Hey,
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 13:51 -0800, Erast Benson wrote:
> But the point is, KDE is quite mature and widely used, and decent
> OpenSolaris-based distro must have it *integrated* (i.e. not just like
> third-party /opt/csw...).
>
> btw, NexentaOS Alpha 2 will have it integrated and derived from
Hey,
> if it's too difficult to support both GNOME and KDE within Sun, why
> can't the Desktop Project be split ? GNOME/JDS within Sun and KDE
> outside Sun.
>
> Having BOTH means giving users (actual and potential) a choice.
It's really about resources issues. The desktop team within Sun is
alr
I agree...whether intended or not comments like that can be offensive to some
members of the community. This is a tech community, if you want to talk
religion go to #religion on irc or something ;)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolari
On 12/20/05, ken mays <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The benefit of BOTH GNOME and KDE is in the modern
> open source applications developed for those desktop
> environments. Really, having both GNOME and KDE
> available is a better choice in the long run as it
> opens up more open source software t
Hey,
On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 23:05 -0800, Bob Palowoda wrote:
> > We don't just ship GNOME though - KDE is available on
> > the CCD right?
> > It's just not supported.
>
> Speaking of the CCD what ever happened with Steve's plans
> for it?
I think work is still continuing on it as far as I unders
If I remember correctly, the story really evolved
around lowering budgeting costs from MS to a lower
cost solution (not anything to do with a Solaris
battle). Suse being HQ in German kinda helped in that
discussion. KDE was one of the primary desktops so it
kinda went in that direction.
Both KDE a
Hello,
> /etc/dfs/dfstab
> share -o ro /cdrom/cdrom0
Delete this configuration, the vold is responsible to share volumes.
> I entered the following in /etc/rmmount.conf
> share -o ro /cdrom*
rmmount.conf(4):
share cdrom* -o ro
> At that time i see on my client all the slice that I
> can mount in
LOL!
Bravo to both Dennis and Bryan--So True!
the press doesn't have the luxury of time to write a story. So just
provide access to complete information and extraordinary minds to
collaborate the story...it's an imperfect model, but of they folks
covering opensolaris...they know the industr
hi to all!
as you probably remember, some months ago I write to the cab members, to make
explicit my idea of constructing my phd research with the opensolaris community.
now I'm ready, you can find more informations about me and my research at:
http://arcadia.lii.unitn.it/MaurizioAndOpensolaris
Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
>
> > Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> > > I woudn't underestimate Linus's Torvalds opinion... A lot of OSS
> > > developers looking at what he is saying and following him no matter
> > > what. I agree
The current rbac(5) man page isn't really that useful as an overview
page for system admins. It does a really poor job of describing the
functionality. It has also been requested that it contain information
to assist admins used to using sudo(1m).
Attached is a draft of the new rbac(5) page I'm
On Sunday 18 December 2005 10:39 pm, Stefan Teleman wrote:
> KDE 3.4.3 (Sun Studio 10 build) has been released.
>
> Announcement is here:
>
> http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-solaris&m=113497402431141&w=2
>
> Screenshots are here:
>
> http://www.flickr.com/photos/skipjackdes/sets/1603147/
>
> Stefan Tel
Hey,
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 12:59 +, Brian Nitz wrote:
> I'm sure there are other areas where GNOME has an advantage over KDE. I
> hope Opensolaris distributions based on KDE, Looking glass and other
> open source desktops become available but if everyone played by the
> rules and followed
Felix Schulte wrote:
Sun's choice of only shipping Gnome...
Keep in mind though, this is a whole new OpenSolaris world. Now anyone
can take OpenSolaris and KDE and do what, e.g., Canonical Ltd. is doing
with Debian and GNOME. (See:
http://www.ubuntulinux.org/support/supportoptions/paidsu
frits vanderlinden wrote:
> Gary Gendel wrote:
>
>
>> I installed the ugen driver, (I got a message like: installed driver
>> but couldn't attach).
>>
> you mean you did an add_drv
Exactly.
>
>> Ok, after reboot. and saw that things were ok in the prtconf output.
