Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Alan Cox]

> I consistently see this complaint, and it really rubs me wrong.  Why
> does everyone compare rpm to apt?  Wouldn't rpm to deb be the correct
> comparison, and then compare yum to apt?

Yes - rpm is a file format.

apt, yum, package-kit and various other tools then install rpm and or
dpkg files.

There are a couple of fundamental architectural differences between the
rpm and dpkg format in design - the big ones are the way it handles (or
doesn't) overlapping binaries for multiple architectures. The other is
the religious viewpoint about whether packages are permitted to interact
with the user as installed (dpkg) or after only (rpm). This all being
related to things like automatic installs/rebuilds

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: SUSE on Native LPAR

[Ceruti, Gerard G]

Hi Martin

This is how I have done all my installs, initial boot off the HMC CD, then 
point to an NFS server ( SuSE PC) I have not been unable to get FTP work, but 
NFS works great, 
check the NFS "exports" are all defined correctly,
Have you checked  /var/log/messages on the PC for any error messages.

The only other problem I had was with the IP address of the zLinux system, it  
had to have the same subnet at the first router it connected to.

Regards
Gerard Ceruti
may the 'z' be with you

-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of Martin, 
Larry D
Sent: 25 March 2009 20:53
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: SUSE on Native LPAR

I am very new to Linux and am trying to install Linux on an LAPR on a
z9BC.

 

I can load the initial Kernel by putting the CD (CD1) into the CD-ROM
drive on the HMC and perform a Lad from CD.

 

After setting up the network the Linux kernel wants to read the rest of
CD1.  If I tell him to use the HMC CD-ROM the response is "Unable to
load" (not an exact quote).

 

I have tried to use NFS on a desktop which has SUSE 10 installed (about
a year ago).  I get a error saying the request was rejected error = -1.

 

I have also tried using SMB to point to the CD reader on my Windows
desktop and get the same response as above (both of these take a few
minutes to return).

 

Can someone who has done this give me an idea as to what I am doing
wrong?

 

Thanks,   .Larry

 

Ps. Small shop - no money - VM not an option.

 

Larry D. Martin

Mainframe Systems Support

Office of Information Technology and Communications

301.883.7335

 



..
This E-mail and any of its attachments may contain Prince George’s County 
Government or Prince George's County 7th Judicial Circuit Court proprietary 
information, which is privileged and confidential. This E-mail is intended 
solely for the use of the individual or entity to which it is addressed. If you 
are not the intended recipient of this E-mail, you are hereby notified that any 
dissemination, distribution, copying, or action taken in relation to the 
contents of and attachments to this E-mail is strictly prohibited and may be 
unlawful. If you have received this E-mail in error, please notify the sender 
immediately and permanently delete the original and any copy of this E-mail and 
any printout.

_

Standard Bank email Disclaimer and confidentiality note

This e-mail, its attachments and any rights attaching hereto are, unless the 
content clearly indicates otherwise, the property of 
Standard Bank Group Limited and its subsidiaries. It is confidential, private 
and intended for only the addressee. 

Should you not be the addressee and receive this e-mail by mistake, kindly 
notify the sender, and delete this e-mail immediately.
Do not disclose or use it in any way. Views and opinions expressed in this 
e-mail are those of the sender unless clearly stated as 
those of Standard Bank Group. 

Standard Bank Group accepts no liability for any loss or damages howsoever 
incurred, or suffered, resulting, or arising, 
from the use of this email or its attachments. 

Standard Bank Group does not warrant the integrity of this e-mail nor that it 
is free of errors, viruses, interception or interference. 

Licensed divisions of the Standard Bank Group are authorised financial services 
providers in terms of the Financial Advisory and 
Intermediary Services Act, No 37 of 2002 (FAIS).

For information about the Standard Bank Group visit our website 
http://www.standardbank.com

2009-03-24 Linux on System z Documentation update on developerWorks

[Gerhard Hiller]

Please refer to:
http://www.ibm.com/developerworks/linux/linux390/whatsnew.html
to download the new "Device Drivers, Features, and Commands as available 
with SUSE Linux Enterprise Server 11" and related hints, which we 
published 2009-03-24. 
We have not announced this update earlier, because we waited 
until all referenced links were up to date.
* end of message


Mit freundlichen Grüßen / Kind regards








Gerhard Hiller








Systems Software Management


IBM Systems & Technology Group, Systems Software Development








Phone:
 +49-7031-16-4388
 IBM Deutschland



Fax:
 +49-7031-16-3545
 Schoenaicher Str. 220


E-Mail:
 ghil...@de.ibm.com
 71032 Boeblingen




 Germany





IBM Deutschland Research & Development GmbH / Vorsitzender des 
Aufsichtsrats: Martin Jetter 
Geschäftsführung: Erich Baier 
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Böblingen / Registergericht: Amtsgericht Stuttgart, 
HRB 243294 
 

<><><><><><><>

Re: Old IBM Mainframe - Still Useful?

