Re: [osol-discuss] Someone please tell me I'm wrong
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > And even they change their minds, so what they said last month may not be > true this month, such as the recent changes re-expanding support for > third-party hardware after previously announcing plans to cut it back. Alan, I probably misses that. Can you point me at some official URL or something, where I can learn this ? Thank you. -- Regards, Cyril ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be available?
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: >> Slide 22 is also very interesting and gives me a lot >> of reassurance: >> >> OpenSolaris >> • Oracle will continue to make OpenSolaris available >> as open source and >> Oracle will continue to actively support and >> participate in the >> OpenSolaris community >> • Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did >> prior to the >> acquisition, and will continue to contribute >> innovative technologies to >> OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other >> open source projects >> >> Coming from Oracle there's no longer any doubt that >> it will be alright. >> I'm going to be an OpenSolairs user for quite some >> time to come. ;-) > > While that presentation was indeed reassuring, from the > reactions I've seen so far, many seem to hope that > "participate in the OpenSolaris community" would include > less restrictive communication than it appears is allowed > by the current application of their policies to OpenSolaris. > > I see open source plus community meaning, when it wouldn't > compromise competitive information about a pending product, > that the development process and activity is also open, to include > some information about _planned_ components thereof, as well. > > One of the many reasons for more open communication is that > outside contributors should be entitled to a little courtesy when > their work is affected (look at ksh93-discuss to see a case of that). Oracle doesn't want the command modernisation and ksh93 projects. They had too much community influence in the past, are too independent and Oracle wants to replace the Solaris commands in usr/bin with GNU commands. Oracle has already decided that in February and now try to get rid of the projects by denying them repository access. The projects are dead. There is enough evidence what Oracle is planning. Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? David -- Forwarded message -- From: Dave Johnson Date: Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:44 PM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be available? To: "Richard L. Hamilton" Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: >> Slide 22 is also very interesting and gives me a lot >> of reassurance: >> >> OpenSolaris >> • Oracle will continue to make OpenSolaris available >> as open source and >> Oracle will continue to actively support and >> participate in the >> OpenSolaris community >> • Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did >> prior to the >> acquisition, and will continue to contribute >> innovative technologies to >> OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other >> open source projects >> >> Coming from Oracle there's no longer any doubt that >> it will be alright. >> I'm going to be an OpenSolairs user for quite some >> time to come. ;-) > > While that presentation was indeed reassuring, from the > reactions I've seen so far, many seem to hope that > "participate in the OpenSolaris community" would include > less restrictive communication than it appears is allowed > by the current application of their policies to OpenSolaris. > > I see open source plus community meaning, when it wouldn't > compromise competitive information about a pending product, > that the development process and activity is also open, to include > some information about _planned_ components thereof, as well. > > One of the many reasons for more open communication is that > outside contributors should be entitled to a little courtesy when > their work is affected (look at ksh93-discuss to see a case of that). Oracle doesn't want the command modernisation and ksh93 projects. They had too much community influence in the past, are too independent and Oracle wants to replace the Solaris commands in usr/bin with GNU commands. Oracle has already decided that in February and now try to get rid of the projects by denying them repository access. The projects are dead. There is enough evidence what Oracle is planning. Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Opensolaris or Solaris VPN solutions
Just curious what is the basic plan for VPN solutions for Opensolaris or even Solaris in general? What would Oracle recommend as a common solution in this category that would include Solaris x86, and Solaris sparc? Open source or proprietary as long as it has a roadmap that can work and is available on both hardware platforms for Solaris and OpenSolaris. ---Bob -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Opensolaris or Solaris VPN solutions
Bob Palowoda wrote: Just curious what is the basic plan for VPN solutions for Opensolaris or even Solaris in general? What would Oracle recommend as a common solution in this category that would include Solaris x86, and Solaris sparc? Open source or proprietary as long as it has a roadmap that can work and is available on both hardware platforms for Solaris and OpenSolaris. ---Bob There are currently several 3rd-party solutions that work on both Sparc & x64, for both OpenSolaris & Solaris. In addition, both support a variety of VPN-style solutions via IPSEC and tunneling. Plus, practically all of the VPN/Firewall vendors produce clients for Solaris (which, to my knowledge, also work fine on OpenSolaris). I don't think there has to be One True Solution, and in fact, I'd be very reluctant to support that sort of thinking. -- 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] Opensolaris or Solaris VPN solutions
