Re: [osol-discuss] Recent FUD from various camps on this mailinglist.
bsdfan, I think Svein basically is right. I mean, BSD is not that big, neither is OpenSolaris. Maybe we should cooperate instead? As of know, BSD has benefited greatly from OpenSolaris: ZFS, DTrace, and dozens of other Sun technology - do you want this to continue, or do you want OpenSolaris dead? I think the world is big enough for both OSes? Both OSes are good, with a great track record. Maybe we should try to help each other? I advocate OpenSolaris, and if the user doesnt want it, I always recommend FreeBSD, because it is far better than Linux. IMHO, FreeBSD and OpenSolaris are equally good, far better than Linux. So, what do you say? Do you agree? In other forum, I also talked with a FreeBSD user, and he was equally hostile to OpenSolaris. Why this hostility? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Recent FUD from various camps on this mailinglist.
Oh I see, so you too overlook the standup comic's bashing of Apple while he tries to make himself seem he is above negative talk?!? He must be a walking contradiction. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OK, please stop now. Was Recent FUD from various camps ...
Uh. By starting another thread on the subject, aren't you contributing to keeping it alive? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Recent FUD from various camps on this mailinglist.
On 13.05.2010 12:59, bsd wrote: > Oh I see, so you too overlook the standup comic's bashing of Apple while he > tries to make himself seem he is above negative talk?!? > > He must be a walking contradiction. I wonder which part it is that you think is Applebashing. Is it calling OSX a glossy smokescreen over cupertino-friendliness, or is it stating that Apple does their best to combat hackintoshes? //Svein -- +---+--- /"\ |Svein Skogen | sv...@d80.iso100.no \ / |Solberg Østli 9| PGP Key: 0xE5E76831 X|2020 Skedsmokorset | sv...@jernhuset.no / \ |Norway | PGP Key: 0xCE96CE13 | | sv...@stillbilde.net ascii | | PGP Key: 0x58CD33B6 ribbon |System Admin | svein-listm...@stillbilde.net Campaign|stillbilde.net | PGP Key: 0x22D494A4 +---+--- |msn messenger: | Mobile Phone: +47 907 03 575 |sv...@jernhuset.no | RIPE handle:SS16503-RIPE +---+--- If you really are in a hurry, mail me at svein-mob...@stillbilde.net This mailbox goes directly to my cellphone and is checked even when I'm not in front of my computer. Picture Gallery: https://gallery.stillbilde.net/v/svein/ signature.asc Description: OpenPGP digital signature ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Recent FUD from various camps on this mailinglist.
> Oh I see, so you too overlook the standup comic's
> bashing of Apple while he tries to make himself seem
> he is above negative talk?!?
>
> He must be a walking contradiction.
You could be nice and admit that was just a distraction from his
main argument.
Besides, the way I read what he said is basically that Apple
is heavy into control ("only cupertino-friendly") and in particular
goes out of their way to keep people from running OS X on
anything but Apples. Duh. Ever since they decided they didn't
want an Apple clone market anymore, that's accurate enough.
(that's as distinct from Darwin, which can run on anything for
all they care; but Quartz, Cocoa, and all that stuff plus the apps
on top of it are among their crown jewels, and if they could
run on anything, people might not bother with the price premium
on Apples, even if they are prettier looking boxes and usually
fairly well made)
Doesn't make it a bad OS; I've got a Mac Mini, and I like it.
It's definitely more stable than Windows, and about as easy
to use as one could ask. (Not nearly as stable as Solaris, though.)
Did he say what he said in a negative way? Yeah, and like I said, that's
a distraction from the rest of his argument, which maybe has a
point.
But OpenSolaris and the *BSDs have benefitted each other
quite a bit, what with FreeBSD adopting DTrace and ZFS, and
OpenSolaris getting the basis of some device drivers from one
or more of the *BSDs, something that wouldn't happen so much
with Linux even if the licenses were compatible, because
Linux is internally more differerent from OpenSolaris than the *BSDs
are.
So BSD advocates talking trash about OpenSolaris just doesn't make
much sense...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Recent FUD from various camps on this mailinglist.
