Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
On 2021-01-29 22:24, Toomas Soome via openindiana-discuss wrote: On 30. Jan 2021, at 03:43, Chris wrote: On 2021-01-29 17:18, Andy Fiddaman wrote: On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chris wrote: ; OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf ; with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM ; as I could jam in it. ; BIOS: ; boot UEFI ; SATA ahci ; I've tried 2 different Nvidia cards, as well as the ; intermal video. The results are the same; ; 2.5 minutes to get to the OI banner/boot options. ; An additiona 3.5 to draw the OI banner/options screen. ; It takes ~0.5 seconds to draw each cell. To be clear; ; I'm not complaining here. Rather, I'm trying to ; pinpoint WTF is going wrong in hopes of overcoming ; the problem. I've attempted to put OI on 3 different ; computers now, and the results have all been ; underwhelming in the console dept. ; ; Any thoughts? If you can press really early in the boot process, you get the first loader prompt (I forget exactly how it looks). At that point, enter "-t" without the quotes and press return. That will keep in VGA mode, which might well be faster/usable. Huge thanks for the reply, Andy! Yes, it made a difference. Drawing each cell only takes 0.25 seconds. :-P So somewhat faster, anyway. It's funny. It starts out quite fast. The speed I normally experience with other stuff. It writes Available consoles: text VGA ... ttya port 0x3f8 ttyb ... not present ttyc ... not present ttyd ... not present null software device spin software device Right at this point is where it drops to about 1/2 or slower speed. Then, cell by cell, it prints console ttyb failed to initialize console ttyc failed to initialize console ttyd failed to initialize This is the point where you have got hint about why this happens. The same defect is with virtualbox, when you have configured host pipe for serial device. The three lines above tell us that ttya was successfully initialized, so it must have to do about ttya. OK I neglected to note that this was including the advice by Andy to drop to text mode, by interrupting loader, and entering -t at the prompt followed by enter. It's clear that it was attempting serial mode -- note the port 0x3f8 Without interrupting loader, text and ttya return: text VESA (800x600 - 1600x1200 depending on what I'm hooked up to) ttya ... not present I'm attempting it again via Legacy where text VESA 1600x1200 ttya ... not present Choosing 5 (options), followed by 5 (verbose) has already taken 20 minutes (it's still in progress). I think I'm just going to try to install it and work on it further from the internal disk. In hopes of getting at least a small speed increase from 0 to actual boot. I greatly appreciate your insight on this, Toomas. If you comment out (I am assuming you have installed OS) the line: console="text, ttya, ttyb, ttyc, ttyd” from /boot/defaults/loader.conf, you will probably find the console is much better. rgds, toomas --Chris Then clears the screen to draw the OI banner, and boot options. Which takes even longer. Not sure where to look from here. But I really appreciate your chiming in, Andy. Thanks! --Chris Andy -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
> On 30. Jan 2021, at 03:43, Chris wrote: > > On 2021-01-29 17:18, Andy Fiddaman wrote: >> On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chris wrote: >> ; OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf >> ; with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM >> ; as I could jam in it. >> ; BIOS: >> ; boot UEFI >> ; SATA ahci >> ; I've tried 2 different Nvidia cards, as well as the >> ; intermal video. The results are the same; >> ; 2.5 minutes to get to the OI banner/boot options. >> ; An additiona 3.5 to draw the OI banner/options screen. >> ; It takes ~0.5 seconds to draw each cell. To be clear; >> ; I'm not complaining here. Rather, I'm trying to >> ; pinpoint WTF is going wrong in hopes of overcoming >> ; the problem. I've attempted to put OI on 3 different >> ; computers now, and the results have all been >> ; underwhelming in the console dept. >> ; >> ; Any thoughts? >> If you can press really early in the boot process, you get the >> first loader prompt (I forget exactly how it looks). At that point, >> enter "-t" without the quotes and press return. That will keep in >> VGA mode, which might well be faster/usable. > Huge thanks for the reply, Andy! > Yes, it made a difference. Drawing each cell only takes 0.25 > seconds. :-P > So somewhat faster, anyway. It's funny. It starts out quite > fast. The speed I normally experience with other stuff. It > writes > Available consoles: > text VGA ... > ttya port 0x3f8 > ttyb ... not present > ttyc ... not present > ttyd ... not present > null software device > spin software device > > Right at this point is where it drops to about 1/2 or slower speed. > Then, cell by cell, it prints > > console ttyb failed to initialize > console ttyc failed to initialize > console ttyd failed to initialize > This is the point where you have got hint about why this happens. The same defect is with virtualbox, when you have configured host pipe for serial device. The three lines above tell us that ttya was successfully initialized, so it must have to do about ttya. If you comment out (I am assuming you have installed OS) the line: console="text, ttya, ttyb, ttyc, ttyd” from /boot/defaults/loader.conf, you will probably find the console is much better. rgds, toomas > Then clears the screen to draw the OI banner, and boot options. > Which takes even longer. > > Not sure where to look from here. But I really appreciate your > chiming in, Andy. > > Thanks! > > --Chris > >> Andy > > -- > ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports > ~40yrs of UNIX > > ___ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
> On 30. Jan 2021, at 03:57, Gary Mills wrote: > > On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 05:02:21PM -0800, Chris wrote: >> OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf >> with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM >> as I could jam in it. >> BIOS: >> boot UEFI > > You can't do that. You have to boot OI in BIOS mode. > > The loader works in UEFI mode, but OI does not. Usually you are > offered a choice at boot time. Chose BIOS mode. > What you mean by “OI does not”? rgds, toomas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
> On 30. Jan 2021, at 06:52, Chris wrote: > > On 2021-01-29 17:57, Gary Mills wrote: >> On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 05:02:21PM -0800, Chris wrote: >>> OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf >>> with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM >>> as I could jam in it. >>> BIOS: >>> boot UEFI >> You can't do that. You have to boot OI in BIOS mode. >> The loader works in UEFI mode, but OI does not. Usually you are >> offered a choice at boot time. Chose BIOS mode. > Alright. I went to the BIOS and changed it to Legacy boot. > Bounced the box. But the problem remains. The only perceivable > difference. Is that when it booted to the OI UEFI firmware, > it changed to the correct resolution: 1920x1200. But after it > left the firmware, it went to 800x600. With legacy boot, it was > 800x600, and then the same path as before. :-( > > Thank you again, Gary for taking the time to help/respond. > we fall back to 800x600 when we get no EDID information, to change, create: /boot/loader.rc.local with line: framebuffer set 1920x1200 rgds, toomas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
On 2021-01-29 17:57, Gary Mills wrote: On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 05:02:21PM -0800, Chris wrote: OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM as I could jam in it. BIOS: boot UEFI You can't do that. You have to boot OI in BIOS mode. The loader works in UEFI mode, but OI does not. Usually you are offered a choice at boot time. Chose BIOS mode. Alright. I went to the BIOS and changed it to Legacy boot. Bounced the box. But the problem remains. The only perceivable difference. Is that when it booted to the OI UEFI firmware, it changed to the correct resolution: 1920x1200. But after it left the firmware, it went to 800x600. With legacy boot, it was 800x600, and then the same path as before. :-( Thank you again, Gary for taking the time to help/respond. --Chris -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
