Ferdinand O. Tempel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought we are still in hope that the SVr4 pkg system
will become OpenSource soon.
Lets start working on solutions anyway. Just in case you run out of breath
while you hold it while waiting for Sun to release. Why rely on kindness on
the
On Thu, 4 Aug 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Ferdinand O. Tempel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought we are still in hope that the SVr4 pkg system
will become OpenSource soon.
Lets start working on solutions anyway. Just in case you run out of breath
while you hold it while waiting for
On 8/4/05, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sun needs to opensource the package system or to rewrite
the zones code. Sun advertizes that OpenSolaris includes
Zones but they rely on the missing package system.
Until the packaging source (or at least redistributable binaries) is
Andy Tucker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 8/4/05, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sun needs to opensource the package system or to rewrite
the zones code. Sun advertizes that OpenSolaris includes
Zones but they rely on the missing package system.
Until the packaging source (or at
On 8/3/05, Ferdinand O. Tempel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I don't have a solution for the dilemma this community seems to be in. If it
were my call, I'd pick the packaging system which is very well documented,
performs well and has a lot of packages for it already. From where I'm
sitting that
Hello Louwtjie,
Wednesday, June 29, 2005, 11:52:03 AM, you wrote:
LB Sorry James, I'll try again :)
LB You need the Express ISO's to deploy the opensolaris source, yes.
LB My question is, looking down the line in 3-6 months (or 12), will there be
any opensolaris distro's (directly from Sun)?
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Are you talking about how binaries built from ON and other Solaris
consolidations are delivered, or about a hypothetical community-led
third-party application repository like portage, pkgsrc, and blastwave
provide today? Certainly unification in
On 6/30/05, Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Or non-portability, as the case may be. Static linking no longer
works on Solaris. For that matter, what mainstream platform doesn't
support dynamic linking?
Uh...static linking does too work on Solaris 10 :P It may not work for
base OS
Tending to be a bit of a reductionist, I can't help but throw out what
I think is the #1 foundational question here.
What's the best package architecture (database) standard for
OpenSolaris? The canonicial choices, listed alphabetically, are:
* deb
* pkgsrc (implemented by pkgsrc system)
*
On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 15:43, Eric Boutilier wrote:
- A big strike against deb and portage (for Solaris/OpenSolaris) is
that no work's been done yet.
- A big strike against Solaris packaging is it's not open-source yet.
- A big point in favor of Solaris packaging is compatibiltiy with
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Eric Boutilier wrote:
My 2 cents:
- A big strike against deb and portage (for Solaris/OpenSolaris) is
that no work's been done yet.
- A big strike against Solaris packaging is it's not open-source yet.
- A big point in favor of Solaris packaging is compatibiltiy
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 02:43:27PM -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote:
Tending to be a bit of a reductionist, I can't help but throw out what
I think is the #1 foundational question here.
What's the best package architecture (database) standard for
OpenSolaris? The canonicial choices, listed
These questions to me frame the entire set of problems for any
existing packaging system that tries to integrate with a native one or
when you have a 3rd party providing the packages instead of the
original project.
On 6/29/05, Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- If new packages are
On Wed, 29 Jun 2005, Darren J Moffat wrote:
On Wed, 2005-06-29 at 12:43, Eric Boutilier wrote:
Tending to be a bit of a reductionist, I can't help but throw out what
I think is the #1 foundational question here.
What's the best package architecture (database) standard for
OpenSolaris?
I feel like it's time to mention my baby: pkgbuild
(pkgbuild.sf.net), which is an rpmbuild replacement that
produces Solaris SVr4 packages. This is what we use for
building JDS/Solaris (all GNOME, Mozilla, Evolution, APOC).
We have rpm spec files [with a few enhancements], patches
and community
On Wed, Jun 29, 2005 at 05:37:59PM -0500, Eric Boutilier wrote:
So them is this commuity here, and the distribution is SchilliX. So
in that context, What suites us? is the issue I'm raising.
I'd think the packaging system used by SchilliX is for Joerg to
decide, in concert with his user base,
On 6/29/05, Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it seems to me that one feasible path would be to take a minimal
OpenSolaris-based OS (SchilliX) and integrate an rpm registry onto
it -- at least for now. Then when Solaris packaging (svr4) is
open-sourced, migrating to a svr4 registry
17 matches
Mail list logo
