Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
> well only issues that are not covered under some > other mailist and > herefore the offending party needs to be advised they > have committed an > offense. "An offense"? What is this, a prison camp? Is there an offense code, pardon, spec, too? So much for friendly community. This whole "policing" opensolaris: discuss is getting out of hand. Really. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best option for my home file server?
> > For example, RAID5 MUST have at least three disks, > > RAIDZ can work with only two. > > > > All disks in a RAID5 config MUST be the same size, > > RAIDZ will take any size disks, although it will > warn > > about it, it will work. ... > He was simply trying to decide how to allocate his > disk space. From the user's perspective, RAIDz and > RAID5 operate the same way. The end. Apparently you did not read what I wrote above. They are NOT the same, not even "from the user's perspective", because storage considerations for RAID5 and RAIDZ are DIFFERENT. If you treat RAIDZ as a RAID5 equivalent, you may seriously misconfigure your storage. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv70 installer comments and issues
Hi Bill, Queries about the new installer are best answered at caiman-discuss mailing list which is the list for new installer related discussions. Some of the points below have already been raised on that list and responded to. You may want to look at the archives before posting the query. Couple of points below. On 8/20/07, William D Waddington <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > The new SNV 70 GUI installer looks nice and moves right along. But. I can't > find the "advanced options" button that lets me decide how to slice my > solaris partition. And the minimum size of 8G is a pain. I'm installing > multiple (throw-away) images under VMWare on a ThinkPad T61 and don't have > drive space to burn :( For that matter, even 8G gets flagged as too small > until i touch the size by lowering it to 7.9 and raising back to 8g, then > it's big enough... > One of the threads on caiman-discuss mentioned about a rounding error that is being fixed in B70b. Under VMware, you can create disks as growable instead of fixed size. With this the disks takes up 8G of space only when you start consuming space. This is the first build where the new installer is integrated into SX. I am sure the feature to allow users to layout the disks is in the pipeline. But distro creators might not have expected so many people asking for it in the first build itself where it got integrated :) regards Shiv ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] [SVOSUG] Desktop Update - Thurs. August 23rd SCA03 7:30pm
It's that time of month for the SVOSUG meeting again, and we have something a little different than our normal type meetings, and as of recent I've been getting requests to show compiz at the user group meeting and/or show it running on Solaris/OpenSolaris. This month we'll be doing an presentation on the Desktop, where have we come from, what we have, and where will we go. To help in presenting that will be Alan Coopersmith (OGB) and Stuart Kreitman from the X team, with myself to possibly do some fill-in and/or show my laptop which is running build 70 with compiz. I will also show a brief demo of the Network Auto-Magic in action, hopefully we'll have active wifi as we have had. When: Thursday, Augutst 23, 2007 Where: Sun's Santa Clara Campus Auditorium (SCA03 upstairs) What: Desktop Update Time: 7:30pm-10:00pm Sun provided PDF: Map: http://blogs.sun.com/roller/resources/aland/scasj_dirmap.pdf Google Maps: http://maps.google.com/maps?f=q&hl=en&q=4030+George+Sellon+Circle,+Santa+Clara,+CA+95054&ie=UTF8&z=16&om=1&iwloc=addr Call-in Info Toll Free: 866-545-5227 Intnl/pay: 865-673-6950 Conference: 809-64-14 Hope to see you there! -- Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] one user logined with different toos get different $PATH value, why?
one user login into solaris, when using SecureCRT with ssh, the $PATH=/opt/SUNWspro/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/sbin:/usr/sfw/bin:/usr/ccs/bin. but when using xmanager , the $PATH=/opt/SUNWspro/bin:/usr/bin:/usr/openwin/bin:/usr/ucb:/usr/sbin:/usr/sfw/bin:/usr/ccs/bin could you tell me the reason? thanks. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] sol-nv-b70-x86-dvd-iso zip files failed to
> those cement people are pretty savvy. They know that > construction never > goes out of style and it is the most stable > investment if done right. > > dc > Actually, these days it is more profitable importing (construction grade) sand from Canada. I was often told that you will do very well $$$-wise, if you (1) can secure a (sand) source in Canada, & (2) have a good buddy in China. Perhaps it is not too bad an idea to register our names in the szosug asap. Who knows, the relationship may become handy one of those unexpected days. :-) This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Using script (perl or korn) to determine opened ports (Method must wor
> Gurus;
>
> Is there a way, through the procfs of Solaris to
> determine whether the a
> process has opened listening network ports?
>
> Either using Perl or otherwise?
>
> I know of a very iterative approach but if we apply
> the approach to all
> the ports and the processes in a running system, it
> well...does not
> really perform.
>
> I was wondering whether there was a specific API call
> in the Solaris
> procfs which readily gives the opened network port
> (if the process has one)?
>
> The above methodology must work in all three Solaris
> version. 8, 9 and 10.
>
> This implies no dtrace and no special pfiles output
> parsing (the pfiles
> output in Solaris 10 easily provides the network
> port).
>
> Warmest Regards
> Steven Sim
>
>
>
>
>
> Fujitsu Asia Pte. Ltd.
> _
>
> This e-mail is confidential and may also be
> privileged. If you are not the intended recipient,
> please notify us immediately. You should not copy or
> use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to
> any other person.
>
> Opinions, conclusions and other information in this
> message that do not relate to the official business
> of my firm shall be understood as neither given nor
> endorsed by it.
>
>
> ___
> opensolaris-discuss mailing list
> opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
You can use "netstat -a" to determine what ports are open.
localhost.35878*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.printer *.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.57855*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.35845*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.52256*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.34781*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.59300*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.57594*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.41428*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.52035*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.62129*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.65284*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.63682*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.55571*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.53421*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.63762*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.39700*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.33613*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.60710*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.64089*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.37041*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
localhost.51288*.*0 0 49152 0 LISTEN
[b]localhost.44341[/b]*.*0 0 49152 0
[b]LISTEN[/b]
The example in bold says that something is listening to port 44341 on localhost.
You can use /usr/proc/bin/pfiles against your process to see which ports it has
open.
