On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
Never could have ever imagined that this was going
to happen, but looks like it is:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2084284,00.asp?kc
=EWEWEMNL011507EP28A
Nothing is certain yet (to my knowledge), but I know
of at least
two CAB
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this opportunity
to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in order
to integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris project
Ok, lets refine this proposal:
1. Deliver KDE3 to /usr/kde3/ and
Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this opportunity
to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in order to
integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris project
Ok, lets refine this proposal:
1. Deliver KDE3
kiran wrote:
Could anyone please provide me the link for man pages for the ndi calls..
I also want to know under what circumstances does the ndi_devi_online fail??
Hi Kiran,
as far as I can see, the ndi* calls are not documented in the
manpages. I recall that they're mentioned in the Writing
Stefan Teleman wrote:
On Tuesday 16 January 2007 19:56, John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this
opportunity to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and
kde-core-devel in order to integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris project
+1.
+1
1. Deliver KDE3 to /usr/kde3/ and reserve /usr/kde4/
for KDE version 4.
Does it really make sense to spend much time on kde3 at this point? Copying the
stuff that is already on solaris.kde.org is ok, but there probably should not
be much more.
I think it makes more sense to collaborate as
QEMU - on the other hand - is happy with gcc and
binutils alone, which
are widely available for almost any platform.
Except that GCC generates slow, crappy code. It's a big slap in GCC team's face
that Sun comes to i86pc as a latecomer with their compiler and trods them into
the ground on
On Wednesday 17 January 2007 05:49, Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this
opportunity to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and
kde-core-devel in order to integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris
project
Ok, lets
UNIX admin wrote:
QEMU - on the other hand - is happy with gcc and
binutils alone, which
are widely available for almost any platform.
Except that GCC generates slow, crappy code. It's a big slap in GCC team's face that Sun
comes to i86pc as a latecomer with their compiler and trods them into
On 1/17/07, Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this opportunity
to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in order to
integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris project
Ok, lets refine
On 1/16/07, Jim Grisanzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, it's well known that Sun has been involved in GPL v3
conversations all long, Java and OpenSPARC went out GPL v2, and
GlassFish is GPLv2/CDDL. So if the company is actually considering v3 as
an addition to CDDL for OpenSolaris, why not?
On 1/17/07, Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this
opportunity to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in
order to integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Also, there will be an enormous amount of
software under v3 when it's done, so wouldn't that benefit us? Don't we
want to grow faster?
It would enable that software to benefit from us, but not us to benefit
from them, since any software we take in from another GPLv3
Bob Palowoda wrote:
On Tue, 16 Jan 2007, W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
Never could have ever imagined that this was going
to happen, but looks like it is:
http://www.eweek.com/article2/0,1895,2084284,00.asp?kc
=EWEWEMNL011507EP28A
Nothing is certain yet (to my knowledge), but I know
of at least
Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this opportunity
to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in order to
integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris project
Ok, lets refine this proposal:
Those all sound
On 1/17/07, Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this opportunity
to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in order to
integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris project
Ok, lets refine
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Also, there will be an enormous amount of
software under v3 when it's done, so wouldn't that benefit us? Don't we
want to grow faster?
It would enable that software to benefit from us, but not us to benefit
from them, since any software we take in from another GPLv3
UNIX admin wrote:
QEMU - on the other hand - is happy with gcc and
binutils alone, which
are widely available for almost any platform.
Except that GCC generates slow, crappy code. It's a big slap in GCC team's face that Sun
comes to i86pc as a latecomer with their compiler and trods them into
On 1/17/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this
opportunity to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in
order to integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris
Perhaps engineering resources that went into making OpenSolaris
GCC-friendly would have been better spent porting SS10 to other
platforms? Were I the manager that had the power to decide, I would
have certainly pushed in that direction, not the other way around.
The reasons those engineering
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 08:20 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Also, there will be an enormous amount of
software under v3 when it's done, so wouldn't that benefit us? Don't we
want to grow faster?
