date:20051123

Hi,

if I like to create a SchilliX that is able to deal with
Blastwave packages, I would need to populate the SUNW* related
package database for a SchilliX installation.

Is there a simple way to do this without really running pkgadd?

Or is there a way to create complete SUNW* packages from the
ON sourcetree and then run pkgadd -R root-path for the SchilliX
template directory?




Jörg

-- 
 EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)  
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

Scott N. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 I understand that not all of Solaris has been opensourced so there will 
 inevitably be inconsistentcies betweem the commercial ones released from Sun 
 and any opensolaris distros. I didn't want to cut down the great efforts of 
 Nexenta or others as I also do realize that these types of projects are 
 different than the goals for Solaris 10/SolExpress. Mainly trying to create a 
 desktop for more for the types who may have used Fedora or Ubuntu. This is 
 great. I actually downloaded the latest Nexenta to play with again. But I 
 hate having to go to a Sol 10 server to Nexenta and feeling like I am 
 starting over again and not even in Solaris anymore.

 I just don't understand why every new project or distro must start with the 
 linux mentality of my way and seemingly purposely *trying* to fork.

You need to distinct between the distros that make things different because 
they have been forced to do so by Sun (missing source availability) and distros
that just decide to be different.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)  
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread Eric Boutilier

Having a distro (or two) that is really, really different from standard 
Solaris is actually a very good thing to have -- as long as it's 
different in all the right ways.


On the LugRadio, Adam Leventhal interview[1], when a LugRadio guy asks 
something like: I'm an Ubuntu user, should I try OpenSolaris? Adam's 
answer of course was: Yes -- try Nexenta.


In other words, I for one am thrilled that we have precisely that answer 
for Ubuntu and other Linux users/developers who have never tried 
Solaris. For the vast majority of them, the existence of a viable 
GNU/Solaris project and distro makes Solaris (and ultimately ZFS[2], 
Zones, DTrace, SMF, etc!) finally worth trying for the first time.


soap-box mode on:

At the risk of sounding like a broken record, OpenSolaris is and should 
be an integral part of -- not the UNIX-pure community -- but the broader 
UNIX/Linux community. (Why self-isolate ourselves from such an _immense_ 
pool of scientists, engineers, and programmers from which undoubtedly 
many future innovations will come?!)


That's why I don't think we want all OpenSolaris-based distros to be 
strictly Solaris/UNIX compliant.


Eric

[1]: See: 
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/patrickf?entry=opensolaris_on_lugradio
[2]: Feeding-frenzy alert: In 6 days, the ZFS mail-list has seen ~200 
messages by ~70 different people!




___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] How to create /var/sadm/* info for OpenSolaris

2005-11-23 Thread Jeff Cheeney


On 11/23/05 05:39, Joerg Schilling wrote:


Hi,

if I like to create a SchilliX that is able to deal with
Blastwave packages, I would need to populate the SUNW* related
package database for a SchilliX installation.

Is there a simple way to do this without really running pkgadd?

Or is there a way to create complete SUNW* packages from the
ON sourcetree and then run pkgadd -R root-path for the SchilliX
template directory?




Jörg

 

It's not pretty or fast, but you can use installf(1M) to add files to 
the package database. This is how some of the Solaris install works. The 
man page has all of the details.


  --jc
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Role based configuration

2005-11-23 Thread Jeff Cheeney


On 11/22/05 05:52, Darren J Moffat wrote:


On Tue, 2005-11-22 at 11:59, Robert Lunnon wrote:
 

Having thought about my recent dialogue about CDROM door locking it occurs to 
me that we really have two different classes of users with different 
requirements. It then occurred to me that perhaps the behaviour of the CDROM 
should be determined by the Role the workstation is playing. For example if 
the role is workstation then the user should be allowed to eject the cd at 
any time and the eject facility on the CDROM drive should not be disabled. 
Whereas if the role is multiuser focused (eg server or say terminal server) 
then the CD door should be locked when it is busy.


There are probably dozens of other instances like this where behaviour should 
be tailored to role. Perhaps we need to consider infrastructure to do this.
   