Here is a simple script:
for x in `ps -ef|awk '{print $2}'`; do echo $x; pfexec /usr/proc/bin/pfiles
$x|grep sockname; done
Output looks like this:
590
644
4309
sockname: AF_UNIX
4106
596
634
sockname: AF_UNIX
1502
728
sockname: AF_INET 0.0.0.0 port: 631
3528
3521
sockname: AF_UNIX
sockname: AF_UNIX
sockname: AF_UNIX
sockname: AF_INET 127.0.0.1 port: 34781
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Using script (perl or korn) to determine opened ports (Method must work in Solaris 8, 9 and 10)
Steven Sim wrote: > Gurus; > > Is there a way, through the procfs of Solaris to determine whether the a > process has opened listening network ports? > > Either using Perl or otherwise? > > I know of a very iterative approach but if we apply the approach to all > the ports and the processes in a running system, it well...does not > really perform. > > I was wondering whether there was a specific API call in the Solaris > procfs which readily gives the opened network port (if the process has one)? > > The above methodology must work in all three Solaris version. 8, 9 and 10. > > What about OpenSolaris? Ian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Fonts looking bad vs Windows?
No offense taken, I just feel generally bad pestering the Solaris developers. On topic: here is a closeup of Vista, Mac and Ubuntu fonts. It would be interesting to see Solaris fonts too? And maybe mail the blogger? http://blogs.zdnet.com/Ou/?p=682 -- The ZDNet writer didn't seem aware that the font technology is in place for Solaris, Ubuntu, or any UNIX-compatible OS to render as well as the Microsoft Windows counterpart. Mac OS X can render things better on LCD screens - but it is not set up by default in most cases. There is also the mentioned issue between browsers and desktop publishing with "web fonts" and such... ~ Ken Mays Be a better Globetrotter. Get better travel answers from someone who knows. Yahoo! Answers - Check it out. http://answers.yahoo.com/dir/?link=list&sid=396545469 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best option for my home file server?
> > Either way you can create a > > RAID5/raidz with the drives and use excess space > as > > non-redundant storage. So pick your poison! > > RAIDZ is NOT RAID5. The two are almost radically > different. > > For example, RAID5 MUST have at least three disks, > RAIDZ can work with only two. > > All disks in a RAID5 config MUST be the same size, > RAIDZ will take any size disks, although it will warn > about it, it will work. > > RAID5 suffers from a write hole which can happen if a > power outage occurs, RAIDZ has no such weakness. > > RAID5 must read the data in before the data is > written out to recalculate the parity - partial > writes KILL RAID5 write performance, RAIDZ always > does full stripe width writes because stripes are > dynamic. > > Point: do not be too quick to use RAID5 and RAIDZ > interchangeably - similarities are only superficial, > just like apples and pears are not the same fruit. You could have just linked the docs if you want to put on a ZFS clinic :) He was simply trying to decide how to allocate his disk space. From the user's perspective, RAIDz and RAID5 operate the same way. The end. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
On 8/20/07, Dave Miner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > You can have the discussion here if that's what floats your boat, but > you can also be certain that most of the people you'd like to have the > discussion with will *not* be participating in it because they've got > better things to do than wade through the general morass of other > mis-directed or otherwise pointless discussions which occur here, so > you're just barely beyond talking to yourself in terms of effecting > change. If you want to have a discussion about installation, then > you'll do a lot better to have it on install-discuss (or caiman-discuss, > if it's specific to the behavior of the new installer). Ellows, Just my two cents in this whole "what to discuss where" thread which i see re-occuring 3 times every week (and it gets tiresome to be honest). Someone put a wonderfull metaphore last week "opensolaris-discuss is like a square where you can meet and have a talk", something like that. And i agree with this. This means, in my opinion, that anyone should be able to shout something which might interest someone else reading this list, with the restriction that it's opensolaris related. Then, when you want to discuss something in depth which might not interest everybody but a selective group, in real life (yes it exists) you'd go to a pub, to a club house, to someone's home, whatever. In this case you'd go to a specific mailing list handling the matter you want to discuss. In short: opensolaris-discuss should be used and accepted for any input regarding opensolaris, for specific or in depth discussions you may want to and should be able to redirect users NICELY and POLITELY to an appropiate list without making them feel unwanted. Seriously, this is getting silly. Patrick ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] OT: Coffee, was Re: SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
On 8/20/07, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On the other hand we can discuss how to make great coffee. That will > probably be on topic here. My company has a nice policy - tea/coffee/etc are free, provided you offer to make the rest of your team a drink if you get one for yourself. Sadly most of the folks in my team are tea drinkers. :-( -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (Joerg Schilling) wrote: > This is what mkisofs does and it may be that a lot of other software works > in a similar way. > > It is good practice to add hsfs for compatibility and the current mkisofs > version even supports to archive files up to 8 TB while it can only support > files up to 20 GB on UDF. Sorry for the type, this should be 200 GB. 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] sol-nv-b70-x86-dvd-iso zip files failed to
"W. Wayne Liauh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What I meant is that the wildcard feature, which would save me 3.5 GB of HD > space, is very difficult to find. > > BTW, not just Dennis, but even my neighbor, who runs a cement business, is > telling me to use cdrecord. :-) The ratio between what is documented and what is implemented for a typical application (even a Sun application) ia ~ 80%. For my programs I try to document everything and I am sure that I am close to 100%. One reason why I usually not help immediately when people cry for help is that I am constantly trying to make the documentation better. This is only possible if I am able to understand why people have problems with the documentation. If you have an idea how to make the documentation better, you are of course welcome! 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] snv_70 odd behavior
Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Lars Tunkrans wrote: > > > The automount by HAL and rmmount did not mount the UDF filesystem > > > > All it did was mounting a HSFS where a little text file " readme.txt" > > with > > the following message appeared. > > > > "This disc contains a "UDF" file system and requires an operating system > > > > that supports the ISO-13346 "UDF" file system specification." > > I have a WinXP CD/DVD recording package that insists on putting both a > UDF & HSFS filesystem on the disk when you select UDF as the required > format, which makes reading them on Solaris a right pain. Is this some > sort of a standard, or is the software vendor trying to be 'helpful' by > including the HSFS filesystem? This is what mkisofs does and it may be that a lot of other software works in a similar way. It is good practice to add hsfs for compatibility and the current mkisofs version even supports to archive files up to 8 TB while it can only support files up to 20 GB on UDF. 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] sol-nv-b70-x86-dvd-iso zip files failed to
> What I meant is that the wildcard feature, which would save me 3.5 GB of HD > space, is very difficult to find. > > BTW, not just Dennis, but even my neighbor, who runs a cement business, is > telling me to use cdrecord. :-) > those cement people are pretty savvy. They know that construction never goes out of style and it is the most stable investment if done right. dc ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Gathering support to replace the current DHCP
Greg Potts wrote: >> Allen Wittenauer wrote: ... >>> As a sidenote, while the Solaris DHCP server >> back-end is supposed to >>> be pluggable, example code was (and probably still >> is) non-existent >>> unless you grovel through the (Open)Solaris >> codebase. When I last >>> asked Dave Miner about it a few years ago, he said >> he didn't know of >>> anyone that actually implemented one either >>> >> The Netra HA suite actually does, though I may not have known it at >> the time you asked (which I don't recall, to be honest ;-) >> >> I'm pretty sure, though, that I would have pointed anyone who asked >> at the DHCP Service Developer's Guide on docs.sun.com, which does >> have some rudimentary examples and a pointer to download the ASCII >> files code (a setup which is somewhat obsolete now that we've got >> OpenSolaris). >> >> Dave ___ >> opensolaris-discuss mailing list >> opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > > The point is what's the point of an API that very few are willing to > use. Even with Sun's own attempts to market added value to the > existing net installation framework (namely N1OSP) they choose ISC > over the in house implementation, stating that there where > insurmountable issue that required ISC. > It's not an API that I would have expected to have a lot of use - maybe an implementation of LDAP as the store, or an ODBC database. Beyond that there weren't a lot of other reasons why it would have been necessary. As I recall with N1, that product had been mostly developed outside Sun on ISC prior to us acquiring it, so I wouldn't read too much into what it supported. The main issue they had with moving onto the Solaris server was support for multiple network prefixes on the same physical link, which is a surmountable problem were someone willing to invest in solving it. It's never been high enough on the networking priority list to get Sun engineers to work on. Overall, I don't really care which way we go forward, but from a Solaris product support perspective there needs to be a transition plan, and that's where previous Sun-internal initiatives have petered out. Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Java package name allocations
Peter Tribble wrote: > Is there a registry of java package names, to avoid name clashes? > > For example, in jkstat, can I just use org.opensolaris.jkstat? > > (And what's the difference between org.opensolaris and org.opensolaris.os?) > > It strikes me that there ought to be a central list of package names > so that we can avoid conflicts. (Using the project name as the last > component seems reasonable, as project names ought to be unique.) > The ARC's used to maintain a registry for Sun's portion of the namespace, but since the sac server's not responding today I don't know if it's still up-to-date. I don't know whether the OpenSolaris portion of the namespace is registered or managed in any way. Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
UNIX admin wrote: >> All matters relating to the new installer and layout have been and >> are discussed on the caiman-discuss list, mostly copied to the >> install-discuss list. >> >> I suggest people with issues take them to those lists rather than >> air them here. > > FYI, I've already (long before you wrote this response) started a > topic on the default FS layout on "install: discuss". > > In spite of that, I still don't see why such a topic should NOT be > discussed on opensolaris general discussion. It's about OpenSolaris, > and it concerns OpenSolaris. > You can have the discussion here if that's what floats your boat, but you can also be certain that most of the people you'd like to have the discussion with will *not* be participating in it because they've got better things to do than wade through the general morass of other mis-directed or otherwise pointless discussions which occur here, so you're just barely beyond talking to yourself in terms of effecting change. If you want to have a discussion about installation, then you'll do a lot better to have it on install-discuss (or caiman-discuss, if it's specific to the behavior of the new installer). Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] sol-nv-b70-x86-dvd-iso zip files failed to
What I meant is that the wildcard feature, which would save me 3.5 GB of HD space, is very difficult to find. BTW, not just Dennis, but even my neighbor, who runs a cement business, is telling me to use cdrecord. :-) This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
Lars Tunkrans wrote: > The automount by HAL and rmmount did not mount the UDF filesystem > > All it did was mounting a HSFS where a little text file " readme.txt" with > the following message appeared. > > "This disc contains a "UDF" file system and requires an operating system > > that supports the ISO-13346 "UDF" file system specification." I have a WinXP CD/DVD recording package that insists on putting both a UDF & HSFS filesystem on the disk when you select UDF as the required format, which makes reading them on Solaris a right pain. Is this some sort of a standard, or is the software vendor trying to be 'helpful' by including the HSFS filesystem? -- Alan Burlison -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> Why can't HAL simply cycle through the media, and mount ALL filesystems it > >> finds on it? > Generically, the 'cycle through' isn't that splendid an idea, especially > with multi-faced filesystems; a CD may contain: > > - an ElTorito boot image which is a FAT filesystem For OpenSolaris, this is no FAT filesystem as OpenSolaris uses a "no-emulation" boot. > - an ISO9660 filesystem that'll be recognized as HSFS > - an UDF filesystem that may or may not be recognized as UDFS > > Which one _do_ you want to mount ? Assuming no bugs in the fstyp backends, > "fstyp" on such a medium would say 'multiple matches'. > > Who sets the preference ? > > For readonly media, case can be made to simply "mount them all (to > different places". Is that what you mean ? A non-closed _writable_ UDF media is not expected to also have a ISO-9660 filesystem. If we find also ISO-9660 and Joliet, we may readonly mount ISO-9660 and Joliet. 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] Using script (perl or korn) to determine opened ports (Method must work in Solaris 8, 9 and 10)
