Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a
Excuse me, you're making the assumption that loud-mouths like me aren't willing to pay for Solaris - I am willing to pay for Solaris, but I'm not willing to pay for a Solaris whose hardware support is subpar. The day when Solaris gets up to the bar set my me will be the day I'll purchase Solaris and support. Actually, I've made no such assumption; I didn't even mention it. I wrote about contributing code, graphics, audio, documentation and test suites to the OpenSolaris project. But if you are going to bring in the issue of commercial support, part of the perks that come with 24/7 Premium support is calling in and getting an RFE worked on. That's what having a Premium support contract is all about. And a single CPU contract is even cheap. With that out of the way, Casper is completely right in that expecting or demanding a paid-for like support of the OpenSolaris volunteers is inappropriate. As I wrote before, we have a disproportionate ratio of users to developers, so people will work primarily on scratching their own itch, or working on things they perceive are critical and/or crucial to the project. So if you guys want things to move forward, and in particular if you want things to move forward faster, then we need your help! It's OK if you don't want to or can't write code, there are other ways to help out (for example, with the documentation, or even with creating some graphics or audio), but demanding something be done yesterday and expecting commercial level support out of a community of volunteers is not going to help matters. Think about it this: many of us have families, and when any one of us works on OpenSolaris in their free / spare time, that goes at the expense of our spouses and children. So next time anybody here thinks of demanding or expecting something, please spare a few moments to think about giving some of your own time and effort back to OpenSolaris first. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a huge network....
No, I think it is wrong to make such an observation. Sun has open sourced solaris, but it assumes a broad responsibility over open solaris, it does everything it can to further the cause of open solaris, Why would it host open solaris as an integral part of Sun Tech Days or Java One ? It is doing more than just lifting a finer. Sun mothers open solaris, however open solaris might appear in conflict with the revenue driven Solaris. What ever Sun does, they do it completely voluntarily, just like everybody else here. I firmly believe that it is truly unjust to expect that just because Sun has done so much to further the cause of OpenSolaris, Sun must be made to bear the brunt of OpenSolaris demands and expectations. Sun has done more than enough, they've given us a state of the art operating environment, with state of the art development tools costing thousands of USD, they help out with the hardware infrastructure and administrative work. In reality, however, Sun is not obligated to do any of those things, they didn't have to do them and it was really, really nice of them to do so. Even if they had other motives, actions speak much louder than words, so it was still really, really nice of them to do so. That, however, doesn't entitle anyone to expect Sun to do XYZ or to press demands on them. If you want to press demands on Sun, buy a commercial support contract and go with Solaris 10. That's fair. You give something and you get something in return. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a
I would contribute but every time I want to actually do something I'm barraged by a list of bullcrap of 'you need to do this, this, this and this before even considering contributing' - sorry, if contributing is made as difficult as possible then bugger it. I wouldn't worry about that one bit. Onc you have the code, going through the paces is trivial. The code is the single most important thing. Plus, when you're actually ready to integrate and go through the paces, once you're done you will have some solid engineering process foundation under your belt, which can be immediately put on your CV. Either way, you win. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a
But ultimately what is developed in OpenSolaris will end up in a payable product. Not necessarily. Features deemed fit for OpenSolaris might never make it into Solaris. There is already code out there that is running on OpenSolaris that didn't make it into Solaris, and might never make it. It's not a 1:1 process. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] opensolaris and linux on same disk
I'm using Ubuntu Feisty (x86_64). I didn't use particular partition tools, just Linux fdisk and Solaris fdisk. FYI the hardware is a Dell M65 laptop. It turned out Solaris seems to reset the MBR and probably installs Grub into its own partition which is nice. Linux distros like to install over the MBR :( I activated the Linux partition, installed its Grub into its own partition, and now I can boot Linux again. I'm planning to add a chainloader entry for the Solaris partition next. Unfortunately it's working time now so I have to quit playing... This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