On 2021-01-29 17:57, Gary Mills wrote: On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 05:02:21PM -0800, Chris wrote: OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM as I could jam in it. BIOS: boot UEFI You can't do that. You have to boot OI in BIOS mode. The loader works in UEFI mode, but OI does not. Usually you are offered a choice at boot time. Chose BIOS mode. Thanks, Gary. I'll give that a shot. --Chris -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 05:02:21PM -0800, Chris wrote: > OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf > with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM > as I could jam in it. > BIOS: > boot UEFI You can't do that. You have to boot OI in BIOS mode. The loader works in UEFI mode, but OI does not. Usually you are offered a choice at boot time. Chose BIOS mode. -- -Gary Mills--refurb--Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada- ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
On 2021-01-29 17:18, Andy Fiddaman wrote: On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chris wrote: ; OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf ; with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM ; as I could jam in it. ; BIOS: ; boot UEFI ; SATA ahci ; I've tried 2 different Nvidia cards, as well as the ; intermal video. The results are the same; ; 2.5 minutes to get to the OI banner/boot options. ; An additiona 3.5 to draw the OI banner/options screen. ; It takes ~0.5 seconds to draw each cell. To be clear; ; I'm not complaining here. Rather, I'm trying to ; pinpoint WTF is going wrong in hopes of overcoming ; the problem. I've attempted to put OI on 3 different ; computers now, and the results have all been ; underwhelming in the console dept. ; ; Any thoughts? If you can press really early in the boot process, you get the first loader prompt (I forget exactly how it looks). At that point, enter "-t" without the quotes and press return. That will keep in VGA mode, which might well be faster/usable. Huge thanks for the reply, Andy! Yes, it made a difference. Drawing each cell only takes 0.25 seconds. :-P So somewhat faster, anyway. It's funny. It starts out quite fast. The speed I normally experience with other stuff. It writes Available consoles: text VGA ... ttya port 0x3f8 ttyb ... not present ttyc ... not present ttyd ... not present null software device spin software device Right at this point is where it drops to about 1/2 or slower speed. Then, cell by cell, it prints console ttyb failed to initialize console ttyc failed to initialize console ttyd failed to initialize Then clears the screen to draw the OI banner, and boot options. Which takes even longer. Not sure where to look from here. But I really appreciate your chiming in, Andy. Thanks! --Chris Andy -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
On Fri, 29 Jan 2021, Chris wrote: ; OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf ; with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM ; as I could jam in it. ; BIOS: ; boot UEFI ; SATA ahci ; I've tried 2 different Nvidia cards, as well as the ; intermal video. The results are the same; ; 2.5 minutes to get to the OI banner/boot options. ; An additiona 3.5 to draw the OI banner/options screen. ; It takes ~0.5 seconds to draw each cell. To be clear; ; I'm not complaining here. Rather, I'm trying to ; pinpoint WTF is going wrong in hopes of overcoming ; the problem. I've attempted to put OI on 3 different ; computers now, and the results have all been ; underwhelming in the console dept. ; ; Any thoughts? If you can press really early in the boot process, you get the first loader prompt (I forget exactly how it looks). At that point, enter "-t" without the quotes and press return. That will keep in VGA mode, which might well be faster/usable. Andy ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] ~6 minutes to OI banner/boot options in text install
OK just dragged a Dell Optiplex 790 off the shelf with a 4 core 8 thread i5 CPU in it, and as much RAM as I could jam in it. BIOS: boot UEFI SATA ahci I've tried 2 different Nvidia cards, as well as the intermal video. The results are the same; 2.5 minutes to get to the OI banner/boot options. An additiona 3.5 to draw the OI banner/options screen. It takes ~0.5 seconds to draw each cell. To be clear; I'm not complaining here. Rather, I'm trying to pinpoint WTF is going wrong in hopes of overcoming the problem. I've attempted to put OI on 3 different computers now, and the results have all been underwhelming in the console dept. Any thoughts? Thank you for all your time, and consideration. --Chris -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A rant
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 11:50 PM Lou Picciano wrote: > Reg, > > As a guy partly responsible (apologies!) for the list being generally > pretty quiet, the only contribution I can make to this at the moment is: > > Reg, You Da Man! > > (written from only a few miles from that Bell Labs you so rightly > mentioned…) > Hi, sorry everyone for the tone of recent messages to the mailing lists. While I did enjoy that these latter are less quiet than usual, discussions will hopefully now remain as courteous and as pleasant as they usually are. Thanks for your contributions. Kind regards, Aurélien > > Lou Picciano > > > > On Jan 29, 2021, at 4:47 PM, Reginald Beardsley via openindiana-discuss < > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org> wrote: > > > > > > I have been ignoring this torrent of BS as patiently as I can, but I'm > really getting tired of it. > > > > First of all, computing has a 75 year old history. There have been many > false starts and mistakes along the way. The failure of the new arrivals to > learn from the past results in the same mistakes being endlessly repeated. > > > > I shall cite a single example from 30 years ago, hard coded filenames. > Motif came out with the name of the keyboard configuration file hard coded > "/etc/keysym.db" IIRC. A the time it was my job to compile and distribute > X11 and Motif binaries on all company research lab systems that did not > have vendor support for X11 and Motif. > > > > This is a common mistake made frequently before the IBM 360 series > appeared and led to "sysin=" and "sysout=" in JCL for the 360 series (That > may not be the exactly correct syntax, but this does not merit my going > into my library to check). But the "genius" who wrote the Motif code could > not be bothered with the past so he repeated the mistake. > > > > No one here "hates" Linux, BSD, Windows or any other OS. We don't like > various operating systems for a variety of legitimate reasons which vary by > task to be accomplished, OS and individual. > > > > Please read the original Bell Labs Unix papers before you subject us to > more of this. Linux has veered so far from the original principles as to be > completely unrecognizable. In any given day I may use Hipster/OI, Solaris > 10 u8, Debian 9.3 or Windows. And I might well spin up Plan 9 or some other > operating systems by inserting the appropriate disk in the machine. In > short, I can crush someone with your attitude in minutes even if they have > a PhD. And have done it more than once. > > > > At such time as you can write intelligently describing the differences > in implementation and philosophy about MVS (and its predecessors) , VM/CMS, > VMS, RSX, Genix, Multics, Perkin-Elmer 3200 OS and a few others you will > have some credibility with me. But until then you are just some child > screaming that they will "hold there breath until they turn blue". I am > quite certain I am not the only one *very* tired of it. I know the names of > most of the people who have been replying to you and have the utmost > respect for all but perhaps a few. Possibly all, as I've not paid close > attention to who replied. The list is generally pretty quiet except for an > occasional nut job. > > > > If you have many years professional experience as a senior member of > staff in large system environments you care about what seems minutiae to > novices. We care because we either got bit or had to clean up after someone > else got bit. Most of the people on this list have been involved in large > system environments for longer than you have been alive. > > > > It is certainly true that the organization of the filesystem in Illumos > et al is a bit of a mess. This is true in every extant OS. IRIX, CLIX, > HP-UX, Ultrix and a dozen other *nix systems I've used are long extinct. > One of the great problems during the workstation wars was dealing with all > the conflicting paths and file names. With xterms open on 6 or more > different systems using a common NFS mounted home directory I had a very > elaborate system for hiding the variations so I could work efficiently > despite the variations. I supported software, both proprietary and GNU > packages across all of them. > > > > Please reply to /dev/null. > > > > Reg > > On Thursday, January 28, 2021, 09:31:12 PM CST, Hung Nguyen Gia via > openindiana-discuss wrote: > > > > Anyone here seems to be hated Linux too much. Does it because their bad > past experience with it or simply because Linux is success and we are loser > and the natural law of the loser hate the winner? > > > > Someone used to said Linux is a cesspool because it's only a kernel and > hacked together to create a working system. > > > > Today I cloned illumos-gate and I see the completely different. > > > > I think Linux is more organized than Illumos. > > > > Saying Linux is a hacked together work is hypocrite and indeed slapping > back into our own faces. > > > > We are no different. Illumos is a hacked together work and was a
