Re: [osol-discuss] Dev + OSS + Virtualbox = not good
Thanks. There was another reply to this thread (although I don't see it here) that says that later versions of wine work fine with boomer. I'll have to compile a more recent version of wine for myself. How is Boomer's hardware compatibility compared to OSS? Does it support the cmedia 8788 (oxygen) chipset? (Just in case I ever decide I want to switch from Gentoo to OpenSolaris) I know that with the 2009.06 livecd, it didn't recognize that sound card. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Mauro M. wrote: >> either install Xsun from >> SXCE on >> OS200yy.mm, or buy one of the officially Sun-Xorg >> supported cards, or >> one of the community supported ones (#0). >> > > What packages have to be installed on OpenSolaris (from SXCE or Solaris 10) > to make Xsun work with a Sun FB? Is there a guide? You'd want the SXCE ones - they're more cleanly separated from the rest of X than Solaris 10 ones. Writing a guide would be an excellent community contribution here. I would also love to hear from one of the passionate users if you can run Xsun from a Solaris 10 branded zone, if you exported the fb devices to it, once there's a build out there with that feature in. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Mauro M. wrote: If they do how can they have an interest into non disclosing information on old and no longer commercially exploited technology? That's their right to determine, not ours or yours. This is arguable. As a consumer I have the right to use the hardware I purchase in whatever way I see fit and without limitations. Moore's law has accelerated the aging of technology consumer products, however in real terms I would expect any goods I purchase to be usable for more than a decade. Aside from the fact that your first sentence (well, OK second) isn't true for a wide variety of cases (in all jurisdictions), you're hardware is still usable. You're asking for /UPGRADABLE/. Which is a completely different issue. Even still, there is a long history in all sorts of industries of equipment which has a built-in obsolescence. If a vendor decides to no longer support a product, he should be forced to disclose the information necessary for the consumers to continue to use their product, and any IP and licenses made void and unenforceable. I hope that this will be clarified by future legislation, and I am confident that in Europe this will happen sooner or later. There's a been quite a bit of discussion in the OpenSource community about "abandonware" in it's many forms - software, computer hardware, even copyrighted works. However, there hasn't been any real discussion in the Intellectual Property legal realm (in either the US or Europe) about codifying this into Copyright Law. Unfortunately, if anything, the trends have been mostly moving the other direction, towards giving more control to the IP owner, and less freedom to the public. So I wouldn't hold your breath for this to change anytime soon. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Dev + OSS + Virtualbox = not good
if you are using opensolaris dev there is no need to install OSS...project boomer was integrated in build 115 of opensolaris: http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+opensound/ On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 12:49, j wrote: > I'm very new to opensolaris. Right now I'm trying it in virtualbox. It > installs fine but I'm having trouble getting it to play nice with oss. > > I downloaded the oss solaris package from 4front's website and I tried > installing it on a VM that I had already updated to 'dev', but after > rebooting and selecting its entry in grub, the splash screen comes up for a > few seconds but then the VM reboots, every time. > > After that I had to boot into the original install boot environment (ZFS is > great :) ), and again tried installing OSS there, and it worked. Then I > once again upgraded to dev, had to remove and then install OSS again, and > bam! endless reboot cycle again. > > Is there something with the current Dev distribution that makes it > incompatible with OSS? > > (I need OSS because I want to try out wine in opensolaris) > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Mauro M. wrote: >>> If they do how can they have an interest into non >> disclosing information on old and no longer >> commercially exploited technology? >> >> That's their right to determine, not ours or yours. >> > > This is arguable. As a consumer I have the right to use the hardware I > purchase in whatever way I see fit and without limitations. >From a legal standpoint, it is not arguable under current laws. I understand you disagree with it, and I don't argue with that, but Sun has to follow the law, not consumer opinion. > Moore's law has accelerated the aging of technology consumer products, > however in real terms I would expect any goods I purchase to be usable for > more than a decade. No one has said that your hardware will be unusable or unsupported. It will remain usable and supported with the software it was sold with and in most cases, a number of newer versions of that software. Sun is just not promising to make all future software releases support that hardware - you got what you paid for, you're just not getting upgrades to improve that any more (whether free or sold). > If a vendor decides to no longer support a product, he should be forced to > disclose the information necessary for the consumers to continue to use their > product, and any IP and licenses made void and unenforceable. > I hope that this will be clarified by future legislation, and I am confident > that in Europe this will happen sooner or later. Sadly, I believe that if such legislation somehow managed to make it past all the lobbying of the technology & media companies, the most likely result would be a lot of products no longer being sold in Europe, or companies finding other loopholes such as shutting down all their European offices, and only selling via third party importers, so they wouldn't be subject to such laws. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Dev + OSS + Virtualbox = not good
I'm very new to opensolaris. Right now I'm trying it in virtualbox. It installs fine but I'm having trouble getting it to play nice with oss. I downloaded the oss solaris package from 4front's website and I tried installing it on a VM that I had already updated to 'dev', but after rebooting and selecting its entry in grub, the splash screen comes up for a few seconds but then the VM reboots, every time. After that I had to boot into the original install boot environment (ZFS is great :) ), and again tried installing OSS there, and it worked. Then I once again upgraded to dev, had to remove and then install OSS again, and bam! endless reboot cycle again. Is there something with the current Dev distribution that makes it incompatible with OSS? (I need OSS because I want to try out wine in opensolaris) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> either install Xsun from > SXCE on > OS200yy.mm, or buy one of the officially Sun-Xorg > supported cards, or > one of the community supported ones (#0). > What packages have to be installed on OpenSolaris (from SXCE or Solaris 10) to make Xsun work with a Sun FB? Is there a guide? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> > If they do how can they have an interest into non > disclosing information on old and no longer > commercially exploited technology? > > That's their right to determine, not ours or yours. > This is arguable. As a consumer I have the right to use the hardware I purchase in whatever way I see fit and without limitations. Moore's law has accelerated the aging of technology consumer products, however in real terms I would expect any goods I purchase to be usable for more than a decade. If a vendor decides to no longer support a product, he should be forced to disclose the information necessary for the consumers to continue to use their product, and any IP and licenses made void and unenforceable. I hope that this will be clarified by future legislation, and I am confident that in Europe this will happen sooner or later. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] USB Mouse Vanishing in snv_126
