Re: [osol-discuss] The Possibilities
On 05.07.2010 06:12, Fredrich Maney wrote: > On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Edward Ned Harvey > wrote: >> It is free. So people should not be expecting supportability or perfection. >> It's very agile to development and change. > > I agree, however that opinion doesn't seem to be universal. Otherwise, > we wouldn't keep seeing so many people on these lists whining about > OpenSolaris support for their production environment, would we? Would be possible, just using your imagination, to see why someone might be _VERY_ reluctant to connect a system they cannot access security-patches for to the internet at all? Is internet connectivity still available only for businesses? *sigh* //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] The Possibilities
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: > It is free. So people should not be expecting supportability or perfection. > It's very agile to development and change. I agree, however that opinion doesn't seem to be universal. Otherwise, we wouldn't keep seeing so many people on these lists whining about OpenSolaris support for their production environment, would we? fpsm ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] New OpenSolaris install has intermittent lockup
What do you mean by intermittent lock ups. There are some video drivers that will lock the screen for 10-12 seconds before releasing. This is do to an assembler bug. If it's something else details will help. alan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
On 07/ 5/10 02:36 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: From: Ian Collins [mailto:i...@ianshome.com] No. Trolls encourage FUD. An information vacuum encourages FUD. If that's true, please define what you're afraid of. I think Ken Gunderson's later post on this thread sums up my concerns. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] New OpenSolaris install has intermittent lockup
Some-one will most likely punch me in the mouth for this post, but I'm new to opensolaris and don't have a lot of time to figure out the search engine here. Bottom line I've done a new install and my system lockups intermittently. What are the steps to track down the cause and fix it? TNX JazzCat -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
kgund...@teamcool.net said: > Support being effectively unaccessible on non Sun > branded hardware, > ... I don't understand why people are saying this. As I have mentioned before, we have a Dell system running Solaris-10 which is covered under an Oracle Premium Support for Operating Systems contract (just purchased the contract in June). > ..., coupled with ensuing exorbitant support fees even if you were > running on Sun branded hardware, have made S10 irrelevant to this market. The > path Sun had previously tried to encourage from OS to S10 and support for > those who needed it have been priced out of reach for all but those > enterprises with the deepest of pockets. > ... This also does not match our experience. Naturally, "exorbitant" is relative to one's own cash flow, but really, the prices are not horrible, and we are in the non-profit/education end of the market. The current "Premium" support prices are either the same as, or significantly lower than, the Gold- or Silver-level contracts were under Sun. On most of our systems the Oracle support prices are much lower than they were before. Don't get me wrong: We are paying more than we used to, because we used to rely on free security updates for less-than-critical systems. And we will likely cut back on our use of Solaris on these lower-end services (nameservers, mail servers, and the like), and focus its use where ZFS and zones are valuable. But Solaris is not irrelevant and need not disappear altogether from our operation. And if Oracle does not come up with a hardware pricing scheme similar to Sun's Education Essentials program, we may have bought our last piece of Sun/Oracle hardware. We see the x64 lineup currently as being cheaper than HP, but more expensive than Dell. Regards, Marion ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
Very well said. All the smb's we were promoting S10 to went back to MS following the takeover. Support being effectively unaccessible on non Sun branded hardware, license changes, security updates no longer being freely available, coupled with ensuing exorbitant support fees even if you were running on Sun branded hardware, have made S10 irrelevant to this market. The path Sun had previously tried to encourage from OS to S10 and support for those who needed it have been priced out of reach for all but those enterprises with the deepest of pockets. So I no longer care a wit about S10, nor by extension "Oracle Solaris Next", wh/I expect to be similarly out of reach. Larry's targeting the top %5. We're not that market. So let's just drop the pretense that we are and promoting the commercial stuff. Like you, however, I'd considered possibility of using OS for some of these services, behind well configured firewalls. But even now that possibility seems to be fading into the sunset. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The Possibilities