On Tue, 21 Aug 2007, Steven Sim wrote: > Gurus; > > Is there a way, through the procfs of Solaris to determine whether the a > process has opened listening network ports? > > Either using Perl or otherwise? > > I know of a very iterative approach but if we apply the approach to all > the ports and the processes in a running system, it well...does not > really perform. > > I was wondering whether there was a specific API call in the Solaris > procfs which readily gives the opened network port (if the process has one)? > > The above methodology must work in all three Solaris version. 8, 9 and 10. > > This implies no dtrace and no special pfiles output parsing (the pfiles > output in Solaris 10 easily provides the network port). > > Warmest Regards > Steven Sim With those requirements in mind: - faster than 'iterative' - running on S8/S9/S10 you're nailed to lsof. May need occasional recompile, but then it works on S8+, and it's blindingly fast (because it doesn't try to do the sort of locking that procfs does). FrankH. > > > > > > Fujitsu Asia Pte. Ltd. > _ > > This e-mail is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the > intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not copy or use > it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. > > Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not > relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither > given nor endorsed by it. > > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- No good can come from selling your freedom, not for all the gold in the world, for the value of this heavenly gift far exceeds that of any fortune on earth. -- ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Using script (perl or korn) to determine opened ports (Method must work in Solaris 8, 9 and 10)
Gurus; Is there a way, through the procfs of Solaris to determine whether the a process has opened listening network ports? Either using Perl or otherwise? I know of a very iterative approach but if we apply the approach to all the ports and the processes in a running system, it well...does not really perform. I was wondering whether there was a specific API call in the Solaris procfs which readily gives the opened network port (if the process has one)? The above methodology must work in all three Solaris version. 8, 9 and 10. This implies no dtrace and no special pfiles output parsing (the pfiles output in Solaris 10 easily provides the network port). Warmest Regards Steven Sim Fujitsu Asia Pte. Ltd. _ This e-mail is confidential and may also be privileged. If you are not the intended recipient, please notify us immediately. You should not copy or use it for any purpose, nor disclose its contents to any other person. Opinions, conclusions and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of my firm shall be understood as neither given nor endorsed by it. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >>> Some DVDs contain two filesystems [1], hence >>> mountable as either hsfs >>> and udfs. fstyp returns the first match, and that's >>> what HAL will use. >>> One fix would be to treat these in the same fashion >>> we treat hybrid >>> data+audio media, i.e. pop a dialog asking for user's >>> preference. A >>> simpler but less generic fix would be in HAL: if >>> libfstyp returns hsfs, >>> call it again to check for udfs [2]. If anyone is >>> willing to contribute >>> code [3], I'll happily sponsor. >> >> Why can't HAL simply cycle through the media, and mount ALL filesystems it >> finds on it? >> > > Unfortunately, there's some media which hsfs recognizes but then fails to > mount. Do you have example images of these, and are bug reports open for those ? Generically, the 'cycle through' isn't that splendid an idea, especially with multi-faced filesystems; a CD may contain: - an ElTorito boot image which is a FAT filesystem - an ISO9660 filesystem that'll be recognized as HSFS - an UDF filesystem that may or may not be recognized as UDFS Which one _do_ you want to mount ? Assuming no bugs in the fstyp backends, "fstyp" on such a medium would say 'multiple matches'. Who sets the preference ? For readonly media, case can be made to simply "mount them all (to different places". Is that what you mean ? FrankH. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Some DVDs contain two filesystems [1], hence > > mountable as either hsfs > > and udfs. fstyp returns the first match, and that's > > what HAL will use. > > One fix would be to treat these in the same fashion > > we treat hybrid > > data+audio media, i.e. pop a dialog asking for user's > > preference. A > > simpler but less generic fix would be in HAL: if > > libfstyp returns hsfs, > > call it again to check for udfs [2]. If anyone is > > willing to contribute > > code [3], I'll happily sponsor. > > Why can't HAL simply cycle through the media, and mount ALL filesystems it > finds on it? This looks like a really good idea! In our case, HAL would need to mount: - ISO-9660 (with Rock Ridge if present) - Joliet - UDF as there could be three different directory trees on the medium. The question would be how to handle the recognition of Joliet which is not an own filesystem type. 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] snv_70 odd behavior
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> >> Some DVDs contain two filesystems [1], hence
> >> mountable as either hsfs
> >> and udfs. fstyp returns the first match, and that's
> >> what HAL will use.
> >> One fix would be to treat these in the same fashion
> >> we treat hybrid
> >> data+audio media, i.e. pop a dialog asking for user's
> >> preference. A
> >> simpler but less generic fix would be in HAL: if
> >> libfstyp returns hsfs,
> >> call it again to check for udfs [2]. If anyone is
> >> willing to contribute
> >> code [3], I'll happily sponsor.
> >
> >Why can't HAL simply cycle through the media, and mount ALL filesystems it
> >finds on it?
> >
>
> Unfortunately, there's some media which hsfs recognizes but then fails to
> mount.
If you have such a medium, just send the first 1000 sectors of such a medium.
You should also have kernel messages and you could send the output of:
dtrace -n 'sdt:hsfs:: { trace(arg0); trace(arg1); trace(arg2); trace(arg3)}'
I asked you to do so on May 25th already..
Are you interested in a solution for your problem?