We have most of that already between logindevperm and RBAC.

cdrw(1) uses RBAC authorisations to determine if the user can
write to CDs since the device nodes are still owned by root and
cdrw(1) is setuid.

You could instead use logindevperm to assign ownership of the
device nodes to the user who logged in on /dev/console - as we do
for audio and usb mass storage devices.  However this is slightly
tricker for CD/DVD writers as the device node alone doesn't tell
you what it is.

 

I agree that many of the pieces are already there, but there is nothing 
tying them together. For example, when you create a user account, there 
is no simple way to say this user is the admin for this laptop. Or as 
Bob suggested, when installing the machine say this is a laptop and the 
install software knows there are some packages to add (or not add) and 
certain feature that should be enabled.


This lack of tying the technologies together into solutions is where we 
are suffering.


my thoughts 

  --jc
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

Even if OpenSolaris splits into countless splinters, you'll always have THE 
Solaris and SolarisExpress which will be consistent.

As for BSDs, they haven't fragmented that much because the BSD community is 
proportionally very small to other groups.  My suspicion is that they have a 
good sense of unity, too.

Unfortunately, the BSD style of things, lack of wide HW driver support have 
kept a really solid operating system from gaining critical momentum; it's 
simply too exotic (OS X comes to mind!), plus SVR4 (from which BSD also stems) 
has been adopted as THE standard for UNIX almost 20 years ago.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

 As J.S. mentioned before, in the future we should
 expect at least 2
 types of OpenSolaris-based distros:
 
 a) GNU-centric, those who trying to re-use GNU/Linux
 as much as possible
 
 b) Solaris-centric, those who trying to mimic Solaris
 as much as
 possible
 
 But I'm hoping that both (a) and (b) will be *much
 more* compatable than
 any two distros in GNU/Linux world. And the reason
 for my hope is that
 we are using the same Least Common Denominator(LCD)
 - OpenSolaris(tm)
 which is not just a kernel but userland too and
 developed under the
 single roof. In my sense, LCD will preserve
 inter-distro compatability.

That is unlikely to happen, although I hope that Moinak G. will make it 
possible.
Why? Because someone who really knows and understands UNIX won't give GNU five 
minutes. GNU is all about the hype and brute force and none of the 
quality/snandards.  UNIX people (and don't tell me that there are no UNIX 
people!) that could bring it together will spring for b) because they know 
that's the right way of doing things (sorry, but that's just the way it is).

Those who don't yet know UNIX and have grown up on GNU diet as Moinak puts it 
(rightly so), will be pushing for GNU.  With a few notable exceptions, those 
people don't have the necessary experience to bring it all together properly, 
and if they keep pushing GNU, they're not likely to get that experience either.

So, with a few exceptions, things will stay as they are.
I can't really say that I'm sorry about that, GNU tools are very poor in every 
respect. I'd much rather be using Sun Studio compilers than GCC, for example.  
Good/usable/quality applications from GNU land will find their way into Solaris.

Yet, there is some hope left.  If Solaris attracts critical enough mass of 
developers (and it looks poised to do so), those people may start using Solaris 
as their main development platform.  This, I hope, would eventually lead to 
extinction of GNU in its present form.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

 Schilymedium age (starting in 1982). The tools are
 e currently in
 /opt/schily/* but as they are not optional on
 on SchilliX, it
   seems that they belong to /usr/schily/* in future.

Just a moment. What is the reason that your tools are not optional?

 GNU   The youngest set of tools (starting around
 d 1986).
 My current idea is to put them into /usr/sps/* as
 as Linux
 users may expect them in the same hierarchy as the
 he rest of
 free software. It may be a good idea to create a

GNU tools are purely optional, and therefore there is no technical reason why 
these, as 3rd party software, shouldn't go into /opt.

Furthermore, putting any 3rd party SW in any location other than /opt violates 
SVR4 and Sun's standards.

Even further down the road, a fine example is the HP-UX operating system, and 
there is something to be learned from him in this particular case.  All the 
HP-UX porting archives, which are 3rd party groups that have nothing to do with 
hp, have been putting all the 3rd party SW into /opt.  Now that's DISCIPLINE! 
Outstanding!

I seriously doubt there is any reason not to put anything non-Sun into /opt. 
That's what /opt is for!

