On Wed, Mar 04, 2009 at 02:16:53PM -0600, Wes Felter wrote:
T10 UNMAP/thin provisioning support in zvols
That's probably simple enough, and sufficiently valuable too.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tue, Mar 03, 2009 at 11:35:40PM +0200, C. Bergström wrote:
7) vdev evacuation as an upgrade path (which may depend or take
advantage of zfs resize/shrink code)
IIRC Matt Ahrens has said on this list that vdev evacuation/pool
shrinking is being worked. So (7) would be duplication of
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 01:05:42PM -0500, Brian Utterback wrote:
It is simple. Do we want the default environment to be a Solaris one
or a GNU one? If you want both, you have to provide a knob to switch
them back and forth.
I agree, but that knob should be made to work via shell startup
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 01:56:45PM -0500, Sebastien Roy wrote:
On Fri, 2009-01-16 at 10:28 -0800, Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* Brian Utterback (brian.utterb...@sun.com) wrote:
It is simple. Do we want the default environment to be a Solaris one or a
GNU one? If you want both, you have to
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 12:52:33PM -0600, Brian Smith wrote:
Nicolas Williams wrote:
The Indiana team evidently want GNU utils be preferred, and evidently
would like to see the compatibility issues with Solaris utils fixed.
I see no problem with that, provided those issues are addressed
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 04:14:01PM -0500, Dave Miner wrote:
My opinion is that the GNU utilities should be modified, with
modifications fed back upstream ... snip
Sometimes that doesn't work. GRUB is a good example.
I don't know whether GRUB is a good example, as I'm not up on
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 03:26:20PM -0600, Shawn Walker wrote:
tcsh is not a core Solaris package and media is not of an infinite size.
Software has to be selected to fit on the core media based on certain
goals. Everyone has their own favourite software that probably isn't
installed by
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 02:16:45PM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Nicolas Williams wrote:
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 03:26:20PM -0600, Shawn Walker wrote:
tcsh is not a core Solaris package and media is not of an infinite size.
Software has to be selected to fit on the core media based
On Fri, Jan 16, 2009 at 02:21:17PM -0800, Brock Pytlik wrote:
Nicolas Williams wrote:
Can't it be in entire?
It is in entire, but that doesn't mean it's part of the default
installation. I believe it was removed from the default install because
of space issues on the CD for 2008.11
If the Solaris commands become a superset of the Gnu ones, then that
position becomes a fait accompli.
Thus avoiding the entire question of whether or not that's the best -
or even a desirable - goal.
Not quite -- there are conflicts between the commands themselves. For
example, GNU and
On Thu, Jan 15, 2009 at 04:31:03PM +0100, I. Szczesniak wrote:
I believe it is a mistake to concentrate on the GNU coreutils tools.
Opensolaris would alienate users from OSX and BSD platforms with an
API which roughly changes every six months. It'd be better if
Opensolaris starts its own
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 10:15:33AM +0100, casper@sun.com wrote:
hello all,
i'm surprised that gnu chmod is installed, what are the advantages
comparing to solaris chmod?
It's very annoying when using ACLs.
No reason; several of the GNU utilities are broken in some way in Solaris;
On Wed, Jan 14, 2009 at 09:36:05PM +0100, Jan Friedel wrote:
RBAC related:
Since I'm using the /usr/xpg4/bin path as the primary one, I was
little bit confused, that, event thought I have the Object
Access Management profile applied on my account, I'm not able
to
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 09:42:37PM +0200, Cyril Plisko wrote:
On Thu, Dec 18, 2008 at 9:22 PM, Nicolas Williams
nicolas.willi...@sun.com wrote:
I was mystified too. I think SRP is too confusable. I recommend a
different acronym. What's wrong with iSER as a project name anyways?
SRP
On Fri, Oct 31, 2008 at 09:13:46PM +1300, Ian Collins wrote:
That's an odd comment, considering most reviews of FF3 I've seen
commends it for being both faster and leaking less memory tan its
predecessor.
See:
6755391 sqlite3 should not be built with SQLITE_DEBUG; uses access(2) too
often,
On Thu, Jun 19, 2008 at 12:10:49PM -0400, Kyle McDonald wrote:
Nicolas Williams wrote:
OK then the prescription is:
- setup a Unix nameservice for the Solaris and Linux systems
I should point out here too that your NFSv3 clients don't strictly need
a Unix nameservice if they don't need
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 06:53:08AM -0400, Kyle McDonald wrote:
as a Domain Controller?
No.
That's OK. But (liking Solaris as much as I do,) it seems a shame to
leave Windows as the only system that can be the authoritative source
for this
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 04:39:52PM -0400, Kyle McDonald wrote:
Is SFU required to use only NFSv3 between Solaris Machines?
No. A Unix name service is strongly implied. That could be SFU.
No interop with Linux with NFSv3. Try using CIFS.
But Linux SMB mounts are done as a single UserID
BTW, for more information on how to use AD SFU as a Unix LDAP
nameservice see:
http://blogs.sun.com/baban/entry/solaris_10_and_active_directory
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Wed, Jun 18, 2008 at 06:40:05PM -0400, Kyle McDonald wrote:
So, what are you trying to do?
I need to setup a new farm of software build servers. They'll consist of
all different versions of Linux (multiple versions of RHEL, and SLES)
and a few S10 for building our software.
