Re: [osol-discuss] libkstat corruption
Hi On 01/28/10 16:45, Bruno Damour wrote: Well, I copied the file back from live-cd so I'm back online. Investigating, I found in the console output (when it happend) : [output of kstat|grep misc] amber ~ # libkstat.so.1 = /usr/lib/libkstat.so.1 bash: libkstat.so.1: command not found amber ~ # kstat -n cpu_info0 Can't load '/usr/perl5/5.8.4/lib/i86pc-solaris-64int/auto/Sun/Solaris/Kstat/Kstat.so' for module Sun::Solaris::Kstat: ld.so.1: perl: fatal: /lib/libkstat.so.1: unknown file type at /usr/perl5/5.8.4/lib/i86pc-solaris-64int/DynaLoader.pm line 230. at /usr/bin/kstat line 37 Compilation failed in require at /usr/bin/kstat line 37. BEGIN failed--compilation aborted at /usr/bin/kstat line 37. So I might have issued some toxic command (with copy/paste maybe ?) Pretty certain I recall this being a case of the Solaris perl packages being corrupt, likely by some cpan additions over it. See what pkg fix -n has to say about the various perl packages. Gavin ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
When I do a pkg image-update today (2010-01-28) I still get b130... :( -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
I think I ran into this, had to remove and recreate publisher to get the update. Bruno -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today? You get http://www.oracle.com Very quick change -- Andrew Watkins * Birkbeck College http://notallmicrosoft.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Andrew, Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today? You get http://www.oracle.com Very quick change Rest In Pieces :-( Sadly won't see you at LOSUG tonite... Sean. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 11:21 +, Andrew Watkins wrote: Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today? You get http://www.oracle.com Very quick change Not really, they had 9 months to plan and to get everything in order. Regards, Paul ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
I think I ran into this, had to remove and recreate publisher to get the update. Nope, still b130 after that... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Paul Griffith pa...@cse.yorku.ca wrote: On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 11:21 +, Andrew Watkins wrote: Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today? You get http://www.oracle.com Very quick change Not really, they had 9 months to plan and to get everything in order. I wonder if they actually worked on the changes a while back. If you look at the x64 and CMT server pages, they list several systems that I thought had disappeared and I'm sure are EOL, such as the T1000, X2200, X4150, and Ultra 24. -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [laptop-discuss] Toshiba M10 - 111 to 131 upgrade issues - GDM fails, blank screen
Bruce Porter wrote: Hi, While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something around 129, but I run into: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380 I can actually get as far as 129 (but slow boot and login puts me off), my real big problems start at 130 (the blank screen actually becomes a hard reset when I leave it alone). I can boot to CLI with gdm disabled My logs show nothing that stands out (Available if anyone is interested) I've got a note in my /etc/motd saying I copied the i915 and drm modules from b129 for a similar issue. I sadly didn't note the bug number, but I suspect 6912996 could be the problem for the slow X startup (which is marked as fixed in b132). http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6912996 The hard reset issue could be 6914386. Do you have a crash dump in /var/crash (you might need to enable savecore with dumpadm -y) http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914386 HTH Brian I also did upgrade through several builds. In case your problem is not related to graphics, then please check your /etc/minor_perm and /etc/driver_aliases and compare with original on your previous boot environment eventually fixing entries in those files. My minor perms show a lot of differences, short of doing a pot luck edit/merge is there anything in particular that could be an issue ? ---8 br...@ytclaptop:/mnt/etc$ diff minor_perm /etc/minor_perm 1a2 clone:dnet 0666 root sys 2a4 clone:elxl 0666 root sys 3a6 clone:ibd 0666 root sys 4a8 clone:iprb 0666 root sys 5a10 clone:pcelx 0666 root sys 6a12 clone:spwr 0666 root sys 14a21,23 clone:llc1 0666 root sys clone:loop 0666 root sys clone:ptmx 0666 root sys 17a27,32 clone:ticlts 0666 root sys clone:ticots 0666 root sys clone:ticotsord 0666 root sys clone:tidg 0666 root sys clone:tivc 0666 root sys clone:tmux 0666 root sys 69a85 md:admin 644 root sys 105a122,148 clone:bge 0666 root sys clone:igb 0666 root sys clone:ixgbe 0666 root sys clone:rge 0666 root sys clone:xge 0666 root sys clone:nge 0666 root sys clone:e1000g 0666 root sys clone:chxge 0666 root sys clone:pcn 0666 root sys clone:rtls 0666 root sys clone:ath 0666 root sys clone:vnic 0666 root sys clone:ipw 0666 root sys clone:iwh 0666 root sys clone:iwi 0666 root sys clone:iwk 0666 root sys clone:pcwl 0666 root sys clone:pcan 0666 root sys clone:ral 0666 root sys clone:rtw 0666 root sys clone:rum 0666 root sys clone:ural 0666 root sys clone:wpi 0666 root sys clone:zyd 0666 root sys clone:dmfe 0666 root sys clone:afe 0666 root sys clone:mxfe 0666 root sys 144a188 amd_iommu:* 0644 root sys 152a197 pem:* 0666 bin bin 161a207 afe:* 0666 root root 183a230 emlxs:* 0600 root sys 187a235 qlc:* 0600 root sys 192a241,242 pcmem:* 0666 bin bin pcram:* 0666 bin bin 193a244 e1000g:* 0666 root root 210a262 sd:* 0640 root sys 238,256d289 iptunq:* 0640 root sys simnet:* 0666 root sys clone:simnet 0666 root sys clone:bridge 0666 root sys sd:* 0640 root sys bpf:bpf 0666 root sys qlge:* 0666 root sys audio:* 0666 root sys md:admin 0644 root sys amd_iommu:* 0644 root sys hwahc:* 0644 root sys hwarc:* 0644 root sys wusb_ca:* 0666 root sys wusb_df:* 0666 root sys oce:* 0666 root sys dlpistub:* 0666 root sys qlc:* 0666 root sys emlxs:* 0666 root sys clone:ptmx 0666 root sys ---8 Thanks, Vita On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Bruce Porter wrote: Hi Bruce... This was certainly the relevant bug for me on my M10 with Intel graphics, the new libraries supplied in that CR have me up and running on 131 with a few other issues but at least it is usable. I am not seeing a link to the libraries ? Any clue to the other issues HTH -George On 25/01/2010 01:04 PM, Bruce Porter wrote: Ok, did the upgrade this morning from 111b to 131. 1st off, boot time now appears to be a lot quicker so an improvement over 124-130 from that POV :-) Unfortunately I still cannot get the GUI up (as has been the way since attempts to load 130). The system boots, GDM starts up, screen goes blank with cursor in top left. Eventually the entire screen blanks (no sign of cursor), so I have to reboot. Ctrl/Alt/Backspace makes no difference. I have booted the system into single user and disabled GDM so I can get at any logs that may be needed to help resolve. Back to working in 111b. Is this the relevant bug ? http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bu g_id=6912996 ___ laptop-discuss mailing list laptop-disc...@opensolaris.org -- This message posted from opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Yea but www.opensolaris.org has not been re-directed. I don't know if that is good or bad? If it was not integrated is it going to be kept? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
but a link to opensolaris is here. http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/solaris/index.htm Yea but www.opensolaris.org has not been re-directed. I don't know if that is good or bad? If it was not integrated is it going to be kept? -- 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] Goodbye Sun.com
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Mike DeMarco mikej...@yahoo.com wrote: Yea but www.opensolaris.org has not been re-directed. I don't know if that is good or bad? If it was not integrated is it going to be kept? The copyright footnote, however, has been changed promptly. -- Regards, Cyril ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
but a link to opensolaris is here. http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/sola ris/index.htm Links to another server. Not a good sign that they plan on keeping it. They will retire the Sun server infrastructure and cut over to their own eventually. Integration would be a better sign! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
On 01/28/10 06:53 AM, Thommy M. Malmström wrote: I think I ran into this, had to remove and recreate publisher to get the update. Nope, still b130 after that... Had the same problem... pkg refresh --full fixed it for me. -- Robert W Hartzell bear at rwhartzell.net RwHartzell.Net ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
On 01/28/10 06:53 AM, Thommy M. Malmström wrote: I think I ran into this, had to remove and recreate publisher to get the update. Nope, still b130 after that... Had the same problem... pkg refresh --full fixed it for me. I've no luck with that (which I of course tried first)... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] website changes
Hi, As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Oracle. An initial change resulting from that acquisition involves updating the opensolaris.org website to reflect the new ownership. Copyright text has been updated, and today the Oracle logo will be added to the site pages. Thanks. Bonnie ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [laptop-discuss] Toshiba M10 - 111 to 131 upgrade issues - GDM fails, blank screen
On 28/01/2010 14:05, Brian Ruthven - Sun UK wrote: Bruce Porter wrote: Hi, While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something around 129, but I run into: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380 I can actually get as far as 129 (but slow boot and login puts me off), my real big problems start at 130 (the blank screen actually becomes a hard reset when I leave it alone). I can boot to CLI with gdm disabled My logs show nothing that stands out (Available if anyone is interested) I've got a note in my /etc/motd saying I copied the i915 and drm modules from b129 for a similar issue. I sadly didn't note the bug number, but I suspect 6912996 could be the problem for the slow X startup (which is marked as fixed in b132). http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6912996 The hard reset issue could be 6914386. Do you have a crash dump in /var/crash (you might need to enable savecore with dumpadm -y) http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914386 Toshiba R600, up-to snv_129 X is working fine. snv_131 and the moment Xorg starts the notebook does hard-reset (quick power-off) - no crash dump, no nothing, When I booted uner kernel debugger the box just hangs and I can't go into the deubuuger. I tried to boot into single user mode, console is fine, then manually start Xorg binary and laptop does a hard-reset almost right-away. I applied extra dev libraries Alan C. posted but it didn't help. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] UltraSPAR_K_