Francois Laagel wrote: Greetings folks, My most recent update to snv_126 has been a mixed blessing: it worked perfectly fine on my IA-32 ATI PCIe based box but still is up in the air wrt. my other AMD64 NVIDIA box. Case in point: USB HID mouse support. On that very same AMD64 box, snv_125 works like a charm but on on snv_126, /var/adm/messages issues scary warnings such as: Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 usba: [ID 912658 kern.info] USB 2.0 device (usb46d,c045) operating at low speed (USB 1.x) on USB 1.10 external hub: mo...@4, hid4 at bus address 4 Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] hid4 is /p...@0,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 (hid4) online Nov 4 23:56:42 kir3 genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 (hid4) removed I didn't go so far as to check if the USB subsystem changed between build 125 and 126 but something here smells a bit fishy and I've not seen anybody else reporting similar problems. I've seen the same problem on a Atom + ION system with b126. Starting X the first time after a reboot, the mouse doesn't work with the last kernel message for the mouse: Nov 3 15:52:43 goober11 genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci1849,a...@4/mo...@2 (hid3) removed Unplugging and reconnecting the USB connector in the same port brings the mouse back alive and keeps it alive until the next reboot. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] USB Mouse Vanishing in snv_126
I have had USB mice consistently drop out too, yet to investigate cause on my system. On my Ultra 20 I have not had any issues, only on Acer 3935 laptop. On Thu, Nov 5, 2009 at 10:23, Francois Laagel wrote: > Greetings folks, > > My most recent update to snv_126 has been a mixed blessing: it worked > perfectly fine on my IA-32 ATI PCIe based box but still is up in the air > wrt. my other AMD64 NVIDIA box. Case in point: USB HID mouse support. On > that very same AMD64 box, snv_125 works like a charm but on on snv_126, > /var/adm/messages issues scary warnings such as: > > Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 usba: [ID 912658 kern.info] USB 2.0 device > (usb46d,c045) operating at low speed (USB 1.x) on USB 1.10 external hub: > mo...@4, hid4 at bus address 4 > Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] hid4 is /p...@0 > ,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 > Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0 > ,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 (hid4) online > Nov 4 23:56:42 kir3 genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0 > ,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 (hid4) removed > > I didn't go so far as to check if the USB subsystem changed between build > 125 and 126 but something here smells a bit fishy and I've not seen anybody > else reporting similar problems. > > Anybody cares to comment on this? > > Best regards. > >Francois > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] configuring fcoe port on Open Solaris
Hi, To configure fcoe port on open solaris, there are two options. One is to manually specify pwwn and nwwn for the interface and other is to leave it for auto assignment by the server. In case i want to manually assign it, i am not having any clue what should be considered to assign the pwwn and nwwn name. Thanks, Niranjan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] fcoe port state offline and Current Speed: not established
Hi, One forum member Nigel Smith guided me to create fcoe ports. I was able to create the fcoe port without error, but after looking at fcoe port state is shown as "offline" and Current Speed: not established. bash-3.2# fcinfo hba-port -e HBA Port WWN: 201b211a5210 Port Mode: Initiator Port ID: 0 OS Device Name: /dev/cfg/c3 Manufacturer: Sun Microsystems, Inc. Model: FCoE Virtual FC HBA Firmware Version: N/A FCode/BIOS Version: N/A Serial Number: N/A Driver Name: SunFC FCoEI v20090729-1.00 Driver Version: 20090729-1.00 Type: unknown State: offline Supported Speeds: 1Gb 10Gb Current Speed: not established Node WWN: 101b211a5210 bash-3.2# bash-3.2# bash-3.2# ifconfig -a lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu 8232 index 1 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff00 bge0: flags=1004843 mtu 1500 index 2 inet 10.13.107.166 netmask fe00 broadcast 10.13.107.255 ether 0:10:18:4:97:63 ixgbe0: flags=1000842 mtu 2500 index 4 inet 0.0.0.0 netmask 0 ether 0:1b:21:1a:52:10 lo0: flags=2002000849 mtu 8252 index 1 inet6 ::1/128 bash-3.2# ixgbe0 is the link which is converted into fcoe port. Other side of the link is connected to a cisco nexus switch 5020 and it is showing link up at 10G. How to correct this problem ?? Any help is much appreacted. Thanks, Niranjan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] USB Mouse Vanishing in snv_126
Greetings folks, My most recent update to snv_126 has been a mixed blessing: it worked perfectly fine on my IA-32 ATI PCIe based box but still is up in the air wrt. my other AMD64 NVIDIA box. Case in point: USB HID mouse support. On that very same AMD64 box, snv_125 works like a charm but on on snv_126, /var/adm/messages issues scary warnings such as: Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 usba: [ID 912658 kern.info] USB 2.0 device (usb46d,c045) operating at low speed (USB 1.x) on USB 1.10 external hub: mo...@4, hid4 at bus address 4 Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] hid4 is /p...@0,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 Nov 4 23:56:38 kir3 genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 (hid4) online Nov 4 23:56:42 kir3 genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci1043,8...@10/h...@2/mo...@4 (hid4) removed I didn't go so far as to check if the USB subsystem changed between build 125 and 126 but something here smells a bit fishy and I've not seen anybody else reporting similar problems. Anybody cares to comment on this? Best regards. Francois -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Failed to config FCoE port with error, Failed to open the specified MAC link
Hi, I have a wierd problem while trying to configure FCoE on open solaris. I was looking for the probable soln on the net when i came across your post/reply to similar issue. For some reason i was not able to post into the forum today. Looks like it is down or something. So thought of posting it to you, in case you have an ans for it. Herer is the problem. I tried to configure fcoe port in a open sol in x86 platform. bash-3.2# fcadm create-fcoe-port ixgbe0 Error: Failed to open the specified MAC link If i look at if i have the driver loaded correctly, it seems ok to me bash-3.2# modinfo | grep fcoe 191 f7da7a88 4200 314 1 fcoe (FCoE Transport v20090729-1.01) bash-3.2# bash-3.2# pkginfo | grep -i fcoe system SUNWfcoeSun FCoE Transport Driver system SUNWfcoei Sun FCoE Initiator Driver system SUNWfcoet Sun FCoE COMSTAR Driver system SUNWfcoeu Sun FCoE Port Management Library bash-3.2# bash-3.2# ls -l /devices/fcoe* crw--- 1 root sys 314, 0 Nov 3 15:20 /devices/fcoe:admin /devices/fcoe: total 0 bash-3.2# bash-3.2# what /kernel/drv/amd64/fcoe /kernel/drv/amd64/fcoe: SunOS 5.11 snv_122 November 2008 bash-3.2# bash-3.2# dladm show-linkprop ixgbe0 LINK PROPERTYPERM VALUE DEFAULTPOSSIBLE ixgbe0 speed r- 1 1 -- ixgbe0 autopush-- -- -- -- ixgbe0 zonerw -- -- -- ixgbe0 duplex r- full full half,full ixgbe0 state r- up up up,down ixgbe0 mtu r- 2500 1500 2500 ixgbe0 maxbw rw -- -- -- ixgbe0 cpusrw -- -- -- ixgbe0 priorityrw high high low,medium,high ixgbe0 tagmode rw vlanonly vlanonly normal,vlanonly bash-3.2# These are some supporting info from the server. I have intel 10G ixgbe0 card. If you can through some info would really appreciate it. Thanks, Niranjan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
