant Solaris positions.
Why not? RHEL3 did not use 2.6. RHEL4 is stuck
For users who come from a Linux background for
whatever reason, system
maintenance has a pretty steep learning curve on
Solaris. This has
absolutely nothing to do with the substantial
advantages that Solaris offers
over Linux. Patches/packages, for example, are a
huge PITA compared to
Why not? RHEL3 did not use 2.6. RHEL4 is stuck
with
2.6.9 + certain backports. If you need some of the
latest features, you use Fedora. Given that a
release
comes with at least one year of updates, I do not
see
a problem especially if you have a system that
automatically builds the
--- Danek Duvall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 08:27:50AM +0800, Chung Hang
Christopher Chan wrote:
The current way software on Solaris is managed, oh
yes
it will need plenty of babysitting in our
environment.
For example, sendmail was patched to add mysql
table
--- Andre van Eyssen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 21 May 2007, Patrick Finch wrote:
If I understand correctly, you are saying that a
Solaris user can become a
Linux user with ease, but not vice versa. Do you
consider this to be a
strength or a weakness of Linux?
Neither.
--- Danek Duvall [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tue, May 22, 2007 at 11:44:52AM +0800, Chung Hang
Christopher Chan wrote:
Why look after two queues and two binaries when
one
will handle everything?
Right. Just use yours and disable or remove the
system one, and never
think about
--- Ignacio Marambio Catán [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Maybe not the kernel sources if we are not
developers.
I would say the chances of interest in other
packages
that come along with the distribution are much
higher
than 0.1%.
i really really doubt that, the sources are quite
--- Ignacio Marambio Catán [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
I love the desktop analogies. People use Fedora in
server farms. I have used Fedora in server farms.
We
are most definitely interested in the source code.
How
else are we suppose to integrate previously
half/non-integrated pieces
Compared to other marketing activities from Sun,
this would be cheap and the
current idea of project Indiana looks to me like
a Sun OpenSolaris
distribution that (if done the way it currently
seems) will most likely embrace
and crush the sensitive plants that are the real
free grown
--- Chao-Feng Guo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Just think it in another way: actually most
habitants in Hong Kong can listen to and understand
the Chinese Mandarin. But in reverse it doesn't
work.
ROTFL. You do not know Hong Kong at all. The newer
generation may be (with the present critically
--- Ghee Teo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chao-Feng Guo wrote:
Just think it in another way: actually most
habitants in Hong Kong can listen to and understand
the Chinese Mandarin. But in reverse it doesn't
work.
Is this assumption true though when comes to
technical terms and
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I've probably a bad idea,but for me to make
Solaris more linux like
is to have an opensolaris distro with all sources
(sources for every
package) and a desktop like Ubuntu or RH.Is this an
open community? Is
this open source?
I find that a strange way to
--- Joerg Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Compared to other marketing activities from Sun,
this would be cheap and the
current idea of project Indiana looks to me
like
a Sun OpenSolaris
distribution that (if done
Take the other side of Sun Marketing, there was an
ad with a single V880
in a lab. What is that about?:-/ With Apple ads you
know what it's about
somehow, there is no secrets.
Yeah I have heard comments about that ad of a trailer
in the middle of nowhere...
Send instant messages to your
--- Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan wrote:
And I don't see th package tools determining
distribution models.
Blastwave have a different distribution model
from
Sun and they
use standard Solaris packages just fine.
Can you store dependency
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry about that mess...here's another try.
The initial area of confusion hits with the
distinction between packages and patches -- I know
there's a difference between releasing
functionality and fixing something that's
broken. That's
And the patches give you one thing by default that
wholesale package
replacement does not: the option to back them out.
You can also roll back on a package system.
A lot of this isn't unique to Solaris; I think a
number of other (mostly
non-Linux) commercially distributed OSs distinguish
And I don't see th package tools determining
distribution models.
Blastwave have a different distribution model from
Sun and they
use standard Solaris packages just fine.
Can you store dependency data in Solaris packages?
Send instant messages to your online friends
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, the Open Solaris community needs more than
just
programmers.
Sure, but if someone that does documentation or
marketing can
code at least to the extent of the bite-size
stuff, can in the
former case read code without the need of
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The correct way to fix this whole situation is
for
Linux developers to migrate to Solaris, and
forget
about Linux. That would fix all these
compilation
issues.
OOh, I like this one. Forget gcc compatibility.
Kill
Sun
qt-*, gtk-* and xorg-* are not interfaces. They
are
libraries. Adding this lot adds system libraries
to
the possible 'release
breakages/differentiations'.
They will not make a 3.x Solaris. They cannot be
compared to the Redhat Linux 7.x - Redhat Linux
8.0
- Redhat Linux 9 ABI
By the way,
earlier today we crossed 50,000 people registered on
the site. We are
diversifying indeed.
That is wonderful. I hope that figure also translates
to users. I wonder which distro draws new blood...
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
We will also take video for the course, whereas it
will be helpful only
if you have a good hearing comprehension of Chinese.
Is that mandarin or cantonese?
Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
___
--- Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/05/07, Brian Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
In order to do that we need a set of common goals,
defining what we
expect out of our modern packaging standard. I
have started with a
list below. Let's work from there and see if we
can't all
--- Christopher Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm going to throw this out there to see what
sticks:
1) Create a Foundation to take over OpenSolaris.