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A rant
Reg, As a guy partly responsible (apologies!) for the list being generally pretty quiet, the only contribution I can make to this at the moment is: Reg, You Da Man! (written from only a few miles from that Bell Labs you so rightly mentioned…) Lou Picciano > On Jan 29, 2021, at 4:47 PM, Reginald Beardsley via openindiana-discuss > wrote: > > > I have been ignoring this torrent of BS as patiently as I can, but I'm really > getting tired of it. > > First of all, computing has a 75 year old history. There have been many false > starts and mistakes along the way. The failure of the new arrivals to learn > from the past results in the same mistakes being endlessly repeated. > > I shall cite a single example from 30 years ago, hard coded filenames. Motif > came out with the name of the keyboard configuration file hard coded > "/etc/keysym.db" IIRC. A the time it was my job to compile and distribute X11 > and Motif binaries on all company research lab systems that did not have > vendor support for X11 and Motif. > > This is a common mistake made frequently before the IBM 360 series appeared > and led to "sysin=" and "sysout=" in JCL for the 360 series (That may not be > the exactly correct syntax, but this does not merit my going into my library > to check). But the "genius" who wrote the Motif code could not be bothered > with the past so he repeated the mistake. > > No one here "hates" Linux, BSD, Windows or any other OS. We don't like > various operating systems for a variety of legitimate reasons which vary by > task to be accomplished, OS and individual. > > Please read the original Bell Labs Unix papers before you subject us to more > of this. Linux has veered so far from the original principles as to be > completely unrecognizable. In any given day I may use Hipster/OI, Solaris 10 > u8, Debian 9.3 or Windows. And I might well spin up Plan 9 or some other > operating systems by inserting the appropriate disk in the machine. In short, > I can crush someone with your attitude in minutes even if they have a PhD. > And have done it more than once. > > At such time as you can write intelligently describing the differences in > implementation and philosophy about MVS (and its predecessors) , VM/CMS, VMS, > RSX, Genix, Multics, Perkin-Elmer 3200 OS and a few others you will have some > credibility with me. But until then you are just some child screaming that > they will "hold there breath until they turn blue". I am quite certain I am > not the only one *very* tired of it. I know the names of most of the people > who have been replying to you and have the utmost respect for all but perhaps > a few. Possibly all, as I've not paid close attention to who replied. The > list is generally pretty quiet except for an occasional nut job. > > If you have many years professional experience as a senior member of staff in > large system environments you care about what seems minutiae to novices. We > care because we either got bit or had to clean up after someone else got bit. > Most of the people on this list have been involved in large system > environments for longer than you have been alive. > > It is certainly true that the organization of the filesystem in Illumos et al > is a bit of a mess. This is true in every extant OS. IRIX, CLIX, HP-UX, > Ultrix and a dozen other *nix systems I've used are long extinct. One of the > great problems during the workstation wars was dealing with all the > conflicting paths and file names. With xterms open on 6 or more different > systems using a common NFS mounted home directory I had a very elaborate > system for hiding the variations so I could work efficiently despite the > variations. I supported software, both proprietary and GNU packages across > all of them. > > Please reply to /dev/null. > > Reg > On Thursday, January 28, 2021, 09:31:12 PM CST, Hung Nguyen Gia via > openindiana-discuss wrote: > > Anyone here seems to be hated Linux too much. Does it because their bad past > experience with it or simply because Linux is success and we are loser and > the natural law of the loser hate the winner? > > Someone used to said Linux is a cesspool because it's only a kernel and > hacked together to create a working system. > > Today I cloned illumos-gate and I see the completely different. > > I think Linux is more organized than Illumos. > > Saying Linux is a hacked together work is hypocrite and indeed slapping back > into our own faces. > > We are no different. Illumos is a hacked together work and was an product of > an desperate attempt to continue OpenSolaris. > > We are a mess, too. > > Indeed I found we are more like Linux than the BSDs. > > The large part of our userland is GNU anyway. > > Back to the rant: where actually things were put? > > I have did many 'find . -name' commands to try to discover where things were > put. > > I want to find the source code of pcfs, aka msdosfs. > > The
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
On 01/29/21 22:24, Toomas Soome via openindiana-discuss wrote: On 29. Jan 2021, at 23:20, Stephan Althaus wrote: On 01/29/21 17:29, Chris wrote: On 2021-01-28 23:38, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote: On 29.01.21 06:48, Chris wrote: Maybe I'm spoiled, because the (Free)BSD console(s) are great. I can CTRL+ALT+F(1-12) for a new session, and attack several different tasks simultaneously. Guess I'm going to have to build all that into OI. Fire up services online 2018 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt4 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt3 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt5 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 and you have what you want (note: Its alt only on the console, ctrl-alt in X) alt-f 1 to 6 gives a new console, alt-f7 graphical desktop (if X is running). Thanks! I don't have any of that here. This sort of thing is controlled by /etc/ttys on FreeBSD. I'm not sure what the equivalent is on OI. Will have to look around and see what I can find. Seems odd to me your listing above isn't initiated by default. Thanks again! :-) --Chris Hello Chris! On my system that was installed on Jan, 24 the services are _not_ enabled by default $ svcs -a|grep -i vt disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 .. disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 So you have to enable them after installation: svcadm enable svc:/system/vtdaemon:default .. and Udo is right, i made a mistake, the keys to be pressed are CTRL-ALT-F1 for the firstVT CTRL-ALT-F2 for the 2nd VT .. *Uups* - These VT won't be there on an UEFI System - just at this moment looking at a black screen after pressing CRTL-ALT-F1 dmesg says: console-kit-daemon[512]: [ID 702911 daemon.warning] WARNING: signal "open_session_request" (from "OpenSessionRequest") exported but not found in object class "CkSeat" Be sure to use LEGACY boot option - if you have.. Greetings, Stephan Is your OI up to date? rgds, toomas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss Hello! Yes, pkg update a few minutes before. SunOS fuji 5.11 illumos-beed421eff i86pc i386 i86pc CTRL-ALT-F1 goes to blank screen, CTRL-ALT-F7 _not_back to X Integrated intel graphics - X is running on an Nvidia NVS 295 with OI standard driver version 340. nvidia kernel module is there, but i am missing the modulge nvidia_modeset OK. # pkg uninstall -v driver/graphics/nvidia mate_install x11/server/xorg/driver/xorg-video reboot Display is on intel (viewed by iRMC). CTRL-ALT-F1 displays weird pixeling after "svcadm disable lightdm" via xterm the "console" showed up, but not VT2, VT3.. etc. services sonsole-login are "online" OK install nvidia 340.108 from nvidia solaris archive, (as described in "https://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Nvidia+Graphics";), reboot. CTRL-ALT-F1 gives a blank screen on nvidia output, and no console on intel. The module nvidia_modeset is not here. This module only part of later versions, but these later versions don't support my card "quadro NVS 295". BTW, i don't need the console on this hardware, but i like to give some testing time to solve things.. Greetings, Stephan ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A rant