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Orvar Korvar wrote: > bsdfan, I think Svein basically is right. I mean, BSD is not that big, > neither is OpenSolaris. Maybe we should cooperate instead? As of know, BSD > has benefited greatly from OpenSolaris: ZFS, DTrace, and dozens of other Sun > technology - do you want this to continue, or do you want OpenSolaris dead? I would like to see the modernisation parts of ksh93-integration ported to BSD, too. It would give it one of the fastest userlands , FreeBSD's userland would finally conform to the Single Unix Standard and a few of Solaris and GNU features would make it there, too. Chris -- ^---^ (@)v(@) Chris Pickett |/ IT consultant ===m==m=== pkch...@users.sourceforge.net ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [zones-discuss] Cannot export EMCpower device to local zone
Just wanted to update that the issue is resolved. While making entry in the devlinks.tab i put tab between the pseudo-device name and Address but somehow my vi setting was replacing tab with 4 spaces. Corrected it and it worked as expected. Thanks all for the help. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Recent FUD from various camps on this mailinglist.
On Thu, May 13, 2010 at 04:27:13AM -0700, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
> > Oh I see, so you too overlook the standup comic's
> > bashing of Apple while he tries to make himself seem
> > he is above negative talk?!?
> >
> > He must be a walking contradiction.
>
> You could be nice and admit that was just a distraction from his
> main argument.
>
> Besides, the way I read what he said is basically that Apple
> is heavy into control ("only cupertino-friendly") and in particular
> goes out of their way to keep people from running OS X on
> anything but Apples. Duh. Ever since they decided they didn't
> want an Apple clone market anymore, that's accurate enough.
> (that's as distinct from Darwin, which can run on anything for
> all they care; but Quartz, Cocoa, and all that stuff plus the apps
> on top of it are among their crown jewels, and if they could
> run on anything, people might not bother with the price premium
> on Apples, even if they are prettier looking boxes and usually
> fairly well made)
>
> Doesn't make it a bad OS; I've got a Mac Mini, and I like it.
> It's definitely more stable than Windows, and about as easy
> to use as one could ask. (Not nearly as stable as Solaris, though.)
>
> Did he say what he said in a negative way? Yeah, and like I said, that's
> a distraction from the rest of his argument, which maybe has a
> point.
>
> But OpenSolaris and the *BSDs have benefitted each other
> quite a bit, what with FreeBSD adopting DTrace and ZFS, and
> OpenSolaris getting the basis of some device drivers from one
> or more of the *BSDs, something that wouldn't happen so much
> with Linux even if the licenses were compatible, because
> Linux is internally more differerent from OpenSolaris than the *BSDs
> are.
>
> So BSD advocates talking trash about OpenSolaris just doesn't make
> much sense...
Blindly advocating anything never yeilds good results. I am both BSD
User/Developer and OpenSolaris User/Developer. I like both the Systems. I don't
see advocates advocating one over the other. They are what they are. Just leave
it that way.
-/PS
> --
> 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] Problem: Very long delay before login prompt (GDM splash)
You shouldn't truss anymore that 3 min for login. -Ghee On 05/12/10 11:41 AM, Robin Axelsson wrote: Just to report what I did last night. I did a relogin with truss on gnome-session-real (since the /usr/bin/gnome-session was renamed to gnome-session-real). The system froze and was stuck as I described in my previous post. After waiting for about 2 hours I interrupted my attempt. The truss file reached 20MB when I interrupted the operation. I will retry this once I get confirmation that the change I did in "/usr/bin/gnome-session" is correct and how long it should take. I also tried without my correction. I rebooted the system and all I saw was a black screen with a busy pointer. When logging in I saw that the truss files in the /tmp/ dir were literaly exploding in size. Initially they were 600MB in size and reached over a gig within a few minutes so I stopped this before things would go haywire. I would also like to know how long time this trussing is supposed to take. I understand that patience is a virtue but it's too much for me to babysit the computer for 12 hours waiting for the login screen to appear. I will return in about a week. - Robin. On 2010-05-11 05:11, Brian Cameron wrote: 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 F
