Just so I'm clear, the Nexenta design philosophy is
(as with many other
people) one of the things you're mainly interested
in here? Is that what
gives rise to most of the sentiments and
observations you're expressing here?
Nexenta design philosophy? I am not sure what you are
referring
On Thu, 19 Apr 2007, Alan DuBoff wrote:
...
If Chung wants to help, he should get involved and try to fix it...
+1000
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Solaris only needs to improve if Sun wants to stay
competitive and grow its market and mind share.
If
it wasn't for that little hitch, Solaris could
remain
as painful as your heart desired.
Solaris isn't painful, but easy and elegant. It's
a
On Fri, 20 Apr 2007, Chung Hang Christopher Chan wrote:
If Chung wants to help, he should get involved and
try to fix it.
I have started trying to compile apt and dpkg under
Sun Studio 11...
Chung,
Just so I'm clear, the Nexenta design philosophy is (as with many other
people) one of the
On 4/20/07, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I really don't get why you think OpenSolaris (esp. as in Solaris Express,
as opposed to regular Solaris (currently 10)) should have any particular
gee-whiz-updates-are-painless tools.
Well, let's see - I have Solaris 8+10 systems in
I really don't get why you think OpenSolaris (esp. as in Solaris Express,
as opposed to regular Solaris (currently 10)) should have any particular
gee-whiz-updates-are-painless tools. Solaris Express is _not_ really
meant for production (or for anybody's technophobe grandmother, either),
it's
So what is the thrust of OpenSolaris if it is *not* at least partially
to gain a share of the desktop market among technophobes, regardless of
their age/gender? Why all the emphasis on JDS and Gnome? For serious
commerce or business on big machines who needs or even wants a browser
client or
I really don't get why you think OpenSolaris (esp. as in Solaris Express,
as opposed to regular Solaris (currently 10)) should have any particular
gee-whiz-updates-are-painless tools.
Thank heavens you aren't in charge of Solaris :)
Solaris only needs to improve if Sun wants to stay competitive
Sun Connection is very easy to use to manage updates and is all you're
likely to need in a *production* environment. So I don't understand
your compliant. Given that you have never indicated actual usage of
it, I think it is unfair for you to be critical of it.
That's a whole different issue.
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you. the concept of apt/yum repositories seems
to be very alien here.
No, it is not. You just have a hard time believing that we don't
embrace it as the one true way of doing things. I think the point
most people have been
Geez, Redhat, Debian, Ubuntu, Fedora, Centos must all
be doing the wrong thing then deploying updates to
their thousands of users whether they are individual
desktops or people who keep their own local repository
for their servers.
With the exception of RedHat, those are all developer distros
Could BFU be more stable and convenient for a common OpenSoalris user as
me? I eventually gave up using OpenSolaris and back to Linux after this
tool
had broken some of my blastwave packages for quite a few times.
I doubt it. BFU is meant for an ad-hoc update on a single system for a
Solaris
a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2007-04-18 16:55:44:
If you want to develop on Solaris for Solaris (and other UNIX and
UNIX-like
systems), or just keep up and play with the latest, cutting edge
technology
in Solaris, then Solaris Express is for you. Otherwise you have to wait
about six
I'm sorry, but how is it okay to bring a production server down completely
and spend the 30 minutes it's gonna take to get a flash archive on a
server, and then the other hour or more it'll take you to regression test
EVERYTHING, since who knows what really happened ... to update a single
developers.sun.com/solaris
We have articles, code samples, tutorials, demos...links to docs. We
only came back online last Oct., so we are still working out the kinks,
getting more and more info...
Look for big navigational improvements coming in the next quarter
:}
-chris
a b wrote:
On 18/04/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote on 2007-04-18 16:55:44:
If you want to develop on Solaris for Solaris (and other UNIX and
UNIX-like
systems), or just keep up and play with the latest, cutting edge
technology
in Solaris, then Solaris
On Wed, 18 Apr 2007, Thomas Rampelberg wrote:
Thank you! I don't care how it's implemented, I'd simply like to see some
functionality added. The current system is working great for some people, and
that's nice it is just my opinion that with some added functionality, we
could really
If Chung wants to help, he should get involved and
try to fix it.
I have started trying to compile apt and dpkg under
Sun Studio 11. As for pooh poohing on the Solaris way
of updates, may I point out there is no Open Solaris
way of updating. The way liveupgrade is done
(liveupgrade seems to me
On 18/04/07, a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I can be critical of the Sun Update Connection because I was a paying
customer for one year.
To be fair and objective (and not be a Sun PR channel, as some feel) Sun
Update connection never worked right.
It shows patches for Solaris 8 on a Solaris 10
Shawn Walker wrote:
Sun Connection is very easy to use to manage updates and is all you're
likely to need in a *production* environment. So I don't understand
your compliant. Given that you have never indicated actual usage of
it, I think it is unfair for you to be critical of it.
Upgrades are
First of all, thank you answer my questions.
On 4/18/07, a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I doubt it. BFU is meant for an ad-hoc update on a single system for a
Solaris developer. Not end user, not sysadmin, but a developer. Which
implies that said developer has an indepth understanding of
Shawn Walker wrote:
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you. the concept of apt/yum repositories seems
to be very alien here.
No, it is not. You just have a hard time believing that we don't
embrace it as the one true way of doing things. I think the point
Shawn Walker wrote:
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is not my problem. I would not bother about this
if I was more than happy to drop in a DVD or a bunch
of CDs to 'upgrade' each box
Except you don't even have to do that. All you need is an ISO image,
no
lloy0076 wrote:
This discussion seems to be spinning around in circles. There is a lot
of benefit to an apt like packaging system but clearly a good number
of organisations and individuals have gotten by with Solaris without
such a packaging system.