Obviously has to be
done by the Board with Sun Microsystem's blessing.
2) Collect monies from donations, for stuff
(promotional, more
--- joey [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is that mandarin or cantonese?
Mandarin.
Ah well, Hong Kong is probably not worth it anyway.
The universities here have all been bought by
Microsoft besides the problem of the crap educational
system currently in place.
Send instant messages to your
I think we need to colour this properly. If we
could
make things somewhat like the Mac OS X environment
with stable libraries (kernel-wise i believe Open
Solaris should not have a problem...) then there
Solaris offers stable interfaces back to a time when
Mac OS X did not exist.
Perhaps I'm reading too much into your comments
here, but why are you drawing a distinction between
the OpenSolaris community (creating a reference
distro) and Solaris engineering (aligning product
releases)?
I think it is more like a distro that will go beyond
the current Solaris market
--- Rainer J. H. Brandt [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan writes:
Solaris offers stable interfaces back to a time
when
Mac OS X did not exist.
Great. That was then. This is now. Now you have a
No, that is now.
_Today_ you can use those stable interfaces
To a head start, I propose that we take Nexenta and
make it the
standard base for the Indiana/Linuxy Solaris.
(OpenSolaris Community
Edition)
Please, Sun Studio and sun linker. I have dpkg partly
compiled (dselect is waiting for gnu gettext, dpkg has
been done and runs) under Sun Studio. I
the installer has
ZFS boot/root support, etc.
Huzzah! Now, I wonder if a Solaris built on built on
Sun Studio (such as
SXCE) would live nicely in a distro built on GCC...
*That* would be interesting.
ROTFL. Well running Sun Studio did not seem to be a
problem (except for missing sun
How can they include closed-source ATI/Nvidia
drivers in a GNU/Linux
LiveDVD without violating the GPL ?
Heh. Who is going to sue? Linus? Who will he sue?
Linus put a stop to those zealots who wanted to make
sure you would not be able to use a binary driver...I
don't see him going after
FSF or maybe http://www.gpl-violations.org/. Just
as the Kororaa
LiveCD was forced to stop distributing the
Nvidia/ATI drivers. It
was one of the first GNU/Linux LiveCDs to bundle
Compiz. It
is redistribution in installed form along with a
GPL kernel.
Ah well. The solution?
--- Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Marc Hamilton wrote:
You don't see too many ISVs saying they support
Fedora (in comparison to RHEL).
You don't see to many ISV's saying they support any
OS with a
6-month release cycle and 1-2 year lifetime when
they can choose
a variant
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh come off it. You want to tell me that all Linux
systems are thus administered?
I do happen to write from *experience* of what I
witnessed in me years as a consultant for various
firms both big and small.
Heh. Thank you LPI. No wonder you ran
It may not be clean for a number of systems or
server farms,
but it seems to me the intention of making
OpenSolaris more
friendly to the other side is to get more
development and
following for OpenSolaris. As the training ground,
we'd all
hope that they come around to more structured
--- Joerg Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
package management. tools are not open, they have
issues and they are not transparent.
What are you talking about?
Are you talking about this:
http://dlc.sun.com/osol/install
--- Michael Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, what you say is all true: we can take it up
with vendors for driver support or purchase NVidia
graphics cards. But the far more realistic
alternative is just switch to Linux and not deal
with it. From the point of view of a desktop, it's
the
Furthermore, expect an A7 release this week of
Nexenta on B61. As
noted from the slides, it will quickly approach a
1.0 as all the
latest Ubuntu (Feisty Fawn) packages are integrated,
the installer has
ZFS boot/root support, etc.
yah! let the packaging begin! i'll live with gcc.
Send
--- Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Good. He sounded like some ksh zealot.
Oh, I am. The _creators_ of all other shells are
heretics that should have
been burned at the stake (metaphorically speaking).
But the poor misguided
fools who prefer other shells...if it doesn't
familiarity. And familiarity for people coming from
Linux is so important
because there are so many of them. It is ultimately
our target market
for Solaris. We need those college kids who are
coming out of university
today who reach for Linux when they start companies
or go to work in
I hear you loud and clear there and am adjusting the
way I'm speaking
about this accordingly.. The point I was trying to
make was: Large parts of
the market want Linux. HOWEVER, when they say they
want Linux, they don't
actually mean they want Linux THE KERNEL, they want
Linux the distro
Linux has a more usable
desktop, it install easier,
it updates easier (and does it over the net), and
has a much broader
selection of software. Given the choice, I'd rather
be looking at the
simple solutions than the difficult ones, because
some of those won't be
easy to tackle.
--- Michael Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's painfully obvious that OpenSolaris and Solaris
on x86 platforms lack drivers of all sorts. It also
lacks an easy way to install software reliably. If
making OpenSolaris/Solaris more like Linux can
resolve both these problems then I'm all for it.
That said, I think the good news for the old guard
is that the largest faults in Solaris can be fixed
by supplementation rather than change. I'm
referring to the GUI. Because whether the old guard
knows it or not, what ls does today won't matter in
the future because the new guard won't
--- Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan wrote:
--- Gueven Bay [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
For example a better package manager: Okay. But
build it on top of the pkg_* commands which are
in
Solaris today AND explain, show and teach the
users
the Solaris
1 - 100 of 169 matches
Mail list logo
