C. wrote:
5) "a secure package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install
scripts"
Ok.. so wait a second.. Let's first of all define "secure" because last
I checked the IPS authorities aren't signed.. Are they? You're only
They are not currently, but this is definitely planned function
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 2:55 AM, Lurie wrote:
...
The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no different
from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception
of ZFS features). From a developer point of view these qualities could ha
Martin Bochnig wrote:
many other benefits. And you don't need to employ 50 engineers for 2
years to get a written-from-scratch monster like IPS going.
I'm not sure where you got this number from, but I think it's about 10x
greater than the reality :-) I'm sure the pkg(5) team would love to
h
casper@sun.com wrote:
DTrace ZFS SMF FMA BootAr IPS IA-Install
Incompatible? N N N N N Y Y
I think the many people screaming about quota support when it debuted a
few years ago, among many other decisions would beg to
Alexander Vlasov wrote:
Lurie wrote:
Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a
secure package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts,
That's why
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:39 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
Alexander Vlasov wrote:
Lurie wrote:
That's why lots of packages deliver their own SMF service which runs only
once.
...which is better because those SMF scripts:
* can run at "boot", which fits corre
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
On Sun, Apr 5, 2009 at 1:54 PM, Lurie wrote:
So modern Linux package managers do not have any of these qualities ?
Some of them ? Of course. All of them ? No. Just a few points:
1. They usually upgrade a live system (and while it's possible for some to do a
non-live upgra
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
On Mon, Apr 6, 2009 at 10:53 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
Which means those packages will require system reboot not unlike
Windoze!
First, how else can you ensure the scripts correctly run without having the
new environment loaded? (i.e. account for
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
When I run "uname -a" it says:
SunOS hostname 5.10 Generic_137138-09 i86pc i386 i86pc
In the past, I've seen the system say "x86_64" when you're 64bit. And
I've also seen it say "32bit" when you're 32bit. But now it says
nothing, so I'm left confused.
How can I kn
Alexander Vlasov wrote:
That's really strange. Have you read
/usr/share/doc/aptitude/README?
currently pkg has very rudimentary search ability, like you can't ask
`which packages were installed only to satifsy other packages'
dependencies', `show me all games' or `which packages has arrived in
Sebastien Roy wrote:
I was under the impression that an IPS package manifest contained the
set of services to be automatically imported and started as part of
package installation, or temporarily disabled during package upgrade,
etc. Where does one get the idea that a reboot is required for a
pa
Moinak Ghosh wrote:
end ?. Do the benefits really outweigh the costs ? Even today the codebase is
significantly large and complex. We simply have to agree to disagree here.
Some things you'll never know unless you try; that's the cost of innovation.
We will indeed have to agree to disagr
Ignacio Marambio Catán wrote:
beadm is not hard to use even outside pkg(5), i've used it in the past
to for example have an alternate BE that is xen able
I never said it was hard to use, but obviously having a single command
to upgrade your entire system instead of a sequence of them is "less
ry" is relative.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
For example, i have an ip of 0.0.0.0 without a cable plugged in, I
plug an Ethernet cable and it remains at 0.0.0.0. I've tried
switching between auto and wired networks without success.
I know how to configure things manually, but I would prefer to do it
automatically.
ss.
I know how to configure things manually, but I would prefer to do it
automatically.
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
the pkg image_update from snv_86 to snv_92,
the zpool won't boot up?
The issue you speak of was a result of changes in the underlying boot
management libraries / grub and not of the pkg system.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss
curate nor constructive.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
.
Quite frankly, your condescending tone and various, continued wild
assumptions whenever something doesn't work the way you want are unhelpful.
I would encourage you to find better usage of your time.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss ma
form the work
necessary to maintain them, and you are often rude and inconsiderate in
your responses.
What you choose to do from here is up to you.
I prefer to use the best technology available.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss maili
g them.
I'd like to see something zfs-centred myself...
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
NWgnome-im-client
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
encies (packages that depend upon a
specific package; already filed as RFE 2713)
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
.
(realmente un anticuario). Mi idea es utilizarla, como "conejillo de indias" e
instalarle el Open Solaris, para cuando compre otra más moderna. ¿Se podrá hacer la
instalación?
Su computadora no tiene bastante memoria. La computadora necesita por lo
menos el mb 512.
Apesadumbrado.
