Xirui [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmm...
The second one sounds easier. :-) How long will it take?
I can't tell. The next release will definitely not have a GUI.
I am not sure about the release after the next one ;-)
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
Scott Howard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jun 26, 2005 at 09:20:24PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Jake Maciejewski wrote:
I've been trying to build X with NetBSD's pkgsrc.
I've never tried using pkgsrc, but Xorg 6.8.2 should build out of
the box with little problem on most
Peter C. Tribble [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Not so. Solaris Express, and the Community release, are binary distributions
based on OpenSolaris. Solaris 10 fails to qualify only as an accident in
timing.
And Sun provide prebuilt binary archives you can bfu.
The next Solaris Express may be
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
Jake Maciejewski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I guess we need to wait for the driver source, as Jörg said. A possible
alternative, however, might be the free aperture driver at
http://www.bolthole.com/solaris/drivers/. If that works, we can have free X
without waiting for the next tarball
Dragan Cvetkovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 30 Jun 2005, [UTF-8] Jürgen Keil wrote:
Quite a few people have reported full duplex problems with the elxl
driver; maybe there's a bug somewhere in the elxl driver with full/half
duplex negotiation?
I have tried forcing half duplex
Dana H. Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
I have some really strange problems with booting
Schillix on a PC with AMD Duron 650 and KT-133
chipset (IIRC).
The boot hangs after printing:
boot scratch memory used: 0x26102c
If I remove the Mouse(PS-2), it boots.
There
I am not sure if this should be something
different from the OpenSolaris macsot.
Last week, I had an Idea and the next working I
found a nice drawing at the door of my office.
The drawing had been made by Thomas Hirsch, a collegue.
The idea for SchilliX is:
Schilli, the knight in shining
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
The Makefile
xc/programs/dpsinfo/Makefile
contains:
.psw.c : $(PSWRAP)
$(PSWRAP) -a -o $*.c -h $*.h $
This syntax is neither covered by the POSIX make standard
nor by the Sun make man page.
I
Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
I'd like to start the ball rolling in getting an OpenSolaris Desktop
Community launched. Let's face it, there's an awful lot of FUD being
spread around OpenSolaris not being ready for the desktop - it's time to
prove them wrong ;)
I'd
Stefan Teleman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
how about a KDE community as well ? :-)
lead-in: i am in the process of packaging and uploading KDE 3.4.1 for
Solaris 10, both of x86 and SPARC, at KDE. finally. :-) i will post
here when it's ready and sync'ed (very shortly).
Solaris 10 is not
Dana H. Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
If I plug in a PS/2 mouse (even after the system is booted successfully)
the keyboard becomes non-functional until the system is rebooted.
That's odd. I'll have to forward this to the keyboard/mouse team;
it doesn't sound
Dana H. Myers [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Have a look here:
http://cvs.opensolaris.org/source/xref/usr/src/uts/i86pc/io/acpica/osl.c#570
What I'm contemplating is adding yet another acpi-user-options bit to
disable access control for those willing to experiment with it.
So you think of making
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'd like to lead a desktop community focused on JDS. There's absolutely
no reason that others can't jump in with proposals to lead KDE, XFCE, or
other variants - in fact, I'd totally
Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whatever it is .. it looks good. And he is a happy looking fellow isn't he?
Should should have seen him at the time when there still was a dead penguin
behind him :-)
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
Dragan Cvetkovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Jul 2 11:10:09 s11 genunix: [ID 243001 kern.warning] WARNING: The binding
file entry iprb 214 conflicts with a previous entry on line 201 of
/etc/name_to_major
Jul 2 11:10:09 s11 genunix: [ID
Albertson, Brett [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yes, in Solaris, Sun has stuck with good old Bourne Shell for the default
root shell. For users, the shell is up to the administrator. The bells and
whistles you are talking about in Linux come from them using BASH (Bourne
Again Shell) by
Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/7/05, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Whatever it is .. it looks good. And he is a happy looking fellow isn't
he?
Should should have seen him at the time when there still was a dead
Chris Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
And BTW: it is definitely unfair to compare an instable devleopment kernel
from
Linux (2.6) with a stable Solaris-10. A fair comparison would compare
Linux2.6
with Solaris-11 or Solaris-10 with Linux
Rainer Orth [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
PS: What is the status of iasl? Getting a standard Solaris iasl binary
out would be very helpful.