> Bob Palowoda wrote: > > Just curious what is the basic plan for VPN > solutions for Opensolaris or even Solaris in general? > What would Oracle recommend as a common solution in > this category that would include Solaris x86, and > Solaris sparc? Open source or proprietary as long > as it has a roadmap that can work and is available > on both hardware platforms for Solaris and > OpenSolaris. > > > ---Bob > > > > There are currently several 3rd-party solutions that > work on both Sparc > & x64, for both OpenSolaris & Solaris. In addition, > both support a > variety of VPN-style solutions via IPSEC and > tunneling. Plus, > practically all of the VPN/Firewall vendors produce > clients for Solaris > (which, to my knowledge, also work fine on > OpenSolaris). > > I don't think there has to be One True Solution, and > in fact, I'd be > very reluctant to support that sort of thinking. > You have suggested supporting anything so your safe. :) ---Bob -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Dave Johnson wrote: > This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? > > David > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Dave Johnson > Date: Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:44 PM > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be > available? > To: "Richard L. Hamilton" > Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org > > > On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: >>> Slide 22 is also very interesting and gives me a lot >>> of reassurance: >>> >>> OpenSolaris >>> • Oracle will continue to make OpenSolaris available >>> as open source and >>> Oracle will continue to actively support and >>> participate in the >>> OpenSolaris community >>> • Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did >>> prior to the >>> acquisition, and will continue to contribute >>> innovative technologies to >>> OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other >>> open source projects >>> >>> Coming from Oracle there's no longer any doubt that >>> it will be alright. >>> I'm going to be an OpenSolairs user for quite some >>> time to come. ;-) >> >> While that presentation was indeed reassuring, from the >> reactions I've seen so far, many seem to hope that >> "participate in the OpenSolaris community" would include >> less restrictive communication than it appears is allowed >> by the current application of their policies to OpenSolaris. >> >> I see open source plus community meaning, when it wouldn't >> compromise competitive information about a pending product, >> that the development process and activity is also open, to include >> some information about _planned_ components thereof, as well. >> >> One of the many reasons for more open communication is that >> outside contributors should be entitled to a little courtesy when >> their work is affected (look at ksh93-discuss to see a case of that). > > Oracle doesn't want the command modernisation and ksh93 projects. They > had too much community influence in the past, are too independent and > Oracle wants to replace the Solaris commands in usr/bin with GNU > commands. Oracle has already decided that in February and now try to > get rid of the projects by denying them repository access. > The projects are dead. There is enough evidence what Oracle is planning. > > Dave Where's your "evidence", troll? Jenny -- Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
> This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB > intervene? Yeah sure .. I'll call up lawyers this morning first thing on nothing but your word and file a statement of claim followed by a class action suit on behalf of the active community members seeking remedy for both damages and mental cruelty. Or I may just make a cup of coffee. Guess which one will happen ? Dennis ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be available?
Do you have any proof of that? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be available?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:44 AM, Dave Johnson wrote: > > Oracle doesn't want the command modernisation and ksh93 projects. They > had too much community influence in the past, are too independent and > Oracle wants to replace the Solaris commands in usr/bin with GNU > commands. Oracle has already decided that in February and now try to > get rid of the projects by denying them repository access. > The projects are dead. There is enough evidence what Oracle is planning. The problem we're currently working through is that Oracle is less open in communication with the community that many would like. You, though, seem to have privileged access to information that's not available to the rest of the community - perhaps you would like to share that with us? Or are you scaremongering based on incomplete (or no) data? -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 2:40 PM, Jennifer Pioch wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Dave Johnson > wrote: >> This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? >> >> David >> >> -- Forwarded message -- >> From: Dave Johnson >> Date: Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:44 PM >> Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be >> available? >> To: "Richard L. Hamilton" >> Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org >> >> >> On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Richard L. Hamilton >> wrote: Slide 22 is also very interesting and gives me a lot of reassurance: OpenSolaris • Oracle will continue to make OpenSolaris available as open source and Oracle will continue to actively support and participate in the OpenSolaris community • Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did prior to the acquisition, and will continue to contribute innovative technologies to OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other open source projects Coming from Oracle there's no longer any doubt that it will be alright. I'm going to be an OpenSolairs user for quite some time to come. ;-) >>> >>> While that presentation was indeed reassuring, from the >>> reactions I've seen so far, many seem to hope that >>> "participate in the OpenSolaris community" would include >>> less restrictive communication than it appears is allowed >>> by the current application of their policies to OpenSolaris. >>> >>> I see open source plus community meaning, when it wouldn't >>> compromise competitive information about a pending product, >>> that the development process and activity is also open, to include >>> some information about _planned_ components thereof, as well. >>> >>> One of the many reasons for more open communication is that >>> outside contributors should be entitled to a little courtesy when >>> their work is affected (look at ksh93-discuss to see a case of that). >> >> Oracle doesn't want the command modernisation and ksh93 projects. They >> had too much community influence in the past, are too independent and >> Oracle wants to replace the Solaris commands in usr/bin with GNU >> commands. Oracle has already decided that in February and now try to >> get rid of the projects by denying them repository access. >> The projects are dead. There is enough evidence what Oracle is planning. >> >> Dave > > Where's your "evidence", troll? Here is the evidence: Evidence 1: - Project cooperation with ksh project withdrawn - GNU commands as replacements are the future -- Forwarded message -- From: John Sonnenschein Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM Subject: Re: Removal of some redundant GNU utilities [PSARC/2009/660 FastTrack timeout 12/10/2009] To: psarc-...@sun.com After discussions with the OpenSolaris architect and lead, I withdraw this case. It was premature and will be revised as part of a bigger project to provide Solaris modernization using GNU utilities for /usr/bin. -JohnS ___ opensolaris-arc mailing list opensolaris-...