>> I tried the usbups code fo
just checking .. rumour is .. the server was down .
dc
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I used to share my cdrom using the following entry in /etc/dfs/dfstab
share -o ro /cdrom/cdrom0
This would allow the client to access usually all the sub-directories of my
cdrom
I tried with Solaris 10 3/05 s10_74L2a with a Solaris cd (installation 1 of 2)
and when I do dfshares I see
:/cdro
Just so some of you that have been asking would know.
1) you do not have to bring anything for the pot luck, just bring yourself and
be a part of the community.
2) if you would like to bring something for the community pot luck, please
feel free to do so, and by all means everyone is welcome to
Apologies for the wide distribution.
I've just done a blog up detailing how, using currently available stuff
one can build an almost completely non-debug opensolaris. I'm currently
running said build on a Ferrari 4005 with the BrandZ code.
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/tpenta?entry=buildin
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I woudn't underestimate Linus's Torvalds opinion... A lot of OSS
> > developers looking at what he is saying and following him no matter
> > what. I agree it will not change picture much, but KDE will defin
On 12/19/05, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> How many catholics will avoid to use the pill just because the pope
> recommends not to use it?
i don't use the pill and i am catholic. is that bad ?
--Stefan
--
Stefan Teleman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
I also would like to participate in this project.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Saturday 17 December 2005 12:45 pm, Rich Teer wrote:
> I love the performance of the AMD stuff, but I'm still a SPARC guy
> at heart. The x86 platform is just so, err, idiosyncratic, and
> broken in some respects, that it probably will never take the place
> of SPARC in my heart. Give me a SPA
How Great is this!
Congratulations OpenSolaris.org!
2005's top 10 moments in IT
InfoWorld
Cathleen Moore
December 19, 2005
http://www.infoworld.com/article/05/12/19/51NNyearinreview_1.html
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@op
On Saturday 17 December 2005 03:52 pm, Bryan Cantrill wrote:
> I'd flip that around: if press stories were written the way software is
> written, your daily newspaper would show up once every couple of months,
> would take several hours to figure out how to open, and (for reasons
> unknown) would
On Mon, 2005-12-19 at 16:52 +0100, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I woudn't underestimate Linus's Torvalds opinion... A lot of OSS
> > developers looking at what he is saying and following him no matter
> > what. I agree it will not change picture much, but
Check this out from Jonathan Swartz's blog:
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/jonathan?entry=holiday_gifts
OK it is just a free trial of a Niagra server but if you have a compelling
blog entry about a benchmark comparison with another chipset/OS you get to
keep it for free. Hmmm, I wonder how if I
On Sunday 18 December 2005 03:19 pm, Ben Rockwood wrote:
> Thursday night, after I presented at Bay Lisa...
I brainfarted and missed it. You did mention to me you were doing this, but
didn't announce it that week or anything...:-( Oh well...
I can't seem to get to the mail.opensolaris.org to fre
Well if you are looking for another distro there is Nexenta, I haven't used it
personally so I don't know its requirement either. Umm, maybe someone else
knows better than I do but isn't this memory requirement newboot's fault, I
seem to remember some blogs on this topic. Googling...
Here is a
is it possible to alter the rpath field of a binary/executable?
I have an executable that requires libm.so.2, but doesn't need to. It could
just as easily link to libm.so.1. I've heard that I can edit the 'rpath' to
force the binary to look for libm.so.1 instead of libm.so.2, but I cannot
fig
Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Sunday 18 December 2005 03:19 pm, Ben Rockwood wrote:
Thursday night, after I presented at Bay Lisa...
I brainfarted and missed it. You did mention to me you were doing this, but
didn't announce it that week or anything...:-( Oh well...
I didn't make much noi
All,
I apologize for the inconvenience caused by today's mail outage. I had
no idea that the server was going to be down today and actually found
when I tried to access the machine this morning.
So what happened?
We were moving to new hosting facility over the weekended and the plan
was to
KDE, GNOME,
In-Reply-To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mime-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
Approved: Gw3Zx
> We don't just ship GNOME though - KDE is available on
> the CCD right?
> It's just not supported.
Speaking of the CCD what ever happen
33 matches
Mail list logo