Dan Mick put one at
ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/dmick/iasl
A nice program, but unfortunately, it does not work on
Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
like that. Every user has the right for working cursor keys.
So says you. Personally, I prefer to use the vi editing keys.
I did never unserstand why someone would use vi methods at
the shell prompt. The interface is bad to use because you need to know
the
Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Gerhard S. wrote:
That's fine. But why does /bin/sh not just implement
command line editing? It's not that cursor key support
Because then it wouldn't be the Bourne Shell! Solaris takes
backwards compatibility more seriously than
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Mick put one at
ftp://playground.sun.com/pub/dmick/iasl
A nice program, but unfortunately, it does not work on OpenSolaris
unless you create this
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 12 Jul 7 21:00 xsvc - fbs/aperture
symlink. Why does iasl not
Gerhard S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 7 Jul 2005, Gerhard S. wrote:
if I change the root default shell to bash. So now
I end up
typing bash or ksh set -o emacs after every su. Not
very friendly.
So put it into root's .profile. Not exactly hard
work.
But shouldn't be
Rich Teer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Case in point: one of the first thing I do when I install a new
system (personal one that is, not in my shared professional
working environment) is install a .profile for root that runs
ksh, because I like the features ksh has over sh. Do I find this
any
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You can save all of us a lot of trouble by reading the POSIX
specification for how a POSIX compliant shell is supposed to work
here:
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/sh.html
You may not understand or agree with it, but the great
Gerhard S. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I wasn't even advocating changing /bin/sh to bash.
Doing so would be nice of course, but I can see
it truly breaking old scripts when moving from a
old Bourne shell to something POSIX compliant like bash
by default.
bash is not POSIX copmpliant, it may
Tao Chen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I vote for changing the default shell to a better one.
I personally prefer ksh over bash, mainly because I think it's _technically_
more efficient to use Esc-k and the traditional vi-key-mode than those
cursor keys.
This was not true in 1984 when I wrote
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
exec /bin/ksh -o vi
As we alrerady have discussed before, this is a really bad idea
as it may make a system unusable if /usr could not be mounted.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Bruce Riddle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
exec /bin/ksh -o vi
or exec /bin/ksh -o emacs
If you remove the exec you are safe.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED](work) Blog:
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Mmm, aperture exists since ~ 1994.
The isal binary above is from June 21st 2005
It should be modified to check for /dev/fbs/aperture too.
1) I've never heard of /dev/fbs/aperture
2) xsvc is a hack that should be replaced by a proper /dev/mem
3) sigh.
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) I've never heard of /dev/fbs/aperture
1a) I don't have one on my x86 system. It's existed since 1994 where,
exactly?
So get it from ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/ or wait for the next SchilliX
release.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's basically an open source version of xsvc included in Xorg
for Solaris systems without xsvc (really ancient Solaris x86 or
any version of Solaris SPARC).
ken mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Can we toss in K3b? I think Kaffeine and K3b are
always a nice combo for the DVD multimedia support in
KDE.
Has k3b been modified to become portable?
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Hi,
I just found an annoying cc bug:
If I call cc -xarch=amd64 -fast ... I get a 32 bit binary
If I call cc -fast -xarch=amd64 ... I get a 64 bit binary
I would expect that the fact that I did specify a -xarch option
is suddificent.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling
ken mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hmmm.. Well I wasn't 'complaining' about Cd-record,
just what I ran into while getting K3b compiled and
packaged. Again, I said what **version** of CD-record
do we use as a backend moving forward. Also, I
mentioned lets mark what we think is worth porting as
John Martinez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This does not help ud /usr is not mounted in single user emergency
mode.
/bin is a symlink to /usr/bin and when /usr is not mounted, then
there is no /bin/ksh - the bourne shell dies from the exec above.
In high end server environments,
Jim Grisanzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Solaris is doing quite well, I see. Over 25 percent and closing in.
We now have 37.9% and are on the top of the list ;-)
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)
[EMAIL
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1) I've never heard of /dev/fbs/aperture
1a) I don't have one on my x86 system. It's existed since 1994 where,
exactly?
