> Silo is unmaintained and it needs to be patched to
> know the sector numbers
> of the second stage boot. This is why SILO does not
> work with mkisofs while
> a standard sparc boot is directly supported by
> mkisofs longer than SILO
> exists. I did try to help the SILO people in former
> times to
Here's the link:
http://sun.com/solaris/freemedia
Basically, it was so successful, we quickly hit a supply issue as well.
It has taken longer than we would have like to be addressed (internal
funding, manufacturing, etc.) and we could have handled the
communication better, but my understan
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
/usr belongs to the OpenSolaris name space right now. How would this
work wrt ARC, etc?
That's a good point. I don't think it's feasible to go to ARC each
time we integrate a package into the proposed repository. ARC would
soon have a huge backlog. Perhaps we cou
Eric Enright wrote:
Hi all,
Several weeks (months?) ago Sun had some sort of online deal where
they would ship free S10 and Sun Studio 11 CDs out for free. A few
weeks ago a friend of mine was complaining about not receiving them,
and just now another friend of mine is mentioning not receiving
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Frank Hofmann <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, Justin Zygmont wrote:
On Tue, 20 Feb 2007, James Carlson wrote:
Andrew Pattison writes:
So am I right in saying that there is no easy way of getting a grub-like
boot menu on SPARC?
Hi all,
Several weeks (months?) ago Sun had some sort of online deal where
they would ship free S10 and Sun Studio 11 CDs out for free. A few
weeks ago a friend of mine was complaining about not receiving them,
and just now another friend of mine is mentioning not receiving them.
Is there any kn
It's not a workload issue. We can handle more packages (as long as
our nightly build completes in 24 hours ;) But it doesn't seem
logical. Currently there is no rule to determine where a package
belongs. It's a matter of who integrated it initially.
Ideally, desktop should be desktop, X should
A huge "+1" from me (would that count as "+2"? :) ).
James has been extremely enthusiastic and effective in promoting
Solaris in various forums. He is always among the first to try the
cutting edge technology in Solaris, to provide feedback and
suggestions, and to share what he knows with the oth
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
> So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
> reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
> GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
I'm nor sure I see the point of exchanging /u
Joshua Clulow wrote:
Greetings,
I would like to nominate jmcp (James McPherson) as a candidate for the
Governing Board.
As a core contributor for the SOSUG (Sydney, AU) Usergroup I've met
James several times and frequently converse with him via IRC. He's hard
working, knowledgeable, and alwa
Greetings,
I would like to nominate jmcp (James McPherson) as a candidate for the
Governing Board.
As a core contributor for the SOSUG (Sydney, AU) Usergroup I've met
James several times and frequently converse with him via IRC. He's hard
working, knowledgeable, and always happy to help -- as
On Thu, 2007-02-22 at 19:08 -0800, Bart Smaalders wrote:
> > The JDS team (well, Dermot ;) is working on adding more packages
> > (mostly the tools required for building JDS). Obviously, it's easier
> > for us to deliver these through the JDS consolidation. However, they
> > really don't belong
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Eric Boutilier wrote:
Note however that if this project doesn't cover Solaris 10, it can't
potentially supersede the CCD because the CCD (/opt/sfw) is a component of
Solaris 10 and delivers to Solaris 10 updates.
Isn't anything for Solaris 10 outsid
Hi Dana,
In effect I am getting system panics after installing solaris 10 u3 on a dell
d820. The only way to get the system to boot was disabling ACPI completely (0x8
or 0x4 didn't work).
Is there any workaround for this now?
Thanks,
Max
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
Eric Boutilier wrote:
Note however that if this project doesn't cover Solaris 10, it can't
potentially supersede the CCD because the CCD (/opt/sfw) is a component of
Solaris 10 and delivers to Solaris 10 updates.
Isn't anything for Solaris 10 outside the scope of OpenSolaris anyway?
Replacing t
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
Hi all,
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
integrating more GNU packages into Solaris
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
Hi all,
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC.
And there was much rejoicing!
Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
integrating more GNU packages
On Fri, 2007-02-23 at 03:39 +0100, Roland Mainz wrote:
> > So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
> > reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
> > GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
> > integrating more GNU packages
Hi Laca,
That's terrific that it made it out of PSARC. This would make it a lot
easier to move a lot of our infrastructure off Gentoo and onto
OpenSolaris. Building a community/repository around spec files rocks
too! Anything that brings the concept of ebuilds closer to being
possible on OpenSola
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
integrating more GNU packages into Solaris. We have already seen
the fi
Mike Kupfer wrote:
>
> > "Eric" == Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Eric> ... In fact Gmane already is carrying some opensolaris lists (I
> Eric> don't know the who/when/why)...