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] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
> On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, UNIX admin wrote: > >>> I suggest people with issues take them to those lists >>> rather than air them here. >> >> Super. So: >> >> - this is not a Solaris helpdesk right. >> >> - Solaris 10 is not to be discussed here right. >> >> - issues with OpenSolaris are not to be discussed here well only issues that are not covered under some other mailist and therefore the offending party needs to be advised they have committed an offense. >> >> What IS to be discussed on openSolaris-discuss then? > > Discussions on what (not) to discuss seem always welcome. > That's why the list is -discuss. That's what it is about :) I think we should discuss VMware Workstation 6.0.0 and the fact that Solaris 10 is fully supported with it now. The question that comes to mind is can we expect that snv_70b ( when it gets released on Thursday? ) will also run smoothly within VMware. If so .. then I'll just be as happy as a lark because I can create and destroy things, brik like crazy, mess with code etc etc . And I will always have a machine snapshot to roll back on. On the other hand we can discuss how to make great coffee. That will probably be on topic here. Dennis ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
>> Some DVDs contain two filesystems [1], hence >> mountable as either hsfs >> and udfs. fstyp returns the first match, and that's >> what HAL will use. >> One fix would be to treat these in the same fashion >> we treat hybrid >> data+audio media, i.e. pop a dialog asking for user's >> preference. A >> simpler but less generic fix would be in HAL: if >> libfstyp returns hsfs, >> call it again to check for udfs [2]. If anyone is >> willing to contribute >> code [3], I'll happily sponsor. > >Why can't HAL simply cycle through the media, and mount ALL filesystems it >finds on it? > Unfortunately, there's some media which hsfs recognizes but then fails to mount. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] snv70 installer comments and issues
The new SNV 70 GUI installer looks nice and moves right along. But. I can't find the "advanced options" button that lets me decide how to slice my solaris partition. And the minimum size of 8G is a pain. I'm installing multiple (throw-away) images under VMWare on a ThinkPad T61 and don't have drive space to burn :( For that matter, even 8G gets flagged as too small until i touch the size by lowering it to 7.9 and raising back to 8g, then it's big enough... Worse, if just go w/the default layout, which isn't _too_ bad, it fails immediately with "The entry "my_user_name" was not found in the /etc/passwd table". If I run it again and leave out the user entry, it fails w/a simple "Could not create install profile". Rats. The above is w/the Developer Edition grub selection. I also tried the vanilla Solaris option in hopes of getting the old installer. I did get the old installer (I think) but it is currently hung with the occasional "/sbin/install-ui-start: fork failed - too many processes". Grrr. SNV 64a installed OK on this laptop, in VMWare and natively. 67 and 69 installed OK in VMWare.I was hoping to run 70 for a while to get around a smeared font problem in gnome-desktop in 67 and 69. I hesitate to report any of this as bugs since I may (again) be overlooking something. I see others don't like the fixed slice thing. Anyone else seeing fatal install regressions? Bill This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
> Some DVDs contain two filesystems [1], hence > mountable as either hsfs > and udfs. fstyp returns the first match, and that's > what HAL will use. > One fix would be to treat these in the same fashion > we treat hybrid > data+audio media, i.e. pop a dialog asking for user's > preference. A > simpler but less generic fix would be in HAL: if > libfstyp returns hsfs, > call it again to check for udfs [2]. If anyone is > willing to contribute > code [3], I'll happily sponsor. Why can't HAL simply cycle through the media, and mount ALL filesystems it finds on it? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
> if I click on Display I get nothing but an hour glass > and then ... nothing. > > I get a core file : > > $ file core > core: ELF 32-bit LSB core file 80386 Version 1, from > 'gnome_segv2' mdb core ::status $c $q This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best option for my home file server?
> Either way you can create a > RAID5/raidz with the drives and use excess space as > non-redundant storage. So pick your poison! RAIDZ is NOT RAID5. The two are almost radically different. For example, RAID5 MUST have at least three disks, RAIDZ can work with only two. All disks in a RAID5 config MUST be the same size, RAIDZ will take any size disks, although it will warn about it, it will work. RAID5 suffers from a write hole which can happen if a power outage occurs, RAIDZ has no such weakness. RAID5 must read the data in before the data is written out to recalculate the checksum - partial writes KILL RAID5 write performance, RAIDZ always does full stripe width writes because stripes are dynamic. Point: do not be too quick to use RAID5 and RAIDZ interchangeably - similarities are only superficial, just like apples and pears are not the same fruit. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Best option for my home file server?
> First, my situation. I have several disks of varying > sizes I would like to run as redundant storage ina > file server at home. Performance is not my number one > priority, largest capacity possible while allowing > for a single disk failure. Is there a soluton to my > problem? > > My understanding is as follows, JBOD does not protect > from a disk failure. > > Raidz can only be as big as your smallest disk. For > example if I had a 320gig with a 250gig and 200gig I > could only have 400gig of storage. With RAIDZ one can use disks of any size in any configuration -- since RAIDZ uses dynamic striping, the stripes aren't fixed anyway and therefore neither do disks have to be. I've tried it and it works. So, the answer for your particular case is ZFS with RAIDZ or RAIDZ2. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nevada b70. New graphic installer, no more partitionning option?
> Hello, > > I tried B70 (SXCE) this weekend and I noticed that > with the new graphic > installer it was not possible anymore to decide over > the partitioning (x Gb > in /, Y in /usr etc etc). > Will it come back in the future? (B71, B72?) Yes. I don't know when. Dave Miner would. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
On Mon, 20 Aug 2007, UNIX admin wrote: >> I suggest people with issues take them to those lists >> rather than air >> them here. > > Super. So: > > - this is not a Solaris helpdesk > > - Solaris 10 is not to be discussed here > > - issues with OpenSolaris are not to be discussed here > > What IS to be discussed on openSolaris-discuss then? Discussions on what (not) to discuss seem always welcome. That's why the list is -discuss. That's what it is about :) (couldn't resist) FrankH. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
> All matters relating to the new installer and layout > have been and are > discussed on the caiman-discuss list, mostly copied > to the > install-discuss list. > > I suggest people with issues take them to those lists > rather than air > them here. FYI, I've already (long before you wrote this response) started a topic on the default FS layout on "install: discuss". In spite of that, I still don't see why such a topic should NOT be discussed on opensolaris general discussion. It's about OpenSolaris, and it concerns OpenSolaris. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
> I suggest people with issues take them to those lists > rather than air > them here. Super. So: - this is not a Solaris helpdesk - Solaris 10 is not to be discussed here - issues with OpenSolaris are not to be discussed here What IS to be discussed on openSolaris-discuss then? This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
> Did you try the new installer in build 70? It just > changed > the default layout. No. I'm explicitly waiting for snv_71 to come out so that I can have a compressed ZFS root (snv_70 pukes on a ZFS compressed root, see bug # 6541114 http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6541114). This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Portable UPnP SDK : build success
Hi, Any updates on this? I have tried to compile and nothing (I dont have that much experience :-/).. maybe including it on the next build? Thanks! This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Portable UPnP SDK : build success
Hi, Any updates on this? I have tried to compile and nothing (I dont have that much experience :-/).. maybe including it on the next build? Thanks! This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: > On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 23:57 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > >> UNIX admin wrote: >> >>> I wonder what it would take to change that crazy "small root, the rest for >>> /export/home/" layout? >>> >> Did you try the new installer in build 70? It just changed >> the default layout. >> >> > > Nope, same thing, a live upgrade partition (why?! I don't even use it), > Those who know it, use it. > a 9.5gig / partition and the rest is /export/home/ - why not have a > 'customise' button and allow people to tweak it the way they want it. > > If you check the archives on the caiman-discuss list, you will see why these values were chosen. Don't forget this is just the first cut. Ian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Nevada b70. New graphic installer, no more partitionning option?