So get it from ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/ or wait
ken mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm all for DVD playback support. Heck, the latest
Mplayer and Xine would be nice to see properly
supported. We can always add encrypt/decrypt libraries
later if its a license issue (or whatever) but let us
at least get the applications ported as well as
ken mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So if you like to discuss things, thell us what you
are interested in
Jörg
1. What are the latest binary versions of CD-Record
available for Solaris 8/9/10 (SPARC x86/AMD64)?
The latest binary version for Solaris 8 is 2.01.01a01
For
ken mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
2. Does CD-Record 2.01.01a01/03 provide complete DVD+R
Double Layer and DVD-R Dual Layer recording support?
NO (as I did write a few hours ago)
As I did write some days ago, I had to decide whether to work
on SchilliX or on dual layer.
3. Does Solaris
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
offering is better than the closed. Consistency with the DVDCCA's
misguided and authoritarian philosophy is not some important
additional feature but rather a serious design flaw.
In Germany it is not a problem to write code that make it useable
Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Originally, before Solaris turned into OpenSolaris, and when Sun was adding
to
the Companion CD, the idea some in the community had was to build upon it so
we didn't duplicate and add what was not there in hopes that it would
eventually move into the
Jürgen Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I get terrible performance problems
some of the times(reported here in a separate thread
but didn't get much response from people, so assuming
that everyone
everyone?
Or noone?
is a getting a jittery USB mouse and skipping in xmms during IO
Josip Gracin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Your complaint would probably be more suited for Sun's Solaris support
department. Once the community creates a fully-fledged
OpenSolaris-based distribution, then we can all discuss whether /bin/sh
is linked to /bin/bash.
I am not sure what you
Jim Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The build/test farm would be available to OpenSolaris developers, and will
provide access to various high-end and low-end Sparc, x64 and other
hardware platforms. We plan on making it better than what's currently
available elsewhere, with help from the
Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The real solution is not in offering up a software service but in
developing a grand unified software software service that can act as
a non-OS open source software base of operations for the OpenSolaris
project. There is no reason that this can not be
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please give a full reference.
POSIX.
That isn't a full reference with version number, but it was enough
to get me started.
http://www.opengroup.org/onlinepubs/009695399/utilities/make.html
Well in contraty to GNU make, Sun make includes a
Jasse Jansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Tests that are only based on SX don't help OpenSolaris.
I think you mean that tests on SX don't help Schillix.
Do you think your Schillix distro is the OpenSolaris reference?
It sounds like that anyway.
If SX Build 18 it out, then Sun now also has an
James Dickens [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I think that there needs to be a separateion between OpenSolaris
source and the software base sources. So how about something simple ?
Each distribution would be free to keep there own source management
location/solution, this would only expect a
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/14/05, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The main features of GNU tar is compliance problems.
I recommend to avoid GNU tar whereever possible.
You cannot replace /usr/bin/tar with a program that does not implement
the features os /usr
Theo Schlossnagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What's worse than adding double hyphened long options? Also require
no hyphen for other tools:
http://jerkcity.com/jerkcity2434.html
PS wars have been started by ATT in 1984.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353
Jake Hamby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You're right. At least my comment led to an interesting discussion, as I
didn't know about star and its functionality. It might also be worthwhile to
look at FreeBSD's tar, which is fast, automatically recognizes .gz and .bz2
archives (and decodes them
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Am I the only one that doesn't like the --something-or-other options
of GNU related software?
Personally, I now consider it preferable (like a little bonus) when a
tool or command provides long option equivalents for short options.
Why?
If long
George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well on powerfull aspect of solaris command recall using the vi is the
ability to search and execute a command which is e.g. 20 in the history list
with a simple /, while in linux bash you have to hit the up arrow 20 times.
I think this makes the speed
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/15/05, George [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Well on powerfull aspect of solaris command recall using the vi is the
ability to search and execute a command which is e.g. 20 in the history
list with a simple /, while in linux bash you have to hit the
Chris Ricker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I cannot see that it would give more performance than star.
star at the time libarchive was started was:
* GPL
* not a library
Before that lib project started, I did aproach the FreeBSD people
and offered to change star's license to *BSD.