That is neither wrong, nor right. It just
On 18/04/07, xiaoming zhu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, I'd like to play the Solaris Express, but I cannot spend much
effort/time to debug the kernel, I just want to have a simple tool/way to
update/recover the system.
If you install Solaris Express, that's exactly what you're opening
yourself
Since Gentoo is compile based, the USE flags
generally are directly
transfered to configure options. For example, if you
wanted to install
MySQL with '--with-big-tables' you can simply specify
the
USE='big-tables' USE flag and everything's taken care
of for you. I
can't imagine how
Sun studio just has to be as available so that
software developers will hopefully stop using gcc/gnu
ld specific stuff and an easy to update open solaris
distribution (nexenta looking pretty much there...)
being installed everywhere will hopefully draw the
attention of those software
Yes, well, a network enabled dist upgrade or package
upgrade are the two things I would be looking for.
Unless there are tools to help maintain hundreds of
servers which are divided into different groups
available...
Yes there are. Commercial tools. And they cost a lot of money. Some
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, well, a network enabled dist upgrade or
package
upgrade are the two things I would be looking for.
Unless there are tools to help maintain hundreds
of
servers which are divided into different groups
available...
Yes there are.
Funny, I got the similar results for my mail servers
with anaconda kickstart, pxe, dhcp, tftp and grub save
for certain stuff in /etc. They all run the same
distro base, run the same software packages and
scriipts and don't require someone baby sitting them
during installation or upgrade.
Chung Hang Christopher Chan wrote:
PXE, Anaconda and JumpStart are just parts and
pieces of the puzzle.
My point is, in an environment like that, one would
*never* run `apt-get` or
`yum update`. That would be ad-hoc. It would take
all the stability and
reliability out of that environment.
I'm
Pretty much. Install, copy configs over, reboot.
Viola. Minus the thousands of servers claim. And of
course no Oracle.
Exactly. As soon as you have to copy config over, you're in ad-hoc land.
That works for maybe up to 100 servers with three full-time people, but
simply shatters for huge
--- a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny, I got the similar results for my mail
servers
with anaconda kickstart, pxe, dhcp, tftp and grub
save
for certain stuff in /etc. They all run the same
distro base, run the same software packages and
scriipts and don't require someone baby sitting
a b wrote:
1. Documentation is a major pain in the ass to find. Outside of man
pages and the occasional Sun engineer blog entry, there seems to be
no decent documentation. In fact, most people admit that the Solaris
10 books that are currently out, are simply Solaris 9 books with a
new cover.
--- a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Pretty much. Install, copy configs over, reboot.
Viola. Minus the thousands of servers claim. And
of
course no Oracle.
Exactly. As soon as you have to copy config over,
you're in ad-hoc land.
That works for maybe up to 100 servers with three
full-time
2. Ease of use Now, I know that most of you old
school UNIX guys
laugh at this, but usability is important. You've
tuned me into a cool
way to do something along the lines of USE flags in
Solaris, but it sure
sounds like it's not gonna be easy. Using Ubuntu for
an example, the
--- Thomas Rampelberg [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Chung Hang Christopher Chan wrote:
PXE, Anaconda and JumpStart are just parts and
pieces of the puzzle.
My point is, in an environment like that, one
would
*never* run `apt-get` or
`yum update`. That would be ad-hoc. It would take
all
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Ease of use Now, I know that most of you old
school UNIX guys
laugh at this, but usability is important. You've
tuned me into a cool
way to do something along the lines of USE flags in
Solaris, but it sure
sounds
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you. the concept of apt/yum repositories seems
to be very alien here.
No, it is not. You just have a hard time believing that we don't
embrace it as the one true way of doing things. I think the point
most people have been
Sun Connection is very easy to use to manage updates
and is all you're
likely to need in a *production* environment. So I
don't understand
your compliant. Given that you have never indicated
actual usage of
it, I think it is unfair for you to be critical of
it.
Eh? When did I make a
--- Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you. the concept of apt/yum repositories
seems
to be very alien here.
No, it is not. You just have a hard time believing
that we don't
embrace it as the one true way of
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--- Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 17/04/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thank you. the concept of apt/yum repositories
seems
to be very alien here.
No, it is not. You just have a hard
The point is, that if you're maintaining your own stack, you don't
need to integrate with the base OS's packaging system. In fact, you
usually don't want to mess with or touch the base stack at all!
Similar to how blastwave works actually, and why it works relatively
well...
I disagree. I
You could even use OpenPKG to build your own entire
software stack or
use the one they provide:
http://www.openpkg.org/
The nice thing about OpenPKG is that it works on more
operating
systems than just Solaris.
You could, and it sounds nice, but it's a trap. Sooner or later whoever does
On 09/04/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You could even use OpenPKG to build your own entire
software stack or
use the one they provide:
http://www.openpkg.org/
The nice thing about OpenPKG is that it works on more
operating
systems than just Solaris.
You could, and it sounds
apt ain't perfect, and I'm not sure any solution will
be perfect, but we can
probably do something better than apt. apt is pretty
old already. opensolaris
has the advantage that apt is already around. Would
be good to borrow the
good from it and have our own. And I don't mean
borrow in
While there's no reason one can't have multiple versions of a library
(with a single-part version number only incremented for ABI changes, please),
they aren't free even if disk space almost is. They cost maintenance, and
memory too (if multiple versions are in use at the same time). Sometimes
Richard L. Hamilton writes:
While there's no reason one can't have multiple versions of a library
(with a single-part version number only incremented for ABI changes, please),
they aren't free even if disk space almost is. They cost maintenance, and
memory too (if multiple versions are in use
48 matches
Mail list logo