@opensolaris.org Evidence 2: Repeated deny of repository access. Repeated. The ksh team is merely needed to do bug fixing for ksh until the team can be replaced by Oracle in house resources. -- Forwarded message -- From: John Beck Date: 2010/4/30 Subject: Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] 4th code review for next POSIX utility modernisation milestone, ksh93 bug fixes and /usr/bin/xgrep To: ? Cc: Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion , John Beck , venkateshwara...@sun.com, u.v.ravin...@oracle.com > All put backs related to the POSIX utility modernisation are on *hold* > right now, even the security related bits of /bin/mktemp we fixed. What I said was that conversion of any *new* utilities to ksh93 is on hold. Bug fixes in ksh93, its libraries, and previously converted utilities are all welcome. -- John Sponsor my 100-mile bike ride fund raiser for the American Lung Association http://action.lungusa.org/goto/jbeck -- Forwarded message -- From: John Beck Date: Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:30 PM Subject: Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] 4th code review for next POSIX utility modernisation milestone, ksh93 bug fixes and /usr/bin/xgrep To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion , John Beck , , venkateshwara...@sun.com, u.v.ravin...@oracle.com I> Why are only *new* utilities on hold? I cannot say at this time. As soon as I have information that I am allowed to share, I will pass that information along. -- John Sponsor my 100-mile bike ride fund raiser for the American Lung Association http://action.lungusa.org/goto/jbeck Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
Worse, quoting himself as proof... ;-) You(Jennifer Pioch) wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Dave Johnson > wrote: > > This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? > > > > David > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > > From: Dave Johnson > > Date: Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:44 PM > > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be > > available? > > To: "Richard L. Hamilton" > > Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org > > > > > > On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Richard L. Hamilton > > wrote: > >>> Slide 22 is also very interesting and gives me a lot > >>> of reassurance: > >>> > >>> OpenSolaris > >>> Oracle will continue to make OpenSolaris available > >>> as open source and > >>> Oracle will continue to actively support and > >>> participate in the > >>> OpenSolaris community > >>> Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did > >>> prior to the > >>> acquisition, and will continue to contribute > >>> innovative technologies to > >>> OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other > >>> open source projects > >>> > >>> Coming from Oracle there's no longer any doubt that > >>> it will be alright. > >>> I'm going to be an OpenSolairs user for quite some > >>> time to come. ;-) > >> > >> While that presentation was indeed reassuring, from the > >> reactions I've seen so far, many seem to hope that > >> "participate in the OpenSolaris community" would include > >> less restrictive communication than it appears is allowed > >> by the current application of their policies to OpenSolaris. > >> > >> I see open source plus community meaning, when it wouldn't > >> compromise competitive information about a pending product, > >> that the development process and activity is also open, to include > >> some information about _planned_ components thereof, as well. > >> > >> One of the many reasons for more open communication is that > >> outside contributors should be entitled to a little courtesy when > >> their work is affected (look at ksh93-discuss to see a case of that). > > > > Oracle doesn't want the command modernisation and ksh93 projects. They > > had too much community influence in the past, are too independent and > > Oracle wants to replace the Solaris commands in usr/bin with GNU > > commands. Oracle has already decided that in February and now try to > > get rid of the projects by denying them repository access. > > The projects are dead. There is enough evidence what Oracle is planning. > > > > Dave > > Where's your "evidence", troll? > > Jenny > -- > Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt > ___ > indiana-discuss mailing list > indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > -- Matthias Pfützner| mailto:pfu...@germany | Ich glaube nicht, daß ich @work: +49 6103 752-394 | @home: +49 6151 75717 | Frauen je begreifen werde. SunCS, Ampèrestraße 6 | Lichtenbergstraße 73 | 63225 Langen, FRG| 64289 Darmstadt, FRG | Federico Fellini ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
2010/5/10 Matthias Pfützner : > Worse, quoting himself as proof... ;-) Matthias Pfützner: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2010-May/056462.html --->> A [ ] You are able to read B [ ] ... ??? > > You(Jennifer Pioch) wrote: >> On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:50 PM, Dave Johnson >> wrote: >> > This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB >> > intervene? >> > >> > David >> > >> > -- Forwarded message -- >> > From: Dave Johnson >> > Date: Mon, May 10, 2010 at 12:44 PM >> > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] 2010.03, when will it be >> > available? >> > To: "Richard L. Hamilton" >> > Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org >> > >> > >> > On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 4:58 PM, Richard L. Hamilton >> > wrote: >> >>> Slide 22 is also very interesting and gives me a lot >> >>> of reassurance: >> >>> >> >>> OpenSolaris >> >>> • Oracle will continue to make OpenSolaris available >> >>> as open source and >> >>> Oracle will continue to actively support and >> >>> participate in the >> >>> OpenSolaris community >> >>> • Oracle is investing more in Solaris than Sun did >> >>> prior to the >> >>> acquisition, and will continue to contribute >> >>> innovative technologies to >> >>> OpenSolaris, as Oracle already does for many other >> >>> open source projects >> >>> >> >>> Coming from Oracle there's no longer any doubt that >> >>> it will be alright. >> >>> I'm going to be an OpenSolairs user for quite some >> >>> time to come. ;-) >> >> >> >> While that presentation was indeed reassuring, from the >> >> reactions I've seen so far, many seem to hope that >> >> "participate in the OpenSolaris community" would include >> >> less restrictive communication than it appears is allowed >> >> by the current application of their policies to OpenSolaris. >> >> >> >> I see open source plus community meaning, when it wouldn't >> >> compromise competitive information about a pending product, >> >> that the development process and activity is also open, to include >> >> some information about _planned_ components thereof, as well. >> >> >> >> One of the many reasons for more open communication is that >> >> outside contributors should be entitled to a little courtesy when >> >> their work is affected (look at ksh93-discuss to see a case of that). >> > >> > Oracle doesn't want the command modernisation and ksh93 projects. They >> > had too much community influence in the past, are too independent and >> > Oracle wants to replace the Solaris commands in usr/bin with GNU >> > commands. Oracle has already decided that in February and now try to >> > get rid of the projects by denying them repository access. >> > The projects are dead. There is enough evidence what Oracle is planning. >> > >> > Dave >> >> Where's your "evidence", troll? >> >> Jenny >> -- >> Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt >> ___ >> indiana-discuss mailing list >> indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org >> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss >> > > -- > Matthias Pfützner | mailto:pfu...