It would enable that software to benefit from us, but not us to benefit
William James writes:
Those all sound like points for the kde project to discuss once
it's established. There's no reason to constrain the project
up front with them.
It's better to discuss and define the scope of the project *NOW*
instead of getting the response 'we don't take that'
Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 08:20 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Also, there will be an enormous amount of
software under v3 when it's done, so wouldn't that benefit us? Don't we
want to grow faster?
It would enable that software to benefit from us, but not
William James wrote:
On 1/17/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this
opportunity to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and
kde-core-devel in order to integrate KDE
On 1/17/07, William James [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/17/07, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this
opportunity to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and
Perhaps engineering resources that went into making
OpenSolaris GCC-friendly would have been better spent
porting SS10 to other platforms? Were I the manager
that had the power to decide, I would have certainly
pushed in that direction, not the other way around.
Sparc, and x86 are
Right - as long as all code was dual licensed - the implication of Jim's
statement was that dual-licensing our sources would allow us to benefit
from other GPLv3 code, but if we did pull that in, it would be GPLv3-only
and not dual licensed, and distros would have no choice on using it.
But if
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 09:33 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 08:20 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Also, there will be an enormous amount of
software under v3 when it's done, so wouldn't that benefit us? Don't we
want to grow
Why would Sun be so keen to pay people to port Solaris (which has a price
tag = FREE) and help HP, IBM etc to sell their hardware? It would end up
being Sun paying to port the code. HP and IBM selling the hardware, and HP
and IBM getting support contracts for maintaining Solaris on HP and
UNIX admin wrote:
Perhaps engineering resources that went into making
OpenSolaris GCC-friendly would have been better spent
porting SS10 to other platforms? Were I the manager
that had the power to decide, I would have certainly
pushed in that direction, not the other way around.
Both the
Ignacio Marambio Catán writes:
I think you're confusing things being under the opensolaris umbrella
does not necesary mean inclusion in the next solaris release. Sun is
the main sponsor of opensolaris, just that.And i think it is a sun
representative you have to talk to to push for kde's
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 09:53 -0800, Rich Teer wrote:
On Wed, 17 Jan 2007, Erast Benson wrote:
Even GPLv2 allows that. The key is to ship closed beastie separately,
i.e. to download on package installation, ask EULA, etc..
How would one ship the closed bits of libc.so separately, given
Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 09:33 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Erast Benson wrote:
On Wed, 2007-01-17 at 08:20 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Also, there will be an enormous amount of
software under v3 when it's done, so wouldn't
george r smith wrote:
My question is why isn't Sun keen in porting Eclipse to Solaris 10 (x86) and
help those of us who bought Sun boxes. I know about Netbeans but do a search
it is not used nearly as much as Ecliplse.
Maybe because Eclipse isn't pure java (trademark or not), so the
guards
+1
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[i]Does it really make sense to spend much time on kde3 at this point? Copying
the stuff that is already on solaris.kde.org is ok, but there probably should
not be much more.
I think it makes more sense to collaborate as much as possible with the main
kde developers on making kde4 as portable
Thanks, Dave. Your project proposal has been seconded. I'll
contact you offline to get you set up.
Eric
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, David Lloyd wrote:
http://www.adam.com.au/lloy0076/solaris/pmpsm.pdf
Project Name
The proposed name of the project is Printable Many Page Solaris
Sorry I've been late to respond to this thread. I'm in Atlanta for Sun Tech
Days and my ability to hop online has been limited.
There's been a lot of chatter about OpenSolaris dual-licensing with CDDL and
GPLv3. As Rich Green points out in his most recent blog entry
Roland Mainz wrote:
John Sonnenschein wrote:
Following the official proposal guidelines, I'd like to take this opportunity
to propose that we collaborate with the KDE e.V. and kde-core-devel in order to
integrate KDE as an OpenSolaris project
Ok, lets refine this proposal:
1. Deliver KDE3
Nothing is certain yet (to my knowledge), but I know
of at least
two CAB members who have serious reservations about
this idea.
--
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OpenSolaris CAB member
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
John Weekley wrote:
Too bad that there are certain segments within Sun who can't see their
way to supporting KDE on a more official level and feel that it's a
direct threat to JDS.