I have been ignoring this torrent of BS as patiently as I can, but I'm really getting tired of it. First of all, computing has a 75 year old history. There have been many false starts and mistakes along the way. The failure of the new arrivals to learn from the past results in the same mistakes being endlessly repeated. I shall cite a single example from 30 years ago, hard coded filenames. Motif came out with the name of the keyboard configuration file hard coded "/etc/keysym.db" IIRC. A the time it was my job to compile and distribute X11 and Motif binaries on all company research lab systems that did not have vendor support for X11 and Motif. This is a common mistake made frequently before the IBM 360 series appeared and led to "sysin=" and "sysout=" in JCL for the 360 series (That may not be the exactly correct syntax, but this does not merit my going into my library to check). But the "genius" who wrote the Motif code could not be bothered with the past so he repeated the mistake. No one here "hates" Linux, BSD, Windows or any other OS. We don't like various operating systems for a variety of legitimate reasons which vary by task to be accomplished, OS and individual. Please read the original Bell Labs Unix papers before you subject us to more of this. Linux has veered so far from the original principles as to be completely unrecognizable. In any given day I may use Hipster/OI, Solaris 10 u8, Debian 9.3 or Windows. And I might well spin up Plan 9 or some other operating systems by inserting the appropriate disk in the machine. In short, I can crush someone with your attitude in minutes even if they have a PhD. And have done it more than once. At such time as you can write intelligently describing the differences in implementation and philosophy about MVS (and its predecessors) , VM/CMS, VMS, RSX, Genix, Multics, Perkin-Elmer 3200 OS and a few others you will have some credibility with me. But until then you are just some child screaming that they will "hold there breath until they turn blue". I am quite certain I am not the only one *very* tired of it. I know the names of most of the people who have been replying to you and have the utmost respect for all but perhaps a few. Possibly all, as I've not paid close attention to who replied. The list is generally pretty quiet except for an occasional nut job. If you have many years professional experience as a senior member of staff in large system environments you care about what seems minutiae to novices. We care because we either got bit or had to clean up after someone else got bit. Most of the people on this list have been involved in large system environments for longer than you have been alive. It is certainly true that the organization of the filesystem in Illumos et al is a bit of a mess. This is true in every extant OS. IRIX, CLIX, HP-UX, Ultrix and a dozen other *nix systems I've used are long extinct. One of the great problems during the workstation wars was dealing with all the conflicting paths and file names. With xterms open on 6 or more different systems using a common NFS mounted home directory I had a very elaborate system for hiding the variations so I could work efficiently despite the variations. I supported software, both proprietary and GNU packages across all of them. Please reply to /dev/null. Reg On Thursday, January 28, 2021, 09:31:12 PM CST, Hung Nguyen Gia via openindiana-discuss wrote: Anyone here seems to be hated Linux too much. Does it because their bad past experience with it or simply because Linux is success and we are loser and the natural law of the loser hate the winner? Someone used to said Linux is a cesspool because it's only a kernel and hacked together to create a working system. Today I cloned illumos-gate and I see the completely different. I think Linux is more organized than Illumos. Saying Linux is a hacked together work is hypocrite and indeed slapping back into our own faces. We are no different. Illumos is a hacked together work and was an product of an desperate attempt to continue OpenSolaris. We are a mess, too. Indeed I found we are more like Linux than the BSDs. The large part of our userland is GNU anyway. Back to the rant: where actually things were put? I have did many 'find . -name' commands to try to discover where things were put. I want to find the source code of pcfs, aka msdosfs. The source files with pcfs as part of their names scattered across the source tree, the same for ufs. Which one is the true one to look for? I really hope we could be as 'a mess' as Linux, where things were put organized into linux/fs: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/fs Oh no, headers scattered everywhere. Which headers really needed and what they are actually for? It might took ages to find the answer. Yet the hypocrites still accused Linux of putting everything into /usr/include. Yes, you, too, the BSDs. __
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
On 2021-01-29 13:20, Stephan Althaus wrote: On 01/29/21 17:29, Chris wrote: On 2021-01-28 23:38, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote: On 29.01.21 06:48, Chris wrote: Maybe I'm spoiled, because the (Free)BSD console(s) are great. I can CTRL+ALT+F(1-12) for a new session, and attack several different tasks simultaneously. Guess I'm going to have to build all that into OI. Fire up services online 2018 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt4 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt3 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt5 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 and you have what you want (note: Its alt only on the console, ctrl-alt in X) alt-f 1 to 6 gives a new console, alt-f7 graphical desktop (if X is running). Thanks! I don't have any of that here. This sort of thing is controlled by /etc/ttys on FreeBSD. I'm not sure what the equivalent is on OI. Will have to look around and see what I can find. Seems odd to me your listing above isn't initiated by default. Thanks again! :-) --Chris Hello Chris! On my system that was installed on Jan, 24 the services are _not_ enabled by default $ svcs -a|grep -i vt disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 .. disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 So you have to enable them after installation: svcadm enable svc:/system/vtdaemon:default .. and Udo is right, i made a mistake, the keys to be pressed are CTRL-ALT-F1 for the firstVT CTRL-ALT-F2 for the 2nd VT .. *Uups* - These VT won't be there on an UEFI System - just at this moment looking at a black screen after pressing CRTL-ALT-F1 dmesg says: console-kit-daemon[512]: [ID 702911 daemon.warning] WARNING: signal "open_session_request" (from "OpenSessionRequest") exported but not found in object class "CkSeat" Be sure to use LEGACY boot option - if you have.. Thank you, Stephan! Yep. sudo svcadm enable vtdaemon followed by for i in 2 3 4 5 6 ; do sudo svcadm enable console-login:vt$i; done; gets it. :-) Thanks again! Greetings, Stephan --Chris -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