They were
Sunil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Star ised -bz long before GNU tar started with -j
Star implement -o as documented on SUSv2 (UNIX-98)
GNU tar does not correctly follow this standard.
but Jorg, now that -j is there and is present all over in many places, does
it not make sense to
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 12:54:49PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
If a few things are granted with the packages, it would be possible to
reuse the work of other people:
Yes, and while there are some good points here, this list in general
shows
John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What kinds of risk? By definition, existing scripts and customers don't use
the long options, so this would be justified only by how it enabled new
markets (i.e., porting from Linux...); adding long options diverges the
commands from the POSIX spec, so
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I actually fail to see a Linux industry standard in POSIX;
Well at a minimum, it's certainly key to much of the development of
POSIX-like Linux distro standards and other Linux standards such as
those
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The difference between Linux and Solaris is that Solaris has been certified
for being SUSv3 compliant.
Solaris, not OpenSolaris. This is an OpenSolaris list, Jörg.
So you believe that we should not try
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 05:48:48PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The implicit assumption here is that Sun make will be available as
open source sometime in the next year and possibly sooner still. If
you don't trust that assumption
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The difference between Linux and Solaris is that Solaris has been
certified
for being SUSv3 compliant.
Solaris
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Then perhaps the complaint about the particular use of the term illegal
is
misplaced.
No. Jörg's further derogatory wording (broken, defective etc.)
leaves no doubt about it. You can hardly claim that people
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Assuming you mean the five I identified as planning (AFAICT)
redistributable distros:
Blastware
JDS/GNOME + KDE
Pkgsrc
Portage
SchilliX
... have anything in common. The answer to that question should be the
focus of this discussion.
The
Bart Smaalders [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
My impression is that you are not interested in a fruitful discussion
but only listen to certain buzzwords and then start to pick on people.
Sigh.
Productive discussion focuses on the technology, not on the personalities.
This sort of statement
Jake Hamby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
As you can see, star is the fastest and gtar is the slowest. My only
complaint with star is that you can't combine single-letter options together
(tar -xzf, tar -cjvf, etc.) like you can with every other version of tar.
I'll have to have a look at the
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I think we can minimize the problem by doing (at least start
planning) an base reference distro ASAP.
If we like to talk about a reference distro, we first need to talk about
the extent it should cover.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, 17 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But I think we can minimize the problem by doing (at least start
planning) an base reference distro ASAP.
If we like to talk about a reference distro, we
John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it important (as an architectural goal...) that we could say
runs on OpenSolaris[1]
in the face of multiple OpenSolaris based distros?
That is, if someone develops an application for Sun's Nevada release,
*should* we expect it to, at a binary
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Any makefile that uses $ in an explicit rule is dubtlessly broken if it
claims to be portable and authors of free software usually claim to
write portable software.
_If_ they claim that. Otherwise they rely
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Jul 15, 2005 at 06:58:24PM -0700, Jake Hamby wrote:
I just did a quick performance test of bsdtar vs. gnutar, star, and Solaris
tar in extracting a large (704MB uncompressed) .tar.bz2 archive:
In the case of compressed files, especially
Jake Hamby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Okay, I did a more scientific test and uncompressed the archive first.
Then I ran every version of tar at least twice (gtar three times b/c the
first two runs were so different). I ran star at the end to make sure the
results weren't getting slower
Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hi,
On Mon, 2005-07-18 at 02:07 -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
Am I the only one that doesn't like the
--something-or-other options
of GNU related software? Please don't do this to
Solaris!
No, you're not the only one. --options are completely
Eric Boutilier [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That is, if someone develops an application for Sun's Nevada release,
*should* we expect it to, at a binary compatable level, just run
correctly on any other OpenSolaris-based distro?
You cannot :-(
Don't you mean: until Sun re-licenses its
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/18/05, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It appears that the installation media did not get burned correctly.
If you have another system with cdrtools installed, use the `readcd`
tool
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This statement does not help, it is no longer needed since 18 months.
Ok, I'll put it this way. Using the version of cdrtools as distributed
by blastwave.org, I cannot do cdrecord -scanbus without disabling
volmgt first. blastwave.org reports these as
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
_If_ they claim that. Otherwise they rely on documented behavior of
GNU make. This is quite different from the authors implement code
that matches GNU make bugs, as you were writing previously.
The GNU make documentation claims that $ is the name
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have to on my Solaris 10 GA system Jörg, otherwise I get errors.
This statement does not help, it is no longer needed since 18 months.
Ok, I'll put it this way. Using the version of cdrtools as distributed
by blastwave.org, I cannot do cdrecord
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Gunnar Ritter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And by the way, does star also still need the -U option in addition
to x to match historical tar behavior?