[Andrew Wiley]

Well, you've given me a lot to think about. I guess what I'll probably wind
up doing is comparing hardware specs and maintenance prices between the
mainframe and a high end PC server that we could build or buy. For now,
though, I guess I'll have to wait for the specs.

Andrew

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP

[CHAPLIN, JAMES (CTR)]

We are trying to allow users to change their mainframe password through
LDAP via ldappasswd command:

 

home/user1)#ldappasswd -A -S -H ldap://hostname:port# user1

Old password:

Re-enter old password:

New password:

Re-enter new password:

SASL/EXTERNAL authentication started

ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s: Unknown authentication method (-6)

additional info: SASL(-4): no mechanism available:

 

We are using Top Secret on the mainframe; we have IBM LDAP on the
mainframe with NATIVEAUTH active (so it is getting the password directly
from Top Secret). However this command is failing to change the Top
Secret stored password. Any suggestions where to look or make changes to
resolve this?

 

James Chaplin

Systems Programmer, MVS, zVM & zLinux

Base Technologies, Inc

Supporting the zSeries Platform Team

 


--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP

[Patrick Spinler]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


Unless you've explicitly set up a SASL authentication method, you're
probably using simple authentication.  Indicate this to linux via the
"-x" command line option to most ldap utils.  Test it via ldapsearch, first.

E.g.:

  ldapsearch -H ldap://hostname uid=some_known_uid

should fail with a similar error.  whereas:

  ldapsearch -x -H ldap://hostname uid=some_known_uid

should work.

Another note.  You should be able to put most of the necessary default
host, search base and similar information into /etc/ldap.conf and
/etc/openldap/ldap.conf (you can cheat and make them symlinks to each
other) so that you don't have to enter -H options, and suchlike.

- -- Pat

CHAPLIN, JAMES (CTR) wrote:
> We are trying to allow users to change their mainframe password through
> LDAP via ldappasswd command:
>
>
>
> home/user1)#ldappasswd -A -S -H ldap://hostname:port# user1
>
> Old password:
>
> Re-enter old password:
>
> New password:
>
> Re-enter new password:
>
> SASL/EXTERNAL authentication started
>
> ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s: Unknown authentication method (-6)
>
> additional info: SASL(-4): no mechanism available:
>
>
>
> We are using Top Secret on the mainframe; we have IBM LDAP on the
> mainframe with NATIVEAUTH active (so it is getting the password directly
> from Top Secret). However this command is failing to change the Top
> Secret stored password. Any suggestions where to look or make changes to
> resolve this?
>
>
>
> James Chaplin
>
> Systems Programmer, MVS, zVM & zLinux
>
> Base Technologies, Inc
>
> Supporting the zSeries Platform Team
>
>
>
>
> --
> For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
> http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAknLntQACgkQNObCqA8uBswM7ACghYxhK8En+SB9NF3x1dBW1lv0
M8AAn3w56kG9xvDsGk3mEMvxAfS3J+hH
=0mCU
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP

[Patrick Spinler]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


One more thing before I forget, if you have a

  password sufficient pam_ldap.so ...

statement in the appropriate /etc/pam.d/... file, with the appropriate
defaults in /etc/ldap.conf, then users should be able to use the
standard unix 'passwd' command.

Warnings:

pam_ldap didn't used to set the shadow_last_changed ldap attribute.  So
expired passwords stayed expired no matter how many times they were
changed.  This was two years ago+ though, so test it and it might be fixed.

insure that if you're working from a master - slave ldap replication
environment that your slaves properly give referrals to your masters,
and that your clients follow referrals.

Luck,
- -- Pat

CHAPLIN, JAMES (CTR) wrote:
> We are trying to allow users to change their mainframe password through
> LDAP via ldappasswd command:
>
>
>
> home/user1)#ldappasswd -A -S -H ldap://hostname:port# user1
>
> Old password:
>
> Re-enter old password:
>
> New password:
>
> Re-enter new password:
>
> SASL/EXTERNAL authentication started
>
> ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s: Unknown authentication method (-6)
>
> additional info: SASL(-4): no mechanism available:
>
>
>
> We are using Top Secret on the mainframe; we have IBM LDAP on the
> mainframe with NATIVEAUTH active (so it is getting the password directly
> from Top Secret). However this command is failing to change the Top
> Secret stored password. Any suggestions where to look or make changes to
> resolve this?
>
>
>
> James Chaplin
>
> Systems Programmer, MVS, zVM & zLinux
>
> Base Technologies, Inc
>
> Supporting the zSeries Platform Team
>
>
>
>
> --
> For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
> http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAknLoDAACgkQNObCqA8uBsy/CACgntk5lD1zZQbaLZMMrxkouQEl
ONYAnR+8c6W6H4r8+RGHXcrX/m51VouP
=c1IP
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP

[Jerry Ekegren]

What you are looking for can be done.  It will require a connector between
the LDAP server and Top Secret.  I've set this up to run between
eDirectory and RACF using a DirXML RACF connector that we bought from
Novell.  You would need to find a similar tool that would run between your
LDAP server and Top Secret.