>
> There should be some discussion of this in the opensolaris-discuss
> archives for July 2005 ("g
"Laszlo (Laca) Peter" wrote:
> So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
> reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
> GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
> integrating more GNU packages into Solaris. We have already see
Hi all,
So the /usr/gnu proposal[1] was approved by PSARC. Obviously, the
reason for defining /usr/gnu wasn't theoretical -- it allows moving
GNU packages from /usr/sfw to /usr or /usr/gnu and it helps us
integrating more GNU packages into Solaris. We have already seen
the first few putbacks (m4
Here are links to the latest batch of overview reports (rollups).
You can also receive them by subscribing to the RSS feed:
http://del.icio.us/rss/bootblog/oss:rollups
or bookmarking the URL:
http://del.icio.us/bootblog/oss:rollups
cab-discuss 02/01 - 02/15
http://mail.opensolari
For background on what this is, see:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=24416#24416
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=25200#25200
=
opensolaris-discuss 02/01 - 02/15
=
Size of all threads du
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Stephen Lau wrote:
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 09:25:37AM -0800, Mike Kupfer wrote:
"Eric" == Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Eric> ... In fact Gmane already is carrying some opensolaris lists (I
Eric> don't know the who/when/why)...
There should be some discussio
On Thu, 22 Feb 2007, Mike Kupfer wrote:
"Eric" == Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Eric> ... In fact Gmane already is carrying some opensolaris lists (I
Eric> don't know the who/when/why)...
There should be some discussion of this in the opensolaris-discuss
archives for July 2005 ("
Austin wrote:
I guess I'll just have to do a bit of experimentation. Logically though if the
7200RPM drives have a typical output of 50 MB/sec, an ATA100 controller should
be able to accomidate writing to both drives on the same channel at full speed
though I would think. I should be able to
On Thu, Feb 22, 2007 at 09:25:37AM -0800, Mike Kupfer wrote:
> > "Eric" == Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Eric> ... In fact Gmane already is carrying some opensolaris lists (I
> Eric> don't know the who/when/why)...
>
> There should be some discussion of this in the opensolar
Go visit:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=24771&tstart=0
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=24565&tstart=0
Might you all be involved in the same discussion?
--
Rod.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
> "Eric" == Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Eric> ... In fact Gmane already is carrying some opensolaris lists (I
Eric> don't know the who/when/why)...
There should be some discussion of this in the opensolaris-discuss
archives for July 2005 ("gmane and OpenSolaris").
My understa
I guess I'll just have to do a bit of experimentation. Logically though if the
7200RPM drives have a typical output of 50 MB/sec, an ATA100 controller should
be able to accomidate writing to both drives on the same channel at full speed
though I would think. I should be able to throw a spare R
Austin wrote:
I'm currently getting !41 MB/s from /dev/zero writing to
the filesystem, and ~50 MB/s from the filesystem to /dev/null.
It's an array of 4 IDE 7200RPM drives running at ATA100, so
theoretically, I should be able to get up to 100 MB/sec per drive,
correct?
Your disk performance
On 2/22/07, Austin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I'm currently getting !41 MB/s from /dev/zero writing to the filesystem,
and ~50 MB/s from the filesystem to /dev/null. It's an array of 4 IDE
7200RPM drives running at ATA100, so theoretically, I should be able to get
up to 100 MB/sec per drive, co
I'm currently getting !41 MB/s from /dev/zero writing to the filesystem, and
~50 MB/s from the filesystem to /dev/null. It's an array of 4 IDE 7200RPM
drives running at ATA100, so theoretically, I should be able to get up to 100
MB/sec per drive, correct? I'm also wondering if the speed should
...
In fact Gmane already is carrying some opensolaris lists (I don't
know the who/when/why)...
Here's a link to them:
http://dir.gmane.org/search.php?match=opensolaris
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Wed, 21 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* Richard L. Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-02-20 21:41]:
I still think feeding the lists to a dedicated news server could be the
cleanest approach to providing a way to read the messages by list in
a threaded manner. Either the groups could b
Want to get paid to work with OpenSolaris all day? Joyent is constantly
pushing at the limits of what OpenSolaris can do. We're running Nevada
in a cutting edge environment; this job isn't for the squeamish!
Applicants have to be able to think on their feet and be prepared for a
"write the bo
Hi,
now, as I'm back to Germany,I've got access to my machine at home with ZFS, so
I could test my binary patch for multi-threading with tar on a ZFS filesystems.
Results look like this:
.tar, small files (e.g. gcc source tree), speedup: x8
.tar.gz, small files (gcc sources tree), speedup x4
.ta
39 matches
Mail list logo
