On Mon, 4 Feb 2008 21:49:04 -0600 "Shawn Walker" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 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. Oh really? How sure are you about that, and by what criteria are you defining "leading" and "market"? EBay started out as a bunch of Linux boxes. Then migrated to some HP stuff. Then under Carly management HP support headed downhill into the kitty-litter so badly that they migrated to Sun. Yeah, there's still a bunch of white-box linux webservers on front end, but what' running the back end? How about wikipedia? Hmmmm... last I looked more and more nodes are running clustered Sun iron to power backend DB. Amazon.com... Hmmm... basic story repeats again... How about Google..... hmm.. bunches of white-box linux machines but trialing Solaris. Yahoo, used to be a bunch of FreeBSD boxes, but in more recent years supplemented by clustered Sun to run db backends. Why might this be? What itch is Solaris doing such a good job of scratching here that it's supplanting *BSD and Linux boxes. I could be wrong, but here's my short list - it scales, it clusters, it's stable, it's supported, and it apparently does these things more reliably in these environments than the "market leaders" it's replacing. Granted, it's a far cry from it's glory days of the past, but it seems to me that the glass is still half full. > > 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. Yeah, this was probably poor choice of words, as *BSD's include many Gnu tools. The point I wanted to make was that they releases were cohesive whole, and updates released as cohesive whole. So you get much more stable experience overall w.r.t. the upgrade path. No Linux upgrade incongruencies that bork your system. Anyone who's been around Linux for any length of time and used it in production environment knows what I'm talking about. > 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. +1 > 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. To clarify, I'm new to Open/Solaris, unfamiliar with Indiana project objectives. My intent is _not_ to criticize Open/Solaris development, but rather comment on future directions that would be +/- attractive to me. I'm a sysadmin. And while I might offer my $0.02 in here and there, take such comments for what they're worth, but don't take them as any lack of respect or appreciation for those who do actually write code. > I do not believe for one moment that the engineers at Sun will replace > anything in Solaris without careful consideration and planning. Nor I. > For now, the most useful kind of feedback people can give is specific > issues or improvements they would like to see. I would like to see a package/ports system, perhaps similar, but improved/modernized FreeBSD type of system that allows for convenient installs of both precompiled binaries _and_ convenient source builds with knobs that easily facilitate various customized tweaks for more specific, "expert" needs that _also_ prioritizes ensuring correct dependency checking and does _not_ sneak in unadvertised changes (e.g. MS, RH), while also allowing for combinations of selective, interactive, and/or batch management of updates. Yep, I know, that one's a tall order;-) -- Best regards, Ken Gunderson Q: Because it reverses the logical flow of conversation. A: Why is putting a reply at the top of the message frowned upon? _______________________________________________ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