As it has been mentioned elsewhere, it's very much a resource issue rather than
'direct threat' that you
IMO KDE continues to outpace GNOME and I would love to see better support on
Solaris!
+1
-- Russ
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right - as long as all code was dual licensed - the implication of Jim's
statement was that dual-licensing our sources would allow us to benefit
from other GPLv3 code, but if we did pull that in, it would be GPLv3-only
and not dual licensed, and distros would have no
On 1/17/07, Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Need clarification please. Are John Sonnenschein and Roland Mainz
co-owners of the KDE proposal now?
I remember the day when it was considered 'impossible' to convince Sun
to introduce ksh93 to Solaris and somehow Roland Mainz managed to get
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Right - as long as all code was dual licensed - the implication of Jim's
statement was that dual-licensing our sources would allow us to benefit
from other GPLv3 code, but if we did pull that in, it would be GPLv3-only
and not dual licensed, and
On 1/17/07, Stephen Harpster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sorry I've been late to respond to this thread. I'm in Atlanta for Sun Tech
Days and my ability to hop online has been limited.
There's been a lot of chatter about OpenSolaris dual-licensing with CDDL and
GPLv3. As Rich Green points out
Holger Berger wrote:
Currently most of us consider it 'impossible' that KDE makes it into
Solaris. I'd like to nominate Roland Mainz as project lead for the
(Open)Solaris KDE project, maybe he can do the 'impossible' again.
Holger
A pity that SUNW didn't decide that way from the
Martin Bochnig wrote:
A pity that SUNW didn't decide that way from the beginning on (2002).
It's such a waste of resources.
GNOME was selected in 2000 for a variety of technical, licensing,
community, and management reasons. Both GNOME KDE were fully
considered, but GNOME was chosen as the
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Solaris has two already - CDE GNOME.
Okay.
Plus all the unsupported WM's from the SFW-Companion_disk (plus from 3rd
party repositories like CSW ... ).
But my personal experience shows, that too few external people _know_
about those options.
SUNW should make more
Holger Berger wrote:
On 1/17/07, Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Need clarification please. Are John Sonnenschein and Roland Mainz
co-owners of the KDE proposal now?
I remember the day when it was considered 'impossible' to convince Sun
to introduce ksh93 to Solaris and somehow
Glynn Foster wrote:
John Weekley wrote:
Too bad that there are certain segments within Sun who can't see their
way to supporting KDE on a more official level and feel that it's a
direct threat to JDS.
As it has been mentioned elsewhere, it's very much a resource issue rather than
Joerg,
The last time I did read the GPLv3 draft, it was not even clear to me whether
GPLv3 really clearly allows a mix with other OSS licenses.
It is clear to me that the GPL of various descriptions is a license to
promote what the Free Software Foundation believes is software freedom;
the
[nobr]bBathing ape hoody/b Bape hoody bathing ape hoody clothing clothes
a href=http://wholesale-distributors-dropship-suppliers-sources.com;img
src=http://wholesale-distributors-dropship-suppliers-sources.com/01hoodie.jpg;
border=0 height=101 width=142/a Bape a
[b]LRG dead serious hoodie LRG skeleton hoody LRG skeleton hoodie jacket[/b]
http://wholesale-distributors-dropship-suppliers-sources.com/
http://wholesale-distributors-dropship-suppliers-sources.com/
http://wholesale-distributors-dropship-suppliers-sources.com/
lrg 116606 66632
[b]Breitling watch uhren uhr montre reloj orologio replica reproduction[/b]
[i]http://advertising-email-services.com[/i]
[u]http://advertising-email-services.com[/u]
[b]http://advertising-email-services.com[/b]
[b]
breitling breitling breitling
breitling watch breitling watch
Thanks, Pavan. Your project proposal has been seconded. I'll contact you
offline to get you set up.
Eric
On Mon, 15 Jan 2007, Pavan T C wrote:
Hi,
The aim of the project is to enable the installation and booting
of OpenSolaris from an extended partition.
This project will be delivered in
56 matches
Mail list logo