+1 gpatrick. Some here unfortunately have minimal understanding or experience with real open source projects. Would you want to host your website on an "experimental" apache web server? Or run your DB on an experimental PostgreSQL? How about an "experimental" reference Tomcat servlet engine? Or an experimental Postfix, Exim, or Sendmail MTA? Or "experimental" Cyrus or Dovecot IMAP server? For even more fun, how about sporting "experimental" versions of Perl, Python, etc. on your awesome commerical Solaris box? Now that should be really fun. Are you starting to get it now? Some of the best and most widely deployed software in the world became such via true open source development models. Not these undercut, commercial sleight of hand "open core" bastardizations we've been hearing about as of late from the marketing arms of predatory commercial outfits such as Oracle. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The Possibilities
"It is free. So people should not be expecting supportability or perfection." I think those who develop FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD would take exception to that statement, and rightly so. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The Possibilities
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris- > discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Edward Ned Harvey > > Possibility #1 > Oracle is discontinuing opensolaris. IMHO, this is unlikely, for many reasons. First of all, it's the opposite of what oracle has announced publicly, but maybe that's not important. Here's what is important: How does Oracle benefit from opensolaris: First and foremost, it's a marketing tool. Admins and enthusiasts want to use a free product with cool features at home. You become used to it. You love it. And at work, you are likely to promote or compare osol vs linux, and solaris vs netapp. I know that I personally was so impressed with ZFS, that I recommended at work we sell the netapp, and buy a sun server to replace it. We did, and we're all extremely happy for it. Our snapshots are just as good or better than they ever were. Our backup window is a fraction of what it used to be. Our reliability has gained tremendously. Our performance is *far* noticeably better. All the users, admins, and management, are all extremely pleased with that change. And now I've become a ZFS activist. I went through all of that, because another ZFS activist just like me, convinced me to give it a try, 2 years ago. I'm not the first or the last. Second, opensolaris provides a channel for community involvement and contribution, although these might be minimal. Third, you don't want to commit experimental changes into your commercial OS. (Thank you, Vista, for the learning experience. Er ... No thank you.) Let those experimental changes happen in an unsupported free community full of enthusiasts. And if something was a bad idea, you're not committed to it. You can leave that part out of your commercial OS, and you can back it out of the free OS. It is free. So people should not be expecting supportability or perfection. It's very agile to development and change. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris- > discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Richard L. Hamilton > > Simply stating that either there will be another > OpenSolaris distro release > or there won't be one, They already did that. They said they planned it for Q2 of this year. They're behind schedule. That is all. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] The Possibilities
I got tired of the "ready to be let down" in the subject of the other thread. People use the terms "FUD" and "fear of the unknown" as if they're foregone conclusions. In reality, uncertainty and the unknown are whatever you make them to be. If you're a pessimist, you assume the worst. If you're an optimist, you assume the best. If you're a realist, you don't assume either one, but you acknowledge what the possibilities are. You hope for the best, plan for the worst, and guess what's the most probable. You don't need to know the future, in order to un-afraid of the future, as long as you know what the possibilities are. Possibility #1 Oracle is discontinuing opensolaris. They have radio silence because they don't care about us. Moving forward, they will only do commercial solaris, and a time-limited trial edition of solaris. It's entirely proprietary, and nobody's allowed to use it for anything other than evaluation unless you paid for it. This is the one for pessimists. It would suck, but it wouldn't be the end of the world. You could continue using opensolaris as-is, but moving forward, you would probably want to plan migration to something else. Possibility #2 Solaris and Opensolaris are moving forward as they were. Developments taking place in both. The only new change is radio silence. This silence is imposed just because Oracle's a big company and they have a policy and culture which is different from what there was under Sun. They don't mean any harm by it, but like it or not, you've got to adapt to it. Possibility #3 Oracle is shifting development effort from opensolaris to solaris 10. They want to put a lot of the bug fixes and feature enhancements into their commercial product. This shift of effort may be temporary, but it cannot be permanent, because if they're developing sol10 faster than osol, eventually all the existing changes would be completely migrated into sol10, and after that point, they would be incorporating experimental changes into their production OS. Possibility #4 Oracle is shifting development, not from osol to sol10, but focusing instead on sol11. IMHO, this is the one for optimists. We're all wondering what's up with osol2010.N, and then one day unexpectedly, there's a huge news anouncement, BAM! on oracle.com that Oracle Solaris 11 is released. All of a sudden, people in the community are excited, curious, wondering and inspecting which changes they managed to port, and which ones were held out for which reasons. People have something new and exciting to talk about and work on. And that's when people feel happy. Possibility #N I named the best case. I named the worst case. In betwen, there are infinite possibilities. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