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html Oh well... -- Regards, Cyril ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [laptop-discuss] Toshiba M10 - 111 to 131 upgrade issues - GDM fails, blank screen
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:05:41 +, Brian Ruthven - Sun UK wrote: Bruce Porter wrote: Hi, While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something around 129, but I run into: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380 I can actually get as far as 129 (but slow boot and login puts me off), my real big problems start at 130 (the blank screen actually becomes a hard reset when I leave it alone). I can boot to CLI with gdm disabled My logs show nothing that stands out (Available if anyone is interested) I've got a note in my /etc/motd saying I copied the i915 and drm modules from b129 for a similar issue. I sadly didn't note the bug number, but I suspect 6912996 could be the problem for the slow X startup (which is marked as fixed in b132). http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6912996 The hard reset issue could be 6914386. Do you have a crash dump in /var/crash (you might need to enable savecore with dumpadm -y) http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914386 This is looking more and more like the real big issue, I'll generate a crashdump I assume it is bad form to post the entire thing to the NG/Forum ? :-) HTH Brian I also did upgrade through several builds. In case your problem is not related to graphics, then please check your /etc/minor_perm and /etc/driver_aliases and compare with original on your previous boot environment eventually fixing entries in those files. My minor perms show a lot of differences, short of doing a pot luck edit/merge is there anything in particular that could be an issue ? ---8 br...@ytclaptop:/mnt/etc$ diff minor_perm /etc/minor_perm 1a2 clone:dnet 0666 root sys 2a4 clone:elxl 0666 root sys 3a6 clone:ibd 0666 root sys 4a8 clone:iprb 0666 root sys 5a10 clone:pcelx 0666 root sys 6a12 clone:spwr 0666 root sys 14a21,23 clone:llc1 0666 root sys clone:loop 0666 root sys clone:ptmx 0666 root sys 17a27,32 clone:ticlts 0666 root sys clone:ticots 0666 root sys clone:ticotsord 0666 root sys clone:tidg 0666 root sys clone:tivc 0666 root sys clone:tmux 0666 root sys 69a85 md:admin 644 root sys 105a122,148 clone:bge 0666 root sys clone:igb 0666 root sys clone:ixgbe 0666 root sys clone:rge 0666 root sys clone:xge 0666 root sys clone:nge 0666 root sys clone:e1000g 0666 root sys clone:chxge 0666 root sys clone:pcn 0666 root sys clone:rtls 0666 root sys clone:ath 0666 root sys clone:vnic 0666 root sys clone:ipw 0666 root sys clone:iwh 0666 root sys clone:iwi 0666 root sys clone:iwk 0666 root sys clone:pcwl 0666 root sys clone:pcan 0666 root sys clone:ral 0666 root sys clone:rtw 0666 root sys clone:rum 0666 root sys clone:ural 0666 root sys clone:wpi 0666 root sys clone:zyd 0666 root sys clone:dmfe 0666 root sys clone:afe 0666 root sys clone:mxfe 0666 root sys 144a188 amd_iommu:* 0644 root sys 152a197 pem:* 0666 bin bin 161a207 afe:* 0666 root root 183a230 emlxs:* 0600 root sys 187a235 qlc:* 0600 root sys 192a241,242 pcmem:* 0666 bin bin pcram:* 0666 bin bin 193a244 e1000g:* 0666 root root 210a262 sd:* 0640 root sys 238,256d289 iptunq:* 0640 root sys simnet:* 0666 root sys clone:simnet 0666 root sys clone:bridge 0666 root sys sd:* 0640 root sys bpf:bpf 0666 root sys qlge:* 0666 root sys audio:* 0666 root sys md:admin 0644 root sys amd_iommu:* 0644 root sys hwahc:* 0644 root sys hwarc:* 0644 root sys wusb_ca:* 0666 root sys wusb_df:* 0666 root sys oce:* 0666 root sys dlpistub:* 0666 root sys qlc:* 0666 root sys emlxs:* 0666 root sys clone:ptmx 0666 root sys ---8 Thanks, Vita On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Bruce Porter wrote: Hi Bruce... This was certainly the relevant bug for me on my M10 with Intel graphics, the new libraries supplied in that CR have me up and running on 131 with a few other issues but at least it is usable. I am not seeing a link to the libraries ? Any clue to the other issues HTH -George On 25/01/2010 01:04 PM, Bruce Porter wrote: Ok, did the upgrade this morning from 111b to 131. 1st off, boot time now appears to be a lot quicker so an improvement over 124-130 from that POV :-) Unfortunately I still cannot get the GUI up (as has been the way since attempts to load 130). The system boots, GDM starts up, screen goes blank with cursor in top left. Eventually the entire screen blanks (no sign of cursor), so I have to reboot. Ctrl/Alt/Backspace makes no difference. I have booted the system into single user and disabled GDM so I can get at any logs that may
Re: [osol-discuss] [laptop-discuss] Toshiba M10 - 111 to 131 upgrade issues - GDM fails, blank screen
Bruce wrote: On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:05:41 +, Brian Ruthven - Sun UK wrote: Bruce Porter wrote: Hi, While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something around 129, but I run into: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380 I can actually get as far as 129 (but slow boot and login puts me off), my real big problems start at 130 (the blank screen actually becomes a hard reset when I leave it alone). I can boot to CLI with gdm disabled My logs show nothing that stands out (Available if anyone is interested) I've got a note in my /etc/motd saying I copied the i915 and drm modules from b129 for a similar issue. I sadly didn't note the bug number, but I suspect 6912996 could be the problem for the slow X startup (which is marked as fixed in b132). http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6912996 The hard reset issue could be 6914386. Do you have a crash dump in /var/crash (you might need to enable savecore with dumpadm -y) http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6914386 This is looking more and more like the real big issue, I'll generate a crashdump I assume it is bad form to post the entire thing to the NG/Forum ? :-) Er, perhaps :-) If you could at least give us the panic message and the stack trace, that would be a start. Compare them with the bugs I mentioned above and see if you find a match. Brian HTH Brian I also did upgrade through several builds. In case your problem is not related to graphics, then please check your /etc/minor_perm and /etc/driver_aliases and compare with original on your previous boot environment eventually fixing entries in those files. My minor perms show a lot of differences, short of doing a pot luck edit/merge is there anything in particular that could be an issue ? ---8 br...@ytclaptop:/mnt/etc$ diff minor_perm /etc/minor_perm 1a2 clone:dnet 0666 root sys 2a4 clone:elxl 0666 root sys 3a6 clone:ibd 0666 root sys 4a8 clone:iprb 0666 root sys 5a10 clone:pcelx 0666 root sys 6a12 clone:spwr 0666 root sys 14a21,23 clone:llc1 0666 root sys clone:loop 0666 root sys clone:ptmx 0666 root sys 17a27,32 clone:ticlts 0666 root sys clone:ticots 0666 root sys clone:ticotsord 0666 root sys clone:tidg 0666 root sys clone:tivc 0666 root sys clone:tmux 0666 root sys 69a85 md:admin 644 root sys 105a122,148 clone:bge 0666 root sys clone:igb 0666 root sys clone:ixgbe 0666 root sys clone:rge 0666 root sys clone:xge 0666 root sys clone:nge 0666 root sys clone:e1000g 0666 root sys clone:chxge 0666 root sys clone:pcn 0666 root sys clone:rtls 0666 root sys clone:ath 0666 root sys clone:vnic 0666 root sys clone:ipw 0666 root sys clone:iwh 0666 root sys clone:iwi 0666 root sys clone:iwk 0666 root sys clone:pcwl 0666 root sys clone:pcan 0666 root sys clone:ral 0666 root sys clone:rtw 0666 root sys clone:rum 0666 root sys clone:ural 0666 root sys clone:wpi 0666 root sys clone:zyd 0666 root sys clone:dmfe 0666 root sys clone:afe 0666 root sys clone:mxfe 0666 root sys 144a188 amd_iommu:* 0644 root sys 152a197 pem:* 0666 bin bin 161a207 afe:* 0666 root root 183a230 emlxs:* 0600 root sys 187a235 qlc:* 0600 root sys 192a241,242 pcmem:* 0666 bin bin pcram:* 0666 bin bin 193a244 e1000g:* 0666 root root 210a262 sd:* 0640 root sys 238,256d289 iptunq:* 0640 root sys simnet:* 0666 root sys clone:simnet 0666 root sys clone:bridge 0666 root sys sd:* 0640 root sys bpf:bpf 0666 root sys qlge:* 0666 root sys audio:* 0666 root sys md:admin 0644 root sys amd_iommu:* 0644 root sys hwahc:* 0644 root sys hwarc:* 0644 root sys wusb_ca:* 0666 root sys wusb_df:* 0666 root sys oce:* 0666 root sys dlpistub:* 0666 root sys qlc:* 0666 root sys emlxs:* 0666 root sys clone:ptmx 0666 root sys ---8 Thanks, Vita On Mon, 25 Jan 2010, Bruce Porter wrote: Hi Bruce... This was certainly the relevant bug for me on my M10 with Intel graphics, the new libraries supplied in that CR have me up and running on 131 with a few other issues but at least it is usable. I am not seeing a link to the libraries ? Any clue to the other issues HTH -George On 25/01/2010 01:04 PM, Bruce Porter wrote: Ok, did the upgrade this morning from 111b to 131. 1st off, boot time now appears to be a lot quicker
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
I listened to the entire webcast yesterday and it leaves wondering about what is the OpenSolaris roadmap! I propose solutions for a living and Solaris has been/is a tough sell. I only wished Oracle would clarify more about OpenSolaris. Time will tell. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] website changes
Hi, As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Oracle. An initial change resulting from that acquisition involves updating the opensolaris.org website to reflect the new ownership. Copyright text has been updated, and today the Oracle logo will be added to the site pages. Thanks. Bonnie I think I may have scored the last Solaris Media Kit shipped as Sun Solaris and not Oracle Solaris : http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/?q=node/148 Sometimes timing is everything. Onwards with regular business now :-) -- Dennis Clarke dcla...@opensolaris.ca - Email related to the open source Solaris dcla...@blastwave.org - Email related to open source for Solaris ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Ed, Well, I'm glad SUN decided to open source solaris years ago. Does anybody know if opensolaris will remain under the CDDL? I was part of when Sun made avopen bits of Solaris 8a decade ago (the only Solaris source availability thus far - outside OpenSolaris). I hope and trust that OpenSolaris will remain in its current state under Oracle. I have also just emailed the office of Larry E in a (futile?) attempt to elicit any more details on our behalf. I expect no response though ;-) Regards... Sean. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
