On Tue, 15 May 2007, Bruno Jargot wrote:
On 5/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can deal with using 'ksh' for scripting and tcsh interactively;
I cannot deal with ksh or bash as interactive shells. They just
have too much catching up to do.
Does that include the new ksh?
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 and
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
On Sat, 3 Mar 2007, Ian Collins wrote:
UNIX admin wrote:
And to bring CDE into the 21. century, one would need an army of skilled
X/Motif engineers... good luck to anyone trying to find that too.
If they were around, we probably wouldn't have all those dreadful (an
installer that
On Fri, 23 Feb 2007, Roland Mainz wrote:
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
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Frank Hofmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Justin Zygmont wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, James Carlson wrote:
Andrew Pattison writes:
So am I right in saying that there is no easy way of getting a grub-like
boot menu on SPARC
On Sun, 18 Feb 2007, UNIX admin wrote:
It's a hardware problem. Your IT department didn't
by Ultrasparc laptops.
Hehe!
You mean, those underpowered, *expensive* laptops that you can only get from
two or three manufacturers, and which are so expensive, they don't even dare
list the price
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
No, that's controlled by The Open Group, although the members
(of which Sun is only one) that contributed may have something
to say about it too.
See
http://www.opengroup.org/cde/
http://www.opengroup.org/desktop/ordering/
Hi, I was wondering if the /etc/release file should be updated after all
patched have been applied to a system? I have solaris 10 06/06 and I did
an smpatch update and successfuly applied all patches. How do I know this
takes me up to 11/06 now?
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Bob Palowoda wrote:
Hi, I was wondering if the /etc/release file should
be updated after all
patched have been applied to a system? I have
solaris 10 06/06 and I did
an smpatch update and successfuly applied all
patches. How do I know this
takes me up to 11/06 now?
If
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, Al Hopper wrote:
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
According to the rumor mill:
http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37089
(Major Intel, Sun deal to be announced Monday)
Confirmed - but you need a subscription to read the WSJ URL below:
TECHNOLOGY
On Wed, 10 Jan 2007, Dave Marquardt wrote:
Justin == Justin Zygmont [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Justin On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Darren J Moffat wrote:
Nikolay Piskun wrote:
I am trying to implement in C++ something like what I get from: kstat -m
cpu_info | grep core_id
That isn't what I
On Tue, 9 Jan 2007, Darren J Moffat wrote:
Nikolay Piskun wrote:
I am trying to implement in C++ something like what I get from: kstat -m
cpu_info | grep core_id
That isn't what I was asking.
Once you know the number of cores vs threads vs sockets etc what are you
planning on doing with
On Fri, 5 Jan 2007, UNIX admin wrote:
exactly which needed features are those that rpm has
that pkgadd does not ?
That's really for Martin and not for me to say, since he seems to be the one
preferring `rpm` to `pkgadd` and friends.
But since you're asking me, I'll tell you what I plan to
On Sat, 6 Jan 2007, UNIX admin wrote:
They're pretty much tanked already:) IRIX is dead,
if they open
sourced inst, maybe you can find out more about this
functionality you
like so much, i'm not sure if they ever released that
part of their OS or
not.
I know; one the *stupidest* things
On Tue, 26 Dec 2006, UNIX admin wrote:
how much throughput could you get with something like
that though?
Roughly about 100 kilobytes per second. The system will eventually be replaced
by a 220R.
not bad, I used to get well over that speed back with ipchains and a
486-33 with 12 MB RAM.
On Mon, 25 Dec 2006, UNIX admin wrote:
I've been using ipfilter on Solaris since Solaris 8
with great success. My
current firewall -- a Cyrix 233MHz PII-clone with
128MB of memory has been
running Solaris 9 for the past 3 years with zero
trouble out of it. I
usually have around 10-20MB of
On Wed, 29 Nov 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Justin Zygmont [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I didn't realize GNU tar has these kind of issues, I thought using gnu tar
on both systems might be ok. i'll test this out and see, but I started
If you don't care about the bugs in GNU tar and if you
On Thu, 30 Nov 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Frank Hofmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[ ... ]
What feature are you really missing in the Bourne shell?
The ability to use my keyboard's cursor keys. By default.
Well, this is why I did write bsh in 1984 ;-)
But the OP was talking about shell
On Tue, 28 Nov 2006, UNIX admin wrote:
ok, i'll give the sysV tar a try and see, if it does
work then all it
needs is gzip ability built in and I wouldn't have to
look back.
tar cvpf - dir-to-archive | bzip2 -9vc /var/tmp/archive.tar.bz2
bzip2 -dc /var/tmp/archive.tar.bz2 | tar xvf -
now
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, Joern Michael Krueger wrote:
Like Dennis wrote: friends don't let friends use
GNU stuff. And why should they, when standard System
V tools are available, for free, with source code
inclusive?
ok, i'll give the sysV tar a try and see, if it does
work then all it
needs is
On Mon, 27 Nov 2006, UNIX admin wrote:
ok, that sure helps a lot, what do you recommend
then?
I recommend the *standard* system V tools. Like system V `tar`. Or Joerg's
`star`.
Like Dennis wrote: friends don't let friends use GNU stuff. And why should
they, when standard System V tools are
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, UNIX admin wrote:
I have just noticed a problem with tapes written from
solaris, linux can't
read them unless I write them using a block size of
1. (-b1)
The problem with this, is that any backup to tape
takes forever now, and
is almost useless, yet solaris reads the linux
On Sun, 26 Nov 2006, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Justin Zygmont [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have just noticed a problem with tapes written from solaris, linux can't
read them unless I write them using a block size of 1. (-b1)
The problem with this, is that any backup to tape takes forever now
I have just noticed a problem with tapes written from solaris, linux can't
read them unless I write them using a block size of 1. (-b1)
The problem with this, is that any backup to tape takes forever now, and
is almost useless, yet solaris reads the linux written tapes no problem.
This is using
25 matches
Mail list logo