Jerry Ekegren
IT - Infrastructure Architecture
jerry.ekeg...@thrivent.com
Office: 612-844-3320
Mobile: 612-791-5223




"CHAPLIN, JAMES (CTR)" 
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port 
03/26/2009 08:44 AM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port 


To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP






We are trying to allow users to change their mainframe password through
LDAP via ldappasswd command:



home/user1)#ldappasswd -A -S -H ldap://hostname:port# user1

Old password:

Re-enter old password:

New password:

Re-enter new password:

SASL/EXTERNAL authentication started

ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s: Unknown authentication method (-6)

additional info: SASL(-4): no mechanism available:



We are using Top Secret on the mainframe; we have IBM LDAP on the
mainframe with NATIVEAUTH active (so it is getting the password directly
from Top Secret). However this command is failing to change the Top
Secret stored password. Any suggestions where to look or make changes to
resolve this?



James Chaplin

Systems Programmer, MVS, zVM & zLinux

Base Technologies, Inc

Supporting the zSeries Platform Team




--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or
visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390


--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP

[CHAPLIN, JAMES (CTR)]

I like you're thinking and tested your idea however got a different
error:

ldappasswd -A -S -x -H ldap://hostname:port# user1
Old password:
Re-enter old password:
New password:
Re-enter new password:
Result: Protocol error (2)
Additional info: No backend for OID=1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.1.11.1


James Chaplin
Systems Programmer, MVS, zVM & zLinux
Base Technologies, Inc
Supporting the zSeries Platform Team
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:linux-...@vm.marist.edu] On Behalf Of
Patrick Spinler
Sent: Thursday, March 26, 2009 11:27 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1


Unless you've explicitly set up a SASL authentication method, you're
probably using simple authentication.  Indicate this to linux via the
"-x" command line option to most ldap utils.  Test it via ldapsearch,
first.

E.g.:

  ldapsearch -H ldap://hostname uid=some_known_uid

should fail with a similar error.  whereas:

  ldapsearch -x -H ldap://hostname uid=some_known_uid

should work.

Another note.  You should be able to put most of the necessary default
host, search base and similar information into /etc/ldap.conf and
/etc/openldap/ldap.conf (you can cheat and make them symlinks to each
other) so that you don't have to enter -H options, and suchlike.

- -- Pat

CHAPLIN, JAMES (CTR) wrote:
> We are trying to allow users to change their mainframe password
through
> LDAP via ldappasswd command:
>
>
>
> home/user1)#ldappasswd -A -S -H ldap://hostname:port# user1
>
> Old password:
>
> Re-enter old password:
>
> New password:
>
> Re-enter new password:
>
> SASL/EXTERNAL authentication started
>
> ldap_sasl_interactive_bind_s: Unknown authentication method (-6)
>
> additional info: SASL(-4): no mechanism available:
>
>
>
> We are using Top Secret on the mainframe; we have IBM LDAP on the
> mainframe with NATIVEAUTH active (so it is getting the password
directly
> from Top Secret). However this command is failing to change the Top
> Secret stored password. Any suggestions where to look or make changes
to
> resolve this?
>
>
>
> James Chaplin
>
> Systems Programmer, MVS, zVM & zLinux
>
> Base Technologies, Inc
>
> Supporting the zSeries Platform Team
>
>
>
>
> --
> For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
> send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390
or visit
> http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.9 (Darwin)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iEYEARECAAYFAknLntQACgkQNObCqA8uBswM7ACghYxhK8En+SB9NF3x1dBW1lv0
M8AAn3w56kG9xvDsGk3mEMvxAfS3J+hH
=0mCU
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or
visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: using ldappasswd with zLinux and LDAP

[Patrick Spinler]

-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1

CHAPLIN, JAMES (CTR) wrote:
> I like you're thinking and tested your idea however got a different
> error:
>
> ldappasswd -A -S -x -H ldap://hostname:port# user1
> Old password:
> Re-enter old password:
> New password:
> Re-enter new password:
> Result: Protocol error (2)
> Additional info: No backend for OID=1.3.6.1.4.1.4203.1.11.1
>
>

My apologies.  I misunderstood the implications of the involvement of
the Top Secret product, since I know literally nothing about it.

Pretty much disregard what I said, since my notes were all with regard
to keeping the password in an LDAP server.

- -- Pat

-BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-
Version: GnuPG v1.4.6 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Using GnuPG with Mozilla - http://enigmail.mozdev.org

iD8DBQFJy7D2NObCqA8uBswRAlwiAJ4gqTc7CCXQhzL/J5bOLcBhAuH8nwCfRNh0
Tz/sHyEq+yx1fPAtHBPE95M=
=19DW
-END PGP SIGNATURE-

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[David Boyes]

On 3/25/09 11:27 PM, "Patrick Spinler"  wrote:

> I consistently see this complaint, and it really rubs me wrong.  Why
> does everyone compare rpm to apt?  Wouldn't rpm to deb be the correct
> comparison, and then compare yum to apt?