> On 29. Jan 2021, at 23:20, Stephan Althaus > wrote: > > On 01/29/21 17:29, Chris wrote: >> On 2021-01-28 23:38, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote: >>> On 29.01.21 06:48, Chris wrote: Maybe I'm spoiled, because the (Free)BSD console(s) are great. I can CTRL+ALT+F(1-12) for a new session, and attack several different tasks simultaneously. Guess I'm going to have to build all that into OI. >>> >>> Fire up services >>> >>> online 2018 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default >>> online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt4 >>> online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 >>> online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt3 >>> online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt5 >>> online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 >>> >>> and you have what you want (note: Its alt only on the console, ctrl-alt in >>> X) >>> alt-f 1 to 6 gives a new console, alt-f7 graphical desktop (if X is >>> running). >> Thanks! I don't have any of that here. This sort of thing is >> controlled by /etc/ttys on FreeBSD. I'm not sure what the equivalent >> is on OI. Will have to look around and see what I can find. >> Seems odd to me your listing above isn't initiated by default. >> >> Thanks again! :-) >> >> --Chris >>> >>> >> > Hello Chris! > > On my system that was installed on Jan, 24 > the services are _not_ enabled by default > > $ svcs -a|grep -i vt > disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default > disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 > .. > disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 > > So you have to enable them after installation: > svcadm enable svc:/system/vtdaemon:default > > .. and Udo is right, i made a mistake, the keys to be pressed are > > CTRL-ALT-F1 for the firstVT > CTRL-ALT-F2 for the 2nd VT > .. > > *Uups* - These VT won't be there on an UEFI System - just at this moment > looking at a black screen after pressing CRTL-ALT-F1 > > dmesg says: > console-kit-daemon[512]: [ID 702911 daemon.warning] WARNING: signal > "open_session_request" (from "OpenSessionRequest") exported but not found in > object class "CkSeat" > > Be sure to use LEGACY boot option - if you have.. > > > Greetings, > > Stephan > Is your OI up to date? rgds, toomas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
On 01/29/21 17:29, Chris wrote: On 2021-01-28 23:38, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote: On 29.01.21 06:48, Chris wrote: Maybe I'm spoiled, because the (Free)BSD console(s) are great. I can CTRL+ALT+F(1-12) for a new session, and attack several different tasks simultaneously. Guess I'm going to have to build all that into OI. Fire up services online 2018 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt4 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt3 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt5 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 and you have what you want (note: Its alt only on the console, ctrl-alt in X) alt-f 1 to 6 gives a new console, alt-f7 graphical desktop (if X is running). Thanks! I don't have any of that here. This sort of thing is controlled by /etc/ttys on FreeBSD. I'm not sure what the equivalent is on OI. Will have to look around and see what I can find. Seems odd to me your listing above isn't initiated by default. Thanks again! :-) --Chris Hello Chris! On my system that was installed on Jan, 24 the services are _not_ enabled by default $ svcs -a|grep -i vt disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 .. disabled 20:57:27 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 So you have to enable them after installation: svcadm enable svc:/system/vtdaemon:default .. and Udo is right, i made a mistake, the keys to be pressed are CTRL-ALT-F1 for the firstVT CTRL-ALT-F2 for the 2nd VT .. *Uups* - These VT won't be there on an UEFI System - just at this moment looking at a black screen after pressing CRTL-ALT-F1 dmesg says: console-kit-daemon[512]: [ID 702911 daemon.warning] WARNING: signal "open_session_request" (from "OpenSessionRequest") exported but not found in object class "CkSeat" Be sure to use LEGACY boot option - if you have.. Greetings, Stephan ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A rant
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 2:46 PM Jedi Tek’Unum wrote: > EVERY OS in existence is getting really long in the tooth (outdated) The irony of this is we're on the discussion list of an OS distribution whose fundamental underpinnings are decades old and that is the continuation of a legacy OS. and for the most part hasn’t innovated in a very long time. Ideally they > would ALL be replaced. > I find this self-contradictory given the above. > > I’m not comparing “Linux” (the hoard of many each slightly different) to > Illumos or derivatives specifically. My comment was purely general and yes, > based on decades of experience with many OSes. You see, I LIVED the Unix > “standards wars” where the industry painfully managed to iron out the many > minor differences that had no business existing. Then Linux came along and > ignored much of it - creating a whole new pile of ridiculous variances that > were just plain stupid. The moral of Linux's rise incumbent OSes need to give their users what they want, or other projects will and the incumbents won't like how the other projects go about it. Look at any large multiplatform software product (the last one I was paid > to develop was 10’s of millions of lines of code) and you will find ifdef > hell for absolutely no good reason. Ever wonder why autoconf exists? Can > you take any “Linux” binary and run on any Linux distribution for the same > architecture? > For the most part if you're on a mainstream distro or one based on them, yes. Binaries tend to work across the same ISA for kernel versions they're compatible with. That said, packaging is the way to go. For more on binary compat, especially back-compat, see Windows ;) > > I came from the world of “big iron” supercomputers and large enterprise > computing. People like me didn’t used to use toys like Linux (or *BSD for > that matter) for industrial-strength computing where data and calculations > and reliability were highly valuable. We used products that were designed > for the job - Solaris, SPARC, etc. I learned Fortran on Sun Workstations myself, and was assigned an AIX workstation in my 1st job. I developed plenty of stuff for IBM/AIX and HP/HPUX and while they were > more trustworthy than the toys, they couldn’t hold a candle to the good > stuff. Have you ever seen a massive heavily used server with an uptime over > 10 years? I have. > The need for reboots due to necessary kernel patching pretty much killed the uptime bragging thing. Nowadays I daresay unless you have an actual mainframe extended uptime is actually a sign of poor security hygiene. > > What I see today is a software industry with zero innovation (Sun & > Solaris WERE the last innovators). Countless resources spent on cloning, > porting, maintaining hoards of duplications. Software descending in > quality. Lots of arguing about which pile of shit is best. > Modern software aims to serve the user as opposed to making the user suffer through some kind of "sacred" learning experience while developers remain intransigent to their needs. Shockingly, it turns out that the people who pay for the stuff (or support for it) tend to drive the bus as far as how the stuff functions or operates. If a project doesn't behave the way its customers or users want, another project that does rises, "standards", philosophies, and sacred cows be damned. > > I thank the universe every day that I no longer have to polish turds that > day. > Observe, adapt, conquer. > > Your attitude here is the same as I’ve seen from many people over many > decades. I’ve felt the same way in my younger more naive days. I’ll give > you this parting advice - it won’t make a bit of difference. > > > On Jan 28, 2021, at 9:31 PM, Hung Nguyen Gia via openindiana-discuss < > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org> wrote: > > > > Anyone here seems to be hated Linux too much. Does it because their bad > past experience with it or simply because Linux is success and we are loser > and the natural law of the loser hate the winner? > > > > Someone used to said Linux is a cesspool because it's only a kernel and > hacked together to create a working system. > > > > Today I cloned illumos-gate and I see the completely different. > > > > I think Linux is more organized than Illumos. > > > > Saying Linux is a hacked together work is hypocrite and indeed slapping > back into our own faces. > > > > We are no different. Illumos is a hacked together work and was an > product of an desperate attempt to continue OpenSolaris. > > > > We are a mess, too. > > > > Indeed I found we are more like Linux than the BSDs. > > > > The large part of our userland is GNU anyway. > > > > Back to the rant: where actually things were put? > > > > I have did many 'find . -name' commands to try to discover where things > were put. > > > > I want to find the source code of pcfs, aka msdosfs. > > > > The source files with pcfs as part of their names scattered across the > source tree, the same for ufs. > > > > Which one i
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A rant