, instale VirtualBox, y después
instale OpenSolaris dentro de él: http://www.virtualbox.org/
Lea más sobre OpenSolaris aquí: http://es.opensolaris.org/
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
virtuales que había instalado, con sus respectivos
errores. ¿Cómo se podrá corregir esto?
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=87892&tstart=0
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
...@7.2.84-0.111
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
ge repositories instead of your local system by default.
To search your local system, use -l.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
lease you're using (based on build 101)
doesn't have SUNWgvim.
To change to using the /dev repository, performing the following steps:
pfexec pkg set-authority -O http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev opensolaris.org
Then perform an image-update:
pfexec pkg im
ates using OpenSolaris technologies such as
DTrace, ZFS, and more.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
ne can help me doing this? Thanks.
If you don't need Sun Studio 12 *specifically*, you can install Sun
Studio Express instead, which is far easier and should be just as good:
pfexec pkg install ss-dev
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss ma
work (untested):
grep Package ~/Sun_Studio_12_software_install.log | sed -e 's/.*Package:
//' | sort | uniq > /tmp/sspkg.txt
for PKG in `cat /tmp/sspkg.txt`; do yes | pkgrm $PKG; done
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailin
ever, as you've pointed out, you've
been using a development version of a product; not a fully-tested,
fully-qa'd, and fully-documented product.
I would encourage you to continue to test and document issues you
encounter for the benefit of others a
led as a new
bug, or simply added as a comment to one of the above.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
milar to a bug David filed last night:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=8409
reading through that page, I see no mention whether this happens with
'image-update' too - I'd assume not, but would appreciate confirmation.
It should not. At least, I've never
processes including new sshd,
vmstat, top and bash).
This may also be helpful:
http://blogs.sun.com/jimlaurent/entry/solaris_faq_myths_and_facts
Remember too that if a process is 32-bit, it will be limited to about
3.996 GB of addressable space.
Cheers,
--
Sh
r at least related to the ARC...
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
d. So, it doesn't contain any
software -- it is just a way to trigger the install of another package.
As such, the behaviour you are seeing is expected.
If you want to get rid of glassfish (for the moment), you'll need to:
pfexec pkg uninst
r,
free software systems is "repository."
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
es must be
provided by other blastwave packages.
Many of the blastwave programs simply don't work if you attempt to use
the libraries on the system instead.
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Martin Bochnig wrote:
On Mon, May 4, 2009 at 5:15 AM, Shawn Walker wrote:
blastwave's packages are built with the assumption that libaries live
relative to the rest of the programs (such as under /opt/csw), are compiled
with different flags, and generally assume dependencies must be pro
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
My point was that a dependency algorithm was not the cause of the issue
with the blastwave packages. It is primarily an issue of how they are
built.
There is no "issue" with Blastwave packages. These packages just make use from
debian, openSUSE or RH/CentOS does it:
"offline repositories"!
Sorry, this is not yet available.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
homerun wrote:
Hi
Coming 2009.06 release is planned to be based on what SNV build ??
Build 111.
I just wish it will be at least SNV 113 or 114 as those include driver support for newer nvidia chipsets sata,ahci,nge, etc...
Sorry, the build has already been set.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
russell aspinwall wrote:
Can OpenSolaris 2009.06 have the functionality to add drivers during the
initial stages of OpenSolaris booting like Solaris and SXCE?
Sorry, this functionality is not yet available.
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss
russell aspinwall wrote:
Can OpenSolaris 2009.06 be configured to allow driver installation during the
early boot process like Solaris and SXDE?
Sorry, this functionality is not yet available.
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
URI
opensolaris.org (preferred) origin online
http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev/
What do you mean by "x86 packages" ?
If you're running a build before 106, sunstudioexpress wasn't published
with the correct tags and will install a
packages, this is on build 111a.
-Lee
Shawn Walker wrote:
Lee Bieber wrote:
I'm trying install packages on an OpenSolaris SPARC machine which is
running build 111a. When I run "pfexec pkg install ss-dev" I'm
getting x86 packages instead of SPARC.
$ pkg publisher
PU
contrib
Cheers.
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
ot;, line 537, in recv
if not s[1].isspace():
IndexError: string index out of range
By the way, this particular issue was fixed after 2008.11, when you
upgrade to 2009.06, you should no longer encounter this traceback.
See bug 5988 for details.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
e manager GUI. Is this a known problem, or is there something I can check to
find the problem if i have one? I have already run a pkg search pkg, and then a pkg
fix . That doesn't correct the problem. Maybe I should open a bug?