Because the distribution vendors continue to conflate the packaging format
with the configuration management tool. Debian made a proper separation of
the two. 

> comparing rpm to apt just
> doesn't fly.

See above. Using the language they use.

-- db

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[David Boyes]

On 3/26/09 2:00 AM, "John Summerfield" 
wrote:

> David Boyes wrote:
> 
>> I'm more concerned about anti-trust. If the IBM/Sun merger is blocked on
>> anti-trust grounds, and Sun cannot locate another angel investor, my
> 
> Fujitsu? FJ uses a lot of sparc* stuff, does its own development, and is
> in the same kind of business - supplying computers and related services.

Under a license from Sun. If IBM were to own Sun, then there may still be
concerns there. 

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Jeff Savit]

I'm going to avoid partisan issues, or at least attempt to do so :-) but
some corrections on Sun-specific stuff:

On 3/25/09 2:07 PM, David Boyes wrote:


In their defense, much of this is not technical in origin, but in licensing
agreements. The reason there is no OpenSolaris for SPARC is that Sun is not
permitted to distribute some of the closed-source pieces on any other
platform than Intel. There are pieces where only they can be the
distributor, and only in a commercial product. That's the main reason for
Opensolaris distributions from Sun -- they can't legally distribute some
things if they are not the actual distributor and they charge something for
it.


The first part of that is correct, but not some of the other parts,
including the bit about OpenSolaris on SPARC. The reason is that
OpenSolaris emphasis is on the developer community, which runs mostly on
Intel, and on creating a user experience consistent with other operating
systems.  such as providing recent GNU userland, Xorg for support of
many graphics adapters, adding support for power management and
wireless. Also, in recent years Sun has added an Intel/AMD product line
- a completely new revenue stream - and that has put a lot of emphasis
on supporting Solaris on Intel and AMD. That, plus the OEM agreements
with IBM, Dell, and HP make the increased emphasis on Intel and AMD
support in Solaris very important. Solaris runs on millions of Intel
systems now, and that's been an area of focus and investment (and should
NOT be interpreted as disinvestment in SPARC).

In fact, OpenSolaris for SPARC is certainly coming. You can see a bit of
discussion of that at:
  http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=78357&tstart=0

So, stay tuned. Speculation on this sort of thing is fun :-) but no need
to speculate as we've been describing our plans in public.


They have been trying rather diligently to clean up the mess around these
issues, but basically the incentive to do the clean up necessary to make
this open-source-clean is not something they are prioritizing if they're
struggling to survive. I can't really argue with that, much as I would like
them to get on with it so I can do more to help them.

Sun is indeed working diligently on this, and this is a priority, but
not necessarily in areas that are important to David. Part of the reason
for introducing new software in OpenSolaris, such as the replacement of
the existing Solaris patch, package, and boot environment is to move to
unencumbered replacements, as well as the reasons cited above.


Dtrace is just too cool to be without -- I hope
that if IBM does buy Sun that they contribute the dtrace code to
open-source. It'd save a lot of time. ZFS, too.

DTrace is indeed cool, but the rest is simply wrong. DTrace and ZFS have
been open-source since Day 1. ZFS exists on BSD and Mac OS X, and of
course the issue with Linux is the incompatible license terms not the
lack of source code. DTrace also runs on FreeBSD and Mac OS X.


As cool as it is, dtrace syntax is fugly.

No it ain't. :-) Oh, well, that's in the category of "degustibus non est
disputandem". I find it a natural expression of the "too cool to be
without" functionality, and in any case there's many pre-cooked scripts
out there, and a GUI tool too. Like any other language it requires some
study and application of effort, and until then it may look odd to the
casual observer.


And we could finally upgrade the Solaris userspace apps to something
resembling usefulness, and flush the whole IPS packaging system, and maybe
get rid of RPM too...8-) (The Nexenta guys did a super job with adapting APT
to Solaris.)

Ian Murdock, founder of the Debian distro and now at Sun, has helped
move us very much in that direction. And that's a big part of what
OpenSolaris is about. We deliberately don't break compatibility in the
long-term-support version of the OS, as that would be a Bad Thing for
our customers who count on tools to work the way they did even if a
newer and even better (but not strictly compatible) replacement is
available. In OpenSolaris we have much more latitude for change, and
you'll find the userland apps much more familar.  I suggest you have a
closer look at IPS before you dismiss it out of hand, too. It's not just
the packaging, it's also the ability to build a boot environment based
on a snapshot that can be rolled back, and only consumes disk space
relative to the previous version. Very nice, IMO.

cheers, Jeff


--
Jeff Savit
Principal Field Technologist
Sun Microsystems, Inc.Phone: 732-537-3451 (x63451)
2398 E Camelback Rd   Email: jeff.sa...@sun.com
Phoenix, AZ  85016http://blogs.sun.com/jsavit/

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[David Boyes]

On 3/26/09 2:13 PM, "Jeff Savit"  wrote:

> I'm going to avoid partisan issues, or at least attempt to do so :-) but
> some corrections on Sun-specific stuff:

> The first part of that is correct, but not some of the other parts,
> including the bit about OpenSolaris on SPARC.