The question is not whether non-Sun stuff should be put into /opt, but -- why 
not?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

 After my initial trial with Nexenta and then finding
 that X was installed in non-stardard Solaris
 location, I have now made an effort to only support
 TRUE Solaris-like 'distro's' like Schillix or even
 better may just stick with Solaris Express for my
 needs (Why hasn't there been a 'distro' where I can
 install SE without the long 4-cd install process). If
 I am going to use and support Solaris, I want to be
 learning and using SOLARIS. Not some distro that goes
 off in its own direction (namely the dumb Linux
 direction) and then just adds the SunOS kernel. This
 is unnessary, Just continue to use
 Linux/Debian/Ubuntu/GNU then if it is SO good! All
 this wasted effort could be put to better use like
 making Blastwave better or something.

Bravo!
I agree, the energy spent on bastardizing Solaris to make it look like Linux is 
counter productive at best.

To recap:
a) one'll learn very little Solaris, if any
b) effort could be channeled to more constructive uses.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] OpenSolaris feature on LugRadio

2005-11-23 Thread Patrick Finch


Hi,

For those interested, Adam Leventhal was interviewed on the British 
podcasting Linux / open source radio show LugRadio this week. He 
discusses OpenSolaris, and how it contrasts with Linux.


You can hear the interview here:

http://www.lugradio.org/

regards

Patrick

___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread Dave Marquardt

UNIX == UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:

UNIX Unfortunately, the BSD style of things, lack of wide HW driver
UNIX support have kept a really solid operating system from gaining
UNIX critical momentum; it's simply too exotic (OS X comes to mind!),
UNIX plus SVR4 (from which BSD also stems) has been adopted as THE
UNIX standard for UNIX almost 20 years ago.

Huh?  BSD stems from SVR4?  In what way?  My recollection of history
is System V catching up to many BSD things years later.  So could you
clarify what you mean by BSD stemming from SVR4?
-- 
Dave Marquardt
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Austin, TX
+1 512 401-1077
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread James Carlson

UNIX admin writes:
 That is unlikely to happen, although I hope that Moinak G. will make it 
 possible.
 Why? Because someone who really knows and understands UNIX won't give GNU 
 five minutes. GNU is all about the hype and brute force and none of the 
 quality/snandards.  UNIX people (and don't tell me that there are no UNIX 
 people!) that could bring it together will spring for b) because they know 
 that's the right way of doing things (sorry, but that's just the way it is).
[...]

Can we _please_ not repeat the OS holy wars here?  They're really
quite off-topic, besides just being silly.

(Check my headers and you'll see I'm using VM on GNU emacs.  Yes, I
intentionally use GNU tools when they do the job that I need to do.
Many others, both inside and outside of Sun, do likewise.  I don't
think that painting GNU with a broad brush helps anybody or any
effort, least of all Open Solaris.)

-- 
James Carlson, KISS Network[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: [approach-discuss] Re: ioctl SIOCGENADDR returns ENOENT

I was referring to SIOCGIFHWADDR or SIOCGENADDR ioctl should work for non-root 
users, too... well, assuming it gets implemented.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: [approach-discuss] Re: ioctl SIOCGENADDR returns ENOENT

That is the tradition of ifconfig. arp gives you MAC addresses without 
being root. Programmatically, you can retrieve MAC by poking the ARP. It's a 
bit ugly since you have to know the IP of the nic to do that and it works for 
UP interfaces only.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Incorporating open-source cmds/libs into OpenSolaris

2005-11-23 Thread Eric Boutilier

[ Followups: _Please_ post followups only to the GNU-Solaris community list:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] ]

Greetings,

For disscussion purposes (comparing/contrasting), I put together this
post which contains the two leading proposals for name-space
conventions of open-source commands and libraries in OpenSolaris. (And
by association, certain distros too I think:  SchilliX, Blastwave/CSW,
and Sun's Solaris and JDS).

--Eric

=
Sun Proposal, copied from http://opensolaris.org/os/community/gnu_solaris
=

Date: Tue Jun 14, 2005

Gnu Solaris

  This community is all about incorporating/including GNU software
  into OpenSolaris.

