On 2/13/06, Alex Ross <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Hmm, sorry I have missed it. ;)
Maybe this is couldn't be a problem right now, IMHO.
I dont know how much work this can cost but Is it possible use glibc instead sun c library at the momment?
This indeed could be a problem. Most part of debian ppl have a critical view about non-gpl licensed softwares but I think this could be solved putting parts of the port or it entirely into non-free debian repository tree. Anyways this is the most complex question of the requirements.
Maybe some rules must be change to adapt Nexenta as part of Debian. I think this is valid effort, Nexenta is definitively a very intersting project.
Great and useful informations here. Thanks you Alex for the attention.
Thanks
Matheus Morais
Yes, absolutely! and we say so right on our main page.
Hmm, sorry I have missed it. ;)
Well, I've copied the following questions from "Requirements for architectures"
(the page above). The new architecture is, by the way, solaris-i386. To be more
exact, here's the dpkg-architecture:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]:~$ dpkg-architecture
DEB_BUILD_ARCH=solaris-i386
DEB_BUILD_ARCH_OS=solaris
DEB_BUILD_ARCH_CPU=i386
DEB_BUILD_GNU_CPU=i486
DEB_BUILD_GNU_SYSTEM=solaris
DEB_BUILD_GNU_TYPE=i386-pc-solaris2.11
DEB_HOST_ARCH=solaris-i386
DEB_HOST_ARCH_OS=solaris
DEB_HOST_ARCH_CPU=i386
DEB_HOST_GNU_CPU=i486
DEB_HOST_GNU_SYSTEM=solaris
DEB_HOST_GNU_TYPE=i386-pc-solaris2.11
* Is port cursed?
Hmm.. I hope not! :)
* Are machines available to general public?
Yes, we have a single amd64 box that currently runs both the gnusolaris.org
web portal and the entire development environment. This box in turn is run by
NexentaOS.
* Is full source available?
Yes.
* Is this architecture related to other architectures already in the
archive, or that also should be considered, either now or in the future?
We introduced a new one.
* Can the related architectures be supported in a single architecture (eg,
with a biarch arrangement)?
Yes.
* Are there 3 or more developers (or n-ms) actively maintaining the port?
Who are they?
Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Mac <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Alex Ross < [EMAIL PROTECTED]>
* What sort of architecture is this? Desktop/workstation?
Mainframe/supercomputer? Embedded? Something else?
Desktop/workstation.
* Does it have any users?
At least 20,000 downloads. Possibly, much more than that. Despite its alpha
stage, many dozens claim to use the system constantly.
* Has the ABI stabalised?
Yes.
* How do you install a system? (URL to a HOWTO)
http://www.gnusolaris.org/Getting_Started
* Is there any corporate support of this arch, and the Debian port in
particular?
Nexenta Systems, Inc. (email: [EMAIL PROTECTED])
* Is there an example box developers can login to to see if it works?
Nope, not yet.
Maybe this is couldn't be a problem right now, IMHO.
* Are there existing comprehensive free distributions of this OS?
Nope.
* Does this system have a standard Unix API?
Yes. Moreover, it is 100% compliant with The Open Group specifications.
* Does the OS support modern glibc and gcc?
Sun C library instead of glibc. Yes, on GCC.
I dont know how much work this can cost but Is it possible use glibc instead sun c library at the momment?
* What is the license on the kernel and libraries? Is it free? Is it GPL
CDDL. Yes, it is free. No, it is not GPL compatible.
This indeed could be a problem. Most part of debian ppl have a critical view about non-gpl licensed softwares but I think this could be solved putting parts of the port or it entirely into non-free debian repository tree. Anyways this is the most complex question of the requirements.
Maybe some rules must be change to adapt Nexenta as part of Debian. I think this is valid effort, Nexenta is definitively a very intersting project.
* Note that if it's not free, building software for it violates the
Social Contract; and if it's not GPL compatible,
GPL software such as dpkg can't be linked to it
This is a misconception that was explained /ad nauseam/ numerous times.
Dynamic linking is perfectly okay in our case.
It is okay de facto: Sun Microsystems ships, for instance, Solaris Express that
contains kernel and C library (both CDDL), and a bunch of GPL software
- all on a single DVD.
It is okay de jure, and FSF made their official opinion on that abundantly clear
with the recent GPLv3 publication.
More information:
http://www.gnusolaris.org/gswiki/GNU/Solaris_Resources
Thanks, Matheus. Your interest is extremely appreciated! This could be the first
step...
--
Alex
Great and useful informations here. Thanks you Alex for the attention.
Thanks
Matheus Morais
_______________________________________________ GNU/Solaris Development mailing list [email protected]