The head of Solaris development disagrees with you. The previous comment was
a direct quote of his words.

> Solaris runs on millions of Intel
> systems now, and that's been an area of focus and investment (and should
> NOT be interpreted as disinvestment in SPARC).

Smoke screen. No one said you weren't investing in SPARC. I said that there
were internal reasons that were slowing up OpenSolaris on SPARC.
 
> In fact, OpenSolaris for SPARC is certainly coming. You can see a bit of
> discussion of that at:
>http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=78357&tstart=0

See above. There are a fair number of missing pieces still. Surprise--
they're some of the same missing pieces in the Z port. I wonder why. 8-)

>> They have been trying rather diligently to clean up the mess around these
>> issues, but basically the incentive to do the clean up necessary to make
>> this open-source-clean is not something they are prioritizing if they're
>> struggling to survive. I can't really argue with that, much as I would like
>> them to get on with it so I can do more to help them.
> Sun is indeed working diligently on this, and this is a priority, but
> not necessarily in areas that are important to David. Part of the reason
> for introducing new software in OpenSolaris, such as the replacement of
> the existing Solaris patch, package, and boot environment is to move to
> unencumbered replacements, as well as the reasons cited above.

All nice sounding, but that's not what your execs are saying to me. I can't
give your official position (that's why you have the sun.com address), but I
can tell it how I see it.

> DTrace is indeed cool, but the rest is simply wrong. DTrace and ZFS have
> been open-source since Day 1. ZFS exists on BSD and Mac OS X, and of
> course the issue with Linux is the incompatible license terms not the
> lack of source code. DTrace also runs on FreeBSD and Mac OS X.

Depends on if you consider CDDL to be open source. I don't find it
particularly open. 

>> As cool as it is, dtrace syntax is fugly.
> No it ain't. :-) Oh, well, that's in the category of "degustibus non est
> disputandem". I find it a natural expression of the "too cool to be
> without" functionality, and in any case there's many pre-cooked scripts
> out there, and a GUI tool too. Like any other language it requires some
> study and application of effort, and until then it may look odd to the
> casual observer.

Any language where syntactic white space is significant is IMHO fugly. Same
reason I think Python is fugly. And S. And Matlab/Macsyma for that matter.
Useful as all hell, but still fugly. No challenge that there are lots of
nifty examples, but that doesn't fix the basic syntactical complexity
ickyness. 

Religious argument. We're allowed to disagree on the fugliness of Dtrace.
It is what it is. It didn't have to be what it is.

> I suggest you have a
> closer look at IPS before you dismiss it out of hand, too. It's not just
> the packaging, it's also the ability to build a boot environment based
> on a snapshot that can be rolled back, and only consumes disk space
> relative to the previous version. Very nice, IMO.

To some degree this strikes me as arguing "new for the sake of new". All the
things you describe can be accomplished with apt and yum if you can rely on
an sophisticated underlying filesystem. My contention is that we did NOT
need another entire design approach to software packaging just to accomplish
what you describe. It's just another annoyance to maintaining a large
environment. 

There are lots of good ideas in IPS. I tend to evaluate tools on three
things: 

Existance -- does the tool actually exist and work at all?
Sufficiency -- is is sufficient to provide the design function?
Necessity -- is it necessary to provide the design function, or can an
existing tool fill the same gaps?

I have no argument that IPS exists for a reason, and that it is sufficient
to satisfy a defined need. I question whether it was necessary. 

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Richard Gasiorowski]

Guys

Interesting stuff - kinfd of like watching an arm wrestling match. Take it
offline and let us know when y'all come to agreement.  Thx


'Where ever you go - There you are!! '
Richard (Gaz) Gasiorowski
System z - Linux Product Manager
Portfolio Platform Services
CSC
3170 Fairview Park Dr., Falls Church, VA 22042
845-773-9243 Work|845-392-7889 Cell|rgasi...@csc.com|www.csc.com




This is a PRIVATE message. If you are not the intended recipient, please
delete without copying and kindly advise us by e-mail of the mistake in
delivery.
NOTE: Regardless of content, this e-mail shall not operate to bind CSC to
any order or other contract unless pursuant to explicit written agreement
or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such
purpose.



David Boyes 
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port 
03/26/2009 03:04 PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port 


To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc

Subject
Re: Solaris v. Linux






On 3/26/09 2:13 PM, "Jeff Savit"  wrote:

> I'm going to avoid partisan issues, or at least attempt to do so :-) but
> some corrections on Sun-specific stuff:

> The first part of that is correct, but not some of the other parts,
> including the bit about OpenSolaris on SPARC.

The head of Solaris development disagrees with you. The previous comment
was
a direct quote of his words.

> Solaris runs on millions of Intel
> systems now, and that's been an area of focus and investment (and should
> NOT be interpreted as disinvestment in SPARC).