QNX is so far ahead of any other operating system, the fact that it hasn't changed yet n the last 20 years is basically a good thing as it has finally stabilised (after having had two completely breaking rewrites from scratch in the prior 20 years). Only now are operating systems like fuchsia and apples secret new OS catching up. On Fri, Jan 29, 2021, 12:46 PM Jedi Tek’Unum wrote: > EVERY OS in existence is getting really long in the tooth (outdated) and > for the most part hasn’t innovated in a very long time. Ideally they would > ALL be replaced. > > I’m not comparing “Linux” (the hoard of many each slightly different) to > Illumos or derivatives specifically. My comment was purely general and yes, > based on decades of experience with many OSes. You see, I LIVED the Unix > “standards wars” where the industry painfully managed to iron out the many > minor differences that had no business existing. Then Linux came along and > ignored much of it - creating a whole new pile of ridiculous variances that > were just plain stupid. Look at any large multiplatform software product > (the last one I was paid to develop was 10’s of millions of lines of code) > and you will find ifdef hell for absolutely no good reason. Ever wonder why > autoconf exists? Can you take any “Linux” binary and run on any Linux > distribution for the same architecture? > > I came from the world of “big iron” supercomputers and large enterprise > computing. People like me didn’t used to use toys like Linux (or *BSD for > that matter) for industrial-strength computing where data and calculations > and reliability were highly valuable. We used products that were designed > for the job - Solaris, SPARC, etc. I developed plenty of stuff for IBM/AIX > and HP/HPUX and while they were more trustworthy than the toys, they > couldn’t hold a candle to the good stuff. Have you ever seen a massive > heavily used server with an uptime over 10 years? I have. > > What I see today is a software industry with zero innovation (Sun & > Solaris WERE the last innovators). Countless resources spent on cloning, > porting, maintaining hoards of duplications. Software descending in > quality. Lots of arguing about which pile of shit is best. > > I thank the universe every day that I no longer have to polish turds that > day. > > Your attitude here is the same as I’ve seen from many people over many > decades. I’ve felt the same way in my younger more naive days. I’ll give > you this parting advice - it won’t make a bit of difference. > > > On Jan 28, 2021, at 9:31 PM, Hung Nguyen Gia via openindiana-discuss < > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org> wrote: > > > > Anyone here seems to be hated Linux too much. Does it because their bad > past experience with it or simply because Linux is success and we are loser > and the natural law of the loser hate the winner? > > > > Someone used to said Linux is a cesspool because it's only a kernel and > hacked together to create a working system. > > > > Today I cloned illumos-gate and I see the completely different. > > > > I think Linux is more organized than Illumos. > > > > Saying Linux is a hacked together work is hypocrite and indeed slapping > back into our own faces. > > > > We are no different. Illumos is a hacked together work and was an > product of an desperate attempt to continue OpenSolaris. > > > > We are a mess, too. > > > > Indeed I found we are more like Linux than the BSDs. > > > > The large part of our userland is GNU anyway. > > > > Back to the rant: where actually things were put? > > > > I have did many 'find . -name' commands to try to discover where things > were put. > > > > I want to find the source code of pcfs, aka msdosfs. > > > > The source files with pcfs as part of their names scattered across the > source tree, the same for ufs. > > > > Which one is the true one to look for? > > > > I really hope we could be as 'a mess' as Linux, where things were put > organized into linux/fs: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/fs > > > > Oh no, headers scattered everywhere. Which headers really needed and > what they are actually for? > > > > It might took ages to find the answer. > > > > Yet the hypocrites still accused Linux of putting everything into > /usr/include. Yes, you, too, the BSDs. > > > > ___ > > openindiana-discuss mailing list > > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > > ___ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A rant
EVERY OS in existence is getting really long in the tooth (outdated) and for the most part hasn’t innovated in a very long time. Ideally they would ALL be replaced. I’m not comparing “Linux” (the hoard of many each slightly different) to Illumos or derivatives specifically. My comment was purely general and yes, based on decades of experience with many OSes. You see, I LIVED the Unix “standards wars” where the industry painfully managed to iron out the many minor differences that had no business existing. Then Linux came along and ignored much of it - creating a whole new pile of ridiculous variances that were just plain stupid. Look at any large multiplatform software product (the last one I was paid to develop was 10’s of millions of lines of code) and you will find ifdef hell for absolutely no good reason. Ever wonder why autoconf exists? Can you take any “Linux” binary and run on any Linux distribution for the same architecture? I came from the world of “big iron” supercomputers and large enterprise computing. People like me didn’t used to use toys like Linux (or *BSD for that matter) for industrial-strength computing where data and calculations and reliability were highly valuable. We used products that were designed for the job - Solaris, SPARC, etc. I developed plenty of stuff for IBM/AIX and HP/HPUX and while they were more trustworthy than the toys, they couldn’t hold a candle to the good stuff. Have you ever seen a massive heavily used server with an uptime over 10 years? I have. What I see today is a software industry with zero innovation (Sun & Solaris WERE the last innovators). Countless resources spent on cloning, porting, maintaining hoards of duplications. Software descending in quality. Lots of arguing about which pile of shit is best. I thank the universe every day that I no longer have to polish turds that day. Your attitude here is the same as I’ve seen from many people over many decades. I’ve felt the same way in my younger more naive days. I’ll give you this parting advice - it won’t make a bit of difference. > On Jan 28, 2021, at 9:31 PM, Hung Nguyen Gia via openindiana-discuss > wrote: > > Anyone here seems to be hated Linux too much. Does it because their bad past > experience with it or simply because Linux is success and we are loser and > the natural law of the loser hate the winner? > > Someone used to said Linux is a cesspool because it's only a kernel and > hacked together to create a working system. > > Today I cloned illumos-gate and I see the completely different. > > I think Linux is more organized than Illumos. > > Saying Linux is a hacked together work is hypocrite and indeed slapping back > into our own faces. > > We are no different. Illumos is a hacked together work and was an product of > an desperate attempt to continue OpenSolaris. > > We are a mess, too. > > Indeed I found we are more like Linux than the BSDs. > > The large part of our userland is GNU anyway. > > Back to the rant: where actually things were put? > > I have did many 'find . -name' commands to try to discover where things were > put. > > I want to find the source code of pcfs, aka msdosfs. > > The source files with pcfs as part of their names scattered across the source > tree, the same for ufs. > > Which one is the true one to look for? > > I really hope we could be as 'a mess' as Linux, where things were put > organized into linux/fs: https://github.com/torvalds/linux/tree/master/fs > > Oh no, headers scattered everywhere. Which headers really needed and what > they are actually for? > > It might took ages to find the answer. > > Yet the hypocrites still accused Linux of putting everything into > /usr/include. Yes, you, too, the BSDs. > > ___ > openindiana-discuss mailing list > openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] How to install MATE or Gnome Desktop?
Am 29.01.21 um 19:59 schrieb Jason Long via openindiana-discuss: Hello, I installed the MATE desktop, but system can't boot in the graphical Desktop. You'll need to enable lightdm: pfexec svcadm enable lightdm This should bring the graphical login. Regards, Andreas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] How to install MATE or Gnome Desktop?