You can run Solaris apps in compat mode under OpenBSD ;-) zfs - no , but you can try real competitor from BSD world in this area - DragonflyBSD zones - chroot of course, not same, but no one says that OpenBSD is good for everything virtualization - no until developers correct their buggy craps (VirtualBox,Wine and so on) You want to use your Sun Blade but in same time you want to use Solaris. Then you have big problem because of this http://www.openbsd.org/lyrics.html#39 ' Blobs are vendor-compiled binary drivers without any source code. Hardware makers like them because they obscure the details of how to make their hardware work. They hide bugs and workarounds for bugs. Newer versions of blobs can weaken support for older hardware and motivate people to buy new hardware...' So you have option. Buy new hardware or use different OS where you have much more longer support for your HW. Funny that many people will choose first option. Some higher lines of Sun HW are very good because of many reasons when comparing to buggy i386/amd64 but if you need something like HA cluster or so then you must use Solaris/OpenSolaris, but if you want NFS server, web server and so on you can be very happy with OpenBSD or maybe another BSD. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Hi Jensen, A few things: 1. There was some work I did a few years ago in that we didn't need "SPARC-specific" video cards - you could use commercially available video cards that were compatible to Xorg and SPARC motherboards. 2. I submitted a bunch of RFEs to update Sun OpenGL to OpenGL 1.5-2.1 compliance. Sun has made a lot of updates to the Sun OpenGL API implementation so existing drivers have a nice OpenGL API. Maybe you'll see Sun OpenGL 3.2 one day - wishful thinking there. 3. As for those existing XVR drivers, I think you basically want XVR driver support and maintainance - right? As for Sun, I don't expect them to handle this role forever. It is almost like saying, we want Sun to provide recommended patch clusters for Solaris 2.5.1 since we still use it. Sometimes you'd hope a small tech company would pick up the slack and provide this service. But, like your driver support sometimes this does not happen - but if it does then you need people dedicated and having the financial resources to provide you that service. Or, make donations to them to inspire them to keep doing it. Sun can't do it all (maybe?)... so that is why community is important. Independent Solaris developers can step in and provide help where they can. Since Martin Bochnig has been working on legacy SPARC video drivers for awhile, you might want to add him as your primary community contact (or whatever team is formed from this result). I also can help you with old XVR cards up to the XVR-2500. I've used most of these graphic cards or maintained them... Ken Mays ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Virtual Machine migration
Muhammed Syyid wrote: Hi I'm looking to setup a few VM's with Centos 4.x/5.x. I had a couple of questions 1) From what I understand I can do this using both Xen or Zones, is that accurate? My understanding is both Xen and Zones would allow some form of Centos, however with Xen, you would be running the entire Linux kernel + userland, with Zones this would be via BrandZ and just the Centos userland on top of the Solaris kernel. 2) If I use either of the two, can I migrate between them later - convert to Xen / convert to Zones etc? You might be able to do so, it would probably be painful, and unsupported. 3) Also if I decide to migrate the images to another Linux machine (using Xen or KVM) , can that be done? any pointers on how? Both technologies allow migration to a different physical host. Each has its own caveats though. Entry point for Xen would be something like "xm migrate", and for Zones would be something like "zoneadm detach". 4) What would be preferable to use Xen or Zones? (I know Xen runs as a hypervisor vs Zones run as more of a client VM, don't know much else) Which technology you select really depends on what you want to do with your VMs. Zones are much more efficient than Xen, but wouldn't give you a full Centos/Linux VM. Xen would give you a more complete Centos/Linux VM but with some overhead. --joe ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] adp driver & the extra repository
Thanks, Marion. That was a very useful reply. I was unaware of that fact. The trick, as always when dealing with SCSI, being to find the appropriate cable ;) Francois -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:44 PM, Jensen Lee wrote: >> I doubt you'll find any vendor who'll promise the >> video card you buy today >> will be supported in new OS versions coming out ten >> years from now. > > True, but as a consumer I have a choice to buy the video card that has open > drivers, at least for x86. > -- FYI: The 3dlabs cards are not open-src supported on / by *any* OS, including Linux and BSD*. There were binary only Xorg ddx modules for Linux x86, but that was it. XIG offered some accellerated drivers for Solaris, but $$$ and closed. They did not use Xorg though, but their own proprietary server derived from 6.8.0 . Forget the wsfb "support" on BSD*, which does not actually deserve this name. Although you are right, that it is better than nothing. Ok: That's why I tried to get it working on Solaris. But it closely depends on wscons, which is not what we have as console driver on Solaris. Alan ported as much of wsfb to OpenSolaris, which has been possible. But this was not enough (without wscons) to get the 3dlabs cards into even only framebuffer Xorg gfx mode. So: Instead of complaining, either install Xsun from SXCE on OS200yy.mm, or buy one of the officially Sun-Xorg supported cards, or one of the community supported ones (#0). (#0) http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+fox/SPARC-Xorg -- %mab ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Virtual Machine migration
Hi I'm looking to setup a few VM's with Centos 4.x/5.x. I had a couple of questions 1) From what I understand I can do this using both Xen or Zones, is that accurate? 2) If I use either of the two, can I migrate between them later - convert to Xen / convert to Zones etc? 3) Also if I decide to migrate the images to another Linux machine (using Xen or KVM) , can that be done? any pointers on how? 4) What would be preferable to use Xen or Zones? (I know Xen runs as a hypervisor vs Zones run as more of a client VM, don't know much else) Thanks -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] ZFS Pools & Raid-Z Question
Hi I've currently got a RaidZ1 pool setup with 4x2tb disks and am planning on adding another 4x1.5tb disks to a second raidz1. I was thinking at some point to upgrade the 1.5tbs to 2tbs and as higher capacity disks show up swap those out in turn etc. I wanted to clarify a few things regarding that 1) From what I understand I can just swap out the 1.5tb's to 2tb's one by one and when they're all swapped I can expand the raidz to fill the entire capacity by issuing a command (not sure what command tho ;) ) - is that accurate? 2) What are the pro's and con's of both the 1.5tb and 2tb raidZ's being in the same or different pools. From what I understand if a separate pool I can take one offline without affecting the other (simply like current filesystem partitions etc). But if they're the same pool the files will be all over the two raidz's (or will this be block level?), basically from a high level view (migration, copying) would the two raidz's be distinguished if they're the same pool 3) Say somewhere down the line my storage needs are less then the 6TB provided by the 2TBx4 array and I want to disconnect the 1.5tbx4 array would that be possible if its the same pool? If so how? 4) Any other better solutions/patterns that I'm missing? Thanks a bunch -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic card
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:48 PM, Martin Bochnig wrote: > Replacing the server would currently be necessary for 2 basic reasons: I forgot the "only" 2 basic reasons. Of course the goal should be to get the changes stable and move them upstream, so that it won't longer be necessary, to replace anything. Then just offer the additional ddx modules in a secondary repo. But as I said: I still did not decide if we should go the BSD/Linux way and use libpciaccess, or the Sun way and interact with the /dev/fb kernel module in the same way, as all Sun-supported ddx modules do. The only opened one is ast. libpciaccess PRO: in theory [!] all pci bridges and boards supported CON: Slow, sluggish, instable to non-functional on SPARC-Solaris Sun-ddx-way derived from ast PRO: Quick and stable. CON: Hardware support limited by definition to those few graphics cards / chipsets, for which Sun wrote a /dev/fb kernel driver. Both approaches have their benefits and drawbacks. And getting at least one of the 2 half-way functioning costs a lot of time plus scratching heads, rather than ranting against Sun. Note: Alan Coopersmith and team made the ast module open-src extra for us (see yearlong earlier discussions on this alias). > * re-enabling SBus/UPA bus scanning support (Creator/Creator3D/Elite3D) > * using libpciaccess for pci scanning > %martin > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic card