All, Apols - new laptop keyboard causing trubs with my typing. avopen and Solaris 8a being gross examples. Regards... Sean. Ed, Well, I'm glad SUN decided to open source solaris years ago. Does anybody know if opensolaris will remain under the CDDL? I was part of when Sun made avopen bits of Solaris 8a decade ago (the only Solaris source availability thus far - outside OpenSolaris). I hope and trust that OpenSolaris will remain in its current state under Oracle. I have also just emailed the office of Larry E in a (futile?) attempt to elicit any more details on our behalf. I expect no response though ;-) Regards... Sean. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] website changes
Hi, As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Oracle. An initial change resulting from that acquisition involves updating the opensolaris.org website to reflect the new ownership. Copyright text has been updated, and today the Oracle logo will be added to the site pages. Thanks. Bonnie I think I may have scored the last Solaris Media Kit shipped as Sun Solaris and not Oracle Solaris : http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/?q=node/148 etimes timing is everything. Onwards with regular business now :-) I rarely do conferences, and since I'm too much of a skeptic to try to use my minimal influence very often and thus am hardly worth anyone kissing up to, I feel guilty about collecting swag. So I don't have much of such things. One I always missed getting was the Sun glasses though. Didn't look particularly special (I recall something vaguely like MIB only clunkier), but that was one of those catchy notions. The yo-yos OTOH, blech. I've got a good yo-yo somewhere with ball bearings, that makes something that's not even a Duncan wannabe (let alone _real_ serious) seem pretty lame. There are only two other souvenirs that I've seen people with that I ever really envied, and neither are Sun. One was a gorgeous cobalt blue Cray coffee cup, and the other was the control panel of a Univac 494, with the big rectangular (think old grade-B sci-fi movie) buttons and I think a mechanical digital clock in it too. I've always been a pushover for buttons and blinkenlights, probably why I'm gabbing here and not so much on Facebook. :-) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
I have also noticed that all of the license agreements still say Sun! Given 6 moths to plan you would think that the license agreements would have been changed to oracle! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pcieb5: Failed setting hotplug framework
FYI, this diagnostic still shows in snv_131 -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] website changes
Hi, As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a wholly-owned subsidiary of Oracle. An initial change resulting from that acquisition involves updating the opensolaris.org website to reflect the new ownership. Copyright text has been updated, and today the Oracle logo will be added to the site pages. Thanks. Bonnie I think I may have scored the last Solaris Media Kit shipped as Sun Solaris and not Oracle Solaris : http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/?q=node/148 etimes timing is everything. Onwards with regular business now :-) snip One I always missed getting was the Sun glasses though. Didn't look particularly special (I recall something vaguely like MIB only clunkier), but that was one of those catchy notions. The yo-yos OTOH, blech. I've got a good yo-yo somewhere with ball bearings, that makes something that's not even a Duncan wannabe (let alone _real_ serious) seem pretty lame. I have entirely too much swag and stuff piled all over the place. One of the better items is a Sun coffee cup heater for your desk. Be darned if I know where it is. I'm just happy I got the order in and had it shipped by 26th Jan 2010. There are only two other souvenirs that I've seen people with that I ever really envied, and neither are Sun. One was a gorgeous cobalt blue Cray coffee cup, and the other was the control panel of a Univac 494, with the big rectangular (think old grade-B sci-fi movie) buttons and I think a mechanical digital clock in it too. I've always been a pushover for buttons and blinkenlights, probably why I'm gabbing here and not so much on Facebook. :-) Well those old funky things are seriously cool. At least to me :-) -- Dennis Clarke dcla...@opensolaris.ca - Email related to the open source Solaris dcla...@blastwave.org - Email related to open source for Solaris ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] UltraSPAR_K_
On 01/28/10 10:11 AM, Cyril Plisko wrote: http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html As another engineer said: Ah, the good, old stories. Noah and his Sparsely Populated Ark. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] UltraSPAR_K_
Cyril Plisko wrote: http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html Oh well... I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already? Scott -- Scott Rotondo Principal Engineer, Solaris Security Technologies President, Trusted Computing Group Phone/FAX: +1 408 850 3655 (Internal x68278) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] UltraSPAR_K_
On 01/28/10 01:08 PM, Scott Rotondo wrote: Cyril Plisko wrote: http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html Oh well... I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already? Yep, it's been fixed since this morning :) -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] UltraSPAR_K_
Cyril Plisko wrote: http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html Oh well... I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already? It looked at it again, saw SPARK; refreshed it and now it says SPARC. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] UltraSPAR_K_
On 01/28/10 01:08 PM, Scott Rotondo wrote: Cyril Plisko wrote: http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html Oh well... I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already? Yep, it's been fixed since this morning :) Could have been worse. The F key is so close to the C we could have gotten UltraSPARF. -- Dennis ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
I cannot quite grasp the name Oracle Solaris which they called it in the webcasts, when I've been saying Sun Solaris for many, many years. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
I may be incorrect, but when I watched the webcast and they had the graphics displayed showing the hardware line and Oracle VM working with Logical Domains, etc., they had the x86 hardware. I'll have to look again, but they had three blocks for operating systems on top which were Solaris, Linux, and Windows. I know in another slide they listed OpenSolaris and had the website, but I honestly don't believe they will continue development of OpenSolaris which has mostly been developed on x86. For quite some time there wasn't a Sparc install and then you needed AI. Now a text installer for Sparc has been released, but it is late. Oracle isn't going to put tens or hundreds of millions into OpenSolaris when they announed they are going to spend more on Solaris development than Sun. And there are many things in OpenSolaris which are not enterprise ready and it would cost a lot of money and time to get OpenSolaris to the point of being ready for enterprise data centers. AI. Caiman. Zones. Network Auto Magic (default). Especially when Oracle spends millions on Linux, why spend more money for another x86 OS when Solaris isn't used much on x86? There are a lot of good innovations in OpenSolaris which can be used in the next Solaris release, but I just don't see OpenSolaris being able to survive. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Gary Bainbridge wrote: Oracle isn't going to put tens or hundreds of millions into OpenSolaris when they announed they are going to spend more on Solaris development than Sun. OpenSolaris isn't a separate OS from Solaris - it's the development branch of the next release of Solaris. Sun's plan was always that the next release of Solaris would be a stable version of the OpenSolaris base, not a completely different beast. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 22:24 +0800, Norbert P. Copones wrote: but a link to opensolaris is here. http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/solaris/index.htm You also have Oracle Solaris Studio there :-P Will the former Sun Studio only work on Solaris in the near future? Or is this already the case? :-P ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Well, I am sure over the next few weeks we will get lots of version upgrades: Oracle Studio 12.2 Oracle Solaris 10 02/10 and OracleOS 5.10.1 Andrew On 28/01/2010 21:02, Sergio Schvezov wrote: On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 22:24 +0800, Norbert P. Copones wrote: but a link to opensolaris is here. http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/solaris/index.htm You also have Oracle Solaris Studio there :-P Will the former Sun Studio only work on Solaris in the near future? Or is this already the case? :-P ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:16:53 +, Andrew Watkins wrote: Well, I am sure over the next few weeks we will get lots of version upgrades: Oracle Studio 12.2 Oracle Solaris 10 02/10 and OracleOS 5.10.1 br...@ytclaptop:~$ uname -a OracleOS YTCLaptop 5.11 onx_133 i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris Andrew On 28/01/2010 21:02, Sergio Schvezov wrote: On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 22:24 +0800, Norbert P. Copones wrote: but a link to opensolaris is here. http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/solaris/index.htm You also have Oracle Solaris Studio there :-P Will the former Sun Studio only work on Solaris in the near future? Or is this already the case? :-P ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org -- Bruce The internet is a huge and diverse community and not every one is friendly http://www.ytc1.co.uk ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] UltraSPAR_K_
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:35:41 +0100, Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/wVw wrote: Cyril Plisko wrote: http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html Oh well... I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already? It looked at it again, saw SPARK; refreshed it and now it says SPARC. Anyone got a cached copy ? -- Bruce The internet is a huge and diverse community and not every one is friendly http://www.ytc1.co.uk ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Well, it's a good thing that for marketing purposes, Sun starting calling SunOS Solaris, starting with SunOS 5. If they hadn't done that, we'd have to to call Solaris OracleOS now! I haven't called Solaris Sun Solaris, not even once. That even made less sense after OpenSolaris was launched. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