@germany | Ich glaube nicht, daß ich > �...@work: +49 6103 752-394 | @home: +49 6151 75717 | Frauen je begreifen > werde. > SunCS, Ampèrestraße 6 | Lichtenbergstraße 73 | > 63225 Langen, FRG | 64289 Darmstadt, FRG | Federico Fellini > ___ > indiana-discuss mailing list > indiana-disc...@opensolaris.org > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 4:33 PM, John Plocher wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Dave Johnson > wrote: >> This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? > > While I have not been following this soap opera in excruciating > detail, my reading of the ARC discussions was that the ksh-93 project > to replace existing GNU utilities with ksh-wrapper AST based versions > that were not completely compatible and that would not track future > evolution of the GNU utilities was withdrawn for good architectural > reasons. Since the ARC case was not approved, it follows that repo > putback access for that part of the project would also be withheld - a > standard ON procedural action that applies to everyone: No approved > ARC case, no putback. > > To answer your question: Will the OGB intervene? The constitution > says (note the first sentence): > > > 3.1 Disputes > > It is expected and encouraged that groups will resolve disputes by > themselves according to their documented decision-making procedures. > If a dispute can not be resolved within a group or it spreads between > groups, then the Governing Board may choose to intervene. The Board > will consider disputes on a case-by-case basis and may decline to > intervene. If the Board chooses to intervene, it will resolve the > issue at its absolute discretion with no possibility of appeal. Its > resolution will be binding on all parties. > > > Given this understanding (which may be flawed, but your posts do > nothing to show that it is), this all smells like an overly emotional > early Monday morning troll; I see no reason for the OGB to get > involved. > > -John It appears too few of you all here are regular readers or subscribers of ksh93-integration-discuss. Then read first (last 2 months) before prematurely labeling somebody an evil Monday-morning-troll. %martin ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
>On 05-10-10, John Plocher wrote: >On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Dave Johnson > wrote: >> This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? > While I have not been following this soap opera in excruciating > detail John, I looked at it as "some guy" making a fair amount of noise and quoting himself in his arguments. So like I said in an earlier message, I made a cup of coffee and then felt that it wasn't worth looking at. Personally I see the ksh93 shell work as some of the best open source collaboration in modern UNIX(R) history. I fully expect that it will always be around forever as some sort of package set to be installed. Dennis ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote: > >>On 05-10-10, John Plocher wrote: >>On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Dave Johnson >> wrote: >>> This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? > >> While I have not been following this soap opera in excruciating >> detail > > John, I looked at it as "some guy" making a fair amount of noise and quoting > himself in his arguments. So like I said in an earlier message, I made a cup > of coffee and then felt that it wasn't worth looking at. > > Personally I see the ksh93 shell work as some of the best open source > collaboration in modern UNIX(R) history. I fully expect that it will always > be around forever as some sort of package set to be installed. > > Dennis Hi quoted not only himself. Drink more coffee until you notice. Here I help you a bit: -- Forwarded message -- From: John Sonnenschein Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM Subject: Re: Removal of some redundant GNU utilities [PSARC/2009/660 FastTrack timeout 12/10/2009] To: PSARC-ext at sun.com After discussions with the OpenSolaris architect and lead, I withdraw this case. It was premature and will be revised as part of a bigger project to provide Solaris modernization using GNU utilities for /usr/bin. -JohnS ___ opensolaris-arc mailing list opensolaris-arc at opensolaris.org Evidence 2: Repeated deny of repository access. Repeated. The ksh team is merely needed to do bug fixing for ksh until the team can be replaced by Oracle in house resources. -- Forwarded message -- From: John Beck Date: 2010/4/30 Subject: Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] 4th code review for next POSIX utility modernisation milestone, ksh93 bug fixes and /usr/bin/xgrep To: ? Cc: Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion , John Beck , Venkateshwara.Tv at sun.com, U.V.Ravindra at oracle.com > All put backs related to the POSIX utility modernisation are on *hold* > right now, even the security related bits of /bin/mktemp we fixed. What I said was that conversion of any *new* utilities to ksh93 is on hold. Bug fixes in ksh93, its libraries, and previously converted utilities are all welcome. -- John Sponsor my 100-mile bike ride fund raiser for the American Lung Association http://action.lungusa.org/goto/jbeck -- Forwarded message -- From: John Beck Date: Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:30 PM Subject: Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] 4th code review for next POSIX utility modernisation milestone, ksh93 bug fixes and /usr/bin/xgrep To: "I. Szczesniak" Cc: Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion , John Beck , , Venkateshwara.Tv at sun.com, U.V.Ravindra at oracle.com I> Why are only *new* utilities on hold? I cannot say at this time. As soon as I have information that I am allowed to share, I will pass that information along. -- John Sponsor my 100-mile bike ride fund raiser for the American Lung Association http://action.lungusa.org/goto/jbeck Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
