[oi-dev] Sun::Solaris perl modules
Good morning. I'm looking on building Sun::Solaris perl modules for perl 5.16. I've found http://search.cpan.org/~suncpan/ on cpan, but it contains subset of these modules and it seems a bit old versions. The original sources come from illumos. But when we build illumos, we use illumos-perl (perl 5.10), so we don't have these modules for perl 5.16. Just for now the most straightforward decision I see is to copy sources to our oi-userland repository and build there for newer perl. The possible problem I see is asynchronous changes - on some point in time perl 5.16 modules will not match illumos perl modules and sources should be manually updated. What do you think? -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Computer Center of Southern Federal University ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Xnv_161 JDS updates
reposting to include oi-dev, not just Alexander :) On 22 July 2013 16:09, Jonathan Adams t12nsloo...@gmail.com wrote: https://drive.google.com/folderview?id=0B6o_jmGQm0dWd0xwQi1yVEJBWU0usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWd0Q1anFyODJPMU0/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWUzExUzhWZUYySkk/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWVWt5bzJ2ZW5uV1E/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWcjQyUTJnREhFdVU/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWaDVoRTZhbVVoLVE/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWbGNOQ2VfNlp1bzg/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWb1VSOGd3bWpyejA/edit?usp=sharing https://docs.google.com/file/d/0B6o_jmGQm0dWRWt5TExkWDRBa3M/edit?usp=sharing On 22 July 2013 15:59, Alexander Pyhalov a...@rsu.ru wrote: On 07/22/2013 18:41, Jonathan Adams wrote: okay, I trashed all the be's after illumos-14, ran a refresh and created an oihipster be. root@jadlaptop:~# beadm list BE Active Mountpoint Space Policy Created illumos-13 - - 24.2M static 2013-02-08 11:33 illumos-14 - - 21.2M static 2013-07-04 23:11 oihipster NR / 21.9G static 2013-07-22 15:17 gnome still core dumps, hmm thunderbird is dying now as well ... jadams@jadlaptop:~$ ls -l core* -rw--- 1 jadams sal 302638676 Jul 22 15:35 core -rw--- 1 jadams sal 7582360 Jul 22 15:33 core.compiz-bin -rw--- 1 jadams sal 26129596 Jul 22 15:32 core.gnome-power-man jadams@jadlaptop:~$ file core core:ELF 32-bit LSB core file 80386 Version 1, from 'thunderbird' jadams@jadlaptop:~$ svcs -xv svc:/application/desktop-**cache/gconf-cache:default (GNOME Gconf Cache Builder) State: maintenance since Mon Jul 22 15:29:42 2013 Reason: Start method exited with $SMF_EXIT_ERR_FATAL. See: http://illumos.org/msg/SMF-**8000-KShttp://illumos.org/msg/SMF-8000-KS See: man -M /usr/share/man -s 1M gconftool-2 See: /var/svc/log/application-**desktop-cache-gconf-cache:** default.log Impact: This service is not running. gconf-cache is still dying: Please, upload a core somewhere. -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Computer Center of Southern Federal University ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Xnv_161 JDS updates
On 07/23/2013 15:07, Jonathan Adams wrote: reposting to include oi-dev, not just Alexander :) I didn't found anything useful, but I didn't have enough time look at this attentively. -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Computer Center of Southern Federal University ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Xnv_161 JDS updates
I didn't think you had, I wasn't trying to push, I just realised that I hadn't posted the links to the group (on our helpdesk system I often ask questions to get more information so that someone else has the information they will need to fix the problem, and I assume that other people do likewise) On 23 July 2013 12:23, Alexander Pyhalov a...@rsu.ru wrote: On 07/23/2013 15:07, Jonathan Adams wrote: reposting to include oi-dev, not just Alexander :) I didn't found anything useful, but I didn't have enough time look at this attentively. -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Computer Center of Southern Federal University ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Copyright for contributors - not in files, OI branded zones, binary compatibility
Repost as the content seems to have been lost before Garrett D'Amore garrett.dam...@dey-sys.com wrote: Now that Sun was sold to Oracle and Oracle stopped contributing to the project, we need to be very careful and I thus strongly recommend to change the CDDL boilerplate to again contain CDDL version 1.0 only in case someone edited a file. Without doing that, Oracle could in theory create a CDDL-1.x or a CDDL-2.x that says everything could be used by Oracle as closed source. Yes. Its actually a little worse than that -- the boilerplate *itself* is possibly subject to copyright, and using Sun's boilerplate in new files may actually require crediting Sun/Oracle with joint ownership. These problems are precisely why I've authored new boilerplate, stating explicitly 1.0, made the boilerplate public domain explicitly, and posted that boilerplate in usr/src/prototypes. I encourage anyone writing *new* files to use those files as starting points. For folks editing existing code, if the file already carries a notice you cannot modify if. But if the license does not already explicitly say 1.0, you can insert a new notice like this: /* * Portions Copyright 2013 Joe Contributor. Contributions by Joe Contributor are made available under * the terms of the CDDL 1.0 only. */ Well, the CDDL does not mention unmodifyable parts, so you may change anything from a file under CDDL (except from Copyright notices that mention the Copyright owners). But the CDDL boilerplate is not such a copyright notice. Given the fact that (from a legal point of view) changing something from: * The contents of this file are subject to the terms of the * Common Development and Distribution License (the License). * You may not use this file except in compliance with the License. to: * The contents of this file are subject to the terms of the * Common Development and Distribution License, Version 1.0 only * (the License). You may not use this file except in compliance * with the License. is _limiting_ the rights, this can of course be donf by anybody as long as this change is (as in this example) compatible to the CDDL. You would need the permission of the copyright holders if you like to _extend_ the granted rights. But this does not happen with limiting to v1.0 only. One additional note for German coders: The German law explicitely forbids to agree to contracts that contain claims that are not known at the time the contract was signed. For this reason contrutcs as ... or any later are void for Germans. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Copyright for contributors - not in files, OI branded zones, binary compatibility