Hello, I installed the MATE desktop, but system can't boot in the graphical Desktop. On Friday, January 29, 2021, 08:59:34 PM GMT+3:30, Jason Long via openindiana-discuss wrote: Thank you so much. On Friday, January 29, 2021, 08:38:52 PM GMT+3:30, Andreas Wacknitz wrote: Am 29.01.21 um 17:57 schrieb Jason Long via openindiana-discuss: > Hello, > I did below commands to install MATE Desktop: > # pfexec pkg refresh --full > # pfexec pkg image-update -v > # pfexec pkg mate_install > > But, I got below error: > pkg: unknown subcommand 'mate_install' mate_install is not a command but a package name. So, if you want to install it you'll have to issue pfexec pkg install mate_install Regards Andreas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
In message <6af404130fb7e202352aab33a4fad...@bsdos.info>, Chris writes: >First off. To make something I can develop (OI) on. If I was in your shoes, I would stick with FreeBSD as my daily driver and do my OI porting and development on a bhyve VM. John groenv...@acm.org ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] How to install MATE or Gnome Desktop?
Thank you so much. On Friday, January 29, 2021, 08:38:52 PM GMT+3:30, Andreas Wacknitz wrote: Am 29.01.21 um 17:57 schrieb Jason Long via openindiana-discuss: > Hello, > I did below commands to install MATE Desktop: > # pfexec pkg refresh --full > # pfexec pkg image-update -v > # pfexec pkg mate_install > > But, I got below error: > pkg: unknown subcommand 'mate_install' mate_install is not a command but a package name. So, if you want to install it you'll have to issue pfexec pkg install mate_install Regards Andreas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] How to install MATE or Gnome Desktop?
Am 29.01.21 um 17:57 schrieb Jason Long via openindiana-discuss: Hello, I did below commands to install MATE Desktop: # pfexec pkg refresh --full # pfexec pkg image-update -v # pfexec pkg mate_install But, I got below error: pkg: unknown subcommand 'mate_install' mate_install is not a command but a package name. So, if you want to install it you'll have to issue pfexec pkg install mate_install Regards Andreas ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
On 2021-01-29 08:45, John D Groenveld wrote: In message <91ecf33c60c1c9dcca392709ecd01...@bsdos.info>, Chris writes: Thanks! I don't have any of that here. This sort of thing is controlled by /etc/ttys on FreeBSD. I'm not sure what the equivalent is on OI. Will have to look around and see what I can find. https://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=30802326> Thanks! :-) Seems odd to me your listing above isn't initiated by default. I rarely use virtual terminals on my *BSD and Linux machines but I don't disable them. BTW besides porting the enhancements of FreeBSD's ath(4) to ath(7D), what's your intention for this OI machine? First off. To make something I can develop (OI) on. In a wider scope; cure what ails it (perceived). IOW I'd really like to get on board with OI as my go-to OS. But it (currently) lacks man power and resources. I'd like help overcome th(at|ose) obstical(s). I'm looking to create an additional install against both Xfce && Cinnamon. But before that I see some things that I've become accustomed to aren't working as I would expect. So I'll need to address them first. fe; a directory listing of /usr/include takes some 20 seconds. All screen draws stutter like the first black-and-white films. Something appears to be broken. Other things may just be a lack of fully understanding on my part -- like the multiple consoles. In any event. I'd just like to "pitch in", and either fix or add to OI. :-) Thanks for your reply, John! John groenv...@acm.org --Chris -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] How to install MATE or Gnome Desktop?
Jason Long via openindiana-discuss writes: > I did below commands to install MATE Desktop: > # pfexec pkg refresh --full > # pfexec pkg image-update -v > # pfexec pkg mate_install Try "pfexec pkg install -v mate_install" or, if you want to do a dry run first to see what it will do, specify "-nv". Regards -- Volker -- Volker A. BrandtConsulting and Support for Solaris-based Systems Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim, GERMANYEmail: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 46 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J.H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt "When logic and proportion have fallen sloppy dead" ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] How to install MATE or Gnome Desktop?
Hello, I did below commands to install MATE Desktop: # pfexec pkg refresh --full # pfexec pkg image-update -v # pfexec pkg mate_install But, I got below error: pkg: unknown subcommand 'mate_install' Why? Thank you. ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
In message <91ecf33c60c1c9dcca392709ecd01...@bsdos.info>, Chris writes: >Thanks! I don't have any of that here. This sort of thing is >controlled by /etc/ttys on FreeBSD. I'm not sure what the equivalent >is on OI. Will have to look around and see what I can find. https://wiki.openindiana.org/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=30802326> >Seems odd to me your listing above isn't initiated by default. I rarely use virtual terminals on my *BSD and Linux machines but I don't disable them. BTW besides porting the enhancements of FreeBSD's ath(4) to ath(7D), what's your intention for this OI machine? John groenv...@acm.org ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
On 2021-01-28 23:38, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote: On 29.01.21 06:48, Chris wrote: Maybe I'm spoiled, because the (Free)BSD console(s) are great. I can CTRL+ALT+F(1-12) for a new session, and attack several different tasks simultaneously. Guess I'm going to have to build all that into OI. Fire up services online 2018 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt4 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt3 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt5 online 2018 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 and you have what you want (note: Its alt only on the console, ctrl-alt in X) alt-f 1 to 6 gives a new console, alt-f7 graphical desktop (if X is running). Thanks! I don't have any of that here. This sort of thing is controlled by /etc/ttys on FreeBSD. I'm not sure what the equivalent is on OI. Will have to look around and see what I can find. Seems odd to me your listing above isn't initiated by default. Thanks again! :-) --Chris -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] What's HASWELL support like on OI?