This "proof"-quotes from others came later! And, the fact, that side-by-side there's /usr/gnu/bin and /usr/bin shall indicate, that there's no FURTHER development of Solaris-tools, is ridiculous... Matthias Du (Martin Bochnig) schreibst: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 4:40 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote: > > > >>On 05-10-10, John Plocher wrote: > >>On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Dave Johnson > >> wrote: > >>> This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB > >>> intervene? > > > >> While I have not been following this soap opera in excruciating > >> detail > > > > John, I looked at it as "some guy" making a fair amount of noise and > > quoting himself in his arguments. So like I said in an earlier message, I > > made a cup of coffee and then felt that it wasn't worth looking at. > > > > Personally I see the ksh93 shell work as some of the best open source > > collaboration in modern UNIX(R) history. I fully expect that it will always > > be around forever as some sort of package set to be installed. > > > > Dennis > > > > Hi quoted not only himself. > Drink more coffee until you notice. > > Here I help you a bit: > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: John Sonnenschein > Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM > Subject: Re: Removal of some redundant GNU utilities [PSARC/2009/660 > FastTrack timeout 12/10/2009] > To: PSARC-ext at sun.com > > > After discussions with the OpenSolaris architect and lead, I withdraw > this case. It was premature and will be revised as part of a bigger > project to provide Solaris modernization using GNU utilities for /usr/bin. > > -JohnS > ___ > opensolaris-arc mailing list > opensolaris-arc at opensolaris.org > > > > Evidence 2: > Repeated deny of repository access. Repeated. > The ksh team is merely needed to do bug fixing for ksh until the team > can be replaced by Oracle in house resources. > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: John Beck > Date: 2010/4/30 > Subject: Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] 4th code review for next > POSIX utility modernisation milestone, ksh93 bug fixes and > /usr/bin/xgrep > To: ? > Cc: Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion > , John Beck > , Venkateshwara.Tv at sun.com, > U.V.Ravindra at oracle.com > > > > All put backs related to the POSIX utility modernisation are on *hold* > > right now, even the security related bits of /bin/mktemp we fixed. > > What I said was that conversion of any *new* utilities to ksh93 is on hold. > Bug fixes in ksh93, its libraries, and previously converted utilities are > all welcome. > > -- John > > Sponsor my 100-mile bike ride fund raiser for the American Lung Association > http://action.lungusa.org/goto/jbeck > > > > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: John Beck > Date: Mon, May 3, 2010 at 10:30 PM > Subject: Re: [ksh93-integration-discuss] 4th code review for next > POSIX utility modernisation milestone, ksh93 bug fixes and > /usr/bin/xgrep > To: "I. Szczesniak" > Cc: Korn Shell 93 integration/migration project discussion > , John Beck > , , > Venkateshwara.Tv at sun.com, U.V.Ravindra at oracle.com > > > I> Why are only *new* utilities on hold? > > I cannot say at this time. As soon as I have information that I am allowed > to share, I will pass that information along. > > -- John > > Sponsor my 100-mile bike ride fund raiser for the American Lung Association > http://action.lungusa.org/goto/jbeck > > Dave > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- Matthias Pfützner| mailto:pfu...@germany | Ich glaube nicht, daß ich @work: +49 6103 752-394 | @home: +49 6151 75717 | Frauen je begreifen werde. SunCS, Ampèrestraße 6 | Lichtenbergstraße 73 | 63225 Langen, FRG| 64289 Darmstadt, FRG | Federico Fellini ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 3:40 PM, Dennis Clarke wrote: > >>On 05-10-10, John Plocher wrote: >>On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 6:15 AM, Dave Johnson >> wrote: >>> This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene? > >> While I have not been following this soap opera in excruciating >> detail > > John, I looked at it as "some guy" making a fair amount of noise and quoting > himself in his arguments. So like I said in an earlier message, I made a cup > of coffee and then felt that it wasn't worth looking at. Did you read http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2010-May/056462.html? > > Personally I see the ksh93 shell work as some of the best open source > collaboration in modern UNIX(R) history. I fully expect that it will always > be around forever as some sort of package set to be installed. I agree. Both the ksh93 and the modernisation project it spawned are excellent work and would be of great benefit of Opensolaris. But all that work appears to be fruitless if the intentions of Oracle described in http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2010-May/056462.html will be implemented. Chris -- ^---^ (@)v(@) Chris Pickett |/ IT consultant ===m==m=== pkch...@users.sourceforge.net ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
2010/5/10 Matthias Pfützner : > This "proof"-quotes from others came later! > > And, the fact, that side-by-side there's /usr/gnu/bin and /usr/bin shall > indicate, that there's no FURTHER development of Solaris-tools, is > ridiculous... if http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2010-May/056462.html turns out to be true then there will be development of Solaris-tools but they will be based on GNU coreutils instead of the ksh93/AST framework developed by Opensolaris in the last four years. IMHO the ksh93/AST framework is superior but it looks Oracle's management has already decided on this. Chris -- ^---^ (@)v(@) Chris Pickett |/ IT consultant ===m==m=== pkch...@users.sourceforge.net ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On 10/05/2010 14:15, Dave Johnson wrote: Here is the evidence: Note the date on this one. Wasn't this before the Oracle takeover ? Evidence 1: - Project cooperation with ksh project withdrawn - GNU commands as replacements are the futur -- Forwarded message -- From: John Sonnenschein Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM Subject: Re: Removal of some redundant GNU utilities [PSARC/2009/660 FastTrack timeout 12/10/2009] To: psarc-...@sun.com After discussions with the OpenSolaris architect and lead, I withdraw this case. It was premature and will be revised as part of a bigger project to provide Solaris modernization using GNU utilities for /usr/bin. -JohnS ___ opensolaris-arc mailing list opensolaris-...@opensolaris.org Rob -- E-Mail: rob.mcma...@warwick.ac.uk PHONE: +44 24 7652 3037 Rob McMahon, IT Services, Warwick University, Coventry, CV4 7AL, England ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] OGB agenda item added related to ksh93 project.
