On Feb 4, 2008 7:30 PM, Ken Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 3 Feb 2008 12:27:41 -0600 > "Shawn Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Feb 3, 2008 12:14 PM, Ken Gunderson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 03 Feb 2008 07:01:18 PST > > > "Dr. Robert Pasken" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > I thought it was a mistake to bring any sort of linux flavoring into > > > > Solaris and I won't deal with anything that has to do with Indiana or > > > > any other attempt to make Solaris look/act like linux. I use Solaris > > > > because it is Unix, is stable and meets some minimum standards for > > > > useability. Linux is a train wreck that hasn't come to a complete stop > > > > yet. Compared to windows, linux is a paragon of stability, compared to > > > > Solaris it makes me think of windows > > > > > > > > > > +1 > > > > Except, as was later discovered, this isn't about making things "like > > Linux"; it's about making the OS more accessible to users and > > developers. > > > > It just so happens that GNU/Linux is one of those platforms from which > > certain evaluations are drawn. > > > > If you'll note past discussions, FreeBSD has been in those evaluations too. > > > > The user base of other operating systems is significantly larger; good > > products adapt to market expectations where possible and reasonable to > > do so. > > You're comparing apples and oranges here:
No, not really. For the purposes of this discussion, I wasn't comparing things at all. I was merely pointing out reference points that I believe have been used in making changes that will hopefully make OpenSolaris more approachable to users. > Linux => GPL license. Linux kernel bundled into assorted "distros" with > various GNU tools (Gnu's Not Unix, proclaimed loud and proud on their > homepage) and disparate userlands, etc., the components of which are > far from standardized. Dependency nightmares during installs and > upgrades. When several _hundred_ RH boxes are borked because of sloppy > merges, etc., who cares that it's commercially "supported", you still > have one hell of a lot of unhappy customers yelling at you. Granted, > Linux has improved over the years, but still not without it's warts. I fail to see what this has to do with anything that is being done with Project Indiana or OpenSOlaris in general. Regardless of the problems that these platforms have, right now, they are the ones leading the market. > Which brings us to Solaris. Can Solaris provide integrated, cohesive > kernel and true unix userland in a stable and well performing package > that is freely available, and hence able to compete on it's own > technical merits with the freely available *BSD's and Linuxes? I hope I find the phrase "true unix userland" to be rather funny. Solaris ships with several flavours of "userland" utilities, many of which aren't even in the default path configuration. Most of the utilities in the default path (such as grep, etc.) are widely panned for the lack of modern functionality, updates, and numerous bugs. While I personally I am very grateful for the xpg4, xpg6, and other standards compliant environments that are available; there is no reason that the default userland has to resemble the olden days of the pdp-11 :) (joking) While I wish that there were better options than GNU userland in terms of functionality, the reality is that the majority of the open source world has chosen the GNU toolset, for better or worse, as their toolset of choice. Wasting precious resources on attempting to reinvent the GNU wheel, all in the name of (mostly) pride and arrogance, isn't going to win any battles. Ivory tower attitudes will keep that tower sparkling white, so that future generations may remember it fondly as they migrate to systems that actually meet their needs. > so. That's why I'm looking at it in the first place. As a professional > unix sysadmin I'm not too interested in yet another "Linux distro > of the month" to play with nights and weekends because I have no other > life. So what's the Solaris target market going to be, professionals or > hobbyists? There's lots more of the latter if you're objective is > mindshare with the pc hobbyist rags, etc., wh/may do quite well at > raising visibility. But I don't think these folks buy support > contracts, nor are they likely to upgrade to Sun "big iron" sparc > machines. I'm not interested in a yet another "Linux distro of the month" either; that's why I'm excited about things like: IPS, the Distribution Constructor, Caiman, and others. All of these projects are taking fairly different approaches to the same problems others have tried to solve before. IPS, notably, stands out the most as being widely divergent in its approach to packaging. I would encourage you to approach the efforts of this community with an open mind. I do not believe for one moment that the engineers at Sun will replace anything in Solaris without careful consideration and planning. For now, the most useful kind of feedback people can give is specific issues or improvements they would like to see. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ "To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so." - Robert Orben _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list [email protected]