I should have clarified. I was speaking about the way zones are implemented presently in OpenSolaris. They need to function like Solaris 10. I like zones and use them frequently. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] FINAL Reminder: End of SXCE
As a reminder, *all* Solaris Express Community Edition images will be removed from the DLC tommorow afternoon. There will be no more subsequent releases. Derek -- Derek Cicero Program Manager Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
I realize that OpenSolaris isn't *entirely* separate from Solaris, but if Sun intended to have the next release of Solaris based on OpenSolaris, then millions will have to be spent to get it to that point, and many years. The better option would have been to have the next release built on SXCE. Now, I am aware that SXCE was built on OpenSolaris, but it was more ready for the enterprise because it had the installer, zones, packaging, etc., already there. The Sparc text installer for OpenSolaris was only released yesterday. There can't be any denial that OpenSolaris was targeted for a desktop user. Network Auto Magic? That doesn't yell enterprise, but rather joe schmoe sitting at home. OpenSolaris Sparc wasn't available for the longest time. AI isn't near ready for the enterprise so how many years before OpenSolaris can be ready. How is OpenSolaris going to run on M-Series servers? That I'd like to see. Sun spent $500 million on Solaris 10. Is Oracle going to spend that much on OpenSolaris to get it ready for the enterprise? I doubt it. Take the good parts from SXCE and merge them into Solaris 10 and create SolarisNextGen or something. BTW, I do run OpenSolaris and have since 2008.05 and will install dev preview 131 soon. But please, OpenSolaris isn't ready to be installed on T- and M-Series servers in a 2000 server data center. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Gary, I cannot quite grasp the name Oracle Solaris which they called it in the webcasts, when I've been saying Sun Solaris for many, many years. Statements of ownership in two differing forms. I too cannot accept the former. personally; having been (and remain) a staunch Sun supporter for many years too. Regards... Sean. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Well, it's a good thing that for marketing purposes, Sun starting calling SunOS Solaris, startin g with SunOS 5. If they hadn't done that, we'd have to to call Solaris OracleOS now! No, really, there was a Solaris 1.0.1 (SunOS 4.1.4) Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
Links to another server. Not a good sign that they plan on keeping it. They will retire the Sun server infrastructure and cut over to their own eventually. Integration would be a better sign! If Oracle retires Sun's infrastructure but still keeps the Solaris / OpenSolaris projects going, then that means that opensolaris.org will probably be running on Oracle Unbreakable Linux, which is a rebadged version of Red Hat Enterprise Linux. The irony of Solaris developers possibly using an RHEL variant to host their web forums and source code repositories is interesting to ponder Anyway, the #1 thing that I'm hoping happens from this buyout is that some of Oracle's Linux engineers contribute to the LX Brand project so that Oracle Enterprise Linux / CentOS and RHEL run better inside branded zones. If LX brand zones get 64 bit capability and can emulate 2.6 Linux kernel system calls better than I will be a very happy customer. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris look and feel, which tends to be blue/silver to something bright red. It would be just too annoying. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris look and feel, which tends to be blue/silver to something bright red. It would be just too annoying. I always thought we should just stick with the gorgeous and elegant 2008.05 branding for all of the OpenSolaris releases. The dark blue in 2008.05 looked better than the light blue from 2008.11 did although 2009.06 did look ok. I can sympathize with how bright colors like really bright red, or the bright blue in 08.11 would be just too painful to stare at if you are someone who works on a computer for 14+ hours a day. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD (RockSolid) infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS-SSO, OpenLdap, Bind, apache2, CIFS, Postgresql ... I think it is a mistake to design OpenSolaris as a desktop first, Sun always shine on the server side. I earned my living on Sun's, managing servers from SunOS3.x - Solaris10 now, I'm into architecture and project management. As far as low-end servers Sun has been tossed big time and MANY companies are getting away from Huge Architectures. ZFS is a technological advance, the new package system is awesome, CIFS integration, ACL and all ...more power to it however, it has to spread on X86 architecture too and the sooner, the more exposure, the better. There are tones of small and not so small companies willing to take the plunge into (low cost/no cost) Linux solutions and not willing to spend on support! It is as crazy as it sounds. In retrospect, yesterday's webcast reinforced a new fully and integrated stack (from disks to apps) for Sparc (Solaris) and Linux! I wish Oracle sees OpenSolaris as a server and not only a desktop where you develop apps for Solaris! Oracle is a big fan of Linux ... mentionned 2-3 times. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
On 29/01/2010, at 1:41 PM, Roger Savard wrote: As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD (RockSolid) infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS- SSO, OpenLdap, Bind, apache2, CIFS, Postgresql ... I think it is a mistake to design OpenSolaris as a desktop first, Sun always shine on the server side. Why do you think we're designing OpenSolaris as a desktop first? Because of the LiveCD? What about the Automated Install images, or the text based interactive installer? Lots of room for both, and over the last couple of releases, there's been a higher priority on getting some of the server/enterprise features in place. Glynn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Well then, if it's the case, OpenSolaris is on the right track. I downloaded the text-based installer yesterday but did not have the time to work with it yet, but I will. The closer opensolaris is to the enterprise, the more exposure and push it' ll have. Keep up the good work. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Surely a fundamental part of the premise here is that there has to be some incentives to get people to join the OpenSolaris community to build some of the user base necessary to bed in a new release, and part of that is that the OpenSolaris builds be easy to deploy and have an initial focus on cheap x86 desktops and servers, where those desktops are probably targeted at developers as much as anyone else. OpenSolaris is thus always going to be preparatory, an indication of what's coming over the horizon that's considerably more substantial than a demo but always ahead of release candidacy, so it'll never be finished or ready in the sense that you seem to expect. After all, Sun's problem doesn't appear to be getting Solaris to run well on high- end servers (they've got decades of experience in that discipline) so much as recruiting and retaining developer seats and allowing customers a more straight-forward way to try out things that are otherwise around the corner and to get behind that direction, while Sun presumably does some further work on the release once there's a stable code base implementing the new feature set before blessing it as a Solaris release. That's what makes OpenSolaris interesting: it occupies a space rather ahead of he usual production cycle for developer/customer and Sun, yet Sun's willing to provide full support for customers who are willing to be more aggressive in deploying it, including for production (and I'd think that there would be plenty of shops running open-source infrastructure for n-tier apps who'd find that the time to market for new features in OpenSolaris may be worth more on modest x86 SMP systems than waiting for all the release to be massaged and cut as a Solaris 10 update or Solaris 11 release that pulls every ounce out of the bigger Sun iron). As far as hardware support goes, the likely deployment profile for OpenSolaris, at least in its earlier days, wouldn't be SPARC boxes, big or small, but x86 kit in engineering labs that people wanted to get up and running quickly to see if Solaris could do things that weren't quite coming together in production (this Linux cack isn't working, what you got Solaris?), where SPARC kit and the kind of additional performance validation for big SPARC boxes could wait until the most recent releases. In addition to source code access to what's released in OpenSolaris, these days people have tools like DTrace to give them an idea of whether their workload runs as well or better with changes that may be six months or more ahead of release, and there's considerable advantage in using that to build excitement and confidence, not to mention analytics that customers can share with Sun where they have concerns. A decade ago this would have been access by invitation only, largely limited to large commercial ISVs (I'm largely following the account offered of the partnership with the major RDBMS vendors in the Configuring and Tuning Databases on Solaris book by Alan Packer), with source code licensed separately, but the last decade has shown that there are distinct advantages to more participatory and open early access, which is the space OpenSolaris targets. I may be wrong in that understanding, and I'm sure someone from Sun will correct me if I'm off-base. In the last decade Sun lost market share because shipping Solaris lost customer bake-offs to Linux, where Sun couldn't put the later and greater into the hands of customers to show that promised improvements were more than vapourware (not to put too fine a point on it, but if you were using Sun compilers ten years ago, you might be forgiven for raising an eyebrow to Sun claims and finding yourself reluctant to say compilers bad, systems good after being bitten by the e-cache rash). On the other hand, there's a foot-in-the-door element to delivering an OS that's rather less raw than what arrives on Solaris 10 install media, and you don't have to be a shmoe at home to want an OS that does a bit more out of the box than does vanilla Solaris if you're otherwise taking on the workload of sorting out a build with such an experimental bent. Developers wanting to look ahead don't necessarily want to have to deal with such initial configuration tasks, which doesn't make for a simple opposition to enterprise deployment (similar things should hold even for systems engineers). All of this seems to me a pretty sharp adaptation to the current market, so I'd struggle to imagine Oracle wanting to pull the legs out from under it. Am 28 Jan 2010 um 22:08 schrieb Gary Bainbridge: I realize that OpenSolaris isn't *entirely* separate from Solaris, but if Sun intended to have the next release of Solaris based on OpenSolaris, then millions will have to be spent to get it to that point, and many years. The better option would have been to have the next release built on