Simply stating that either there will be another OpenSolaris distro release (delayed for an unspecified time, obviously) or there won't be one, (and that repository updates will or won't eventually resume) should not endanger anything and would be morally the right thing to do as well as reducing the alienation of present paying customers, future potential paying customers, 3rd party developers, and contributors. It isn't necessary to explain at this time what the reason for the delay is. It isn't even necessary to offer any new timeline yet. If that's too much to ask, then this universe is broken and I want to start over! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VirtualBox/OpenSolaris
:...ensures the product always meets professional quality criteria. " That is a misstatement if ever I've heard one. SUN/VirtualBox say OpenBSD IS a supported guest os. For the longest time I had segmentation faults when trying to install OpenBSD and finally have succeeded in not having them anymore. However, if you read the open bugs, you will notice some people are STILL having segmentation faults and other problems related to the *supported guest*. They either need to drop OpenBSD from their list of supported guests or fix the problem once and for all. Of course, that would drop the number of supported os's from their list, but what is worse, having one less operating system on your list, or having it on your list so people can open bugs and complain that it doesn't work, even though it is "supported?" VirtualBox listing OpenBSD is like Ford selling the Pinto. Well, it only explodes under certain conditions. That is as far from professional quality for both! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
> From: Ian Collins [mailto:i...@ianshome.com] > >> > > No. Trolls encourage FUD. > > > An information vacuum encourages FUD. If that's true, please define what you're afraid of. I know I said this before, but maybe you don't believe it? : The worst case scenario is Oracle decided to terminate all development of opensolaris. In which case, you're still able to use what you've already got, but during the next 1-2 years you have plenty of time to figure out what you're going to use next. And I think we'll all agree that the above possibility, while possible, is pretty darn unlikely. I know I said this before: Oracle made statements that their emphasis is on commercialization of solaris, not opensolaris. If I were in charge there, I would take this as an opportunity to finally port all the osol developments into solaris now. Prove the dedication to solaris by releasing Solaris Next, or 11, or whatever they want to call it. One really simple point for emphasis ... ZFS is certainly a huge part of the attraction for solaris/opensolaris right now. But a fully patched sol10 can only reach zpool 15, while the ability to remove a log device (zpool 19) is a pretty huge important reliability feature. Linux cannot do any of this stuff anytime soon. Release Sol Next. Make money while you still have that opportunity. I would close (or shrink) the technology gap between the commercial product and the open source development product. And I think radio silence while preparing Sol11 or whatever is totally appropriate. Especially given the fact that netapp's copy-on-write lawsuit still is not closed. And BTRFS still doesn't exist. And ZFS for Linux is still unusable for production. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
> I know for several months, I have recommended the > latest developer build of osol, as long as you're not using it in production. > But if you *are* using it in production, I recommend paying for sol10. > (Better yet, sun hardware ith sol10.) I do wish people would remember that there's a spectrum in between "top tier support" and "no support at all". I have Sun gear running Solaris with Oracle databases on them. I want, and have, full support contracts on that gear. It only makes sense. However, before the full Oracle takeover, I was deploying Solaris onto the minor stuff... my mail hubs, for example, or the low-end web servers. I certainly hope I wouldn't need to explain to anyone on this list why Solaris would be the bee's knees for these tasks. It helps me maintain some homogeneity of environment, and more importantly it gives my coworkers a place where they can practice, a place where it's reasonably important that they watch what they do, but crashing the mail server isn't quite the same disaster as wiping out the payroll database server. I DON'T need full Oracle support on those machines. Because they're net-facing, I DO need updates. I can't justify $1k per year per machine (Oracle's quoted price) for access to security patches... my managers will - and have - told me to just go with Windows 2008R2, which costs us ~$500 one-time charge with OS updates for free for the rest of the serviceable lifetime of the product, or my coworkers tell me to switch to Redhat Linux, for half that again. So Oracle has priced itself