Please let me know, and thanks.
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
don't have many OpenSolaris 200x SPARC
users yet.
This issue is being tracked as:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=8904
However, I still need to know what the output of "pkg version" is for them.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
op
j6dev SUNWflexlex SUNWcvs SUNWj6dmx
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
the help!
When you say, "complains it doesn't have an image to update." Can you
provide the exact error text?
If you are using the /release repository, you won't have any updates
very likely.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensol
erform the update:
pfexec pkg image-update
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
appear in the GUI but they do.
The easiest way to install "all" available packages is to select the
"redistributable" package and install that.
Or:
pfexec pkg install redistributable
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mail
. I believe it is not usable because I ran out of
space trying to do a pkg image-update.
Has anyone seen this behavior before?
What does zfs list say?
Do you have previous snapshots that are depending on this data?
Are any of the files you removed hardlinked somewhere else?
Cheers,
--
Shawn
about ...
Is it expected to be on the installation media? Or there's some "sun.com"
package repository somewhere for use with pkgadd or something?
It appears to only be available in Solaris Express Community Releases.
I've checked the most recent Solaris 10 re
contain data
different from their source. But, as long as they contain blocks
referencing data you've removed in later snapshots, that space will
continue to be "used".
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
open
eps:
pfexec pkg set-publisher -O http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev opensolaris.org
pfexec pkg install redistributable
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Martin Bochnig wrote:
On Fri, May 22, 2009 at 5:35 AM, Shawn Walker wrote:
Martin Bochnig wrote:
#4.) pfexec pkg set-publisher -P -O http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev dev
#5.) pfexec pkg unset-publisher opensolaris.org
#6.) pfexec pkg refresh
#7.) pfexec pkg install entire
#8
adequate for 24h/7 hosting IMHO
I googled during about one hour ... found many linux and windows hosting
offers but nothing on OpenSolaris
Any recommendation ?
www.joyent.com
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolar
care has been taken to keep it that way.
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
David Abrahams wrote:
on Fri May 22 2009, Shawn Walker
wrote:
pfexec pkg image-update
osol n00b here ---
I just did a fresh 0906 install and followed these instructions:
pfexec pkg set-publisher -O http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev opensolaris.org
pfexec pkg image-update
and to my
David Abrahams wrote:
on Wed May 27 2009, Shawn Walker
wrote:
David Abrahams wrote:
on Fri May 22 2009, Shawn Walker
wrote:
pfexec pkg image-update
osol n00b here ---
I just did a fresh 0906 install and followed these instructions:
pfexec pkg set-publisher -O http
in
preparation for being pushed to /release when 2009.06 is finally
shipped. So until that happens, there won't be any later builds pushed
to /dev.
No, the public pkg.opensolaris.org/dev repository has not been updated
since 111a :)
111b was never published there (intentiona
Martin Bochnig wrote:
No, the public pkg.opensolaris.org/dev repository has not been updated since
111a :)
111b was never published there (intentionally).
We know. But why?
Because 2009.06 is scheduled to be released during C1.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
as you have internet access, you should be able to install packages.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Jürgen Keil wrote:
b111a neither includes the pci10de,45c nor
pci10de,450 binding in /etc/driver_aliases.
Nor does 111b.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
SATA DVD drive myself.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
David Runyon wrote:
I still see 2008.11 at
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/downloads/
Hi, it is scheduled for release at CommunityOne next week.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
like to have audio so am trying to
update.
Hi, you can expect a download of about 440MB going from 2008.11 (rc2) ->
2009.06 (111b).
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://defect.opensolaris.org if
they haven't been already for ekiga.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
e package names reflected the actual
contents.
...and they will later this year.
The currently proposed name for this particular package is 'image/gimp' [1].
--
Shawn Walker
[1]
http://cr.opensolaris.org/~richb/package_rename-v4/packages_by_old_name.txt
__
Ekiga. Your only option will be to go back to the older release.
In the meantime, please file bugs at http://defect.opensolaris.org if
they haven't been already for ekiga.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
--
Shawn Walker
___
ope
7:22
ne...@filez:/# beadm activate opensolaris-3
Unable to activate opensolaris-3.
Unknown external error.
What's this about then? :)
You may wish to try again but doing this:
BE_PRINT_ERR=true beadm activate opensolaris-3
That should produce some possibly useful information.
Cheers,
:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=8035
But note that due to zfs behaviour, it would have to be cleaned up in
all of your older boot environment as well to see a real space savings.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing
/share.