> On 05-10-10, Chris Pickett wrote: >Dennis, please add this to the OGB call agenda for today. IMO the OGB >should intervene in favor of the ksh93/AST framework. > >Chris I already added it before I got your message. http://wiki.genunix.org:8080/wiki/index.php/2010_05_10_OGB_Agenda Dennis ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Someone please tell me I'm wrong
Cyril Plisko wrote: > On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 7:32 AM, Alan Coopersmith > wrote: >> And even they change their minds, so what they said last month may not be >> true this month, such as the recent changes re-expanding support for >> third-party hardware after previously announcing plans to cut it back. > > Alan, > > I probably misses that. Can you point me at some official URL or > something, where I can learn this ? Unfortunately, this change is so recent, that I don't think the official websites have been updated yet while they work out the details. We got the notice internally late last week that said: "Oracle Solaris on non-Oracle Sun hardware will be supported. The program is being worked out and more details will be available shortly." -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
Rob McMahon wrote: > On 10/05/2010 14:15, Dave Johnson wrote: >>> >> Here is the evidence: >> > Note the date on this one. Wasn't this before the Oracle takeover ? >> Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM Yes - the plan to modernize /usr/bin and eventually get rid of the need to have /usr/gnu/bin first in the $PATH to provide a modern experience has been around since far before the Oracle acquisition - dating back to the start of Project Indiana pretty much. BTW, if it was true that every /usr/bin utility was going to be replaced by a GNU one, would there have been a half dozen bug fixes to the Solaris version of tar over the past couple of months? -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle forces Opera.com out of Solaris (was: Opera drops browser support for Solaris)
> Richard L. Hamilton wrote: > The short story is: > The Opera staff asked - as usual - for help to > circumvent a Solaris > bug. The (new) response, totally the opposite from > Sun's helpful > behavior of the past was: > 1. Opera did not purchase support for Solaris > 2. Without support Oracle will not answer technical > questions or > provide ANY help > 3. Opera uses the SOLARIS trademark without > permission > 4. Opera will have to buy a full year of support for > 502018 Euro to > obtain questions to their answers > > 502018 Euro for WHAT? How crazy is Oracle? They > provided one of the > best browsers on the planet for Solaris and Oracle > did what? Ask for > money? IMO the manager responsible at Oracle should > be fired. > > The Opera legal folks is looking into whether > Oracle's emails can be > published or not. As I have stated elsewhere, there is absolutely no truth in this at all: http://my.opera.com/desktopteam/blog/show.dml/10734611?startidx=100#comment27108831 -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
Not to be rude, but can we take this discussion elsewhere? I'm not sure why it was moved onto opensolaris-discuss, as it seems to be properly handled over in ogb-discuss and indiana-discuss, which is where it was originally. Multi-list cross-posting gets to be a bit much. -Erik -- 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] [ogb-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
> Not to be rude, but can we take this discussion elsewhere? It has become an action item in the OGB meeting which is in progress now. -- Dennis Clarke2010 OpenSolaris Governance Member 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] Opensolaris or Solaris VPN solutions
Erik Trimble wrote: There are currently several 3rd-party solutions that work on both Sparc & x64, for both OpenSolaris & Solaris. In addition, both support a variety of VPN-style solutions via IPSEC and tunneling. Plus, practically all of the VPN/Firewall vendors produce clients for Solaris (which, to my knowledge, also work fine on OpenSolaris). I thought Cisco still didn't support a Solaris x86 client. Did this change? Hugh. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] This is how Oracl e treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On Mon, 10 May 2010 08:08:45 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Rob McMahon wrote: >> On 10/05/2010 14:15, Dave Johnson wrote: >>> Here is the evidence: >>> >> Note the date on this one. Wasn't this before the Oracle takeover ? >>> Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM > > Yes - the plan to modernize /usr/bin and eventually get rid of the need > to have /usr/gnu/bin first in the $PATH to provide a modern experience > has been around since far before the Oracle acquisition - dating back to > the start of Project Indiana pretty much. > > BTW, if it was true that every /usr/bin utility was going to be replaced > by a GNU one, would there have been a half dozen bug fixes to the Solaris > version of tar over the past couple of months? "Dave Johnson" has demonstrated that he has a huge axe to grind; his previous post, also spammed to multiple lists, was entitled "Oracle forces Opera.com out of Solaris", and of dubious veracity: http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=128617 -Albert ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] This is how Oracle treats open communities and projects. Will OGB intervene?