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris look and feel, which tends to be blue/silver to something bright red. It would be just too annoying. Bright red will do very well in the greater China market. Very very well, indeed. Thus, quite contrary to what probably everyone else is thinking, I am really hoping that this change will help OpenSolaris make the first step. Finally. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
I realize that OpenSolaris isn't *entirely* separate from Solaris, but if Sun intended to have the next release of Solaris based on OpenSolaris, then millions will have to be spent to get it to that point, and many years. The better option would have been to have the next release built on SXCE. Now, I am aware that SXCE was built on OpenSolaris, but it was more ready for the enterprise because it had the installer, zones, packaging, etc., already there. The Sparc text installer for OpenSolaris was only released yesterday. There can't be any denial that OpenSolaris was targeted for a desktop user. Network Auto Magic? That doesn't yell enterprise, but rather joe schmoe sitting at home. OpenSolaris Sparc wasn't available for the longest time. AI isn't near ready for the enterprise so how many years before OpenSolaris can be ready. How is OpenSolaris going to run on M-Series servers? That I'd like to see. Sun spent $500 million on Solaris 10. Is Oracle going to spend that much on OpenSolaris to get it ready for the enterprise? I doubt it. Take the good parts from SXCE and merge them into Solaris 10 and create SolarisNextGen or something. BTW, I do run OpenSolaris and have since 2008.05 and will install dev preview 131 soon. But please, OpenSolaris isn't ready to be installed on T- and M-Series servers in a 2000 server data center. I agree. I can't see the IPS being anywhere close to Enterprise ready. It's OK on my laptop but I wouldn't advocate switching from Solaris 10 on our data servers. People have complained about the SVR4 patching system, and it creaks like hell, but it's one thing to say it's broke and quite another to 'fix' it with something less functional. I don't like the 'all or nothing' image-update principle, is this because patching doesn't work yet or is that how it always will be? I can't see that fitting well with data centre SysAdmins wanting to patch one critical bug with minimal collateral impact on other services. But this is all academic anyway now that Oracle has taken the reins. Judging by how the word OpenSolaris has yet to be uttered by any Oracle spokesperson, it's quite clear where their intentions are. They will continue to invest in ClosedSolaris. I don't even know if the successor to Solaris 10 will continue to be a free download or if Oracle will want to start making money again from licensing and compulsory support subscriptions. I hope not! Compare Screven's statements about OpenOffice, where the Oracle pledge is to: Continue to develop, promote and support OpenOffice – Including the OpenOffice.org community edition This contrasts with the rather bland operating system commitment: Invest significantly in both Solaris and Linux No inclusion of the opensolaris community edition here. Their website community support statements offer to support the java and opensolaris communities, but this is not a promise to continue Sun's plan to base the next release of Solaris on a public opensolaris build, nor is it a pledge to continue updating the opensolaris code base with any improvements they make to their commercial release of Solaris. If they're really going to spend more than Sun did on improving Solaris, they might choose to keep those improvements to the source code in-house. The 7000 series is here to stay, so OpenSolaris is still of use to Oracle, but even the 7000 machines were always closed appliances from Sun. We know they were built using the OpenSolaris kernel, but that's about it. Maybe I'm being pessimistic, but I think in this case given how much Oracle has already said about Solaris, their lack of comment on OpenSolaris is worrying. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Glynn Foster glynn.fos...@sun.com wrote: On 29/01/2010, at 1:41 PM, Roger Savard wrote: As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD (RockSolid) infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS-SSO, OpenLdap, Bind, apache2, CIFS, Postgresql ... I think it is a mistake to design OpenSolaris as a desktop first, Sun always shine on the server side. Why do you think we're designing OpenSolaris as a desktop first? Because of the LiveCD? What about the Automated Install images, or the text based interactive installer? Lots of room for both, and over the last couple of releases, there's been a higher priority on getting some of the server/enterprise features in place. Because anytime anyone tries to offer any criticism or documents issues trying to use it as a server, the response is 'well we're concentrating on the desktop first'. I seem to recall the whole point of the project Indiana (now OpenSolaris the distribution) versus SXCE was to have a desktop oriented distribution (with the idea of trying to entice developers from other *nix variants). Hence the prioritization of the graphical installer before a text-based one (thus x86 before sparc), interactive installations before automated ones, nwam being the default, bash being the default shell, GNU utilities being the default, etc. If someone wants to argue those are appropriate for a server setting instead of a desktop, I'd like to know the name of their pharmacist =] This is generally not a bad thing (as you know I disagree with a couple of decisions, but I do try to do my talking with hg so to speak to address that) -- I suspect most people understand the constraints of limited resources and such, but it doesn't mean we get to have it both ways. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Sun has already been doing that. If you pay for support and use the support repository, you are using a closed fork. Since penSolaris-dev and OpenSolaris-support are pretty close together temporally, this isn't a big deal. You can look at a snapshot of the snv_111 code and the list of fixes applied to get a pretty good idea of what the code looks like. After several years and potentially thousands of fixes, a lot of the benefit of the open source roots is lost. While the typical customer doesn't have an interest in modifying the code, many have an interest in looking at it to understand observed behavior or to aid in writing dtrace scripts that journey into fbt probes. As the years have passed since the fork between what became Solaris 10 and what became OpenSolaris, I have increasingly less confidence that looking at any version of OpenSolaris code will allow me to really understand what is happening on a Solaris 10 system. That is, as the number of fixes and features included in Solaris 10 increases, the value of the open source roots decreases. I have always expected that the same will happen with Solaris 10+1 (11g?). I have consistently asked Sun to make the code for supported OS's available to customers, even if it is under a license other than the CDDL. I encourage others to make similar requests. -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ With you 1000% on that. I'd always like nothing better than to have as much of the source as possible (i.e. not locked up in some agreement to keep it proprietary) _matching_ what I'm running there to look at. I'm most unlikely to have the time or patience to do a full build often, and as the code sits now, it's not pretty to try to build one thing without having first done a full build of everything. So even on a development system, I might never try _fixing_ something myself. But the better the code I can look at matches what I'm running (esp with tools like DTrace or (k)mdb), the better the chance I can at least understand whose problem something is (OS vendor, 3rd party, in-house) and do enough of the diagnosis that I can get a quick turnaround out of them. OpenGrok is pretty good for looking at the code, but it could be great if one could tell it what one was running and have it show just that version of the code. Too few people anywhere are good at troubleshooting, and the ones that are tend to be busy and shielded by layers of helpdesk types and the like; so whatever someone can do for themselves can really make a difference. And if there's an easy workaround, one might be able to find it oneself. And then there's sunsolve. Not terrible, but not great either. Not near as good at relevance of unfielded keyword searches as the major search engines, nor capable of good old fashioned Boolean queries (like AltaVista used to be way back when). -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
On 01/28/10 09:07 PM, Jason King wrote: I seem to recall the whole point of the project Indiana (now OpenSolaris the distribution) versus SXCE was to have a desktop oriented distribution (with the idea of trying to entice developers from other *nix variants). Hence the prioritization of the graphical installer before a text-based one (thus x86 before sparc), interactive installations before automated ones, nwam being the default, bash being the default shell, GNU utilities being the default, etc. If someone wants to argue those are appropriate for a server setting instead of a desktop, I'd like to know the name of their pharmacist =] Given that almost all of the bits of functionality you mentioned above are often found in GNU/Linux server distributions too, I don't see the issue. Yes, some of the bits were prioritised before others, but I've used (and installed) numerous GNU/Linux distributions in the past that used graphical installers, automated network configuration, GNU utilities, and bash as the default shell :) Somehow, I don't think those are issues that are a large barrier to adoption. And yes, I remember installing operating systems from *tape* and floppy disk...you want to talk about barriers! -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