Nico Sabbi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: can I suggest considering the following items? 1) a current, working and maintained port of eclipse 2) kde (much more powerful, lightweight and usable than gnome, IMO) 3) the Reply-to header in its lists :-) those are all topics that some kind third party soul sometimes provides, thus they shouldn't really require a lot of effort to merge in Opensolaris (especially item n. 3) This is opensolaris. If you like it, do it! Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
Nico Sabbi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: This is opensolaris. If you like it, do it! Jörg you explained yourself that doing it is one thing, integrating it in Opensolaris is a totally different thing that only the members of some board can decide. Since the ports of eclipse and kde exist already now, it's up to the board to decide what to do with them If the sources together with binaries are loadable in a useful way, people would appreciate it. Jörg -- EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin [EMAIL PROTECTED](uni) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/old/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 23:51 -0700, UNIX admin wrote: I would contribute but every time I want to actually do something I'm barraged by a list of bullcrap of 'you need to do this, this, this and this before even considering contributing' - sorry, if contributing is made as difficult as possible then bugger it. I wouldn't worry about that one bit. Onc you have the code, going through the paces is trivial. The code is the single most important thing. Plus, when you're actually ready to integrate and go through the paces, once you're done you will have some solid engineering process foundation under your belt, which can be immediately put on your CV. Either way, you win. I'd like to contribute to localisation for New Zealand - include Maori/English translations - right now it is pretty pathetic, there is no British English dictionary for Evolution, StarOffice 8 is all setup incorrectly - given the 'Maori language creep' into New Zealand English, there is a need to have both dictionaries by default. I've had a look around and can't find where to start. Matthew ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Nico Sabbi wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: Nico Sabbi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: [ ... ] This is opensolaris. If you like it, do it! Jörg you explained yourself that doing it is one thing, integrating it in Opensolaris is a totally different thing that only the members of some board can decide. Since the ports of eclipse and kde exist already now, it's up to the board to decide what to do with them Not quite. For one thing, what you're asking for is integration of KDE and Eclipse into a specific distribution, probably Solaris Express. That's different from integrating into OpenSolaris. Are KDE and Eclipse part of the Linux kernel ? Are they part of the GNU compiler collection ? Are they integrated with GNU libc ? Ah, and yes, it'd really be a great idea to actually integrate them both into GNOME ... You're asking for co-packaging, what in terms of OpenSolaris is called a WAD - the term would roughly describe what's commonly referred to as distribution. That's a collection of various so-called, again in terms of OpenSolaris, consolidations, which are e.g. X11, ON, install, Java - which are not fully self-contained, but also not tightly coupled. There's no need to create a new build of the X server each time a new build of the ON kernel components go out. Same would be true for e.g. Eclipse and KDE. The mythical entity you refer to as The board will not object to a specific consolidation's idea of what code/feature/subsystem should go in or out as long as there are no side effects beyond that consolidation. Adding new software packages therefore needs talking to the specific people who work on the umbrella thing - and that's the consolidation, the community that'd embrace your project(s). Trying to integrate a new manual page, would you talk to a kernel engineer or a documentations maintainer ? I guess you get the idea now. Assuming you have a piece of code, a specific item of software you want to have distributed as part of some OpenSolaris distribution, you would, in order: - ask the maintainer(s) of that distribution how that'd work - ask people from a related community what'd be needed and only _then_ start worrying about what strange questions they might come up with. What Joerg was talking about was code integration into the ON consolidation (kernel/libraries/UN*X utils), that currently uses what's called a sponsorship model where you dump your code onto some Sun person for them to turn the internal wheels and get stuff in. If you search the archives for e.g. ksh93 you'll see that such integration discussions can take a very long time. But that's far from what you want. You're not developing a kernel driver, a UN*X utility of a fix/enhancement to libc. You're simply requesting (some) (Open)Solaris distributions to include additional software. Which might have its own pitfalls, ok. Have you tried talking to talk to any distribution maintainer ? FrankH. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a