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 11:19 AM, Albert Lee wrote: > On Mon, 10 May 2010 08:08:45 -0700, Alan Coopersmith > wrote: >> Rob McMahon wrote: >>> On 10/05/2010 14:15, Dave Johnson wrote: > Here is the evidence: >>> Note the date on this one. Wasn't this before the Oracle takeover ? Date: Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 6:01 PM >> >> Yes - the plan to modernize /usr/bin and eventually get rid of the need >> to have /usr/gnu/bin first in the $PATH to provide a modern experience >> has been around since far before the Oracle acquisition - dating back to >> the start of Project Indiana pretty much. >> >> BTW, if it was true that every /usr/bin utility was going to be replaced >> by a GNU one, would there have been a half dozen bug fixes to the > Solaris >> version of tar over the past couple of months? > > "Dave Johnson" has demonstrated that he has a huge axe to grind; his > previous post, also spammed to multiple lists, was entitled "Oracle forces > Opera.com out of Solaris", and of dubious veracity: > http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=128617 Dubious? I thought it was flat out denied by Opera. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Someone please tell me I'm wrong
> wrote: > > And even they change their minds, so what they said last month may not be > true this month, such as the recent changes re-expanding support for > third-party hardware after previously announcing plans to cut it back. > cyril.pli...@mountall.com said: > Alan, > I probably misses that. Can you point me at some official URL or something, > where I can learn this ? I heard the same thing from our sales people just last week. They say they are reworking our Solaris-only support quote to include a Dell system they had previously not been able to give a price for. Regards, Marion ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Cloud services
This may seem to be a naive question...but what cloud Apps/products are available for Opensolaris users either through Oracle or elsewhere? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Cloud services
Before me can answer, please define "cloud app/product"... ;-) -Ursprüngliche Nachricht- Von: Peter Jones An: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Gesendet: 10.5.'10, 20:38 This may seem to be a naive question...but what cloud Apps/products are available for Opensolaris users either through Oracle or elsewhere? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Cloud services
I am interested in storage/back up products such as dropbox for personal computing -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Cloud services
On Mon, May 10, 2010 at 5:45 PM, Peter Jones wrote: > I am interested in storage/back up products such as dropbox for personal > computing Crashplan has a backup solution for OpenSolaris (among other clients). I've been using the home version across 4 different platforms for quite some time and have recommended it to friends. http://b3.crashplan.com/consumer/features.html (disclosure: I do not work for Crashplan, its affiliates, or its partners; nor do I own stock) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Opensolaris or Solaris VPN solutions
Try openvpn or a web site that has a list. http://www.ilkda.com :-) alan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Problem: Very long delay before login prompt (GDM splash)
Robin: On 05/ 8/10 02:14 PM, Robin Axelsson wrote: The delay is 3 minutes long (~180 seconds) and not 2 or 30 seconds. This is delay easy to measure since there's a clock in the bottom right corner of the login splash that is frozen which "jumps" 3 minutes forward when the input text field for the user login pops up. I supply a picture of what the login soplash screen looks like when it's frozen and another /var/adm/messages logfile that is linked to this image and contains more "before and after" information. Looking at the messages20100508-1959.log.txt file that you provided, I notice the following: - The GDM service started at 19:59:27 - At 19:59:33 it looks like the slave daemon informs the greeter to prompt for the username - At 20:06:14 it looks like the prompt was answered with a username. This looks like a 6 minute delay, much longer than 3 minutes, but perhaps it took you some additional time to actually enter a username? Unfortunately, the syslog doesn't seem to contain any information between 19:59:33 and 20:06:14 to indicate what might be causing this hang. Later in the log, I also notice that GDM service started at 20:08:21 and that the greeter was informed to prompt for a username at 20:08:31, but that is where the log ends, so I don't see any delay here. Also the 0-greeter*log files (which shows stdout/stderr when the greeter is running) shows the same warning/error messages that I see on my machine but I do not have a slowdown. So this log does not seem to highlight anything unusual that is causing the hang for you. Since this problem seems to only be affecting a few people, I wonder if you might be able to identify what about your setup might be different that could be causing the slowdown. Are you using a particular locale, IM (Input Method) setup, or somesuch that might be causing GDM to behave differently for you than for others? If you are using a locale, then does GDM not hang if you switch to using the default C locale? I notice that bug #14857 in defect.opensolaris.org seems like it might be related. I notice the same unusual GConf error in the "out" file that you provided. Your problem sounds different than bug #14857 since it seems to be affecting you on the login screen, while the slowdown in bug #14857 seems to affect the user session starting. However, if this is a locale issue, then this might be explained if you are setting your default locale systemwide (so GDM picks it up) while the person who reported bug #14857 might be setting their locale via the GDM login screen. http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=14857 It might be helpful to get some truss output to debug this problem. If you rename /usr/bin/gnome-session to /usr/bin/gnome-session-real and then create a script (with execute permissions) named /usr/bin/gnome-session which contains these two lines #/bin/bash truss -faldo /tmp/truss.out.$$ gnome-session --debug Then restart the "gdm" service. This will cause GDM to run the script to start gnome-session, which will launch the gnome-session-real with truss turned on. This will do two things. It will make things even slower, and it will create a /tmp/truss.out.(pid) file which will show what gnome-session is doing, and might highlight the problem. The truss output timestamps each line so it might better highlight where the problem is happening. Truss output is large, so it might make sense to attach the output to doo bug #14857 rather than as an email attachment. > I forgot to say: I don't know what "face browser" means. If it is the > feature that enables the possibility of "choosing" users at the login > and/or poweroff/restart the the answer to this question is no. Yes, that is what I meant. If you don't have the Face Browser enabled, then there is no need to load the users. However, according to the syslog, this slowdown is only a couple of seconds, and probably not the issue which is causing the long slowdown that you are seeing. --- Brian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Trying to compile gtk murrine
Not sure if this is the correct ML but its the only one I'm subscribed
to right now.