  OpenSolaris supports lots of standards - XPG3, XPG4, XPG6, Posix,
  etc. GNU has become a defacto standard in the Linux and *BSD
  communities, and we've incorporated many GNU commands and libraries
  into Solaris already, albeit often with name changes, marooned out in
  /usr/sfw where new users cannot find it, etc.

  We would like to bring more GNU software into OpenSolaris, and
  rationalize the naming conventions without breaking backwards
  compatibility. In addition, we could provide an individual user with
  a choice of a GNU personality for OpenSolaris/Solaris.
___

Initial Proposal

  * GNU commands that don't collide with current /usr/bin namespace -
place these in /usr/bin.

  * GNU commands that do collide with commands already in /usr/bin -
place these in /usr/gnu/bin, following the convention we started
with /usr/xpg*/bin.

  * Existing aliases (gtar, gmake, etc) will appear in /usr/sfw (and
perhaps also in /usr/bin).

___

  This naming proposal offers simple rules which would both simplify
  access to GNU commands on an OpenSolaris-derived system, as well as
  easily allow an individual user to have a GNU personality to their
  default commands by placing /usr/gnu/bin first in their PATH.

  None of this is cast in stone; it's a idea to get people started
  thinking about how to incorporate more open source software into
  Solaris.



===
Schilling proposal, copied from:
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2005-November/011157.html
===

Date: Tue Nov 15, 2005

Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Joerg Schilling wrote:
  -   The current hierarchy on Sun Solaris is just using a planless
  aggregation of free software on various places. There is no reason
  why GNOME related programs (that are completely useless without X
  that could modify the PATH) made it into /usr/bin while iportant
  programs like wget are hidden in /usr/sfw/bin/

 There were plans - they just kept changing.  8-)

 The plan for /usr/sfw/bin is changing to be mainly for things like GNU
 utilities whose names conflict with programs already in /usr/bin - those
 that don't, like wget, are likely to move in the future.   There's even
 talk of no longer hiding developer tools like make in /usr/ccs/bin!

Yesterday, I had a long discussion about the best hierarchy

Here are my complusions that did lead me to my current decision:

-   Most free software is unique in functionality and name.
This software may go either to /usr/bin or to /usr/sps/*
or any other distribution specific FOSS hierarchy.

In case that a unique hierarchy name is desired, there is a
need to standardize on the way the programs are compiled.
This means e.g. GNU tar (a secondary level application because
it creates a name clash if compiled in the default way) needs
to be compiled to use the 'g' prefix and to create POSIX.1-1988
compliant archives by default on all distributions that choose
to put GNU tar on the same location. If GNU tar is compiled to create
non-standard GNU-tar archives by default, there may be no link
with the name 'tar' pointing to 'gtar'.

-   The following sources of free software create a significant number
of programs that do similar things than the POSIX basic tool set
and thus create name clashes:

*BSDthe oldest source of tools (starting in 1978). As the current
tools are significantly different from 4.2-BSD (/usr/ucb), it
makes sense to reserve the /usr/bsd/* hierarchy in case there
is a demand for porting recent versions of BSD tools.

Schily  medium age (starting in 1982). The tools are currently in
/opt/schily/* but as they are not optional on SchilliX, it
seems that they belong to

[osol-discuss] Third BJOSUG meeting - Dec. 3

2005-11-23 Thread Victor Hu

Hi All,

The first two BJOSUG meetings are very successful. Thanks to the
speakers and all folks who have attended and show interest in Beijing
OpenSolaris User Group. We are honored to have Max Bruning and Mark
Nelson to speak this time and will have the meeting in a conference room
located in Sun China ERI. Here is the detailed information about the
meeting:

Time: 2:00 pm, Saturday, Dec. 3

Venue: St. Andrew Conference Room
Floor 7A, Chuangxin Plaza
Tsinghua Science Park
Map: http://thsp.com.cn/images/yqjs_jiaotong.jpg

Agenda:

2:00 pm - 2:45 pm Max Bruning A Comparison of Solaris, Linux, and
FreeBSD Kernels and Device Drivers

2:45 pm - 3:30 pm Mark Nelson OpenSolaris Development Process

3:30 pm - 4:30 pm QA and Free Discussions

As noted above, this meeting will be held in Sun's conference room. For
non-Sun attendees, please send an email with your first name, last name
and company name to [EMAIL PROTECTED] before Dec. 3 so that we will have
you pre-registered in Sun's Visitor Management System.