On 8/8/07, Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'd like to contribute to localisation for New Zealand - include Maori/English translations - right now it is pretty pathetic, there is no British English dictionary for Evolution, StarOffice 8 is all setup incorrectly - given the 'Maori language creep' into New Zealand English, there is a need to have both dictionaries by default. I've had a look around and can't find where to start. Matthew People on the i18n-discuss list should be able to provide the right inputs. regards Shiv ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Opportunities
Hi, I'm looking for some contract work mainly s-o-h-o based but I can do around 10% travel. I have long experience in OS Kernel Compiler development working for Computer Manufacturers and Silicon Design companies. I can send my resume on request - I can also provide the following references: * Software Director, Advanced Computing Technologies, ST Microelectronics, UK Design HQ, Aztec West, Bristol * Project Manager, C/C++ Compiler Development, Microsoft HQ, 1 Microsoft Way, Redmond, WA. USA. Regards, David Moore [EMAIL PROTECTED] This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 12:57 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote: On Fri, 3 Aug 2007, Matthew Gardiner wrote: Yes, it has changed - but I'm just frustrated at the lack of progress outside of the 'basics'. The next meeting of SVOSUG will feature a presentation by the Xorg group, notably Alan Coopersmith, showing the latest Xorg changes and/or what is in store, but to also show Compiz. Your comments got me to thinking, and I have really come to the conclusion that Solaris has made some incredible improvements on the desktop, IMO. 1) The new-boot architecture brought us into the modern age of booting. 2) Xorg replaced Xsun as the X server, and we have more support for video than we ever had. 3) RealPlayer - This was a long and hard battle, and finally we have a RealPlayer that is included in Solaris and/or can be added to OpenSolaris. 4) Flash...another long and hard battle which I was involved in before I joined Sun. We have had some problems with the current Flash 9 being delivered, but it is out now and we're in ok shape on this, IMO. 5) NWAM - this will change the way folks use their laptops, the way they connect, and will elliminate much of the confusion in system configuration that prevents new folks from being able to use their systems more easily. 6) JDS - while not my favorite desktop, it has moved Solaris away from the old CDE, and this is good for many of the new adopters of Solaris/OpenSolaris. There have been quite a few developments in JDS and quite a bit has changed. 7) Additional desktop software such as GIMP, gphoto, evince, etc...this has made it easier for the bulk of folks to use their Solaris/OpenSolaris systems to interact with web work, image editing, and incorporating their digital pics. 8) StarOffice - was not even being built for Solaris on x86 when I joined Sun more than 4 years ago. It has been packaged and on the system for the past 2 years at least. This is a huge improvement and we have an office suite that allows us to function in the real world. 9) Mozilla, Firefox, Thunderbird - also not being built for Solaris/OpenSolaris when I came to Sun. I pounded on the folks responsible for it and made them change their ways by starting to build the packages and distributing them on my own. We have current versions in new builds now, and it's setup with flash to work. This is a HUGE improvement over what we had 2 years ago. 10) wifi - people laughed when you mentioned wifi on Solaris a couple years ago. Now we have several decent drivers that allow us to connect over wireless networks, and using WEP as well. I can probably think of more, given time, but this list above I believe represents an incredible leap for Solaris, and certainly on x86. Sun has shown that they are in the x86 space for the long haul, even the execs speak it on stage when they give presentations these days. Do you really think that this is all a part of the basics? These, IMO, are huge improvements to bring out system/desktop to the masses, and Solaris/OpenSolaris continues to move forward. Unfortunately however, there are a sizable number who have romantic notions about where Solaris has come - thats easy, anyone can look with sheepish eyes over the past. The difficult thing is acknowledging the issues that plague Solaris *today* and doing something about it. Simply sitting back and patting each other on the back for 'past glories and achievements' does not get things fixed which today requires. Matthew ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 14:08 +0200, Mark Phalan wrote: On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 23:02 +1200, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: ... 