Daniel, Thanks for trying the new installer. If you choose the Solaris Developer Release install option you get the new installer, it has restricted ability over partitioning/slicing, and preservation. This feature will be part of the new installer and is planned for a future release, hopefully early 2008. To use the partitioning etc, you can still use the old installer, available under a different option from the install menu. cheerie... Matt Daniel Tourde wrote: > Hello, > > I tried B70 (SXCE) this weekend and I noticed that with the new graphic > installer it was not possible anymore to decide over the partitioning (x Gb > in /, Y in /usr etc etc). > Will it come back in the future? (B71, B72?) > > Daniel > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Where can I ask questions regarding OS/NET, please?
Stephen Lau writes: > Gueven Bay wrote: [...] > > My question is - maybe someone just can clear it here - : It must be > > possible to make a small installation of SXCE to compile on-src (I made > > nightly compilations based on fully installed SXCE already, but I want to > > minimize the installation now) . Which minimal set of packages should I > > choose for installation if my goal is then to compile the sources (with > > gcc)? [...] > Nope - nothing on the SXCE CD/DVD is legally redistributable. As for the other question, I think the real answer depends on how much your own time is worth. You'd be chasing a moving target in figuring this set of packages -- not just changes in the SXCE packaging over time but in the ON dependencies over time. It's hard to do, and you'll almost certainly end up hitting obscure problems that you'll have to diagnose and repair on your own -- because nobody else will have exactly the same configuration. If your time is worth nothing or nearly so, then go for it. Otherwise, I'd recommend just installing the whole thing and, for security, minimizing the service configuration rather than trying to scrape bits off of the rotating rust. -- 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] Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA?
Daniel Tourde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > This WE I tried to install Solaris 11 Nevada, beta 70 on a ASUS P5VD1-X based > PC with a 320GB IDE HD. > It did not went long, Solaris was unable to handle the HD... After some > thinking and some check on the net, I suppose it has to do with the 48bits > LBA issue (The 128 GB barrier). Back in the Solaris 6, 7, 8 days I had I did never have any such problems even on a very old (1999) P-III 550 MHz running Solaris 9. It would be extremely improbable that Solaris is the reason for your problems. 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] Nevada b70. New graphic installer, no more partitionning option?
I installed Neveda build 70 and it gives me the option to select partitioning. Thanks P.S.M.Swamiji Daniel Tourde wrote: >Hello, > >I tried B70 (SXCE) this weekend and I noticed that with the new graphic >installer it was not possible anymore to decide over the partitioning (x Gb >in /, Y in /usr etc etc). >Will it come back in the future? (B71, B72?) > > Daniel > > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Nevada b70. New graphic installer, no more partitionning option?
Hello, I tried B70 (SXCE) this weekend and I noticed that with the new graphic installer it was not possible anymore to decide over the partitioning (x Gb in /, Y in /usr etc etc). Will it come back in the future? (B71, B72?) Daniel -- ** Daniel TOURDEE-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] FOI, Swedish Defence Research AgencyTel : +46 (0)8-55 50 32 12 Defence & Security, Systems and Technology Fax : +46 (0)8-55 50 36 51 Department of Autonomous Systems Cellular : +46 (0)70-849 93 40 SE-164 90 Stockholm, Sweden ** ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > For me, only Solaris as host OS would be of interest > > > >> Does anyone have any experience on xen? thanks. > > > > Did someone use Xen and is it possible to run MS-WIN on case that > > the host platform supports Pacifica or Vanderbilt? > > Technically yes it is possible and I've seen it done. However there are > licensing issues (that are not appropriate for *any* @opensolaris.org > alias) depending on which version/edition of a windows operating system > you have. Fraunhofer Employees may install as many MS-WIN instances as possible, so this does not seem to be a problem for me. Do you know of a pointer to install instructions? 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] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
On Sun, 2007-08-19 at 23:57 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > UNIX admin wrote: > > I wonder what it would take to change that crazy "small root, the rest for > > /export/home/" layout? > > Did you try the new installer in build 70? It just changed > the default layout. > Nope, same thing, a live upgrade partition (why?! I don't even use it), a 9.5gig / partition and the rest is /export/home/ - why not have a 'customise' button and allow people to tweak it the way they want it. Matthew ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
Joerg Schilling wrote: > "W. Wayne Liauh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >>> It'd be great if we could run VMWare with Solaris as >>> the guest OS. >>> >> You mean with Solaris as a "host" OS? > > For me, only Solaris as host OS would be of interest > >> Does anyone have any experience on xen? thanks. > > Did someone use Xen and is it possible to run MS-WIN on case that > the host platform supports Pacifica or Vanderbilt? Technically yes it is possible and I've seen it done. However there are licensing issues (that are not appropriate for *any* @opensolaris.org alias) depending on which version/edition of a windows operating system you have. -- Darren J Moffat ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
"W. Wayne Liauh" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > It'd be great if we could run VMWare with Solaris as > > the guest OS. > > > > You mean with Solaris as a "host" OS? For me, only Solaris as host OS would be of interest > Does anyone have any experience on xen? thanks. Did someone use Xen and is it possible to run MS-WIN on case that the host platform supports Pacifica or Vanderbilt? 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] snv_70 odd behavior
Artem Kachitchkine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > # fstyp -v /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s2 | more > > hsfs > > Some DVDs contain two filesystems [1], hence mountable as either hsfs > and udfs. fstyp returns the first match, and that's what HAL will use. > One fix would be to treat these in the same fashion we treat hybrid > data+audio media, i.e. pop a dialog asking for user's preference. A > simpler but less generic fix would be in HAL: if libfstyp returns hsfs, > call it again to check for udfs [2]. If anyone is willing to contribute > code [3], I'll happily sponsor. As I did just mention, the second approach is not the best I would propose: - Add a menue to the GUI that allows to choose - Add a method to define a preference order in a /etc/default/* file - Make sure that the method works on servers with no GUI running. 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] snv_70 odd behavior