The presentations will be provided as soon as they are available. Below
is the information about the speakers and their topics:

Max Bruning

Max is an experienced Unix teacher and consultant. He has been doing
Unix trainings, mostly for internal Sun engineers, as well as kernel
work for over 25 years. Currently he teaches and consults on Solaris
internals, device drivers, kernel (as well as application) crash
analysis and debugging, networking internals, and specialized topics.

His blog is http://mbruning.blogspot.com/.

A Comparison of Solaris, Linux, and FreeBSD Kernels and Device Drivers

Please refer to the following articles written by Max:

http://www.opensolaris.org/os/article/2005-10-14_a_comparison_of_solaris__linux__and_freebsd_kernels/
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/article/2005-03-31_inside_opensolaris__introduction_to_solaris_drivers/
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/article/2005-03-31_inside_opensolaris__solaris_driver_programming/

Mark J. Nelson

Mark is the Tech Lead for the Operating System and Network Consolidation
for Nevada, which will be the next release of Solaris. Along with the
rest of the Consolidation Team (C-Team) and the Change Review Team
(CRT), he is tasked with maintaining the health of the consolidation. He
spend most of his time working with project teams that are getting ready
to integrate their changes. With the help of the C-Team, he help them
review their changes, their test plans, their test results, their
process completion, and their general crossing of t's and dotting of
i's. Like other members of the CRT, he also do the same (without the
C-Team) for smaller changes and projects that aren't big enough to
warrant a full review.

Before he got into the Tech Lead business, he worked on the Solaris
Volume Manager. Prior to joining Sun five years ago, he worked for Ball
Aerospace, where he wrote part of the control software for two of the
scientific instruments on board the Spitzer Space Telescope.

Hi blog is http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/mjnelson/.

OpenSolaris Development Process

The Solaris kernel Development community has a well-defined process for
the Solaris ON (Operating System and Network) Consolidation. For
OpenSolaris, the ON development process will also open to the
OpenSolaris community, which is new to the community developers outsides
Sun. How to file a bug, How to start a project, how to find a sponsor,
how to find a code reviewer, how to integrate a fix to OpenSolaris, all
this questions will be confronted by the Sun external developers in
OpenSolaris community. In this presentation, you will have some ideas
and get the answers.

--
Di-Li Victor Hu
Sun China ERI OPG Group

___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread James Carlson

Eric Boutilier writes:
[...]
 That's why I don't think we want all OpenSolaris-based distros to be 
 strictly Solaris/UNIX compliant.

I agree with that completely, though it doesn't quite address one of
the original comments that started the email torrent.  There's
certainly a problem for third-party software makers if they have to
recompile for N different kinds of Solaris, as they often have to do
(with not inconsiderable pain) for Linux.

It'd be nice if that problem were mostly avoided by having folks
involved with the various flavors attempting to make sure that key
parts are still compatible (e.g., not replacing libc with glibc), but
managing at least that won't be simple.

-- 
James Carlson, KISS Network[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] coding style

2005-11-23 Thread Paul Durrant

Apologies if this has been asked before...

Is the Sun coding style doc. available to the opensolaris community?
Given that, I presume, code taken from contributors from outside Sun
still has to pass the standard ON cstyle/hdrchk stuff it would be
useful to have the doc. as a reference.

  Paul
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

I think having different distrobutions of OpenSolaris is not a bad thing as 
long as each distro agrees on some basic frameworks: binary compatibilities 
with each other, common libraries, common kernel, common X window, common 
GNOME...