> Xorg has no problem loading new drivers at runtime, without > recompiling. When using PCI vendor id to autoselect a driver, > you'll need an xorg.conf to tell Xorg which driver to load when > it's not in the builtin list. For SPARC, where /dev/fb mapping > is mainly used for selecting a fb driver, you can either provide > an xorg.conf or name the driver such that it matches the automatic > pattern matching for kernel driver name (reported by constype) to > Xorg driver name. > > Martin's previous work required replacing the X server because of > other changes which he hasn't requested integrating into the Xorg > server sources either at X.Org upstream or OpenSolaris. I don't > know how many of those are still relevant in the current Xorg server. > > -- > -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com > Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering Replacing the server would currently be necessary for 2 basic reasons: * re-enabling SBus/UPA bus scanning support (Creator/Creator3D/Elite3D) * using libpciaccess for pci scanning (I wasted 5 days on getting libpciaccess to function, the best I can currently follows below) SBus is stable and would be ready for going upstream any minute. libpciaccess will be covered in my next novel. <> %martin Xorg.0.log Description: Binary data ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> I doubt you'll find any vendor who'll promise the > video card you buy today > will be supported in new OS versions coming out ten > years from now. True, but as a consumer I have a choice to buy the video card that has open drivers, at least for x86. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic card
Richard L. Hamilton wrote: > Could Xorg be built to handle a particular list of loadable (separate) > community-supported > drivers, so that those could be added without replacing Xorg itself? That > wouldn't be perfect, > but it would be a lot better than nothing. Xorg has no problem loading new drivers at runtime, without recompiling. When using PCI vendor id to autoselect a driver, you'll need an xorg.conf to tell Xorg which driver to load when it's not in the builtin list. For SPARC, where /dev/fb mapping is mainly used for selecting a fb driver, you can either provide an xorg.conf or name the driver such that it matches the automatic pattern matching for kernel driver name (reported by constype) to Xorg driver name. Martin's previous work required replacing the X server because of other changes which he hasn't requested integrating into the Xorg server sources either at X.Org upstream or OpenSolaris. I don't know how many of those are still relevant in the current Xorg server. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> Frankly, it's a better idea to see if we (or some > other helpful soul) > can implement support for the various cards into Xorg > (which comes with > t's own challenges, but is a more sure bet). Thank you, we are beginning to be constructive here, better than a NO NO So what it the plan? Who is working on it? Is there any documentation? It would be a start at least to support plain desktop like they did on OpenBSD, can anyone port it into OpenSolaris to begin with? > The license restrictions are REDISTRIBUTION > restrictions. Not USE > restrictions. So, if you happen to have a > legally-obtained copy of Xsun > from [say] older Solaris 10 media, you can happily > install and run it > legally on your own workstation with OpenSol. We Excellent, so what would be the problem with: 1) package and configure OpenSolaris to make easy to install Xsun, this means have everything there ready, but the actual packages 2) publish a step by step guide to get the packages from Solaris 10 or SXCE, if necessary extract and repackage them with IPS, put them in a local private repository and install them into OpenSolaris? I do not think this would be a great deal of work for Sun to make a considerable amount of customers happy, and it would not break any law or contract. And next time you Sun signs a contract with its suppliers, I hope they will make sure they obtain the "integration" rights to protect their customers! How shortsighted is that! No wonder they're loosing money they did not have me checking their deals :-) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic card
> I've complained about the same issues before. I > understand the need to move onto Xorg and drop Xsun. > At the same time, I understand that Sun really isn't > in the SPARC workstation business anymore and is > hoping that people will buy a Intel PC from them for > running Solaris 10 or OpenSolaris on today. The > reality is that only folks who want a complete > support contact on the desktop hardware and OS will > bother, because it runs on a wide variety of PC > hardware. By doing this Sun has killed it's own > workstation market which is drying up and obviously > pissed off all of it's ISV's, vendors, and > integrators that marketed, developed, and resold > SPARC workstations. This even forced me to bite the > bullet and buy a used Ultra20 to use OpenSolaris. > Notice, used.. so no money went back to Sun! Hell, > I'll probably just keep the case and upgrade > everything inside of it! This is the future Sun has > chosen outside of servers and thin clients, limited > desktop/workstation > sales. Not to mention that Sun has killed the > ecosystem for SPARC by making the entry-point > extremely expensive.. $12,795 for a T5120 > (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/overview/prod > cts.jsp) and $14,795 for a M3000 > (http://www.sun.com/servers/midrange/m3000/index.xml). > > So you have to wonder what is the thinking here? Are > x64 server sales out-pacing SPARC for Sun? Hate to > burst the bubble of every Sun employee working on > Solaris/OpenSolaris with their x64 laptop.. NO! The > lion's share of server sales are SPARC, specifically > the T-Series CMT servers! So how does this make > sense? The sales are on SPARC, but the majority of > the development effort with OpenSolaris has been > focused on x64. So Sun has to decide if they want to > keep soo much of the development effort with > OpenSolaris focused on x64, which brings in little > profit or if they want to focus on the needs of their > paying customers. Hey, I'm not saying the stuff that > has been done on OpenSolaris doesn't matter, it's > great work. But focus has been lost on turning that > into profit and you have to wonder at the end of the > day how Oracle will look at this. They have committed > themselves to investing more into SPARC, because they > know that's where the money is. > > Sun/Oracle needs to bring back SPARC workstations and > rebuilding the ecosystem. > > Here's a fun test that shouldn't cost millions for > Sun to do today. How about get Nvidia or ATI to build > a PCI and PCI-E 3D video card that will work with > OpenSolaris Xorg on SPARC. Make it work on UltraSPARC > III/IIIi workstations and sell it for under $300. I'm > willing to bet that this would sell like crazy and > make tons of people happy. It would also let Sun see > that there is still a large SPARC workstation market > out there that they have been ignoring. This isn't > rocket science, look on Ebay and check out the number > of SPARC workstations being sold every week! And why? > Because businesses and professionals need a SPARC > workstation. While I sympathize, one thing you're overlooking is those systems for which the UPA slot(s) are the fastest; I'm in bad shape, because my only 66MHz slot (SB1K/SB2K) has a SAS controller, so all my other slots are either 33MHz PCI, or UPA. Another thing is that the XVR-100, although only 2D and not very fast, AFAIK should work with Xorg. Not available new anymore, but probably not too hard to find used. Last but not least, to use it as console, a SPARC frame buffer needs on-board fcode for OpenBoot; a PC frame buffer would typically have a video BIOS or some such support more suitable for a PC. Could Xorg be built to handle a particular list of loadable (separate) community-supported drivers, so that those could be added without replacing Xorg itself? That wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a lot better than nothing. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:28 PM, Martin Bochnig wrote: > OBP *is* open src since 2007. > And there have always been guides and books describing how to write > fcode drivers. > One I know costs 60$ and includes many sample fcode / forth sample > drivers, including basic graphics. > > > if you are that expert who will write us all this fancy stuff, then > you can already start. beyond that I could need some help with libpciaccess ... p.s. i don't work for Sun, nor ever did. So don't expect me to be biased. I understood parts of your complaints, at the beginning. > -- > %mab ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