I've no luck with that (which I of course tried first)... don't just look at the name of the boot environment, it's simply counted upwards and after 129 comes 130 ;) boot the new BE and run uname -a to see which build you're actually running - I bet it will show snv_131. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Goodbye Sun.com
W. Wayne Liauh wrote: I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris look and feel, which tends to be blue/silver to something bright red. It would be just too annoying. Bright red will do very well in the greater China market. Very very well, indeed. Yah, things are a bit red over there, aren't they. :) More subdued tones here in Japan, but Oracle is very big in Tokyo nonetheless (and throughout all of Asia, obviously), and that will offer us some really interesting opportunities in this region. And I like the blue-ish feel to our stuff as well, but I could get used to a bolder look as well. It's growing on me. And it could be good for us to assert a bit more as well. Thus, quite contrary to what probably everyone else is thinking, I am really hoping that this change will help OpenSolaris make the first step. Finally. What's interesting about the general statements thus far is this: growth pervades the rhetoric. That's new. I like it. Jim ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
In retrospect, yesterday's webcast reinforced a new fully and integrated stack (from disks to apps) for Sparc (Solaris) and Linux! I wish Oracle sees OpenSolaris as a server and not only a desktop where you develop apps for Solaris! Oracle is a big fan of Linux ... mentionned 2-3 times. Oracle also mention that Solaris is more advanced then linux and it would take years for linux to catch up to Solaris. I think Oracle sees a huge opening to promote Solaris while linux is currently missing those advancements,like ZFS,etc and if Oracle leaves OpenSolaris/Solaris under the CDDL then it can create it's own community with Opensolaris/Solaris similar to redhat and fedora and take market share away from linux and when i say linux i really mean red hat and novell. only if Oracle promotes it correctly. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
On 29/01/2010, at 4:07 PM, Jason King wrote: On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Glynn Foster glynn.fos...@sun.com wrote: On 29/01/2010, at 1:41 PM, Roger Savard wrote: As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD (RockSolid) infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS-SSO, OpenLdap, Bind, apache2, CIFS, Postgresql ... I think it is a mistake to design OpenSolaris as a desktop first, Sun always shine on the server side. Why do you think we're designing OpenSolaris as a desktop first? Because of the LiveCD? What about the Automated Install images, or the text based interactive installer? Lots of room for both, and over the last couple of releases, there's been a higher priority on getting some of the server/enterprise features in place. Because anytime anyone tries to offer any criticism or documents issues trying to use it as a server, the response is 'well we're concentrating on the desktop first'. Certainly it made sense to focus on desktop and developer as ideal candidates to test out some of the technology we were building. The end game was always going to be enterprise and building something that would carry over into the next generation enterprise platform. The response was more likely to be acknowledgement that some things weren't quite ready yet for the larger scale. Glynn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
If I wanted to run a GNU/Linux distribution I would, but apparently the decision is being made for those who like Solaris, to be made to run another Linux-type server. Seriously, how long (how many years) and how much money is it going to take to make OpenSolaris a replacement for Solaris 10? Is Oracle going to spend that much money? To make a desktop OS work as a data center OS is not remotely the best engineering practice. Could you run Solaris 8 on a desktop? Sure. But why? It wasn't practical. Could you use Windows 95 as a server? Probably many did. But why? That wasn't its intended use. Now the OS is going to be retrofitted to make it an enterprise server? With Solaris you can choose what you want to install. Not so with OpenSolaris. You get what you're told. I'm probably old school, however, the barrier to adoption is probably right, but with those installers like RHEL and SuSE have, everything is going web-based and you need Java installed to open a console. Give me a Putty session and connect me via ALOM and I'm ready to go with my Jumpstart server! 'boot net - install' and off and running. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Why do you think we're designing OpenSolaris as a desktop first? OpenSolaris is designed as a destkop first because the GUI installer doesn't even let you assign a static IP address the way that Red Hat Enterprise Linux / Oracle Unbreakable Linux / CentOS installer does and it forces you to have a full on GNOME desktop installed on your server whether you want it to or not (compare this to a server OS like FreeBSD or Ubuntu Server which does not install x-windows and RHEL which lets you choose whether or not you want to install it). For OpenSolaris to even be considered as a server O.S. in most shops, it needs three things: (1) Assign a static IP address during the installation process (it's ok if it has to be installed from a live CD, that's fine, but the installer needs to have a static IP option and not just default to using DHCP, which is a huge pain for me because I never, never, NEVER, NEVER use DHCP in any of the several data centers I work in). (2) There needs to be an option to install it as a headless server on x86 or on a SPARC Netra with no GNOME, no X-windows, no GUI installed. All that should be installed is a command line with SSH and virtual terminals and the screen utility to switch between different CLI's. Just put the server related packages like Postfix and Apache and BIND / DNS etc. etc. ready to go in the /var/pkg/download cache folder so that they can be installed quickly into zones right after the install without even needing to talk to the IPS repository. (3) After the installation process is done, only SSH and mail should be running. Everything else (this includes GNOME and multicast DNS / avahi and CUPS) should be turned off! When the OpenSolaris Indiana developers get serious about competing with FreeBSD and Red Hat Enterprise Linux in the server market and are willing to implement the three items that I have mentioned above, give us in the community a call and we will buy it. Until then, we will just be waiting quietly in the wings. I've been waiting patiently for over a year now for a real minimalized JeOS OpenSolaris server distro that prospective clients can install from a CD to come out, but so far no dice, the only OpenSolaris minimal headless server type operating systems that are available so far are Nexenta and SXCE. Just go to any real professional Linux, *BSD or Solaris sysadmin's blog and you'll see that they all unanimously want the same thing for their servers. Take Ben Rockwood for example who said in several different posts in his blog here: http://www.cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=1065 that Nexenta and Solaris Express worked great on servers but that Indiana wasn't ready this is coming from a lead sysadmin from a company that is the largest OpenSolaris (SXCE) customer that Sun has ever had. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
With the OpenSolaris distribution, you install a relatively small core (that is supported), and then you add pieces to that. U, OpenSolaris might be an improvement over Solaris 10 in some ways (i.e. pkg image-update being better than live upgrade) but any OS that forces you to install a full on GNOME desktop (whether you want it or not) is certainly not a relatively small core. If you want so see what a small core looks like, I recommend that you try installing FreeBSD or OpenBSD some time. FreeBSD is starting to look particularly interesting because it has a lot of the same great features that OpenSolaris does, but it gives you a much smaller minimal installation footprint (just SSH and a command line and man pages and a ports tree and nothing else) which makes FreeBSD look good for people who develop embedded devices while OpenSolaris looks bad (i.e. you don't want a full on GNOME desktop running in an embedded server appliance). -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Anon Y Mous wrote: (2) There needs to be an option to install it as a headless server on x86 or on a SPARC Netra with no GNOME, no X-windows, no GUI installed. All that should be installed is a command line with SSH and virtual terminals and the screen utility to switch between different CLI's. Just put the server related packages like Postfix and Apache and BIND / DNS etc. etc. ready to go in the /var/pkg/download cache folder so that they can be installed quickly into zones right after the install without even needing to talk to the IPS repository. Done. See the Automated Install or new Text Install CD's. (3) After the installation process is done, only SSH and mail should be running. Done since the Secure by Default project integrated a few years ago. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
On 01/28/10 10:50 PM, Anon Y Mous wrote: With the OpenSolaris distribution, you install a relatively small core (that is supported), and then you add pieces to that. U, OpenSolaris might be an improvement over Solaris 10 in some ways (i.e. pkg image-update being better than live upgrade) but any OS that forces you to install a full on GNOME desktop (whether you want it or not) is certainly not a relatively small core. If you want so see what a small core looks like, I recommend that you try installing FreeBSD or OpenBSD some time. FreeBSD is starting to look particularly interesting because it has a lot of the same great features that OpenSolaris does, but it gives you a much smaller minimal installation footprint (just SSH and a command line and man pages and a ports tree and nothing else) which makes FreeBSD look good for people who develop embedded devices while OpenSolaris looks bad (i.e. you don't want a full on GNOME desktop running in an embedded server appliance). Everyone's definition of a minimal OS is different since their definition reflects their own needs. For example, for a desktop user, their core OS includes GNOME, etc. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