I also
On Tue, Jun 17, 2008 at 01:43:46PM -0400, Kyle McDonald wrote:
The part I'm fuzzy on are the nameservies interoperation. I know the
CIFS server required a bunch of work to deal with windows user and
groups for file ownership and access control. What is new in Solaris
though for shareing
On Fri, May 23, 2008 at 01:10:15PM +0200, Nico Sabbi wrote:
I'd like to point out this stupidity in the localization of scp/ssh,
that can have *VERY* dangerous consequences (like being
locked out of your server).
At the first connection ssh asks you if you want to continue the
connection
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 04:45:19PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I believe Paul was suggesting that you could *now* use the knowledge you
gained in writing your compare(1) to improved the now available in
source form cmp(1) ? As some other
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 05:56:49PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Or you could rename your compare to something else that conflicts
neither with the existing cmp(1) nor the new compare(1) (yes, it came in
before yours and now you're not happy; c'est la vie). ecmp, fcmp, ...
four letters
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 06:36:13PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
It happened. Oh well. Now you might want to finish the task of
integrating star before someone appropriates that command name for
something else... :/
This does not depend on me as I am ready and waiting sice quite some
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 06:43:02PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It most definitely does depend on you since noone is getting paid to do
it and noone is volunteering to do it either, which leaves you as the
party with the most interest
On Wed, Dec 19, 2007 at 08:24:36PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It obviously doesn't work then because freshmeat.net lists both star and
ImageMagic.
I see no relation between imagemagic and star. What is your problem?
Darren is saying that
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 05:55:52PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Joep Vesseur [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 12/14/07 12:58, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The real compare is 20 years older and I did _warn_ _before_ the name
appeared
in /usr/bin. For this reason, this is an important bug in
Jörg seems to want the ARC and c-teams to use a different method than
they use today for deciding when some utility (or library, or whatever)
name is a conflict with another existing one.
I recommend that Jörg make a proposal for such a change without making
such a proposal specific to his
I'd set Reply-To so your replies, if any, would go to opensolaris-discuss,
not psarc-ext. One more try. Again, don't reply to me directly please.
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 06:42:58PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Nicolas Williams [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why are we still arguing about
On Fri, Dec 14, 2007 at 08:35:33PM +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
As long as it it impossible to implement the arc decisions in OpenSolaris,
OpenSolaris cannot evolve.
You've jumped the shark.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
On Tue, Nov 27, 2007 at 07:23:35AM -0800, Gary Winiger wrote:
Secondly, Craig has hired someone to work on SMC. Once he gets
up to speed, one of the tasks I've got planned for him is
a general key=value extension so SMC will not continue to block
work that needs to be
On Thu, May 17, 2007 at 09:34:29AM -0700, David Bustos wrote:
Quoth Nicolas Droux on Wed, May 16, 2007 at 11:00:30PM -0600:
On behalf of the Networking Community I'd like to propose the
creation of a new OpenSolaris project: Virtual Network Machines.
The project will exploit
On Tue, Jun 13, 2006 at 08:13:05AM -0700, Gary Winiger wrote:
They don't duplicate the info in the syslog files though?
Just to this point. Solaris Audit records a local binary
file (possibly remote via NFS).
In parallel it will write some subset of that file
in a
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 12:12:33PM -0400, James Carlson wrote:
Instead, syslog is a great dumping ground for all sorts of debug and
human-only messages, and will likely be treated that way indefinitely.
I would oppose an effort to apply structure on top of something that
is inherently without
On Fri, Jun 09, 2006 at 10:58:09PM +0800, Darren Reed wrote:
If there is any evolution of the log file format, it will
be to use XML. [...]
Sure, but the schema will have to be influenced by what the IETF SYSLOG
WG ends up doing w.r.t. structured messages.
On Tue, May 30, 2006 at 06:19:16AM +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The requirement is not that inodes and data are separate; the requirement
is a specific upperbound to disk transactions. The question therefor
is not when will ZFS be able to separate inods and data; the question
is when ZFS
The ZFS discuss list is re-delivering old messages.
Have the problems with the archives been fixed?
Nico
--
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 10:29:53AM -0700, Derek Cicero wrote:
Nicolas Williams wrote:
The ZFS discuss list is re-delivering old messages.
Which message(s) was redelivered?
E.g., a post from Eric Schrock from May 5, 2006, with message ID
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
and a few others.
Have
Also, I'm getting tired of replying to some e-mail only to get a post
awaits moderator approval reply.
I understand why we do that for non-subscribers.
And I guess we wouldn't want to by default treat @sun.com posters as
permitted to post w/o moderation.
But it's bloody obnoxious. I don't want
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 02:13:37PM -0700, Derek Cicero wrote:
Yes, the future goal is to allow all registered users to post to all
lists, however this requires us to re-write parts of mailman. The folks
working on the SCM app right now should be able to turn their attention
to the mailman
On Fri, May 12, 2006 at 02:28:42PM -0700, Derek Cicero wrote:
E.g., a post from Eric Schrock from May 5, 2006, with message ID
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
OK, based on this message ID, it did not come twice to the same list. It
came once to the zfs list on 5/5 and was cross posted to the nfs list.
On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 02:30:29PM +0800, Wuming Shi wrote:
hi,
how can I disable the root from su - id to become id? currently
the root can su to id without password, so it's not safe to this
user.
This thread is not showing up on the OpenSolaris discuss archive...
The mailman archives has
43 matches
Mail list logo