OBP *is* open src since 2007. And there have always been guides and books describing how to write fcode drivers. One I know costs 60$ and includes many sample fcode / forth sample drivers, including basic graphics. if you are that expert who will write us all this fancy stuff, then you can already start. -- %mab On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 7:14 PM, Jensen Lee wrote: >> Sun's been selling ATI cards for SPARC workstations >> for a while, >> the XVR-100 (PCI) and XVR-300 (PCI-E) - both of which >> are supported >> under OpenSolaris Xorg - sales are not exciting in >> the least. > > Is this perhaps because they are 2D and too expensive for what they offer? > >> Developing new models would cost millions, especially >> if it meant >> having nvidia port their driver to a new platform and >> develop >> OBP-compatible firmware for their hardware. > > It cannot be that hard or expensive to develop an OPB firmware for an > existing chipset, again, give us the OBP source code and will do it for you > guys, free. > > >> > It would also let Sun see that there is still a >> large SPARC workstation market out there that they >> have been ignoring. > > What Sun fail to understand here is that it does not make sense to sell SPARC > servers without supporting workstations. Where do they think the application > development do take place? > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: >> Who said anything about software patents? Copyright >> & contract >> law are enforceable in Europe, but frankly, European >> law is irrelevant, >> since the contract is between two US-based companies, >> and is thus >> governed by US law, and would result in lawsuits in >> US court if we >> decided to break it. > > Do these companies Sun have contracts with even exist anymore? Yes - as you yourself posted just a few days ago, 3DLabs is still around, though under a new name. > If they do how can they have an interest into non disclosing information on > old and no longer commercially exploited technology? That's their right to determine, not ours or yours. > Do Sun care more about the apathic interest of a defunt organization or that > of hundreds of thousands of pissed-off professional customers? If Sun starts ignoring our contract obligations, not only do we risk lawsuits, we make it harder to get other vendors to be willing to do business with us in the future. I also don't see hundreds of thousands of pissed off customers - most professional customers for those workstations are very slow to upgrade since the apps they run take years to get certified for new OS releases. We get far more complaints about the workstations not running Solaris 8 or 9 than about them not being able to run a new Solaris release coming out in the future, and forcing them to stay on Solaris 10 for the remaining life of their workstation. >> As already noted, we cannot make the current Xsun >> available for >> separate download due to other license issues in Xsun >> itself. >> > > Please could you expand on the license issues you mention? Why would I be > denied to run on my own workstation with OpenSolaris a software component > that Sun provides for other Solaris versions if these are provided or sold > separately? Xsun is an "X" server and as such I could run it anywhere I like. I never said you were not allowed to run it. Sun is not allowed to make the current Xsun server available as a freely redistributable download, which is what's required for inclusion in OpenSolaris or the OpenSolaris IPS repository. The exact contract terms are confidential. > Will then Sun prohibit OpenSolaris users to run on OpenSolaris other > commercial close source applications? > I am afraid this does not make sense. Of course not, that makes no sense, and I never said anything of the sort. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> Sun's been selling ATI cards for SPARC workstations > for a while, > the XVR-100 (PCI) and XVR-300 (PCI-E) - both of which > are supported > under OpenSolaris Xorg - sales are not exciting in > the least. Is this perhaps because they are 2D and too expensive for what they offer? > Developing new models would cost millions, especially > if it meant > having nvidia port their driver to a new platform and > develop > OBP-compatible firmware for their hardware. It cannot be that hard or expensive to develop an OPB firmware for an existing chipset, again, give us the OBP source code and will do it for you guys, free. > > It would also let Sun see that there is still a > large SPARC workstation market out there that they > have been ignoring. What Sun fail to understand here is that it does not make sense to sell SPARC servers without supporting workstations. Where do they think the application development do take place? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] HA server
I'm thinking of creating a ZFS iscsi target for use as a storage respository for my virtual servers. This is going to be in a production environment so needs to be HA. I intend to have two (or more) targets that replicate pools between each other so if one fails, I can simply point the virtual server to use the remaining target. However I have noticed this server (S3-DSS-XL+) http://www.rackservers.com/Configurator.aspx?S=949 which has dual redundant disk controllers and as such would provide an added level of redundancy. The question is, would Solaris see one instance of the disks, or would it report each one twice, since they will be connected to both controllers at the same time. Anyone got any experience in this arena, is this at all possible ? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Mattieu Baptiste wrote: 3) obtain the chips documentation from 3D Labs and give that to the community. Like Sun already did for his own chips. It can be understood that 3D Labs don't want to provide documentation for advanced 3D features. But not publishing the basics to use the chip is utterly outrageous. The docs we received from Intense3D and later 3DLabs were: 1. Paper only. I never saw electronic copies of these docs and even the 3DLabs employees used paper copies. This could pose a distibution problem even if Creative wants to release them. 2. Not separated into basic and advanced functionality. If Creative is approached to release docs they will need to decide to release everything. Does "basics" mean the highly touted dumb frame buffer implementation for FreeBSD is sufficient? I had previously assumed people wanted full 2D and 3D acceleration for OpenSolaris. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: Who said anything about software patents? Copyright & contract law are enforceable in Europe, but frankly, European law is irrelevant, since the contract is between two US-based companies, and is thus governed by US law, and would result in lawsuits in US court if we decided to break it. Do these companies Sun have contracts with even exist anymore? If they do how can they have an interest into non disclosing information on old and no longer commercially exploited technology? Do Sun care more about the apathic interest of a defunt organization or that of hundreds of thousands of pissed-off professional customers? Look, it's contract law, and it's an effort (often non-trivial) to get these contracts changed. You can't change a contract license just because you want to (or, for that matter, because you can't find the other party). We have to go to every vendor we licensed code from (and remember, some of this is 15+ years old now), and re-negotiate being able to Open Source their code. It's a huge effort, logistically. And, many of those companies don't have the commitment to Open Source Sun makes, so much of it is going to be wasted effort. We went through this when the JDK was Open Sourced, which is why even though 95% of the JDK is now GPL'd, there still are binary-only plugs. It's a decidedly non-trivial effort, which costs non-trivial $$, and may very well not pan out in the end. And where is the revenue stream to offset this cost? Frankly, it's a better idea to see if we (or some other helpful soul) can implement support for the various cards into Xorg (which comes with it's own challenges, but is a more sure bet). As already noted, we cannot make the current Xsun available for separate download due to other license issues in Xsun itself. Please could you expand on the license issues you mention? Why would I be denied to run on my own workstation with OpenSolaris a software component that Sun provides for other Solaris versions if these are provided or sold separately? Xsun is an "X" server and as such I could run it anywhere I like. Will then Sun prohibit OpenSolaris users to run on OpenSolaris other commercial close source applications? I am afraid this does not make sense. The license restrictions are REDISTRIBUTION restrictions. Not USE restrictions. So, if you happen to have a legally-obtained copy of Xsun from [say] older Solaris 10 media, you can happily install and run it legally on your own workstation with OpenSol. We just can't make available for download Xsun unless it's bundled into a Solaris release [i.e. 10, 9, etc]. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: Windows 7: Requires at least 1Ghz CPU, 1 GB RAM, MacOS "Snow Leopard": only supports Intel Macs - no WinXP? That is hardly the latest Windows - I doubt that machine runs Vista or Windows 7. You'll be able to run Solaris 10 for many years to come on your workstation - that would be similar to running True, however my WinXP laptop that I use only to browse the Internet from the bathroom runs the latest version of Firefox. Something that appears to be hard business for a Unix/Solaris/Linux workstation! To get the latest Firefox you have to upgrade the whole system. And that of course applies to several other applications, not just Firefox. Be careful in your assumptions there. You confuse having depository/repository access to a program, with being able to install the program manually. Remember that Windows (any flavor) doesn't have software repos - this is a feature that Linux/OpenSolaris has above and beyond that of Windows. Yes, WinXP will run the latest Firefox. So will Solaris 10 (for that matter, Solaris 9, as well). For that matter, you should be able to trivially install it on a Linux as far back as 1999. In all cases, you'll have to download the installer from www.mozilla.org and install it yourself. Very rarely with Linux and extremely rarely Solaris do you need to update anything else to get a new program installer to work. What OpenSolaris (and Linux) aren't going to do is keep refreshing old release repositories indefinitely. So, at some point, you lose the ability to use the nice OpenSolaris/Linux software installer tool to get the latest version of . It can hardly be any other way. -- Erik Trimble Java System Support Mailstop: usca22-123 Phone: x17195 Santa Clara, CA ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> Who said anything about software patents? Copyright > & contract > law are enforceable in Europe, but frankly, European > law is irrelevant, > since the contract is between two US-based companies, > and is thus > governed by US law, and would result in lawsuits in > US court if we > decided to break it. Do these companies Sun have contracts with even exist anymore? If they do how can they have an interest into non disclosing information on old and no longer commercially exploited technology? Do Sun care more about the apathic interest of a defunt organization or that of hundreds of thousands of pissed-off professional customers? > As already noted, we cannot make the current Xsun > available for > separate download due to other license issues in Xsun > itself. > Please could you expand on the license issues you mention? Why would I be denied to run on my own workstation with OpenSolaris a software component that Sun provides for other Solaris versions if these are provided or sold separately? Xsun is an "X" server and as such I could run it anywhere I like. Will then Sun prohibit OpenSolaris users to run on OpenSolaris other commercial close source applications? I am afraid this does not make sense. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> Windows 7: Requires at least 1Ghz CPU, 1 GB RAM, >> MacOS "Snow Leopard": only supports Intel Macs - no > WinXP? That is hardly the latest Windows - I doubt > that machine runs Vista > or Windows 7. You'll be able to run Solaris 10 for > many years to come on > your workstation - that would be similar to running True, however my WinXP laptop that I use only to browse the Internet from the bathroom runs the latest version of Firefox. Something that appears to be hard business for a Unix/Solaris/Linux workstation! To get the latest Firefox you have to upgrade the whole system. And that of course applies to several other applications, not just Firefox. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Octave Orgeron wrote: > Here's a fun test that shouldn't cost millions for Sun to do today. How about > get Nvidia or ATI to build a PCI and PCI-E 3D video card that will work with > OpenSolaris Xorg on SPARC. Make it work on UltraSPARC III/IIIi workstations > and sell it for under $300. I'm willing to bet that this would sell like > crazy and make tons of people happy. Sun's been selling ATI cards for SPARC workstations for a while, the XVR-100 (PCI) and XVR-300 (PCI-E) - both of which are supported under OpenSolaris Xorg - sales are not exciting in the least. Developing new models would cost millions, especially if it meant having nvidia port their driver to a new platform and develop OBP-compatible firmware for their hardware. > It would also let Sun see that there is still a large SPARC workstation > market out there that they have been ignoring. A new SPARC workstation would require a significant design effort, since the CPU's used in the previous models are simply no longer made, and workstation based on either the Niagara or SPARC64 chips would be a significantly different beast. That one hasn't been produced doesn't mean Sun's ignoring it's users, just that management hasn't believed that it could earn enough profit on such a project in the current economic climate to justify pulling engineers off other projects. > This isn't rocket science, look on Ebay and check out the number of SPARC > workstations being sold every week! And why? Because businesses and > professionals need a SPARC workstation. But every workstation offered for sale on Ebay is a sign that someone else no longer needs one. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: > Let me understand Alan, why in 25 years of computing I never had this problem > before. Windoze supports old hardware, Windows 7: Requires at least 1Ghz CPU, 1 GB RAM, Video card capable of "DirectX 9" MacOS "Snow Leopard": only supports Intel Macs - no longer supports their previous PowerPC Macs, sold until 2006. > Now I chose a very expensive platform, let say the Rolls Royce of > workstations, 10 years on they decide to stop selling leaded fuel, only green > one. Do you think Rolls Royce would tell me my expensive car would no longer > run because the fuel standard has changed or would they make it run with the > new fuel? I have a 1998 Pentium II laptop that runs the latest versions of > both WinXP and Linux! WinXP? That is hardly the latest Windows - I doubt that machine runs Vista or Windows 7. You'll be able to run Solaris 10 for many years to come on your workstation - that would be similar to running XP on your ancient laptop forever. > 1) open the 3D Labs drivers in Europe where software patents even if existing > are not enforceable, someone in Europe could pick up the work Who said anything about software patents? Copyright & contract law are enforceable in Europe, but frankly, European law is irrelevant, since the contract is between two US-based companies, and is thus governed by US law, and would result in lawsuits in US court if we decided to break it. > 2) include a binary package of both drivers (already available I believe) and > Xsun, installable on OpenSolaris Sparc. The binary package of the drivers is available on opensolaris.org. As already noted, we cannot make the current Xsun available for separate download due to other license issues in Xsun itself. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Tecra M10 laptop hangs on shutdown & reboot
It definitely acts better when the extensions are disabled, but at the cost of not being able to boot up an image in VirtualBox. -- Alan John Martin wrote: Christopher Baumbauer wrote: As a followup, if you have virtualization extensions enabled in the bios, try disabling it, and then try it again. I filed 6870290 where S3 S/R fails on the M10 when hardware virtualization is enabled in the SBIOS but I didn't experience a regular showdown or reboot hang when this was enabled. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Hi Everyone, I've complained about the same issues before. I understand the need to move onto Xorg and drop Xsun. At the same time, I understand that Sun really isn't in the SPARC workstation business anymore and is hoping that people will buy a Intel PC from them for running Solaris 10 or OpenSolaris on today. The reality is that only folks who want a complete support contact on the desktop hardware and OS will bother, because it runs on a wide variety of PC hardware. By doing this Sun has killed it's own workstation market which is drying up and obviously pissed off all of it's ISV's, vendors, and integrators that marketed, developed, and resold SPARC workstations. This even forced me to bite the bullet and buy a used Ultra20 to use OpenSolaris. Notice, used.. so no money went back to Sun! Hell, I'll probably just keep the case and upgrade everything inside of it! This is the future Sun has chosen outside of servers and thin clients, limited desktop/workstation sales. Not to mention that Sun has killed the ecosystem for SPARC by making the entry-point extremely expensive.. $12,795 for a T5120 (http://www.sun.com/servers/coolthreads/overview/products.jsp) and $14,795 for a M3000 (http://www.sun.com/servers/midrange/m3000/index.xml). So you have to wonder what is the thinking here? Are x64 server sales out-pacing SPARC for Sun? Hate to burst the bubble of every Sun employee working on Solaris/OpenSolaris with their x64 laptop.. NO! The lion's share of server sales are SPARC, specifically the T-Series CMT servers! So how does this make sense? The sales are on SPARC, but the majority of the development effort with OpenSolaris has been focused on x64. So Sun has to decide if they want to keep soo much of the development effort with OpenSolaris focused on x64, which brings in little profit or if they want to focus on the needs of their paying customers. Hey, I'm not saying the stuff that has been done on OpenSolaris doesn't matter, it's great work. But focus has been lost on turning that into profit and you have to wonder at the end of the day how Oracle will look at this. They have committed themselves to investing more into SPARC, because they know that's where the money is. Sun/Oracle needs to bring back SPARC workstations and rebuilding the ecosystem. Here's a fun test that shouldn't cost millions for Sun to do today. How about get Nvidia or ATI to build a PCI and PCI-E 3D video card that will work with OpenSolaris Xorg on SPARC. Make it work on UltraSPARC III/IIIi workstations and sell it for under $300. I'm willing to bet that this would sell like crazy and make tons of people happy. It would also let Sun see that there is still a large SPARC workstation market out there that they have been ignoring. This isn't rocket science, look on Ebay and check out the number of SPARC workstations being sold every week! And why? Because businesses and professionals need a SPARC workstation. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Jensen Lee To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Wed, November 4, 2009 8:30:33 AM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards > Jensen Lee wrote: > > Certainly I want to keep using my Sun Blade. Will > Sun next commercial release of Solaris at least > support the legacy 3D Labs cards? > Because like every other computer company in the > world, including Sun for > the past 25 years, hardware is not supported forever > and at some point you > must choose between hardware upgrade or software > upgrade? Those cards Let me understand Alan, why in 25 years of computing I never had this problem before. Windoze supports old hardware, Linux supports very old hardware. Now I chose a very expensive platform, let say the Rolls Royce of workstations, 10 years on they decide to stop selling leaded fuel, only green one. Do you think Rolls Royce would tell me my expensive car would no longer run because the fuel standard has changed or would they make it run with the new fuel? I have a 1998 Pentium II laptop that runs the latest versions of both WinXP and Linux! Thanks God I am European and in Europe software patents are illegal, and for a very good reason, they hamper progress and integration to the detriment of the consumer. Now, on the constructive side, I understand the financial problems Sun is going through right now, but there is a large user base who owns workstations with 3D labs based FBs that sooner or later will want to upgrade to OpenSolaris. If Sun keeps supporting their hardware they will remain Sun's customers and may pay for support licenses, a memory upgrade etc. But if you brick their workstatio
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 3:30 PM, Jensen Lee wrote: >> Jensen Lee wrote: >> > Certainly I want to keep using my Sun Blade. Will >> Sun next commercial release of Solaris at least >> support the legacy 3D Labs cards? > >> Because like every other computer company in the >> world, including Sun for >> the past 25 years, hardware is not supported forever >> and at some point you >> must choose between hardware upgrade or software >> upgrade? Those cards > > Let me understand Alan, why in 25 years of computing I never had this problem > before. Windoze supports old hardware, Linux supports very old hardware. > Now I chose a very expensive platform, let say the Rolls Royce of > workstations, 10 years on they decide to stop selling leaded fuel, only green > one. Do you think Rolls Royce would tell me my expensive car would no longer > run because the fuel standard has changed or would they make it run with the > new fuel? I have a 1998 Pentium II laptop that runs the latest versions of > both WinXP and Linux! > > Thanks God I am European and in Europe software patents are illegal, and for > a very good reason, they hamper progress and integration to the detriment of > the consumer. > > Now, on the constructive side, I understand the financial problems Sun is > going through right now, but there is a large user base who owns workstations > with 3D labs based FBs that sooner or later will want to upgrade to > OpenSolaris. If Sun keeps supporting their hardware they will remain Sun's > customers and may pay for support licenses, a memory upgrade etc. But if you > brick their workstations, chances are they will switch to a different > hardware supplier as in the Intel/AMD market there is open competition. > > What about the following options: > > 1) open the 3D Labs drivers in Europe where software patents even if existing > are not enforceable, someone in Europe could pick up the work > 2) include a binary package of both drivers (already available I believe) and > Xsun, installable on OpenSolaris Sparc. 3) obtain the chips documentation from 3D Labs and give that to the community. Like Sun already did for his own chips. It can be understood that 3D Labs don't want to provide documentation for advanced 3D features. But not publishing the basics to use the chip is utterly outrageous. > -- > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- Mattieu Baptiste "/earth is 102% full ... please delete anyone you can." ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: 1) open the 3D Labs drivers in Europe where software patents even if existing are not enforceable, someone in Europe could pick up the work Software patents have nothing to do with this discussion. There are legal agreements in place which restrict disclosure and derived works. FWIW, using WinXP as a metric for the proper way to provide long term hardware support is a bit of a stretch compared to what we continue to do with the IFB/JFB family on Solaris. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
> Jensen Lee wrote: > > Certainly I want to keep using my Sun Blade. Will > Sun next commercial release of Solaris at least > support the legacy 3D Labs cards? > Because like every other computer company in the > world, including Sun for > the past 25 years, hardware is not supported forever > and at some point you > must choose between hardware upgrade or software > upgrade? Those cards Let me understand Alan, why in 25 years of computing I never had this problem before. Windoze supports old hardware, Linux supports very old hardware. Now I chose a very expensive platform, let say the Rolls Royce of workstations, 10 years on they decide to stop selling leaded fuel, only green one. Do you think Rolls Royce would tell me my expensive car would no longer run because the fuel standard has changed or would they make it run with the new fuel? I have a 1998 Pentium II laptop that runs the latest versions of both WinXP and Linux! Thanks God I am European and in Europe software patents are illegal, and for a very good reason, they hamper progress and integration to the detriment of the consumer. Now, on the constructive side, I understand the financial problems Sun is going through right now, but there is a large user base who owns workstations with 3D labs based FBs that sooner or later will want to upgrade to OpenSolaris. If Sun keeps supporting their hardware they will remain Sun's customers and may pay for support licenses, a memory upgrade etc. But if you brick their workstations, chances are they will switch to a different hardware supplier as in the Intel/AMD market there is open competition. What about the following options: 1) open the 3D Labs drivers in Europe where software patents even if existing are not enforceable, someone in Europe could pick up the work 2) include a binary package of both drivers (already available I believe) and Xsun, installable on OpenSolaris Sparc. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Skype is being open sourced! OpenSolaris?