On 2021-01-28 22:54, Stephan Althaus wrote: On 01/29/21 07:48, Chris wrote: On 2021-01-28 22:18, Toomas Soome via openindiana-discuss wrote: On 29. Jan 2021, at 07:48, Chris wrote: On 2021-01-28 19:48, Gary Mills wrote: On Thu, Jan 28, 2021 at 05:35:38PM -0800, Chris wrote: I'm trying to find some combination of hardware that will produce reasonable performance at the console. By console, do you mean the raw console without a window manager? If that's the case, it's no wonder that you are finding it slow. Most people never see this, except during boot. The raw console is known to be quite slow. It's never been a problem because the terminal windows you get with a window manager are quite fast. I have five low-end systems with a variety of video cards all running OI here. All I ever did was to do the initial install from the live USB image, and do updates afterwards with the pkg command. Well *that's* depressing. Hmm. I guess my first task is going to be *fixing* that. Frustrating; as I do a great deal of my initial work from the console. Maybe I'm spoiled, because the (Free)BSD console(s) are great. I can CTRL+ALT+F(1-12) for a new session, and attack several different tasks simultaneously. Guess I'm going to have to build all that into OI. Looks like OI uses wcons. I'll see if I can coerce syscons(4) to replace it. Unless someone else has a better idea/option. :-) Thanks for taking the time to reply, Gary. Greatly appreciated! —Chris You do not really want to start with replacing console with syscons, syscons itself is already obsolete and freebsd got itself in situation with two competing (and broken in parts) console implementations:) For virtual consoles, you want to check VT(7I), I do not know why we do not enable vt’s bt default: tsoome@beastie:~$ svcs -a | grep vt disabled 11:34:57 svc:/system/vtdaemon:default disabled 11:34:57 svc:/system/console-login:vt2 disabled 11:34:57 svc:/system/console-login:vt3 disabled 11:34:57 svc:/system/console-login:vt4 disabled 11:34:57 svc:/system/console-login:vt5 disabled 11:34:57 svc:/system/console-login:vt6 IMO this is a bug. In any case, there is not need to start with replacing random components with another kind of random components when there is perfectly good option about making existing components better;) I fully agree that needless "competition* should be avoided. However for production, I exclusively use Nvidia adapters, as there is far too much overhead attempting to use AMD/radeon/intel on FreeBSD. They work very inconsistently between brands, and between console vs Graphics/X(org). Most all of this is simply the churn adapting Linux graphics to FreeBSD. In fact after ~2yrs. I am still unable to CTRL+ALT+F1 from X with anything but an Nvidia adapter. In part because using an Nvidia adapter I simply add kern.vty=sc to loader.conf(5) and I'm done. X works && so do all the consoles. I can't say the same for the other video adapters. They all require vt(4) which is as yet still immature, and incomplete as compared to syscons(2) (sc). The font handling is poor. Copy Paste at the console is inconsistent && largely impossible. Character mode is almost unusable. Mode switching is also wonky. As it is, it is almost exclusively limited to Graphics mode, Which is fine if you live in X. But if you're already in X, you don't need it. My experience(s). Thank you for taking the time to point out vt(4) lives in OI, Toomas. :-) --Chris rgds, toomas Hello! I am using an NVIDIA card with OI, LEGACY boot, vt is enabled and in TEXT mode which is about as fast as i was used to in former lx days, nothing to compain here.., CTRL-1, CTRL-2 is working from X Is it available by default on a fresh install? Because I'm not enjoying your success. I guess I'll have to see if I can simply enable it, and give it a go. :-) Greetings, Stephan Thanks, Stephan! :-) --Chris -- ~10yrs a FreeBSD maintainer of ~160 ports ~40yrs of UNIX ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A dumb idea
On 01/29/21 13:10, Udo Grabowski (IMK) wrote: On 29.01.21 11:52, Jim Klimov wrote: On January 29, 2021 6:08:50 AM UTC, Stephan Althaus wrote: On 01/29/21 06:58, Chris wrote: ... Taken this idea, to me it would make more sense to try to transform joyent's pkgsrc, as many these pkgs in there are known to build on illumos. IF it is possible technically and a reasonable effort. Isn't pkgsrc.joyent.com usable on any illumos a thing already done for years? I believe it comes with its own ecosystem of binaries and library dependencies, Yes, exactly, we're using it with some older Hipster from 2017 to enrich the software portfolio a bit, and it does mostly work out of the box. Some of the libraries OI already has are duplicated (often in somewhat different versions), but that's a small price to pay compared to the vast software catalogue pkgsrc offers. So no reason to "transform" packages, given the limited manpower OI has. Just do everything to keep the illumos/Joyent/Tribblix community binary compatible. ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss i agree. About compatibility, sometimes pkgsrc progs tend to crash because of the binary or version differences. i had a dream of a transform script to keep things automated :-) Greetings, Stephan ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A dumb idea
On 29.01.21 13:39, Chris Game wrote: On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, Chris wrote: ... fe; if you build your packages/applications from ports (source). You can NOT use package AT ALL. Conversely; if you install your applications from pkg(8). You can NOT build additional applications from ports/source. They are mutually incompatible. Something to think about. :-) Is anyone building from source these days? A lot ! Most things we need are not in packages, self-written etc. Or if they are in packages, they are compile with a minimum of options, and we require a maximum of options, etc.pp. If you have to do a job with your computer, you always have something that has to be compiled from source and disseminated to /usr/local or /opt or wherever. ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A dumb idea
On Thu, 28 Jan 2021, Chris wrote: While coming from FreeBSD makes me a bit biased. I think it's a good thing to think/talk about. But be warned; FreeBSD pkg(8) comes with it's own set of complications. Not something OI would want to inherit. fe; if you build your packages/applications from ports (source). You can NOT use package AT ALL. Conversely; if you install your applications from pkg(8). You can NOT build additional applications from ports/source. They are mutually incompatible. Something to think about. :-) Is anyone building from source these days? I thought of trying that for a FreeBSD system last week and it shocked me how much time and space was needed to build Xorg just to start things off. I gave up the idea when the system crashed due to lack of space - a 15GB virtual partition was full, and the 'make' operation had already taken 4 hrs or so. Probably off topic, but showed me all is not well in the BSD world. ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A dumb idea
On 29.01.21 11:52, Jim Klimov wrote: On January 29, 2021 6:08:50 AM UTC, Stephan Althaus wrote: On 01/29/21 06:58, Chris wrote: ... Taken this idea, to me it would make more sense to try to transform joyent's pkgsrc, as many these pkgs in there are known to build on illumos. IF it is possible technically and a reasonable effort. Isn't pkgsrc.joyent.com usable on any illumos a thing already done for years? I believe it comes with its own ecosystem of binaries and library dependencies, Yes, exactly, we're using it with some older Hipster from 2017 to enrich the software portfolio a bit, and it does mostly work out of the box. Some of the libraries OI already has are duplicated (often in somewhat different versions), but that's a small price to pay compared to the vast software catalogue pkgsrc offers. So no reason to "transform" packages, given the limited manpower OI has. Just do everything to keep the illumos/Joyent/Tribblix community binary compatible. ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A dumb idea
On Fri, Jan 29, 2021 at 3:51 AM Hung Nguyen Gia via openindiana-discuss < openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org> wrote: > What about just import the FreeBSD Ports system and like DragonflyBSD uses > transformations scripts (https://github.com/DragonFlyBSD/DeltaPorts) to > transform it into illumos-ports something like this ( > https://github.com/DragonFlyBSD/DPorts) and enjoying the large amount of > software we will never able to port by our own with little effort? > That doesn't address the fundamental problem: you still have to do the port to illumos. In general, those of us porting stuff tend to look at what's in other systems to see if and how they've solved similar problems. But importing the system as a whole means you're now having to deal with not only the idiosyncracies of the software you're interested in but also having to deal with problems from the alien system itself. To be successful, you require buy-in from that system - so something like pkgsrc is fine, for example. -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] A dumb idea
On January 29, 2021 6:08:50 AM UTC, Stephan Althaus wrote: >On 01/29/21 06:58, Chris wrote: ... >Taken this idea, to me it would make more sense to try to transform >joyent's pkgsrc, >as many these pkgs in there are known to build on illumos. >IF it is possible technically and a reasonable effort. > Isn't pkgsrc.joyent.com usable on any illumos a thing already done for years? I believe it comes with its own ecosystem of binaries and library dependencies, and its own separate packaging manager, and a separate learning and maintenance curve - but otherwise it is something people use who hop distros and like equivalent userlands. Perhaps using it makes more sense on OmniOS that is intentionally minimalistic by itself and ships almost nothing in main IPS repo, than on OI that intends to integrate as much as can be supported, though. Jonathan et al did a great job at that project, IMHO. Jim -- Typos courtesy of K-9 Mail on my Android ___ openindiana-discuss mailing list openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org https://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