Did I miss somtheing and there is a POSIX standard for star
Dragan Cvetkovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mon, 18 Jul 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
If you have no medium in the drive, you will not see it due to
the behavior of volmgt.
Wait for Build 19 or 20 for a revised volmgt system that also shows
empty drives while volmgt is running
Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sun, Jul 17, 2005 at 01:01:09AM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
No, Nevada is the engineering name for the development version of the
whole Sun-Solaris.
Then it is currently impossible to be binary compatible with it.
That should
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
and for the record, /dev/xsvc is coming. I'm working on it personally now.
Good news
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED](work) Blog:
Jürgen Keil [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oddly, I didn't have this problem with the first (same) CD-RW, only
after rebooted from disk and started installing CD-2.
That is, readcd didn't detect media errors on CD#1?
If it doesn't, the CD-ROMdrive would be buggy.
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL
Darren Kenny [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure what you mean by Solaris / CDE in this context?
To reiterate what we are planning and to try clarify things (I hope) :
JDS, as a desktop platform, is essentially GNOME, in that we take GNOME
packages
and apply patches (which include bug
Gavin Maltby [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 07/14/05 20:11, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Every second free software packet comes with illegal Makefiles that only
work
usually because they depend on bugs in Sun Make or GNU make. Note that
OpenSolaris does not come with Sun Make, I use smake
Paul Gress [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On my Solaris 10 GA, W2100z (Dual Opteron):
$ /opt/csw/bin/cdrecord -scanbus
Cdrecord-ProDVD-Clone 2.01b35 (i386-pc-solaris2.8) Copyright (C)
1995-2004 J�rg Schilling
Unlocked features: ProDVD Clone
Limited features:
This copy of cdrecord is licensed
Hi,
when trying to boot SchilliX on this notebook, I get:
panic: failed to boot kernel/unix
Now unfortunately we don't have all sources for multiboot
so I am unable to even find out how to set the variable
verbosemode to get better messages.
How may I set verbosemode to a value != 0 and when
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/20/05, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How may I set verbosemode to a value != 0 and when will
we have full sources for multiboot?
I'm pretty sure verbosemode is activated by doing -v to the kernel...
Just like one does -kdv...
-v
John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure I would have phrased it in those words (after all, part of a
being in a community means being tactful and polite), but debian encompasses
a lot of architectural policy that sfw/csw don't. To be fair, one of the
reasons that they don't is
Dragan Cvetkovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That was a problem discussed a few days ago. Basically, as I understand
it, Blastwave packages are supposed to work the same way on any Solaris
version (from 8 to 11) and you can't guarantee that some required library
would be in the base OS or in
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 14:04, Chris Ricker wrote:
creating a mysql-4.1 pkg from scratch. Or what if you want the same
version that Sun shipped, but just need it compiled with different
options? That's trivial on Linux distros, not so trivial on
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Mick wrote:
and for the record, /dev/xsvc is coming. I'm working on it personally now.
BTW, examining the source for aperture, it looks very much like programs
designed to use /dev/xsvc (like the afore-argued-about iasl) would work
fine if /dev/xsvc
Alvaro Lopez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, it is the systems level thought and integration that makes
Debian more than simply a collection of pre-built packages.
Obviously, I have been quite impressed by the thought and effort
that has gone into the Debian system, and agree
Ferdinand O. Tempel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought about this as well, and as a matter of fact, I want to go through
with it. The Debian project itself isn't all that enthousiastic due to the
GPL not being compatible with the CDDL and all that crap, but that doesn't
mean noone else can
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't it be even better to not have to make that judgment call? Now
don't get me wrong, the stuff done by the likes of Blastwave and
Sunfreeware were *hugely* important - I'd just like to see us acting as
a combined community, working on porting the software,
Theo Schlossnagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, that exactly what I mean. Debian will bring a huge set of
quality software greatly integrated to OpenSolaris.
Why do you expect that packages that only have been tested on Linux
will even compile on Solaris?
Because the vast
Ferdinand O. Tempel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't expect things to work if you adopt to the entire Debian way of
thinking.
Actually, I do. I don't care much about what the debian project thinks or
expects, and I doubt it's what you claim as:
As long as Debian compiles software on
1 - 100 of 2195 matches
Mail list logo