Joerg Schilling wrote: Che Kristo wrote: From what I understand there will be a closed "libskype" which could feasibly ported to OpenSolaris by Skype. Skype have in the past said that they are not against the idea of supporting our platform, it's just a matter of priorities for them. If they had written a clean portable source, it would just be a recompile. So the fact that it did not yet happen is a hint for non-clean sources. Their comments to the posting made it clear there were components in the library they did not own. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Fluendo DVD player for OpenSolaris to release this week
Francois Dion wrote: Do you know what it is doing there? Just a linear interpolation, or is it upscaling? Under windows, players like Arcsoft use CUDA to upscale. VDPAU provides the necessary hooks for doing accelerated scaling. I was in contact with Fluendo earlier this year about it. Of course CUDA is not available under solaris. I've asked around about this feature and I've heard nothing, so that tells me it's not on the radar screen. That would be incorrect. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Fluendo DVD player for OpenSolaris to release this week
On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Che Kristo wrote: > Just a brief heads up that Fluendo will be releasing the DVD Player for > OpenSolaris at *some stage this week*. You can see some screenshots at my > blog: > http://myunix.org/2009/11/03/fluendo-dvd-player-for-opensolaris-arriving-very-very-soon/ > > Thanks to the guys at Fluendo for the hard work. > > Che Kristo I was looking through their web page and your blog, and I'm not too clear on the sound support and the specs. Maybe you know a bit more? I'll skip the obvious features, but these points, I was wondering about? * Fullscreen support Do you know what it is doing there? Just a linear interpolation, or is it upscaling? Under windows, players like Arcsoft use CUDA to upscale. Of course CUDA is not available under solaris. I've asked around about this feature and I've heard nothing, so that tells me it's not on the radar screen. However, if it has some decent upscaling in software, it can still be worth it, for those with fast processors. When using a computer as a DVD player that has some importance, because even if you have a Reon HQV in your TV, you are driving it at native resolution, so the chip sits idle, and all the upscaling has to be done in the PC. * Dolby Digital pass-through Does pass-through work in OpenSolaris, it is really bitstreaming DD and DTS? If it is a true pass-through, it should even work with dolby digital plus, yes? * Dolby Digital 5.1 output Does it mean it can decode DD and send it PCM 5.1 out, or that it can output 5.1 over the analog out or something else? * Subtitle support Can you set where the subtitle shows? * Multiregion, works in all regions Is that true? I thought that was enforced by the DVD reader itself along with the driver? Years ago I set up an HTPC using solaris, mplayer and some custom front end I wrote. The dvd was brand new and I was having issues until I took the dvd reader, put it in a windows machine, use powerdvd (or something like that) and set the region code, and back into my Solaris HTPC. Then it worked, but only for DVDs with that region code. * Multiple video deinterlacing algorithms Is this automatic or you have to specify film, tv, inverse telecine etc? How does it handle PAL, does it pitch down audio? On your blog you mention no spdif. I'm assuming this is on your specific setup, because OSS does support it and I've used mplayer with that (with -ao to specify the spdif device and -channel 6). Or is there no way to specify the audio output device in the fluendo dvd player? What about keyboard shortcuts, in order to use either a remote or a multimedia wireless keyboard (with stop, play/pause, forward/back etc buttons)? Finally, more important than anything else, can you specify aspect ratio and zoom level? Francois ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Skype is being open sourced! OpenSolaris?
Che Kristo wrote: > From what I understand there will be a closed "libskype" which could > feasibly ported to OpenSolaris by Skype. Skype have in the past said that > they are not against the idea of supporting our platform, it's just a matter > of priorities for them. If they had written a clean portable source, it would just be a recompile. So the fact that it did not yet happen is a hint for non-clean sources. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Skype is being open sourced! OpenSolaris?
Orvar Korvar wrote: > Will it be possible to port it to OpenSolaris? It will depend only upon the > license they choose, right? > http://share.skype.com/sites/linux/2009/11/skype_open_source.html I read that only the GUI will be "OSS" and it was not even clear whether this will use an acceptd OSS license. With a closed source binary compiled for Linux that contains the code that does the real work, I see no progress towards a port for Solaris. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Fluendo DVD player for OpenSolaris to release this week
Hi Francois, I don't have the answers to your questions unfortunately. I will chase this up with Fluendo and see if I can get some answers for you. On Wed, Nov 4, 2009 at 05:52, Francois Dion wrote: > On Tue, Nov 3, 2009 at 12:41 AM, Che Kristo wrote: > > Just a brief heads up that Fluendo will be releasing the DVD Player for > > OpenSolaris at *some stage this week*. You can see some screenshots at my > > blog: > > > http://myunix.org/2009/11/03/fluendo-dvd-player-for-opensolaris-arriving-very-very-soon/ > > > > Thanks to the guys at Fluendo for the hard work. > > > > Che Kristo > > I was looking through their web page and your blog, and I'm not too > clear on the sound support and the specs. Maybe you know a bit more? > I'll skip the obvious features, but these points, I was wondering > about? > >* Fullscreen support > > Do you know what it is doing there? Just a linear interpolation, or is > it upscaling? Under windows, players like Arcsoft use CUDA to upscale. > Of course CUDA is not available under solaris. I've asked around about > this feature and I've heard nothing, so that tells me it's not on the > radar screen. However, if it has some decent upscaling in software, it > can still be worth it, for those with fast processors. When using a > computer as a DVD player that has some importance, because even if you > have a Reon HQV in your TV, you are driving it at native resolution, > so the chip sits idle, and all the upscaling has to be done in the PC. > >* Dolby Digital pass-through > > Does pass-through work in OpenSolaris, it is really bitstreaming DD > and DTS? If it is a true pass-through, it should even work with dolby > digital plus, yes? > >* Dolby Digital 5.1 output > > Does it mean it can decode DD and send it PCM 5.1 out, or that it can > output 5.1 over the analog out or something else? > >* Subtitle support > > Can you set where the subtitle shows? > >* Multiregion, works in all regions > > Is that true? I thought that was enforced by the DVD reader itself > along with the driver? Years ago I set up an HTPC using solaris, > mplayer and some custom front end I wrote. The dvd was brand new and I > was having issues until I took the dvd reader, put it in a windows > machine, use powerdvd (or something like that) and set the region > code, and back into my Solaris HTPC. Then it worked, but only for DVDs > with that region code. > >* Multiple video deinterlacing algorithms > > Is this automatic or you have to specify film, tv, inverse telecine > etc? How does it handle PAL, does it pitch down audio? > > On your blog you mention no spdif. I'm assuming this is on your > specific setup, because OSS does support it and I've used mplayer with > that (with -ao to specify the spdif device and -channel 6). Or is > there no way to specify the audio output device in the fluendo dvd > player? > > What about keyboard shortcuts, in order to use either a remote or a > multimedia wireless keyboard (with stop, play/pause, forward/back etc > buttons)? Finally, more important than anything else, can you specify > aspect ratio and zoom level? > > Francois > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