2) kde (much more powerful, lightweight and usable than gnome, IMO) Someone has built 3.5.7 but unfortunately they seem to live under a giant size bolder - ignoring that x86 is now a viable target. You're probably referring to this.. ftp://ls12-ftp.cs.uni-dortmund.de/outgoing/KDE/3.5.7/README.SRC Looks to me like it wouldn't be too hard to get that going on x86. Have you tried those instructions? Does the source file include all the sources required to build - all the dependencies etc. etc? From what I've heard people are working on KDE for Solaris/SunStudio, particularily Sefan Teleman, but they are focusing on KDE 4. Try [EMAIL PROTECTED] its a better place for KDE questions. I've tried to build KDE - it breaks every time; they need to do something about that. I should be able to grab a source, grab gcc, and voila, it compiles. Me thinks that that is one of the goals of project Indiana - we're not there yet but thats where we're headed. Hopefully - that is the one thing holding it back. When there is all the necessary GNU stuff there to allow compilation out of the, life will be alot easier. Matthew ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [driver-discuss] Sound Blaster Live! in ONNV
James Carlson wrote: snip The one thing I'd ask about here is whether the project team is aware of the OSS integration project (that will likely be obsoleting the old SADA bits), and if this project conflicts with or is obsoleted by that one. If so, then coordinating with them would be helpful. I didn't know that someone intends to port OSS bits to OpenSolaris until now. Could someone please point me to the project page or provide more info ? If the OSS bits (including working SBLive! driver) are going to be integrated into Nevada in the foreseeable future then there is no point in integrating SADA based driver. I have seen some posts about providing SADA-OSS layer etc. but it seems audio driver area in OpenSolaris is kind of misty at this point. v. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On 8/8/07, Frank Hofmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But that's far from what you want. You're not developing a kernel driver, a UN*X utility of a fix/enhancement to libc. You're simply requesting (some) (Open)Solaris distributions to include additional software. Which might have its own pitfalls, ok. Have you tried talking to talk to any distribution maintainer ? To address the issue of the software stack, I believe based on the discussions happening on the Indiana mailing list, it will have a network based installation (similar to ubuntu's synaptic manager) that is better integrated and *just works*. If the software a person likes is not there, Indiana hopefully provides a mechanism for people to contribute. Sigh, Indiana, *the silver bullet* for every issue that is raised !!! ~Shiv ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [driver-discuss] Sound Blaster Live! in ONNV
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 14:29 +0200, Vladimir Kotal wrote: James Carlson wrote: snip The one thing I'd ask about here is whether the project team is aware of the OSS integration project (that will likely be obsoleting the old SADA bits), and if this project conflicts with or is obsoleted by that one. If so, then coordinating with them would be helpful. I didn't know that someone intends to port OSS bits to OpenSolaris until now. Could someone please point me to the project page or provide more info ? If the OSS bits (including working SBLive! driver) are going to be integrated into Nevada in the foreseeable future then there is no point in integrating SADA based driver. I have seen some posts about providing SADA-OSS layer etc. but it seems audio driver area in OpenSolaris is kind of misty at this point. http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/ Look for opensound from the list. Matthew ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 18:03 +0530, S h i v wrote: On 8/8/07, Frank Hofmann [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: But that's far from what you want. You're not developing a kernel driver, a UN*X utility of a fix/enhancement to libc. You're simply requesting (some) (Open)Solaris distributions to include additional software. Which might have its own pitfalls, ok. Have you tried talking to talk to any distribution maintainer ? To address the issue of the software stack, I believe based on the discussions happening on the Indiana mailing list, it will have a network based installation (similar to ubuntu's synaptic manager) that is better integrated and *just works*. If the software a person likes is not there, Indiana hopefully provides a mechanism for people to contribute. Sigh, Indiana, *the silver bullet* for every issue that is raised !!! Thats probably because Indiana is the umbrella for a lot of new technologies/projects being worked on. (I'm confused by the Sigh). -Mark ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Thu, 2007-08-09 at 00:34 +1200, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: ... The way I read it, I would still need to travel to hell and back with the laundry list of GNU stuff I would need to install along with heaps I don't think thats really the case. Yes, there is some GNU stuff missing but most of it is here (build 69). The only obvious GNU stuff missing from a build point of view that I can see is the lack of auto* - but in general these are only needed if you are building from a source checkout and need to generate the configure script. of dependencies with broken Solaris build settings (Qt hard coded to use sun's CC instead of respecting environment variables). Yes, thats one thing I've noticed. If Solaris is supported it assumes Sun Studio and/or sparc. It can be frustrating - best thing to do is to nag the upstream sources. ... In general things aren't as bad as you are making out. In my experience most things actually *do* compile out of the box on the latest builds of Nevada with a little PATH magic. Probably the better thing is less path magic more correction of the defaults. Indeed. Indiana :) -Mark ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [driver-discuss] Sound Blaster Live! in ONNV
Vladimir Kotal wrote: James Carlson wrote: snip The one thing I'd ask about here is whether the project team is aware of the OSS integration project (that will likely be obsoleting the old SADA bits), and if this project conflicts with or is obsoleted by that one. If so, then coordinating with them would be helpful. I didn't know that someone intends to port OSS bits to OpenSolaris until now. Could someone please point me to the project page or provide more info ? All I've been able externally that I could find is the ARC one pager: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/238/ I'd suggest contactin Margot Miller - she is listed as the submitter for the ARC case. If the OSS bits (including working SBLive! driver) are going to be integrated into Nevada in the foreseeable future then there is no point in integrating SADA based driver. According to the list on opensound.com the Creative SBLive! is supported on x86 but not on SPARC: http://manuals.opensound.com/devlists/Solaris-i386.html http://manuals.opensound.com/devlists/Solaris-sparc.html -- Darren J Moffat ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On 8/8/07, Mark Phalan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Sigh, Indiana, *the silver bullet* for every issue that is raised !!! Thats probably because Indiana is the umbrella for a lot of new technologies/projects being worked on. (I'm confused by the Sigh). Sigh = want to take a break (from the long opensolaris.org threads that repeat the usability discussions) and wait for the *silver bullet* to appear. A distro (unlike SXDE), that does not have the compulsion to support 8years of legacy compatibility opens up some really nice possibilities on the user segments not explored enough earlier. Am excited about Indiana...(SXDE itself has just works for me for my requirements of *desktop* ) ~Shiv ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [driver-discuss] Sound Blaster Live! in ONNV
Kaiwai Gardiner writes: On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 14:29 +0200, Vladimir Kotal wrote: Could someone please point me to the project page or provide more info ? If the OSS bits (including working SBLive! driver) are going to be integrated into Nevada in the foreseeable future then there is no point in integrating SADA based driver. I have seen some posts about providing SADA-OSS layer etc. but it seems audio driver area in OpenSolaris is kind of misty at this point. http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/ Specifically, it's this project: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/238/ I don't know why there's no project in the regular opensolaris.org list. I know there was a proposal for one, but you'll need to contact the project team directly to find out what's going on. See the 1-pager in the above link. There does seem to be a mailing list: http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensound-discuss ... so, most likely, the project team just hasn't gotten around to un-hiding the project pages yet. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [driver-discuss] Sound Blaster Live! in ONNV
Darren J Moffat wrote: snip Could someone please point me to the project page or provide more info ? All I've been able externally that I could find is the ARC one pager: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2007/238/ I'd suggest contactin Margot Miller - she is listed as the submitter for the ARC case. What surprises me most is that there does not seem to be any project page at opensolaris.org (given the impact of this). In particular, I'd like to see design docs and actually try the bits to see if RFE 6539690 can be closed with PSARC/2007/238. v. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 09:00 -0400, James Carlson wrote: Kaiwai Gardiner writes: On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 23:57 -0700, UNIX admin wrote: But ultimately what is developed in OpenSolaris will end up in a payable product. Not necessarily. Features deemed fit for OpenSolaris might never make it into Solaris. There is already code out there that is running on OpenSolaris that didn't make it into Solaris, and might never make it. It's not a 1:1 process. Thats pretty stupid given how badly Solaris needs attention in all areas. Given the current state of Solaris 10 - can anyone blame those who still think that Solaris x86 is being treated as the red head step child of the family? No, it's not stupid. It's the difference between a source base and a distribution. Distributors get to choose what they want to include in their distribution from the given source base. It must be like that -- otherwise, all of the distributions would be identical, and that'd be a bit silly. Incorrect - Sun could go, hey, thats really good, we'll take the base from the opensource community, use the contacts we have with Microsoft, bundle Microsoft audio and video CODECs along with mp3/aac encoding - possibly even include a dvd player with it as well voila, value added and differentiated from the rest of the pack. That said, it's likely that many (and perhaps most) of the things in OpenSolaris will eventually be in some Sun Solaris release. Which things those are, and which release will have them, aren't really appropriate things to discuss here. They're business decisions. Instead, as those are commercial distributions you're talking about, you need to contact the distributor -- sun.com in this case, not opensolaris.org. In short, OpenSolaris != Sun. As for x86, I really have no idea what you're talking about. Not only does Sun sell and support these sorts of systems, but most of us (myself included) do our primary development on x86. I realize that's a bit of a works for me sort of argument, but I don't see that the linkage in your argument is as clear as you seem to think it is. Works does not equate to supported; Linux supports certain sound chips, but it doesn't mean that all the features or the features are properly supported. It runs on my laptop but features of the laptop aren't supported. There is a difference. Matthew ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris thinks that my standalone desktop is a
Kaiwai Gardiner writes: On Tue, 2007-08-07 at 23:57 -0700, UNIX admin wrote: But ultimately what is developed in OpenSolaris will end up in a payable product. Not necessarily. Features deemed fit for OpenSolaris might never make it into Solaris. There is already code out there that is running on OpenSolaris that didn't make it into Solaris, and might never make it. It's not a 1:1 process. Thats pretty stupid given how badly Solaris needs attention in all areas. Given the current state of Solaris 10 - can anyone blame those who still think that Solaris x86 is being treated as the red head step child of the family? No, it's not stupid. It's the difference between a source base and a distribution. Distributors get to choose what they want to include in their distribution from the given source base. It must be like that -- otherwise, all of the distributions would be identical, and that'd be a bit silly. That said, it's likely that many (and perhaps most) of the things in OpenSolaris will eventually be in some Sun Solaris release. Which things those are, and which release will have them, aren't really appropriate things to discuss here. They're business decisions. Instead, as those are commercial distributions you're talking about, you need to contact the distributor -- sun.com in this case, not opensolaris.org. In short, OpenSolaris != Sun. As for x86, I really have no idea what you're talking about. Not only does Sun sell and support these sorts of systems, but most of us (myself included) do our primary development on x86. I realize that's a bit of a works for me sort of argument, but I don't see that the linkage in your argument is as clear as you seem to think it is. -- James Carlson, Solaris Networking [EMAIL PROTECTED] Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084 MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Wed, 2007-08-08 at 16:45 +0100, Calum Benson wrote: On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 04:19 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote: I do wonder why we need to have a different GNOME desktop? Well, I know why we do it (i.e., JDS), but I'm not sure why we should. It only diverges us from the mainstream, and makes things different. Seems better to leverage the mainstream GNOME project to me, and be the same, the Ubuntu uses a stock GNOME desktop, AFAICT. It doesn't really, Ubuntu have a whole ream of local patches just like we do, and other distros like SuSE have a lot more. They arguably do a better job of getting theirs upstream, but they also have the advantage of being Just Another Linux. It often takes longer to get the GNOME community to buy into Solaris patches, particuarly if they also happen to change the way things work on Linux. Or some of the time the patches made are for components that are going to be completely re-written :) It confuses me that zfs has been out for about a year and a half and we don't see our desktop folks doing that type of simple integration. Being able to take snapshots, list information on zfs filesystems, or getting the status of a zpool, those are all things that should be available for the user. I agree, and we have had people working on ZFS desktop integration prototypes on and off over the past couple of years. But as always it's a question of resources and priorities, and as yet it just hasn't been made a high enough one for us to drive to completion. (There's nothing that says Sun has to do the work, of course.) Hmm, thats assuming one doesn't want to actually make Solaris a success either on the desktop or for the Sun Ray. Imagine, end user in 'very big corporation of america' deletes file, then is able to roll back with a click of a mouse - no interaction with the system admin needed. There are a heap of scenarios I could possibly rectum pluck where the benefits to Sun for 'customer selling points' would be alot higher than a sole individual. Mathew ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Mon, 2007-07-30 at 12:11 -0700, Edward McAuley wrote: Uh, let's see. Beautiful interface (as attractive as the Mac or Vista), intuitively laid out, ease of use, UNIX (like), open source...it's already here. You can download it or buy it. Suse 10.2 Please look at this latest version, it is stunning. The beautifully designed and intuitive layout of its desktop is very difficult to communicate until you spin it up and use it for a while. Everything they have is or will be available to us in Solaris GNOME soon enough. SuSE just tend to annoy people by developing it all themselves before turning it over to the open source community at large, so we always have to play catch-up with anything they do. (Personally I dislike some of it and find it a step backwards in usability terms-- especially the new control centre and the brick of a main menu-- and Apple have already been down the same path and realised they had to scale back most of the glitz because most people just turned it off after a while anyway. Hopefully the GNOME community will have learned from that experience...) Cheeri, Calum. -- CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer Sun Microsystems Ireland mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]GNOME Desktop Group http://ie.sun.com +353 1 819 9771 Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] File Events Notification API - PSARC/2007/027
Robert Milkowski wrote: Hello prakash, Thank you for information. I'll check with perf-discuss@ to see if there're any examples how to use it. I am trying to make this case public. The case material will have man page documentation on how to use these interfaces. I will provide more details and examples thru my blog later. When it comes to ARC cases - should it be better with all new ARC cases would be made public by default, and only if necessary one would not be public instead of trying to make one public every time. IIRC someone from Sun already has pointed that it should be the case (all new ARC cases should be public). Yes, I think so. The process is being streamlined now. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: 1) The new-boot architecture brought us into the modern age of booting. Which was great - but need I be negative, but what took so long? it took *that* long for Sun to realise their x86 booting royally sucked? This was one of the quicker project in Sun, I think it only was in development for about 6 months. It's not that it took them that long to realize the boot on x86 sucked, but it's been the first chance that it could be changed, given the state of some of the other Solaris integration. I tip my hat to the new boot team, this REALLY makes a difference on modern hardware. 2) Xorg replaced Xsun as the X server, and we have more support for video than we ever had. But the hickory Xsun still remains - pkgconfig not located in once place which causes all manner of problems when compiling applications which use pkgconfig for dependency checking. It needs to be moved completely to Xorg and the SPARC driver writers to be given a shock with a cattle prod. I can't speak for the sparc driver theropy you mention, but it sounds like a decent plan.;-) I'm not gonna comment on some of your stuff like RealPlayer, because complaining our player is not the same as windows is irrealevant, IMO, at least we have a player...for a long time we had to use a glue wrapper and run the SCO binary on Solaris. 