I'm trying to compile the gtk engine, murrine from git but keep getting
a syntax error in the configure script.
checking whether the g77 linker (/usr/bin/ld) supports shared
libraries... yes
checking dynamic linker characteristics... solaris2.11 ld.so
checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate
./configure: line 19782: syntax error at line 19806: `(' unexpected
Line 19786 looks like this:
LIBTOOL='$(SHELL) $(top_builddir)/libtool'
Line 19806 looks like this:
AC_PROG_INTLTOOL(0.37.1)
I'm not much of a bash scripter so I'm hoping someone here knows what I
need to change so it parses properly
Cheers :)
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Trying to compile gtk murrine
Ty John wrote:
> Not sure if this is the correct ML but its the only one I'm subscribed
> to right now.
> I'm trying to compile the gtk engine, murrine from git but keep getting
> a syntax error in the configure script.
>
> checking whether the g77 linker (/usr/bin/ld) supports shared
> libraries... yes
> checking dynamic linker characteristics... solaris2.11 ld.so
> checking how to hardcode library paths into programs... immediate
> ./configure: line 19782: syntax error at line 19806: `(' unexpected
>
> Line 19786 looks like this:
> LIBTOOL='$(SHELL) $(top_builddir)/libtool'
>
>
> Line 19806 looks like this:
> AC_PROG_INTLTOOL(0.37.1)
That indicates you're missing the intltool.m4 macros that would
expand AC_PROG_INTLTOOL into the right shell code calls. Bash/ksh
don't know what to do with the unexpanded m4 macro.
'pkg search intltool.m4' suggests installing pkg:/developer/gnome/gettext
(aka SUNWgnome-common-devel if you're not on a recent /dev build with the
new-style package names).
--
-Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com
Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Disk broken - replaced - but still has "failed" condition
Hi, i am having some trouble replacing a former failed disk. As you can see from the following disk c11t15d0 is in condition "failed": r...@openstorage:~# cfgadm -al c11 Ap_Id Type Receptacle Occupant Condition c11scsi-sas connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t6d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t7d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t8d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t9d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t10d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t11d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t12d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t13d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t14d0 disk connectedconfigured unknown c11::dsk/c11t15d0 disk connectedconfigured failed We replaced the disk physically with a new one but trying to configure the disk fails: r...@openstorage:~# cfgadm -c unconfigure c11::dsk/c11t15d0 May 11 07:19:35 openstorage genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@5/pci1014,3...@0/s...@f,0 (sd124) offline r...@openstorage:~# cfgadm -c configure c11::dsk/c11t15d0 cfgadm: Insufficient condition Configuration can be forced but the disk is still in "failed" condition. r...@openstorage:~# cfgadm -f -c configure c11::dsk/c11t15d0 May 11 07:19:55 openstorage scsi: [ID 583861 kern.info] sd124 at mpt4: unit-address f,0: target f lun 0 May 11 07:19:55 openstorage genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] sd124 is /p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@5/pci1014,3...@0/s...@f,0 May 11 07:19:55 openstorage genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@5/pci1014,3...@0/s...@f,0 (sd124) online Interestingly device nodes look quite strange as wel: r...@openstorage:~# cd /dev/rdsk r...@openstorage:~# ls -la c11t15d0* r...@openstorage:~# lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 63 2010-05-10 13:06 c11t15d0p0 -> ../../devices/p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@5/pci1014,3...@0/s...@f,0:q,raw r...@openstorage:~# cd ../../devices/p...@0,0/pci8086,3...@5/pci1014,3...@0 r...@openstorage:~# ls -la drwxr-xr-x 2 root sys 2 2010-04-10 20:40 s...@f,0 ?? ? ???? s...@f,0:a ?? ? ???? s...@f,0:a,raw I already did a "boot -r" but to no avail. Any help? Thanks in advance -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