Smoke screen. No one said you weren't investing in SPARC. I said that
there
were internal reasons that were slowing up OpenSolaris on SPARC.

> In fact, OpenSolaris for SPARC is certainly coming. You can see a bit of
> discussion of that at:
>http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=78357&tstart=0

See above. There are a fair number of missing pieces still. Surprise--
they're some of the same missing pieces in the Z port. I wonder why. 8-)

>> They have been trying rather diligently to clean up the mess around
these
>> issues, but basically the incentive to do the clean up necessary to
make
>> this open-source-clean is not something they are prioritizing if
they're
>> struggling to survive. I can't really argue with that, much as I would
like
>> them to get on with it so I can do more to help them.
> Sun is indeed working diligently on this, and this is a priority, but
> not necessarily in areas that are important to David. Part of the reason
> for introducing new software in OpenSolaris, such as the replacement of
> the existing Solaris patch, package, and boot environment is to move to
> unencumbered replacements, as well as the reasons cited above.

All nice sounding, but that's not what your execs are saying to me. I
can't
give your official position (that's why you have the sun.com address), but
I
can tell it how I see it.

> DTrace is indeed cool, but the rest is simply wrong. DTrace and ZFS have
> been open-source since Day 1. ZFS exists on BSD and Mac OS X, and of
> course the issue with Linux is the incompatible license terms not the
> lack of source code. DTrace also runs on FreeBSD and Mac OS X.

Depends on if you consider CDDL to be open source. I don't find it
particularly open.

>> As cool as it is, dtrace syntax is fugly.
> No it ain't. :-) Oh, well, that's in the category of "degustibus non est
> disputandem". I find it a natural expression of the "too cool to be
> without" functionality, and in any case there's many pre-cooked scripts
> out there, and a GUI tool too. Like any other language it requires some
> study and application of effort, and until then it may look odd to the
> casual observer.

Any language where syntactic white space is significant is IMHO fugly.
Same
reason I think Python is fugly. And S. And Matlab/Macsyma for that matter.
Useful as all hell, but still fugly. No challenge that there are lots of
nifty examples, but that doesn't fix the basic syntactical complexity
ickyness.

Religious argument. We're allowed to disagree on the fugliness of Dtrace.
It is what it is. It didn't have to be what it is.

> I suggest you have a
> closer look at IPS before you dismiss it out of hand, too. It's not just
> the packaging, it's also the ability to build a boot environment based
> on a snapshot that can be rolled back, and only consumes disk space
> relative to the previous version. Very nice, IMO.

To some degree this strikes me as arguing "new for the sake of new". All
the
things you describe can be accomplished with apt and yum if you can rely
on
an sophisticated underlying filesystem. My contention is that we did NOT
need another entire design approach to software packaging just to
accomplish
what you describe. It's just another annoyance to maintaining a large
environment.

There are lots of good ideas in IPS. I tend to evaluate tools on three
things:

Existance -- does the tool actually exist and work at all?
Sufficiency -- is is sufficient to provide the design function?
Necessity -- is it necessa

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[John Summerfield]

David Boyes wrote:

On 3/25/09 11:27 PM, "Patrick Spinler"  wrote:


I consistently see this complaint, and it really rubs me wrong.  Why
does everyone compare rpm to apt?  Wouldn't rpm to deb be the correct
comparison, and then compare yum to apt?


Because the distribution vendors continue to conflate the packaging format
with the configuration management tool. Debian made a proper separation of
the two.


So has Red Hat, though it took some time. SUSE too has solutions
equivalent to apt - several of them.



--

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1...@coco.merseine.nu  z1...@coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[John Summerfield]

David Boyes wrote:

On 3/26/09 2:00 AM, "John Summerfield" 
wrote:


David Boyes wrote:


I'm more concerned about anti-trust. If the IBM/Sun merger is blocked on
anti-trust grounds, and Sun cannot locate another angel investor, my

Fujitsu? FJ uses a lot of sparc* stuff, does its own development, and is
in the same kind of business - supplying computers and related services.


Under a license from Sun. If IBM were to own Sun, then there may still be
concerns there.


I was thinking of FJ as the angel, it surely has an interest in the
relevant technologies, and it has taken over rivals before.


--

Cheers
John

-- spambait
1...@coco.merseine.nu  z1...@coco.merseine.nu
-- Advice
http://webfoot.com/advice/email.top.php
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
http://support.microsoft.com/kb/555375

You cannot reply off-list:-)

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Solaris v. Linux

[Carey Tyler Schug]

My 2 cents:

I am not an expert.

I easily found a way to find a way to get a list of all processes in the
parent tree of my existing task in Solaris, but even asking for help on
the local Linux user group, could not find a way in Linux, short of
writing a program with a loop containing tests..  This was several years
ago, so if it has changed, please ignore this, except that it may
indicate Solaris is "ahead" of Linux.  At the time I was trying to move
my tools to Linux, there were other ways I felt Linux had glitz but not
nitty gritty ease of use, but that my have only been my ignorance.  The
closest Linux equivalent to pstree is pretty with a full color display,
but can't be limited to one branch.