5) NWAM - this will change the way folks use their laptops, the way they connect, and will elliminate much of the confusion in system configuration that prevents new folks from being able to use their systems more easily. There is nwam but doesn't even have the ability to come back and request the user when the password is wrong; in my case I changed my password on my router and ended up screwed because there was no way to flush the existing setting from nwam to force redetection and requesting for the password again. Again, first version, it's under development. The project was a fairly short one also, so the first cut is what it is. Give the developers some consideration, it's a tough problem to solve for the masses and keep all happy. I like JDS, but the bugs *need* to be fixed; take 2.18.x, it was shipped knowing full well the albumart plugin for rhythmbox crashed the application - for instance. No argument. One asks, if there is a relationship with Intel, why isn't there a 4965 driver yet for Solaris I'm not familiar with the 4965, but the 3945 wifi is under development with specs provided as is some of the Intel video (945/955/965). Intel is being a genuine partner, AFAIK, I see no reason to wonder about that relationship, they have already come through and have provided specs. which is no better than the 'screw you' relationship that AMD has with Sun and their refusal to play ball when it comes to working on ATI drivers. I don't have enough info to comment on that, but suffice to say that Sun is working to get the ATI specs for the video cards, and I believe they might have received some of the specs to date, but not certain. The executives can speak - but I want them to go out, purchase a laptop, without any help, and install Solaris without an assistance. Thats the benchmark that needs to be used. People can talk - heck, i can get up in front of customers and lie through my teeth, its not difficult. This has happened in Solaris engineering for a while, and it forced some of them to not just understand, but seek out help to get it installed and/or configured. I think they understand what needs to be done, and know the state things are in, but Rome wasn't built in a day. To that point, I do believe this things listed over the past couple years are significant improvements. The question is, do management *really* know how much resources *need* to be invested in Solaris - besides what the bean counters and a few x86 hating bigots scream from the cheap seats? I think they know better than someone like you does. They have been managing and running the Solaris development for quite some time, and while every Tom, Dick, and Harry always feels they can run Sun better than Sun, managing a company of 35,000 employees is not that easy. OpenSound for example - when is it being merged? Being worked as we type...Management has put resources into getting it putback. It will take more than a couple days to get it in though, and I think that's a good thing. We don't want to make it too easy for folks to put something back, otherwise we'll have every little un-needed piece of open source available. -- Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On Wed, 8 Aug 2007, Calum Benson wrote: On Wed, 2007-08-01 at 04:19 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote: I do wonder why we need to have a different GNOME desktop? Well, I know why we do it (i.e., JDS), but I'm not sure why we should. It only diverges us from the mainstream, and makes things different. Seems better to leverage the mainstream GNOME project to me, and be the same, the Ubuntu uses a stock GNOME desktop, AFAICT. It doesn't really, Ubuntu have a whole ream of local patches just like we do, and other distros like SuSE have a lot more. They arguably do a better job of getting theirs upstream, but they also have the advantage of being Just Another Linux. It often takes longer to get the GNOME community to buy into Solaris patches, particuarly if they also happen to change the way things work on Linux. Actually this is one of our advantages, IMO, that we're not just another Linux distribution. We're a Solaris/OpenSolaris distribution and that in itself needs to carry it's own clout. It confuses me that zfs has been out for about a year and a half and we don't see our desktop folks doing that type of simple integration. Being able to take snapshots, list information on zfs filesystems, or getting the status of a zpool, those are all things that should be available for the user. I agree, and we have had people working on ZFS desktop integration prototypes on and off over the past couple of years. But as always it's a question of resources and priorities, and as yet it just hasn't been made a high enough one for us to drive to completion. (There's nothing that says Sun has to do the work, of course.) Well, to give them credit, the zfs filesystem is not your average problem to solve, Jeff Bonwick went out on a limb and tried to design and build the worlds best filesystem. It will mature over time, but there's a lot of interest, and I consider this to be the best thing that has gone back to Solaris/OpenSolaris since S10. Remeber that zfs went into S10u2. The only thing I would have done different given the limited resources in engineering, would have been to license under the BSD 3 clause so that anyone, any system, could have taken the code to incorporate into their system, even Linux. It seems that will happen if Sun does GPL2 and/or GPL3 the OpenSolaris sources, and I don't know if they will do that, just that they have mentioned that in the press. -- Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