At the user level, it shouldn't matter if someone makes a Linux-like Solaris, 
BSD-like Solaris, or Windows-like (with WINE??) Solaris. Since we are talking 
about Open, I can see that everyone starts with replacing close-source stuff 
with open source stuff. and that is perfectly reasonable to me.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

May be he meant BSD stem from System 5. SVR4 was a result of combining System 
5, BSD (SunOS 4), and some of its new develoopments On the other hand, 
there is only one truly successful Unix derived from SVR4, and it's Solaris. 
All other Unix derived from SVR4 are either RIP or in their sunset days 
Linux will replace them in a few years.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Firefox 1.5rc3 for solaris available on mozilla.org

2005-11-23 Thread Jason W

You know, this is odd but my Windows version of Firefox 1.5rc3 ran an
update about 3 days ago that became 1.5 Final but I have seen it
mentioned nowhere and all sources show 1.5rc3 as the latest Very
odd.

On 11/23/05, Ivan Wang [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
 Cool, thanks Sun Beijing team for keeping Firefox Solaris build updated. It 
 already becomes my primary browser so that I can have consistent lookfeel 
 and functionality across all OSes I run.

 Ivan.
 This message posted from opensolaris.org
 ___
 opensolaris-discuss mailing list
 opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] coding style

2005-11-23 Thread James Carlson

Paul Durrant writes:
 Apologies if this has been asked before...
 
 Is the Sun coding style doc. available to the opensolaris community?
 Given that, I presume, code taken from contributors from outside Sun
 still has to pass the standard ON cstyle/hdrchk stuff it would be
 useful to have the doc. as a reference.

http://opensolaris.org/os/community/documentation/getting_started_docs/cstyle.ms.pdf

-- 
James Carlson, KISS Network[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W   Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757   42.496N   Fax +1 781 442 1677
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] coding style

2005-11-23 Thread Stephen Hahn

* Paul Durrant [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-23 09:51]:
 Apologies if this has been asked before...
 
 Is the Sun coding style doc. available to the opensolaris community?
 Given that, I presume, code taken from contributors from outside Sun
 still has to pass the standard ON cstyle/hdrchk stuff it would be
 useful to have the doc. as a reference.

  It is
  
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/documentation/getting_started_docs/cstyle.ms.pdf

  (It's linked to from the Nevada community page, which is what the
  unbelievably big Developer's Reference currently calls home.)

  - Stephen

-- 
Stephen Hahn, PhD  Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Microsystems
[EMAIL PROTECTED]  http://blogs.sun.com/sch/
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] coding style

2005-11-23 Thread Casper . Dik


* Paul Durrant [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-23 09:51]:
 Apologies if this has been asked before...
 
 Is the Sun coding style doc. available to the opensolaris community?
 Given that, I presume, code taken from contributors from outside Sun
 still has to pass the standard ON cstyle/hdrchk stuff it would be
 useful to have the doc. as a reference.

  It is
  
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/documentation/getting_started_docs/cstyle.ms.pdf

  (It's linked to from the Nevada community page, which is what the
  unbelievably big Developer's Reference currently calls home.)

And please note that the cstype tool does a fairly poor job
of checking some errors.

Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread Erast Benson

To me, it sounds like you lost the ground...
Where are you? On Mars? So, how is the craters? :-)

Have you ever noticed that GNU/Linux is everywhere?

I'm still not so sure in bright OpenSolaris future because of 2 main
non-thechnical reasons:

a) mind set shift (GNU/Linux = */OpenSolaris) might not happen at all
or will take too much time to happen and than GNU/Linux will close the
gap on server side too. And people like you will scare existing
GNU/Linux user base which is very bad for OpenSolaris community in
general.

b) SUN Microsystems still do not care to explain their oficial position
on CDDL vs. GPL compatability issue in terms of shipping GPL apps on
single media as Solaris Express, Nexenta, BeleniX and others do or will
do. This is purely publiciy thing, but it *must* be clarified ASAP. So,
users will not be afraid to jump on OpenSolaris-based distros.

In regard to (b). One simple thing SUN could do is to dual license SUN
libc as GPL and CDDL. The way FreeBSD, Mozilla and many others resolved
it. This will immediately resolve publicity issue.

But at the same time I *LOVE* OpenSolaris and very much would like to
continue on conquer existing GNU/Linux users hearts and believe in our
final success!