out of the small/medium internet services market. I can cope with that; that market is what OpenSolaris is for. However, before I can start deploying OSol, I need *proof* that it's going to continue. It's important to remember that - from a certain point of view - Oracle has NEVER put out an OpenSolaris release. Have they said they plan to? Yes, in uncertain terms. Have others said they're going to? Yes, in uncertain, "I can't speak authoritatively for Oracle" terms. I've seen the words "have faith" thrown around, which is completely ridiculous... nobody makes business decisions based on "faith" except a church. So I need concrete proof of a future OpenSolaris release, and I need it in the form of a binary release, even to /dev. My coworkers are by no means dummies, but expecting them to build the distribution from source is unreasonable, not the least of which because it's a messy, convoluted process. They've got things that need to be done, and they can flatten and rebuild using Linux (or Win2008) in less time. And to explain why that's a bad thing: once that happens, not only do I lose a *Solaris server, *they* lose a reason to learn Solaris at all. And why is that bad? Because when it comes time to refresh our database kit, my very-upper-management - who is already very pro-Microsoft as it is - is going to look at the fact that they have ONE Solaris expert, a bunch of Linux experts, a bunch of Windows experts, weigh the balances, and switch us over to SQL Server. I'm not speaking from FUD here... this is *exactly* the same circumstances that caused my organization to kick IBM to the curb and switch us to Sun kit eight years ago. But Oracle has one advantage IBM doesn't; a very-near-free version of their enterprise OS. *All* I need to stave off the switch is a binary OpenSolaris release. It doesn't even need to be a *good* release. It can be buggy as hell; I simply won't upgrade to it. But it will be a tactile, hold-it-in-your-hands proof of Oracle's commitment. I don't need / repo updated, I need /dev updated. To stave off a depressing series of events, I need to deploy a small, unimportant server using OSol, *without* my manager and coworkers looking at me as if I've just suggested deploying a server running BeOS. I haven't ranted about this here before, because I *know* this list is filled with engineers who can't make the release happen, who can't adjust Oracle's marketing efforts. I've been enjoying the fruits of their labours for a long time now, and I definitely don't want to increase their frustration. But I've seen multiple people present three options: build OSol from source; run "old" OSol; buy a full Solaris support contract. In my environment, none of those is particularly viable. "Have faith" isn't a choice at all. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
--- On Sat, 7/3/10, Giovanni Tirloni wrote in responded to a quote below: > > You also have the legacy distros to review and learn > > from: > > http://www.genunix.org/dist/ > > > Are you saying the goal from the beginning was to encourage > people to split their efforts ? In open source you usually > don't care too much about wasted efforts when you've got > lots of people working on everything. That doesn't seem to > be the case for OpenSolaris so actually concentrating > efforts would make more sense. > > There is an OpenSolaris distribution (Indiana) and people > should be encouraged to dedicate their time to make it > better. Why can't they ? Some good points. I'm not a spokeperson for Oracle, so take my answers for the coin throws they are worth. Let me toss this one out there for you: See: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bpj0t2ozPWY 1. Oracle has provided roadmaps and briefings on Sun products and migrations within Oracle's product umbrella. They have posted slides, publically, on their website. Also, a bunch of info is getting tossed into the OTN as well. Timeline specifics relating to 'Solaris Next Dev' is not publically documented enough to warrant a true datestamp by anyone due to the feature set of 'Solaris Next Dev' not being truely defined, speculated, and/or approved for submittal to the general audience. 2. Split efforts is a community function and option. Contributions come in many forms (which some engineers fail to understand) whether it is basic feedback, bug reporting, code submittals, code review, or just friendly advice. It is not always about producing and submitting code (some good, some bad). Good documentation and technical support is worth its weight in gold for many software projects. Even financial funding is sometimes overlooked. Depends on how you look at the subject on contributing (kinda understanding a janitor is just as valuable as the office manager theorem). As for OpenSolaris, remember that at an earlier time this was called Solaris Express - which was closed source. How did users/developers contribute 'source code' back then? The forums help unify people and people are free to unify and work on projects together. That is an option that I'm not against or opposed to (seems silly if "I" did). Also, remember that OpenSolaris binary releases are always considered ALPHA/BETA engineering snapshots - not produced for data center "production-based" migrations or deployments. Solaris Express had a similar 'bail out' disclaimer in case finger pointing arose. As for splitting work, the final 'Solaris Next Dev' product may or may not consist of everything worked on. A lot of the work was engineering concepts for people would LIKE to see. This is the true 'whiteboard' and final roadmap we haven't seen yet within the general public yet. Same thing happened with during Solaris 2.5/6/7/8/9/10 versus Solaris Express/Next. Nothing has changed in how Solaris product releases were handled other than us peeking at source code and being more involved in engineering projects and conceptualization (or advisory boards). 