Here Solaris code:

mypid=`ps -opid`
mypid=`echo $mypid|cut -d" " -f2`
mycons=`/usr/proc/bin/ptree $mypid|grep console.|grep -v grep|wc -l`


My goal was to find if what I was doing was being recorded, so I would
not start a second console log if there already was one being created.
I worked for a bank and we needed to document everything.   Also, I if I
made a mistake, I wanted to be able to go back and figure out what I did
wrong.  I performed the above whenever I worked on a server, as part of
my profile.  There are other reasons one might want to see what tasks
were in one's parent tree, but not care if they were running under some
other person.

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[R P Herrold]

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009, John Summerfield wrote:


I haven't yet figured out what's wrong with up2date.


Except of course that the server side source code has never
been released, and ran against an Oracle backend using stored
procedures for dep solving (so I am told) ...

What's not to love, indeed.  ;)

-- Russ herrold

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Jeff Savit]

David Boyes wrote:

On 3/26/09 2:13 PM, "Jeff Savit"  wrote:

> I'm going to avoid partisan issues, or at least attempt to do so :-) but
> some corrections on Sun-specific stuff:

> The first part of that is correct, but not some of the other parts,
> including the bit about OpenSolaris on SPARC.

The head of Solaris development disagrees with you. The previous comment was
a direct quote of his words.


Yet nonetheless, OpenSolaris on SPARC is coming.



> Solaris runs on millions of Intel
> systems now, and that's been an area of focus and investment (and should
> NOT be interpreted as disinvestment in SPARC).

Smoke screen. No one said you weren't investing in SPARC. I said that there
were internal reasons that were slowing up OpenSolaris on SPARC.


That comment wasn't directed at you, but every time somebody from Sun
talks about what we're doing on Intel, somebody pipes up afterwards and
says "oh, they are disinvesting in SPARC". So, I wanted to stave that
off. I'm aware of the issues related to OpenSolaris on SPARC, but didn't
feel the need to enumerate all of them.



=20
> In fact, OpenSolaris for SPARC is certainly coming. You can see a bit of
> discussion of that at:
>http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=3D78357&tstart=3D= 

0

See above. There are a fair number of missing pieces still. Surprise--
they're some of the same missing pieces in the Z port. I wonder why. 8-)


Time. Budget. Resources. Priorities. Several of which I just stated.



>> They have been trying rather diligently to clean up the mess around thes=
e
>> issues, but basically the incentive to do the clean up necessary to make
>> this open-source-clean is not something they are prioritizing if they're
>> struggling to survive. I can't really argue with that, much as I would l=
ike
>> them to get on with it so I can do more to help them.
> Sun is indeed working diligently on this, and this is a priority, but
> not necessarily in areas that are important to David. Part of the reason
> for introducing new software in OpenSolaris, such as the replacement of
> the existing Solaris patch, package, and boot environment is to move to
> unencumbered replacements, as well as the reasons cited above.

All nice sounding, but that's not what your execs are saying to me. I can't
give your official position (that's why you have the sun.com address), but I
can tell it how I see it.


As is your right, and as is ours to set priorities based on our business
needs.



> DTrace is indeed cool, but the rest is simply wrong. DTrace and ZFS have
> been open-source since Day 1. ZFS exists on BSD and Mac OS X, and of
> course the issue with Linux is the incompatible license terms not the
> lack of source code. DTrace also runs on FreeBSD and Mac OS X.

Depends on if you consider CDDL to be open source. I don't find it
particularly open.


I understand that this is a point of controversy. Some will agree with
you, some will not.

I consider CDDL to be open source (as with the Mozilla Public License on
which it was based) and so does the OSI. But I recognise that not
everyone will share that stance.

It's what made your port to z feasible.



>> As cool as it is, dtrace syntax is fugly.
> No it ain't. :-) Oh, well, that's in the category of "degustibus non est
> disputandem". I find it a natural expression of the "too cool to be
> without" functionality, and in any case there's many pre-cooked scripts
> out there, and a GUI tool too. Like any other language it requires some
> study and application of effort, and until then it may look odd to the
> casual observer.

Any language where syntactic white space is significant is IMHO fugly. Same
reason I think Python is fugly. And S. And Matlab/Macsyma for that matter.
Useful as all hell, but still fugly. No challenge that there are lots of
nifty examples, but that doesn't fix the basic syntactical complexity
ickyness.


Please remind me which part you have in mind. From the DTrace guide,
document 819-3620, page 71 "Whitespace can be used to separate any D
program elements and to indent action statements."

And no Java byte code as a prerequisite, either :-)


Religious argument. We're allowed to disagree on the fugliness of Dtrace.
It is what it is. It didn't have to be what it is.

> I suggest you have a
> closer look at IPS before you dismiss it out of hand, too. It's not just
> the packaging, it's also the ability to build a boot environment based
> on a snapshot that can be rolled back, and only consumes disk space
> relative to the previous version. Very nice, IMO.