Erast

On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 07:46 -0800, UNIX admin wrote:
  As J.S. mentioned before, in the future we should
  expect at least 2
  types of OpenSolaris-based distros:
  
  a) GNU-centric, those who trying to re-use GNU/Linux
  as much as possible
  
  b) Solaris-centric, those who trying to mimic Solaris
  as much as
  possible
  
  But I'm hoping that both (a) and (b) will be *much
  more* compatable than
  any two distros in GNU/Linux world. And the reason
  for my hope is that
  we are using the same Least Common Denominator(LCD)
  - OpenSolaris(tm)
  which is not just a kernel but userland too and
  developed under the
  single roof. In my sense, LCD will preserve
  inter-distro compatability.
 
 That is unlikely to happen, although I hope that Moinak G. will make it 
 possible.
 Why? Because someone who really knows and understands UNIX won't give GNU 
 five minutes. GNU is all about the hype and brute force and none of the 
 quality/snandards.  UNIX people (and don't tell me that there are no UNIX 
 people!) that could bring it together will spring for b) because they know 
 that's the right way of doing things (sorry, but that's just the way it is).
 
 Those who don't yet know UNIX and have grown up on GNU diet as Moinak puts 
 it (rightly so), will be pushing for GNU.  With a few notable exceptions, 
 those people don't have the necessary experience to bring it all together 
 properly, and if they keep pushing GNU, they're not likely to get that 
 experience either.
 
 So, with a few exceptions, things will stay as they are.
 I can't really say that I'm sorry about that, GNU tools are very poor in 
 every respect. I'd much rather be using Sun Studio compilers than GCC, for 
 example.  Good/usable/quality applications from GNU land will find their way 
 into Solaris.
 
 Yet, there is some hope left.  If Solaris attracts critical enough mass of 
 developers (and it looks poised to do so), those people may start using 
 Solaris as their main development platform.  This, I hope, would eventually 
 lead to extinction of GNU in its present form.
 This message posted from opensolaris.org
 ___
 opensolaris-discuss mailing list
 opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
 

___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread Alan Coopersmith


Erast Benson wrote:

In regard to (b). One simple thing SUN could do is to dual license SUN
libc as GPL and CDDL.


But not all the source to Sun libc is available, so releasing it under the
GPL would forbid people from re-distributing it, and make it less free than
the CDDL allows.

--
-Alan Coopersmith-   [EMAIL PROTECTED]
 Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread Rich Teer

On Wed, 23 Nov 2005, Erast Benson wrote:

Please don't top post.

 Have you ever noticed that GNU/Linux is everywhere?

Not here, and not on ANY computer I have a say in.

 a) mind set shift (GNU/Linux = */OpenSolaris) might not happen at all
 or will take too much time to happen and than GNU/Linux will close the

I agree that the mindset shift will take time.

 gap on server side too. And people like you will scare existing

Please.  That assumes that OpenSOlaris is going to stand still, giving
other OSes a chance to catch up.  That ain't gonna happen.

 b) SUN Microsystems still do not care to explain their oficial position

That's Sun Microsystems.  Others have addressed this, so I won't
add to the discussion.

 In regard to (b). One simple thing SUN could do is to dual license SUN
 libc as GPL and CDDL. The way FreeBSD, Mozilla and many others resolved
 it. This will immediately resolve publicity issue.

I see no publicity issue to resolve, and I see no reason why Sun would
want to license libc (or any other part of OpenSolaris) under the GPL.
The CDDL is fine.

 But at the same time I *LOVE* OpenSolaris and very much would like to
 continue on conquer existing GNU/Linux users hearts and believe in our
 final success!

Same here, but there will always be some Linux hold-outs.  But also,
there's room for both OSes--just not on any of my machines.  :-)

-- 
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, OpenSolaris CAB member

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: t-shirt sad tale

2005-11-23 Thread Peter Eriksson

Got it today! *Starts breathing again*

Interresting variation of my address you managed to mangle it to btw 
Perhaps next time make sure the mailing address printer understands UTF8? :-)

/Happy Guy!
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread Erast Benson

On Wed, 2005-11-23 at 12:23 -0800, Rich Teer wrote:
  a) mind set shift (GNU/Linux = */OpenSolaris) might not happen at all
  or will take too much time to happen and than GNU/Linux will close the
 
 I agree that the mindset shift will take time.