Lars Tunkrans <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dennis , I agree with you that SNV70 is not mounting a Vista UDFS > dvd correctly > > I did a clean Install of Snv_70 on a new disc ( a 10.000 rpm disc which > contributes > nicely to the speed of the system btw ) > > The automount by HAL and rmmount did not mount the UDF filesystem There was a similar bug reported in May from Casper Dik (6562403). Unfortunately Casper did never send the information I asked for, so the problem could not be investigated. > All it did was mounting a HSFS where a little text file " readme.txt" with > the following message appeared. > > "This disc contains a "UDF" file system and requires an operating system > > that supports the ISO-13346 "UDF" file system specification." If your problem is that the medium you mounted is incosistent, then you would complain at the manufacturer/publisher. The problem with CD/DVD/ media is that this media usually now contain 3 filesystems in 4 flavors: - ISO-9660 - ISO-9660 Rock Ridge extensions - Joliet - UDF If you ask a utility (like e.g. fstyp) whether a specific filesystem type is available, you will typically get positive replies for all filesystems! Media handling on Solaris is unfortunately based on asking this way and the first ask that results in a positive will be turned into a mount action. I just found that we did forget to enhance /usr/lib/fs/hsfs/fstyp to know about Joliet when Joliet support was added a year ago In any case, we will get into trouble! - The DVD manufacturers believe that there is a standard that requires UDF on a DVD medium. - There is no such "requirement" for other media types - Many people believe that UDF is a better choice than ISO-9660, but this is not correct from my experiences: - UDF limits single files to a max of ~ 200 GB - ISO-9660 limits single files to 8 TB This all will not create real problems in case that you manually mount the medium, but it will cause trouble if you auto-mount with any possible rule-set. > Only after I did the below command could I see the files on the UDF disc. > > # mount -F udfs -o ro /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s2 /mnt > > and even then fstyp(1M) reports that its a HSFS file system > > # fstyp -v /dev/dsk/c1t0d0s2 | more > hsfs > CD-ROM is in ISO 9660 format > System id: > Volume id: LRMCXFRE_EN_DVD > Volume set id: LRMCXFRE_EN_DVD > Publisher id: MICROSOFT CORPORATION > Data preparer id: MICROSOFT CORPORATION, ONE MICROSOFT WAY, REDMOND WA 98052, > (425) 882-8080 > Application id: CDIMAGE 2.52 (03/09/2004 TM) > Copyright File id: > Abstract File id: > Bibliographic File id: > Volume set size is 1 > Volume set sequence number is 1 > Logical block size is 2048 > Volume size is 1853755 > --- > Media format detection is obviously not working with UDF. Please repeat the text using "isoinfo -d". If isoinfo _also_ reports a Volume size of 33.6 GB, then this is a medium that has been created by a (intentionally???) buggy application. 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] Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA?
Hello, First of all. I am sorry if I asked this question to the wrong forum. I will send a mail to opensolaris-help as well. I am just a beginner on these forums... ;) > >This WE I tried to install Solaris 11 Nevada, beta 70 on a ASUS P5VD1-X > > based PC with a 320GB IDE HD. > >It did not went long, Solaris was unable to handle the HD... After some > >thinking and some check on the net, I suppose it has to do with the 48bits > >LBA issue (The 128 GB barrier). Back in the Solaris 6, 7, 8 days I had > >similar issues on a Dell machine with HDs > 8 GB. > >So now I wonder if I have problems with the BIOS of my motherboard or with > >Solaris. According to the ASUS website, the P5 serie support 48 bits LBA. > > So, here is my question: Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA? > > What problems are you seeing? Well, it gives me 3 errors. I do not have the wording in front of me but it seems that it cannot handle the whole HD (That's my understanding). I am on x86, I have one HD that I want to use at its maximum. Once I replied to all the questions from the installer, the installation procedure starts and then it stops almost at once, the system not being able to format (?) / handle (?) the HD. I tried b69 and b70 with the same unfortunate results. The installtion check 1.2 tool tells me that Solaris 'should' install without problems on my hardware. > Solaris handles larger disks just fine (many of us run systems with larger > and much larger disks). I have IDE, not SATA. > I did see a message just now that the new installer seems to have issues > with larger HDs. I tried the text version, the graphic version, b69 and b70 with the same outcome FreeBSD handles the whole HD without problems (apparently). Daniel -- ** Daniel TOURDEE-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] FOI, Swedish Defence Research AgencyTel : +46 (0)8-55 50 32 12 Defence & Security, Systems and Technology Fax : +46 (0)8-55 50 36 51 Department of Autonomous Systems Cellular : +46 (0)70-849 93 40 SE-164 90 Stockholm, Sweden ** ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_70 odd behavior
"Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Strangly .. basic applications fail to launch. > > For example, I wanted to see what happens when I insert a Microsoft Windows > Vista Business Edition DVD into my machine. I would expect that it would be > automatically mounted but I was wrong .. snv_70 mounted the DVD as a HSFS > filesystem which it is not. It is actually UDFS and there is a small readme > on the DVD to that effect. I attempted to read that README ... and .. nada > ..just a core file : This is something you would need to verify using "isoinfo -d" 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] Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA?
Daniel Tourde wrote: This would be better on opensolaris-help, CC'd. > Hello, > > This WE I tried to install Solaris 11 Nevada, beta 70 on a ASUS P5VD1-X based > PC with a 320GB IDE HD. > That shouldn't cause any problems. > It did not went long, Solaris was unable to handle the HD. In what way? Ian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA?
>Hello, > >This WE I tried to install Solaris 11 Nevada, beta 70 on a ASUS P5VD1-X based >PC with a 320GB IDE HD. >It did not went long, Solaris was unable to handle the HD... After some >thinking and some check on the net, I suppose it has to do with the 48bits >LBA issue (The 128 GB barrier). Back in the Solaris 6, 7, 8 days I had >similar issues on a Dell machine with HDs > 8 GB. >So now I wonder if I have problems with the BIOS of my motherboard or with >Solaris. According to the ASUS website, the P5 serie support 48 bits LBA. So, >here is my question: Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA? > What problems are you seeing? Solaris handles larger disks just fine (many of us run systems with larger and much larger disks). I did see a message just now that the new installer seems to have issues with larger HDs. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA?