In this particular case, the data under /var/pkg is part of the system
state, so it is desirable that is part of '/'. It is not information
that is really meant to be necessarily be shared between boot environments.
Cheers,
--
Sh
orters-discuss.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
ll be your best option to
stay on a stable, fixed software release stream that primarily consists
of security fixes and necessary updates.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Guido Berhoerster wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
In the near future, the 'support' repository will be your best option
to stay on a stable, fixed software release stream that primarily
consists of security fixes and necessary updates.
Does that mean that plans to provide the /release b
non-sun DHCP servers...
The primary issue with a bootable SPARC Live CD is the non-existent
graphics support on SPARC. That in turn is because a text-only
installer isn't available yet.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mail
Shawn Walker wrote:
Jenny wrote:
Is it asking too much to distribute a bootable image as well? By
offering only AI, we have to practically dump a lot of working Solaris
machines that do not have OBP level (> 4.17) update. Also the dhcp set
up is pain in axx as well especially in an enterpr
t for this.
I guess, the best thing you can do is copy the drivers onto a USB stick
under windows and then use the USB stick to get the software into Solaris...
For read-only NTFS access, I use this:
http://mount-ntfs.sourceforge.net/
--
Shawn W
est way to get a working gcc compiler and all of the
header files, etc. you need to compile software.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
russell aspinwall wrote:
You can download the Sun Studio 12 C, C++ and Fortran compiler from here
http://developers.sun.com/sunstudio/downloads/index.jsp
If you are using OpenSolaris 2009.06, the right way to install it is by
doing this:
pfexec pkg install ss-dev
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
dio Express 2009.03
on 111b systems (OpenSolaris 2009.06 systems).
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
c-432 doesn't give you any of those things.
Thankfully, there's also a gcc-dev-4 package now if you want all of the
above plus gcc-4.3.2.
Be aware though that the gcc 4.x series can generate problematic code
for some projects (such as ON). So you mig
ially FOSS,
they'll have better luck with the newer compilers due to enhanced gcc
compatibility and other fixes. That's why I don't see a reason to use
Studio 12, and would strongly recommend the express version instead to
any users wanting to compile software on 2009.06.
the consolidation builds, you would want Studio 12
(with the specified Nevada CBE patch list) instead of Studio Express.
That patch aspect is rather problematic for 2009.06 users as patchadd
isn't available for 2009.06.
I've always ended up using the tarball version instead.
Cheers
;you're on your own" feel.
As far as I know, that's more of a naming convention issue than
anything. The "SUNW" prefix will be dropped from all packages for
future OpenSolaris releases.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolar
Glenn Lagasse wrote:
* Shawn Walker (swal...@opensolaris.org) wrote:
Jim Langston wrote:
This is where my confusion rests - SUNWgcc is still 3.4.3, it is
through the development package that 4.3.3 gets loaded, are they
both supported ? I'm confused because SUNWgcc seems distinctly
direct
ce 1993 or 1994...
Regardless, as long as Sun Studio remains closed, it is important that
the OpenSolaris community provide a viable, up-to-date, open source
option as much as possible.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
open
helpful:
http://markmail.org/message/52s4jy5jtruuzv2j
In short, its a technical limitation of the tools and OS being used to
administrate the website.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
ago.
Such application must be up-to-date, AFAIK..
GIMP 2.4 was part of GNOME 2.24, which is what was shipped. GNOME
2.26 didn't make it in time for this release.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-di
s, GIMP is packaged as part of the JDS consolidation, so from
what I understand, its updates are limited by updates to GNOME.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Jun 16, 2009, at 2:49 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
Regardless, GIMP is packaged as part of the JDS consolidation, so
from
what I understand, its updates are limited by updates to GNOME.
I believe in this case, it's updates were limited by having to wait
for
t a package for it,
especially if bacula is the name of the executable.
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Jun 17, 2009, at 10:53 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
Shawn Walker writes:
On Jun 17, 2009, at 10:00 AM, Harry Putnam wrote:
Anyone know if the backup tool bacula is available to `pkg install'
from one of the repositories?
Not as far as I know.
You can always find out by doing this:
rch Xlib.h
INDEX ACTION VALUE PACKAGE
...
basenamefileusr/X11/include/X11/Xlib.h
pkg:/sunwxw...@0.5.11-0.111
...
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolar
1001 - 1100 of 1553 matches
Mail list logo