Right. that is precisely my point

  gap on server side too. And people like you will scare existing
 
 Please.  That assumes that OpenSOlaris is going to stand still, giving
 other OSes a chance to catch up.  That ain't gonna happen.

I'm pretty sure that ain't gonna happen. But history tells us that
technical superiority is not a gold key to success. Remember IBM OS/2
vs. M$ Windows 95 story? i.e. we need something more than just
thechnical advances.

To me, there are 2 main reasons(aside of technical advantages) for
GNU/Linux user to migrate:

a) OpenSolaris kernel and core userland interface stability. Long time
Solaris users do not appreciate this, but this is exactly what is
missing in todays GNU/Linux. So, lets keep it this way.

b) Availability of the Distributions which he used to work with in the
past. Debian/Ubuntu = Nexenta OS is a perfect solution for their
problems. So, lets help and use Nexenta as the best migration path for
the newcommers.

Erast

___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

2005-11-23 Thread Casper . Dik


Perhaps what he meant to say was that SVr4 comes in part from BSD.  As
I recall the order events:

You forgot the first event: which is that Unix escaped from
Bell Labs and is enhanced elsewhere, including Berkeley;
BSD did include ATT materials 

-People at Berkeley write BSD, some of these people go work for Sun.

-ATT and Sun take the parts of Unix, BSD, and some new stuff to
create a new Unix, which eventually becomes Unix SVr4 and Solaris.

Much of what became SVR4 came from Sun, not BSD.

-Post lawsuit with ATT, 4.4 BSD Lite is created, which in turn is th=
e basis for Free, Net and OpenBSD.
-ATT anti-trust.  Open Group is created as the holder of the Unix
`standard' but not the source code, and POSIX and UNIX standards as we
know them today are based on for the most part on SVr4.

So chronologically I guess SVr4 pre-dates 4.4 BSD, so maybe that's th=
e
source of confusion.  Clearly a lot of ideas happened in BSD first and
made there way into the current incarnation of Solaris.

Clearly?  If you discount the inventions done for SunOS at Sun, I don't
think there's that much to show: sockets, reliable signal handling,
r* commands.

I think it's safer to say that there's common ancestry and that the
torch of development passed from ATT to BSD to Sun (and that's where
it still is, if you ask me :-)

Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

  Schily  medium age (starting in 1982). The tools are
  e currently in
  /opt/schily/* but as they are not optional on
  on SchilliX, it
  seems that they belong to /usr/schily/* in future.

 Just a moment. What is the reason that your tools are not optional?

You cannot boot SchilliX without /opt/schily/bin, but moving
it to /usr would not work either as we need software on /opt/schily
in order to mount /usr ;-)


 GNU tools are purely optional, and therefore there is no technical reason why 
 these, as 3rd party software, shouldn't go into /opt.

Don't call things optional that are needed to make UNIX homey
to people

20 years ago, the schily tools have been important to several people
because e.g. all of them use a unique pattern matcher (*) and bsh was the 
only shell with an interactive history editor (**)

*) Pattern matching was a real nightmare n UNIX that times.

**) ksh has been developed at the same time as bsh but it was not
known by me and not available for 99.9% of the UNIX users.

Since approx. 1995 when bash became usable, things did change and
it seems that there are people who like to see bash everywhere.
Note that csh is just a nightmare compared to bash.

Not everyone like vi. I prefer my ved and other people like to use emacs.
Although emacs has it's roots at James Gosling (a Sun Employee), people
nowadays would call emacs a GNU tool.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)  
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?

Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:

 Erast Benson wrote:
  In regard to (b). One simple thing SUN could do is to dual license SUN
  libc as GPL and CDDL.

 But not all the source to Sun libc is available, so releasing it under the
 GPL would forbid people from re-distributing it, and make it less free than
 the CDDL allows.

The FSF did start with SunOS-4.0 as the main development platform when they 
started the GNU project. Why should something be wrong in 2005 that has been
OK for the FSF people in 1988?

... and even before when libc was a static lib

Just ignore those people from Debian who are not well informed about facts and
try to start a religuous discussion.

Jörg

-- 
 EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)  
   [EMAIL PROTECTED](work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
 URL:  http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Is 'forking' inevitable here too?