(3) After the installation process is done, only SSH and mail should be running. alanc: Done since the Secure by Default project integrated a few years ago. Yes, but I just had to do the following two commands on an OpenSolaris Indiana snv_129 server that a client was evaluating: #svcadm disable multicast:default #svcadm disable cups/scheduler:default so cups and multicast dns were running in the default install, which is fine and dandy on a desktop, such as the OpenSolaris desktop I do work on, but I was going to benchmark this server for a client to show them what OpenSolaris can (or can't) do as a minimalized headless server and I'm trying to squeeze out every last bit of performance here. It's not going to be a print server so there's no need for cups ;-) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Gary Bainbridge g_patri...@yahoo.com wrote: If I wanted to run a GNU/Linux distribution I would, but apparently the decision is being made for those who like Solaris, to be made to run another Linux-type server. Seriously, how long (how many years) and how much money is it going to take to make OpenSolaris a replacement for Solaris 10? Is Oracle going to spend that much money? In my mind the key things that seem to be missing for it to be able to take the baton from Solaris 10 are: - Interactive text installer (apparently that came out in the last day or so) - Easy to configure automated installer. Some docs to go with the bootable AI iso would be a big help here. - The ability to host all of the media required on my own install servers - The ability to install software from a file - Speed improvements for pkg command, particularly on CMT - Package signing to ensure integrity of bits delivered. - Refactor package names - Integration with 800-USA-4SUN. Any OpenSolaris cases I have opened on a supported system have turned into redirects to mailing lists. Maybe this has improved in the past 6 months. - Stablization freeze and beta cycle Certainly, there may be other things that are missing from a Solaris 11 roadmap that no one has shared with me. However, those aren't necessarily things that keep it from being at least as good as Solaris 10. I suspect that if resources were increased to finish off the areas listed above that the beta cycle could begin with 3 - 6 months and a release could happen this year. By and large, I find that (after installation) OpenSolaris servers are nearly identical to Solaris 10 servers to administer, except when I need a feature that is unique to OpenSolaris. I generally find more value in the OpenSolaris feature set. Sure there are bleeding edge issues that crop up, but those are the things that get ironed out in stablization and beta. To make a desktop OS work as a data center OS is not remotely the best engineering practice. Could you run Solaris 8 on a desktop? Sure. But why? It wasn't practical. Could you use Windows 95 as a server? Probably many did. But why? That wasn't its intended use. Now the OS is going to be retrofitted to make it an enterprise server? With Solaris you can choose what you want to install. Not so with OpenSolaris. You get what you're told. I see it just the opposite. On Solaris 10 if you are trying to create an image to work across all hardware platforms, the most supported way of doing this is to install SUNWCXall. Then you can start trimming away big things like Staroffice and the bulk of the desktop tools until you become afraid that you are going to break some application's unknown dependencies. For example, the Oracle installer never says that it needs to have X libraries (but it does if running in GUI mode) and some annoying J2EE app never mentions that it needs X fonts but it does else it can't render some text in images. Go figure. If you decide not to do flash archives on Solaris 10 and install via pkgadd instead (not nearly as painful after Casper's work on turbo charging), you can start out a lot smaller (e.g SUNWCmreq or SUNWCreq), but creation of a custom profile to bring in those annoying bits that you've learned are needed is quite a pain. If you guess wrong at install time, you will go through lots of iterations of pkgadd + error messages to try to add the other packages you need - once you figure out which uninstalled package delivers the shared library or font files that you need. In contrast, with OpenSolaris I can use AI to start out with a pretty small installation. Lots smaller than slim_install (live CD contents) - look to the packages installed in a zone by default (plus kernel bits) as a rough guide of the base install. Then add the packages that deliver the shared library or font that you need. The dependencies should automatically add the rest of the packages. I know this isn't perfect yet, but I think a beta cycle would raise the bugs and fixes for missing dependencies. If you miss something at install time, it is just as easy after the system is installed to add the required packages with automatic dependency resolution. -- Mike Gerdts http://mgerdts.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
To make a desktop OS work as a data center OS is not remotely the best engineering practice. Could you run Solaris 8 on a desktop? Sure. But why? It wasn't practical. Could you use Windows 95 as a server? Probably many did. But why? That wasn't its intended use. And where is that Solaris now? The most widespread server enterprise OS are Windows Server 2003/2008 and different Linux distributions. It's the worst policy: we are cool server OS for REALLY BIG SPARC SERVERS. It made Solaris 10... not very popular. How many good Solaris admins can you find? How much do they want to earn? And every student can manage Windows 2003 after some months of training. It is like Win XP. (Yes, it may have in some type different architecture, it's not easy to administrate it correctly (as every other OS), but it looks familiar and simple). Linux was the most available Unix-like OS. And after people had tried it, they didn't want to study commercial Unix (Solaris, HP-UX, AIX and other monsters). These OS looked unfamiliar and strange. RedHat appeared as mass spread desktop Linux. Ubuntu is the most wide spread desktop Linux - and now it goes to server market. I heard a lot some wishes for Oracle to officially support Ubuntu Server... And do you really say that Oracle will close OpenSolaris project? It is the most stupid step they can do. The popularity of OS is determined not only by its quality, but even more (do you remember Win 98 servers in SMB area ?) by its community -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Mike knows all of this I believe, so this is mainly for others: On 01/28/10 11:11 PM, Mike Gerdts wrote: In my mind the key things that seem to be missing for it to be able to take the baton from Solaris 10 are: ... - The ability to host all of the media required on my own install servers Planned; non-technical issues have made this difficult. It was provided for the 2009.06 release. - The ability to install software from a file Missed 2010.03; already in progress for the next. - Speed improvements for pkg command, particularly on CMT There have been significant performance improvements to the point where many operations can take less than a second (or 500ms even) now on x86 systems. However, significant optimisation work remains for SPARC/CMT. - Package signing to ensure integrity of bits delivered. Tentatively scheduled for the next release. - Refactor package names Coming in the next build or so I believe. Some of this has already been done. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
I just had to play some more whack-a-mole and kill yet another one of these unnecessary services: # svcadm disable avahi-bridge-dsd:default and what does: svc:/application/desktop-cache/mime-types-cache:default do? And why is it running right now on my minimalized headless server that has X-windows disabled? There should be an official minimal OpenSolaris Indiana distribution so that we aren't forced to use Milax or Nexenta Core to get that high performance, streamlined and minimalized headless server OS that many of us are looking for. Right now JeOS OpenSolaris only seems to work for VM images. A live CD distro that boots to a text prompt might with a static IP address might be nice to play around with in a lot of instances... Yes, but I just had to do the following two commands on an OpenSolaris Indiana snv_129 server that a client was evaluating: #svcadm disable multicast:default #svcadm disable cups/scheduler:default so cups and multicast dns were running in the default install, which is fine and dandy on a desktop, such as the OpenSolaris desktop I do work on, but I was going to benchmark this server for a client to show them what OpenSolaris can (or can't) do as a minimalized headless server and I'm trying to squeeze out every last bit of performance here. It's not going to be a print server so there's no need for cups ;-) -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
SMF is already filled up with so much stuff that at a certain point, it starts to become overwhelming from a sysadmin persective just to parse through the output of svcs -a and now the goal is to add even more stuff to it by getting rid of scripting during package installation and offloading all of that stuff to SMF as well! Jeepers creepers this is going to be tough to admin! SysV packages had shell scripts in them, or at least I think they did, but then again I'm no UNIX expert. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Shawn Walker wrote: On 01/28/10 10:50 PM, Anon Y Mous wrote: With the OpenSolaris distribution, you install a relatively small core (that is supported), and then you add pieces to that. U, OpenSolaris might be an improvement over Solaris 10 in some ways (i.e. pkg image-update being better than live upgrade) but any OS that forces you to install a full on GNOME desktop (whether you want it or not) is certainly not a relatively small core. If you want so see what a small core looks like, I recommend that you try installing FreeBSD or OpenBSD some time. FreeBSD is starting to look particularly interesting because it has a lot of the same great features that OpenSolaris does, but it gives you a much smaller minimal installation footprint (just SSH and a command line and man pages and a ports tree and nothing else) which makes FreeBSD look good for people who develop embedded devices while OpenSolaris looks bad (i.e. you don't want a full on GNOME desktop running in an embedded server appliance). Everyone's definition of a minimal OS is different since their definition reflects their own needs. For example, for a desktop user, their core OS includes GNOME, etc. Shawn hits the problem right on the head. Minimal installs for me wouldn't include man pages, but X server apps. With the old Solaris method of packaging, the only pretty much usable install was everything. SUNWxallNow, with IPS, we at least have given everyone the option to create their own, well-understood install image, customized according to YOUR needs. More importantly, custom installs from a LiveCD (or, frankly, any interactive media) aren't a valid Enterprise method of handling things. Automated installs are the way to go, and efforts to allow for distro customization belong there, not in a interactive installer, which it intended (by definition) as a 1-off. Supporting N different install flavors for 1-offs is foolhardy, as we're always going to be making someone unhappy. The current LiveCD is a reasonable compromise for a single image for 1-offs, and AI and related technologies are available for wide customization. There's still some work to be done on AI, and we indeed should think about maybe tweeking the LiveCD, but efforts to support customization in the LiveCD install are (IMHO) misplaced. Frankly, the only thing I'd like the LiveCD to support in terms of customization is to have the ability of the LiveCD installer to point to an AI server, and have the AI server provide the install profile software. -- 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] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Shawn Walker wrote: - Refactor package names Coming in the next build or so I believe. Some of this has already been done. Package renaming missed 132 and is trying for 133, but refactoring package contents won't be until after 2010.03. (Fortunately, it will be easier to do that once the consolidations are building IPS only - we won't have to worry about keeping in sync with the old SVR4 rules like separate root vs. usr or the old SVR4 cluster boundaries like no docs in end user cluster.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
Anon Y Mous wrote: SMF is already filled up with so much stuff that at a certain point, it starts to become overwhelming from a sysadmin persective just to parse through the output of svcs -a and now the goal is to add even more stuff to it by getting rid of scripting during package installation and offloading all of that stuff to SMF as well! Jeepers creepers this is going to be tough to admin! SysV packages had shell scripts in them, or at least I think they did, but then again I'm no UNIX expert. That's a valid complaint, and I don't think the answer is set in stone yet - that is, theres still room for ideas as to where to implement such functionality. SVR4 packages did indeed allow (arbitrary) shells scripts, both pre- and post-install (and pre- and post-remove). This is a useful function, and discussions on it and related topics belong over ininstall-disc...@opensolaris.org -- 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] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
It appears that this site was left behind on sun's servers and was not added to oracle.com like the rest of sun's products. I hope it's not a bad sign. Just think a second why it has always been opensolaris.org and not sun.com/opensolaris ... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Shawn Walker swal...@opensolaris.org wrote: On 01/28/10 09:07 PM, Jason King wrote: I seem to recall the whole point of the project Indiana (now OpenSolaris the distribution) versus SXCE was to have a desktop oriented distribution (with the idea of trying to entice developers from other *nix variants). Hence the prioritization of the graphical installer before a text-based one (thus x86 before sparc), interactive installations before automated ones, nwam being the default, bash being the default shell, GNU utilities being the default, etc. If someone wants to argue those are appropriate for a server setting instead of a desktop, I'd like to know the name of their pharmacist =] Given that almost all of the bits of functionality you mentioned above are often found in GNU/Linux server distributions too, I don't see the issue. Yes, some of the bits were prioritised before others, but I've used (and installed) numerous GNU/Linux distributions in the past that used graphical installers, automated network configuration, GNU utilities, and bash as the default shell :) The pieces prioritized were those most geared for the desktop -- as I said (but perhaps wasn't clear) I don't think that's necessarily wrong (I won't rehash the implications of a GNU userland in the context of Solaris, that's been beaten to death, and will hopefully become a moot point between the stuff I and Roland have been doing is complete), but it does mean that currently the lack of usability at the server level is a valid criticism (for now, I'm hopeful it will not continue to be one). My point was that to pretend that's not the case (even if the eventual goal is to make sure it's equally suitable for both desktop and the enterprise) when all the historical evidence suggests otherwise just looks bad. The desktop was prioritized first, but now more work is being done to make it more suitable for the enterprise (and I do actually see that btw). No matter what the choice is, in the world of finite resources, someone's going to be disappointed, so I don't know that any particular order is necessarily 'better'. It just is what is it is, but don't pretend it's not -- that's all I'm suggesting. Somehow, I don't think those are issues that are a large barrier to adoption. And yes, I remember installing operating systems from *tape* and floppy disk...you want to talk about barriers! But there still are barriers (at the moment) for adoption in the enterprise. No I don't think they're insurmountable, nor that the won't get addressed (I do actually read pkg-discuss, so I do see the work that's going on, and see that it's being worked on), but the barriers are there for the moment. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What's Going to Happen to OpenSolaris?
To make a desktop OS work as a data center OS is not remotely the best engineering practice. Could you run Solaris 8 on a desktop? Sure. But why? It wasn't practical. Could you use Windows 95 as a server? Probably many did. But why? That wasn't its intended use. And where is that Solaris now? The most widespread server enterprise OS are Windows Server 2003/2008 and different Linux distributions. It's the worst policy: we are cool server OS for REALLY BIG SPARC SERVERS. It made Solaris 10... not very popular. How many good Solaris admins can you find? How much do they want to earn? And every student can manage Windows 2003 after some months of training. It is like Win XP. (Yes, it may have in some type different architecture, it's not easy to administrate it correctly (as every other OS), but it looks familiar and simple). Linux was the most available Unix-like OS. And after people had tried it, they didn't want to study commercial Unix (Solaris, HP-UX, AIX and other monsters). These OS looked unfamiliar and strange. RedHat appeared as mass spread desktop Linux. Ubuntu is the most wide spread desktop Linux - and now it goes to server market. I heard a lot some wishes for Oracle to officially support Ubuntu Server... And do you really say that Oracle will close OpenSolaris project? It is the most stupid step they can do. The popularity of OS is determined not only by its quality, but even more (do you remember Win 98 servers in SMB area ?) by its community Nice rant. There may even be some truth to it. The big iron only approach does tend to shut out newcomers. A few points though: * I don't think Ubuntu is the top desktop Unix-like OS, that would probably be Mac OS X. (in terms of actual desktops in use, not necessarily downloads, since a lot of downloads are just people playing around, e.g. I've got a VirtualBox VM with Ubuntu Studio in it, but I hardly ever _use_ it; and Mac OS X isn't (legitimately) available for download anyway). * if I'm dealing with lots of servers (small or large), I want automated installs and serial (or better, network access via an RSC or ALOM) console access. Non-graphical, no click-monkeys allowed. Probably the server won't need _any_ of X11 installed, although sometimes it might. _Obviously_ I don't want just a character console for my desktop, but desktops aren't really running much more than browsers and word processors, and occasionally website prototypes or the like. Now with some sort of distributed scheduler, unused desktop cycles might be doing more than that, but those things would require uniform (automated) installs, and probably OpenMPI (which a non-developer desktop not sharing cycles probably wouldn't need). So not only big servers, but even many little desktops, mean that enterprise features can't be neglected for the sake of eye candy. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Building ON after end of January 2010
The main opensolaris download page advises two things: that SXCE will no longer be available past January 2010, but also that, To build OpenSolaris from the source, you first need to install a suitable OpenSolaris distribution, which at this time is limited to the Solaris Express Community Release (above). My build experience is consistent with this. For example, onnv_130 builds just fine with the sources, SunStudio level and onbld tools provided at the -130 level. However, just for grins, I tried to build the 111b-level set sources, etc., driving the build with a 2009.06 system (which reports snv_111b from uname(1)), and this build indeed did fall over badly on mismatched header levels and related problems. Do we know at this point how ON consolidation builds are to be handled after the sunsetting of SXCE? Regards, Jim -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Building ON after end of January 2010
On Jan 29, 2010, at 1:15 AM, James C. Cotillier wrote: The main opensolaris download page advises two things: that SXCE will no longer be available past January 2010, but also that, To build OpenSolaris from the source, you first need to install a suitable OpenSolaris distribution, which at this time is limited to the Solaris Express Community Release (above). My build experience is consistent with this. For example, onnv_130 builds just fine with the sources, SunStudio level and onbld tools provided at the -130 level. However, just for grins, I tried to build the 111b-level set sources, etc., driving the build with a 2009.06 system (which reports snv_111b from uname(1)), and this build indeed did fall over badly on mismatched header levels and related problems. Do we know at this point how ON consolidation builds are to be handled after the sunsetting of SXCE? You can build ON on OpenSolaris now and have been able to for some time. Although I believe you need to use one of the /dev builds. You will need to add the extra repository to your system and then install the osnet-dev package to do so. http://blogs.sun.com/lianep/entry/simplifying_building_on_on_an -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