On 2013-07-22 17:59, Garrett D'Amore wrote: On Jul 22, 2013, at 8:57 AM, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@oracle.com wrote: On 07/22/13 07:30 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: unless it had explicit approval to do so from any joint contributors. Remember the terms of the Sun Contributor Agreement granted Sun co-ownership and the right to release the code under any license of Sun's choosing, such as a proprietary license in any Solaris 10 backport. Oh right. The SCA. Damn, forgot about that! Would I be wrong to assume that this was in place for OpenSolaris code (and indeed Oracle closed up their Solaris), while the new illumos contributors did not sign an SCA with Sun and thus are not subject to its terms? Did the (ex-)Sun/Oracle employees, including those currently active in illumos community, sign it? Even if yes, does it hold valid for post-split codebase? Thanks for clarifications, //Jim ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Copyright for contributors - not in files, OI branded zones, binary compatibility
bin2mKIry89JQ.bin Description: Binary data ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Copyright for contributors - not in files, OI branded zones, binary compatibility
On Jul 22, 2013, at 8:57 AM, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@oracle.com wrote: On 07/22/13 07:30 AM, Garrett D'Amore wrote: unless it had explicit approval to do so from any joint contributors. Remember the terms of the Sun Contributor Agreement granted Sun co-ownership and the right to release the code under any license of Sun's choosing, such as a proprietary license in any Solaris 10 backport. Oh right. The SCA. Damn, forgot about that! - Garrett ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] Copyright for contributors - not in files, OI branded zones, binary compatibility
On Jul 22, 2013, at 2:03 AM, Joerg Schilling joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote: Garrett D'Amore garrett.dam...@dey-sys.com wrote: CDDL should not contain changes to itself, nor additional copyright notices of any kind. Its inappropriate (and in violation of the license terms) to modify the CDDL license or boilerplate on code that you are not the sole author of. That boiler plate has *nothing* to do do with the copyright notices, except that without a copyright notice, it becomes impossible to verify *ownership* of the contribution, which is vital. I am not sure what you understand by boilerplate, but I believe that people usually understand by boilerplate the copyright notice that is typically at the beginning of a file. It is of course apropriate to change the boilerplate, in special as Sun agreed with the community to put CDDL version 1.0 only in that text and this text was later mofified to read any CDDL version… Sun should *not* have made any such modification to a file that had contributors to which it was note the sole owner, unless it had explicit approval to do so from any joint contributors. The CDDL itself forbids modification or alteration of the copyright or license notices. Now that Sun was sold to Oracle and Oracle stopped contributing to the project, we need to be very careful and I thus strongly recommend to change the CDDL boilerplate to again contain CDDL version 1.0 only in case someone edited a file. Without doing that, Oracle could in theory create a CDDL-1.x or a CDDL-2.x that says everything could be used by Oracle as closed source. Yes. Its actually a little worse than that -- the boilerplate *itself* is possibly subject to copyright, and using Sun's boilerplate in new files may actually require crediting Sun/Oracle with joint ownership. These problems are precisely why I've authored new boilerplate, stating explicitly 1.0, made the boilerplate public domain explicitly, and posted that boilerplate in usr/src/prototypes. I encourage anyone writing *new* files to use those files as starting points. For folks editing existing code, if the file already carries a notice you cannot modify if. But if the license does not already explicitly say 1.0, you can insert a new notice like this: /* * Portions Copyright 2013 Joe Contributor. Contributions by Joe Contributor are made available under * the terms of the CDDL 1.0 only. */ That makes it pretty clear. :-) - Garrett Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
Re: [oi-dev] libtool update
On 07/22/2013 19:45, David Höppner wrote: On 21 July 2013 13:15, Alexander Pyhalov a...@rsu.ru wrote: It is installed: $ pkg list |grep automake developer/build/automake 1.11.2-0.151.1.8.1 i-- developer/build/automake-110 1.10-0.151.1.8.1 i-- developer/build/automake-111 1.11.2-0.151.1.8.1 i-- developer/build/automake-19 1.9.6-0.151.1.8i-- I'm just a bit worried about testing. Strange, maybe automake-110 was installed later. From the log: autoreconf: running: /usr/bin/autoconf --force autoreconf: running: /usr/bin/autoheader --force autoreconf: running: automake --add-missing --copy --force-missing configure.ac:130: require Automake 1.11.1, but have 1.10 autom4te: closing standard output: Broken pipe autoreconf: automake failed with exit status: 1 gmake[2]: *** [/data/jenkins/jobs/oi-userland/workspace/components/libtool/libtool-2.4.2/.prep] Error 1 gmake[2]: Leaving directory `/data/jenkins/jobs/oi-userland/workspace/components/libtool' grep -ri automake make-rules/ make-rules/build-zone.mk:TMPL_ZONE_TOOLS += developer/build/automake-110 make-rules/shared-macros.mk:AUTOMAKE = /usr/bin/automake-1.10 Perhaps, you just need to redefine this variable. -- Best regards, Alexander Pyhalov, system administrator of Computer Center of Southern Federal University ___ oi-dev mailing list oi-dev@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/oi-dev