3. Oracle Account or Business Relationship management. These people have the responsibility to make sure you (aka the company your work or own) are happy 'somewhat' in your concerns with services or products provided by their company (aka Oracle). Make full use of them - if your company has support contracts in place. What you received as a Live CD was part of a project to release a core binary distro (aka Indiana). Third-party developers took parts from the code available and worked on their own distro from the existing or modified package set (IPS or otherwise). So, some people are 'rolling their own' which the comment is not meant for most sys admins and intermediate users. As for innovation, that can be what you do with what you got - not if the code is open or closed. Many projects have rules of if the code doesn't fall in line with what they want then they can reject it. That is not Oracle specific. As for companies running off and making commercial competitive products, are we talking on the OS product level (like CentOS versus RHEL or Ubuntu versus Debian) or application/appliance? I haven't seen any journalistic documentation or periodicals on that subject yet (i.e. OSOL 2009.06/DEV (Solaris Next Dev) versus competitor's OpenSolaris-based distro). At least not where I've witnessed a OpenSolaris-based competitor having a winning hand over Oracle/Sun in some review. Send me the link if its out there. I pointed out the Paul Masson commercial when Orson Welles would quote and say "we will sell no wine before its time". I'd think this is what many 'engineering employees' are trying to tell the general public is the generic umbrella mandate and NDA scrutiny of Oracle - in relation to Solaris Next Dev. As for OpenSolaris updated binary distros, there was some commentary awhile ago that energies are focused
Re: [osol-discuss] not able to install open solaris.
Hi Eric, I have tried this steps, I don't have error code with me right now. Now i have done the installation on another disk. Will post you the exact error code on Monday. To run the installation on the same disk, I have done following steps but still failed. Formatted the disk on Windows 2003 using NTFS Partition.Run the solaris installer.Still it says that Solaris partition exist. Regards, Abhishek > Date: Thu, 1 Jul 2010 21:28:46 -0700 > From: erik.trim...@oracle.com > To: ak_gi...@hotmail.com > CC: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] not able to install open solaris. > > On 7/1/2010 9:13 PM, abhishek wrote: > > Dear All, > > > > I have tested open solaris and ZFS ISCSI on vmware. > > > > Not i am planning to install it on physial machine. During the open solaris > > installation > > > > my Server restarted at 5%. Now next time when I reboot and run the > > installation > > > > wizard, it does not allow me to format the disk and install Solaris. > > > > It says Solaris partition already exist, I tried formating drive from > > windows with a > > > > NTFS partition and reinstall but no success. Can anyone help me to reinstall > > > > Solaris on the same disk > > > > Boot the machine from the OpenSolaris CD, and wait for it to bring up > the desktop. > > Before running the Install Wizard, do the following: > > (1) Open a terminal > (2) run 'format' > (3) chose the disk you're going to install to > (4) pick the 'fdisk' option > (5) delete all partitions > (6) Quit > > Now run the Wizard. > > Alternately, just overwrite the label like this: > > dd if=/dev/zero count=10 bs=512 of=/dev/rdsk/Xp0 > > where X = the disk you want to install to (e.g. c0t0d0 or c0d0 or > something like that) > > > > -- > Erik Trimble > Java System Support > Mailstop: usca22-123 > Phone: x17195 > Santa Clara, CA > Timezone: US/Pacific (GMT-0800) > _ See the news as it happens on MSN videos http://video.in.msn.com/___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
> fwiw-- 8.1RC2 is at ZFS v14 as well. I think 8.0 > was at 13. > > It's not ZFS per se that I'm hesitant to trust but > rather FreeBSD's implementation. Nothing against the > FBSD developers. Just best to be conservative in the > test of time department when it comes to production > systems and "new features" ;) > > And no, not too far off topic. Good to see that Sun > engineers aren't too "inbred" and keeping abreast. > FreeBSD gets a LOT of stuff right and has done > amazing progress as a true open source project. I > think Open Solaris could learn from it. Some Solaris/OpenSolaris drivers were ported from *BSD originals. And not only ZFS, but DTrace have been ported to one or more *BSDs and derivatives. The license compatibility (in both directions) certainly helps. But lest folks that prefer GPL view that as some vast conspiracy, remember that the *BSDs and Solaris have common ancestors, whereas Linux was intended from the beginning to be a completely independent implementation with similar functionality. So porting a driver from a *BSD to Solaris might well be easier than from Linux to Solaris (or vice versa), even if the licenses weren't an issue. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
