On 10/15/14 04:49 PM, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote:
On 15/10/2014 16:41, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote:
Who said anything about 129a? I am using 134 the last OpenSolaris
release. Also, the name of the binary distribution contains the word
This is not an official release, but was build as an interim to
enable Osol users to upgrade to Solaris 11, and is also very old
and long dead.
Hi Udo, take care not to top-post, but hit reply or reply to list button
to stay in thread.
Btw, 2009.06 was snv_111b and last Opensolaris was snv_134 that is still
hosted in Openindiana /legacy
and enables updating to Openindiana. I did it with success through all
those versions several times, although small changes are needed on GRUB
but menu at the end of the Boot line, and then updating inside
Openindiana. Last OI that supports Solaris-compatible ZFS version by
default upon install from DVD/USB is Openindiana 151a3 so I usually
update entire to 151a7 and then further to a8 and a9 and Hipster
earlier, while it was still possible to update.
Solaris, not Opensolaris anymore (why should they?).
Because Opensolaris installs are still supported and that it works on
Openindiana.
Because same binaries work on wide variety of Opensolaris-descendent
OS-es etc.
it is the most stupid compiler I have ever used!
No question about that...
Yet code it generates was usually faster.
For flash, they even don't care about compatibility,
flash support was officially removed already in 11.1:
It is not the point actually,
because Adobe Flash problem arised inside Openindiana 151a8 , because
Flash started behaving like that after 151a7->151a8 update, with same
Firefox version/binaries.
So you couldn't say that actually, because I still use
Oracle-contributed binaries in Openindiana and they work just fine, usually.
_______________________________________________
openindiana-discuss mailing list
openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