To some degree this strikes me as arguing "new for the sake of new". All the
things you describe can be accomplished with apt and yum if you can rely on
an sophisticated underlying filesystem. My contention is that we did NOT
need another entire design approach to software packaging just to accomplish
what you describe. It's just another annoyance to ma

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Larry Ploetz]

On 3/26/09 5:47 PM, Carey Tyler Schug wrote:

My 2 cents:

I am not an expert.

I easily found a way to find a way to get a list of all processes in the
parent tree of my existing task in Solaris, but even asking for help on
the local Linux user group, could not find a way in Linux, short of
writing a program with a loop containing tests..  This was several years
ago, so if it has changed, please ignore this, except that it may
indicate Solaris is "ahead" of Linux.  At the time I was trying to move
my tools to Linux, there were other ways I felt Linux had glitz but not
nitty gritty ease of use, but that my have only been my ignorance.  The
closest Linux equivalent to pstree is pretty with a full color display,
but can't be limited to one branch.

Here Solaris code:

mypid=`ps -opid`
mypid=`echo $mypid|cut -d" " -f2`
mycons=`/usr/proc/bin/ptree $mypid|grep console.|grep -v grep|wc -l`


I see a gauntlet...

pstree -hAp | egrep "($$)" | egrep -q console \
&&  \
|| 

(BTW avoid "grep -v grep" -- use "grep [c]onsole" in the prior grep. I'd
also avoid the "wc -l" thing just to find out if something matches --
that's what grep is for, especially with the -q flag.)

I've been using pstree (usually pstree -hlupaG) in Linux for a long
time, so this isn't a "new" thing -- I think your "local Linux user
group" was a bit inexperienced. And the loop they complained about?

$ x=$$; until [ $x -eq 0 ]; do ps -ocmd= -p $x; x=$(ps -oppid= -p $x); done
-bash
sshd: la...@pts/0
sshd: larry [priv]
/usr/sbin/sshd
init [3]

Feh.

*Larry Ploetz
Systems Administrator
Carnegie Institution of Washington
Department of Plant Biology
The Arabidopsis Information Resource
650 325 1521 x 296 la...@tairgroup.org *

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Adam Thornton]

On Mar 26, 2009, at 1:13 PM, Jeff Savit wrote:


We deliberately don't break compatibility in the
long-term-support version of the OS, as that would be a Bad Thing for
our customers who count on tools to work the way they did even if a
newer and even better (but not strictly compatible) replacement is
available.


Hence Solaris non-POSIX /bin/sh.

Pardon me while I go vomit in this corner here.

Adam

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

LVM Striping and RAID for performance?

[Fred Schmidt]

Would somebody please clarify - is LVM striping still of benefit to
performance if your disk is RAID? 

If so, why? 

Regards, 
Fred Schmidt
NT Government, Australia


--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Scott Rohling]

Is there another place where the virtues of non-Linux OS's can be debated?
I'm starting to get annoyed at the irrelevant (to me anyway) tennis match..
it's drifted on some wayward current to...   ?

Scott

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: LVM Striping and RAID for performance?

[Mark Post]

>>> On 3/27/2009 at  1:17 AM, Fred Schmidt  wrote: 
> Would somebody please clarify - is LVM striping still of benefit to
> performance if your disk is RAID? 
> 
> If so, why? 

If you mean the disks in the storage array itself, then yes, because z/VM and 
Linux can only start one I/O to a single device address at a time.  (Unless 
you're using PAV.)  If your LVs are striped across multiple devices, then you 
have the potential of starting multiple I/Os to multiple device addresses 
concurrently.

If you mean software RAID within the Linux system, then perhaps less so.


Mark Post

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390

Re: Solaris v. Linux

[Douglas M. Wooster]

On Thu March 26 2009, Alan Cox >
wrote:
   .  .  .
> The other is the religious viewpoint about whether
> packages are permitted to interact with the user as installed
> (dpkg) or after only (rpm). This all being related to things like
> automatic installs/rebuilds

As one who's recently had experience with both systems, I really like
the way dpkg/apt automatically searches for serious outstanding bugs,
and warnings about incompatible changes, with every package it's
installing, and makes sure I notice.  On the other hand, the rpm and
yum commands have a more consistent syntax than the long list of
programs used with dpkg.

Douglas Wooster

--
Permission is granted to use the email address(es), postal
addresses, telephone numbers, Web site URLs, names, account
numbers, userids, passwords, and other identifying or contact
information contained in, or attached to, this email, for the
purposes of responding to queries, providing support, or
fulfilling sales orders contained in this email or its
attachment(s) (if any).  Trading, selling, otherwise publishing,
or making available to employees or third parties, any
identifying information contained in this email or its
attachment(s) (if any) for other purposes, including use in
advertising, is forbidden.

--
For LINUX-390 subscribe / signoff / archive access instructions,
send email to lists...@vm.marist.edu with the message: INFO LINUX-390 or visit
http://www.marist.edu/htbin/wlvindex?LINUX-390