Hello, This WE I tried to install Solaris 11 Nevada, beta 70 on a ASUS P5VD1-X based PC with a 320GB IDE HD. It did not went long, Solaris was unable to handle the HD... After some thinking and some check on the net, I suppose it has to do with the 48bits LBA issue (The 128 GB barrier). Back in the Solaris 6, 7, 8 days I had similar issues on a Dell machine with HDs > 8 GB. So now I wonder if I have problems with the BIOS of my motherboard or with Solaris. According to the ASUS website, the P5 serie support 48 bits LBA. So, here is my question: Does OpenSolaris support 48 bits LBA? Daniel -- ** Daniel TOURDEE-mail : [EMAIL PROTECTED] FOI, Swedish Defence Research AgencyTel : +46 (0)8-55 50 32 12 Defence & Security, Systems and Technology Fax : +46 (0)8-55 50 36 51 Department of Autonomous Systems Cellular : +46 (0)70-849 93 40 SE-164 90 Stockholm, Sweden ** ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
> > > Sorry, I forgot to check my filters, that should have been > caiman-discuss only. I actually filed a bug yesterday :) Patrick ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] what does "subgraph" mean?
Hi, folks: What does "subgraph" mean in the text: milestone=milestone Boot to the subgraph defined by the given milestone. Legitimate milestones are none, single-user, multi-user, multi-user-server, and all. We are going to translate the text. But I failed to find a official defination of a subgraph. Does it mean "subset of services"? Can anyone explain it in simple English? Thanks, Funix This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
Ian Collins wrote: > MC wrote: > >>> I wonder what it would take to change that crazy "small root, the rest for >>> /export/home/" layout? >>> >>> I mean, what good is a "default" when it has to be modified as a rule and >>> not an exception? >>> >>> >> I think we need to find that "how should the file system layout be >> designed?" thread and stick you in it :) >> >> I never did see a final report on what+why the default zfs root setup will >> look the way it will look. >> >> >> > All matters relating to the new installer and layout have been and are > discussed on the caiman-discuss list, mostly copied to the > install-discuss list. > > Sorry, I forgot to check my filters, that should have been caiman-discuss only. Ian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
MC wrote: >> I wonder what it would take to change that crazy "small root, the rest for >> /export/home/" layout? >> >> I mean, what good is a "default" when it has to be modified as a rule and >> not an exception? >> > > I think we need to find that "how should the file system layout be designed?" > thread and stick you in it :) > > I never did see a final report on what+why the default zfs root setup will > look the way it will look. > > All matters relating to the new installer and layout have been and are discussed on the caiman-discuss list, mostly copied to the install-discuss list. I suggest people with issues take them to those lists rather than air them here. Ian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
> I wonder what it would take to change that crazy "small root, the rest for > /export/home/" layout? > > I mean, what good is a "default" when it has to be modified as a rule and not > an exception? I think we need to find that "how should the file system layout be designed?" thread and stick you in it :) I never did see a final report on what+why the default zfs root setup will look the way it will look. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
> I beg to differ, as a Sun > customer we are going commodity all the way. We > haven't bought an Enterprise system since the > 3800. Currently the majority of the Machines we are > deploying are x4200s and T2000s. I find it funny that you use T2000 and commodity hardware in the same sentence. T2000 is anything but commodity hardware, and a T2000 is certainly overpriced and not cheap - at $9,995.00 USD [store.sun.com] starting price and exotic CPU and hardware, it's anything but cheap or commodity. I've spent considerable time porting a C/C++ product and trying to tune it to the UltraSPARC T1 processor, and that thing is so exotic in comparison to the CPUs out there (more will follow, but just not yet), that one is mostly at a loss. That thing is anything but commodity hardware, in every way imaginable. This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE 70's installer and laying out file systems
On 8/20/07, Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Did you try the new installer in build 70? It just changed > the default layout. Yes, to the point it breaks on any big disk when you use an x86 platform. I tried a 200GB ATA disk, and it told me the '/' slice extended beyond the first 1024 cylinders of my HBA. So I was forced to use the old installer, which funny enough happely created a 200GB '/' partition, created just to test if it'd work. Big (read 400GB) SATA disks seem to be a problem on its own, neither the old or the new installer allow me to install a '/' partition of any size. Even when I create a '/' partition of 5120MB (which is 660 cylinders acording to the old installer) it tells me the '/' partition extends beyond the first 1024 cylinders. These error messages are just stupid in my opinion. Cause lo and behold my 'format' output after installing SXCE70 on a 200GB ata disk with a 15GB Part TagFlag Cylinders SizeBlocks 0 rootwm2323 - 4235 14.65GB(1913/0/0) 30732345 1 swapwu 3 - 10478.01GB(1045/0/0) 16787925 2 backupwm 0 - 30511 233.73GB(30512/0/0) 490175280 3varwm1048 - 23229.77GB(1275/0/0) 20482875 4 unassignedwm4236 - 8060 29.30GB(3825/0/0) 61448625 5 unassignedwm8061 - 30511 171.98GB(22451/0/0) 360675315 6 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 7 unassignedwm 00 (0/0/0) 0 8 bootwu 0 - 07.84MB(1/0/0) 16065 9 alternateswu 1 - 2 15.69MB(2/0/0) 32130 As you can see, the installer happely installs my root partition way beyond the 1024th cylinder.. Patrick / WickedWicky ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
> On 8/20/07, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> >> > >> >> I beg to differ, as a Sun customer we are going commodity all the way. >> We >> >> haven't bought an Enterprise system since the 3800. Currently the >> majority >> >> of the Machines we are deploying are x4200s and T2000s. We are also >> >> investigating VMWare ESX running Solaris in a big way. (I wonder if >> there >> >> is >> >> room for a vmware community group on opensolaris.org) >> >> >> > It'd be great if we could run VMWare with Solaris as the guest OS. >> > >> >> we can. Works fine ( thus far for me ) and is actually supported. >> > > Yes, it works already. > Choose "Solaris 10" as the guest OS while configuring it. But you may > go ahead with SXDE, it works. I'm running VMware Workstation 6.0.0 build 45731 here and it shows me that Solaris 10 is supported as a guess OS. I'll have SXDE in there asap also just to do some testing. For the most part I run pure Solaris 10 99.995% of the time and when I do boot Windows XP it may be so long between boots that the battery on the motherboard dies and I lose the BIOS config. That may change if I *have* to work with Vista and CATIA V5 and thus VMWare will become reasonable for me. That is a long and verbose way for me to explain that VMware 6.0.0 ( on Vista ) looks like a safe leap for me to make now that Solaris 10 is considered "supported". Dennis ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
