Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Ken, et al, > IPS was shoved down the community's throat in a heavy handed and decidedly > not FOSS manner. What shoving? It seems to me that those of you who are wailing and moaning that you want a version of OpenSolaris with SVr4 packages are conspicuous by the absence of an OpenSolaris derived distro based on SVr4 packages. Even Joerg has put sweat behind his dislike of IPS and produced Schillix with his own build and packaging set. Hmmm, does that mean you will now claim Joerg is shoving his schilly-tools vision down the community's throat in a heavy handed and decidedly not FOSS manner because he didn't consult with you about his decision? FOSS isn't a democracy, and it is certainly isn't a republic - it is a despotic form of self-selected government where voting rights are earned by the measurable contributions one makes; the one(s) who put in the most effort make most, if not all of the rules. If you don't like how a community is run, fork the code and start your own, with you as king (or queen). Even if Oracle isn't, and Sun wasn't, playing in our sandbox, our community was formed around the idea of governance by a meritocracy: "Code wins". While I'm one of those who wished that the decision to put IPS into OpenSolaris-the-Sun-distro was something the community as a whole had some say in, rather than being a decision made behind closed doors, it really is no different from Joerg's choosing to use his schilly tools to build his distro or Nexenta's to use Debian/RPM - both those decisions were made by the people putting their sweat into making a distro, and those of us who were only backseat driving on the mailing lists got deservedly ignored. Myself, I am coming to understand - and respect - IPS more and more as I use it. It is hard to compare IPS to SVr4 packages because it solves a larger set of problems. For all intents and purposes, SVr4 packages are not much more than file archives with meta data and conventions; worse, most of those conventions are so poorly understood that the features they try to provide (cross package dependencies, upgrade paths, multi-platform/architecture support, ...) are effectively unusable AND unfixable. Speaking from experience with Sun's Release Engineering package audit tools, if you were to create an audit tool for packages that validated ALL the SVr4 and Solaris package requirements and conventions, and ran it against every existing Solaris SVr4 based package out there from Sun and Blastwave and all the other vendors, enthusiasts and suppliers, I would wager that close to 100% of them would fail the test - even if you could somehow agree on what all those requirements and conventions were. In other words, after 20-some years, I believe it is time to admit that the SVr4 package ecosystem can not really be fixed or evolved. In much the same way that SMF was both better than, and a different beast from rc3.d/* and ZFS was better than and more than ufs, IPS is better and different from SVr4 packages. IPS is an ecosystem that SVr4 packages never attempted to be, and (IMHO) never could become. Even so, at least in OS2009/06, SVr4 packages and IPS work together on the same system. You can install Blastwave packages, and you can grab updates to your OS from IPS repos, and both work. Where's the gripe? If you don't want to produce IPS style stuff, don't. If, despite your product's lack of the value-added IPS features I have come to expect, I choose to use it, I can still invoke pkgadd, install it and use it. Of course, I can also choose not to, and shop elsewhere. Of course, if your argument is that nobody listens to your gripes on mailing lists when you don't contribute tangibly towards a solution, then I'd have to agree - those doing the development *shouldn't* have to listen to those who simply chatter; why do you suppose so few developers hang out on OpenSolaris-discuss? We put up with Joerg because he votes with his code; what are you voting with? :-) -John ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On Wed, Jul 21, 2010 at 12:16 PM, Stefan Parvu wrote: > Interesting. Do you have any comparative numbers between > OSOL and others: RHAT, Ubuntu for instance ? > > I had the impression SMF did improve things. As I read your post > it seems, sometimes in past but not anymore ... why is that ? > Probable somebody should fill in some bugs regarding this ? > I am taking guesses here but I suspect this boot performance may be relative. AFAIK SMF does not restrict the extent of concurrency. So if there are 100 non-interdependent services ready to be started at the current graph state then it will start all 100 concurrently. This might be good for multi-way big-iron boxes but can be at the diminishing returns point for smaller workstations and laptops where there is neither the disk/memory bandwidth and nor the core-count to handle such a load. In this case a feature to have a graceful reduction in concurrency level in SMF should help. Regards, Moinak. -- http://www.belenix.org/ http://moinakg.wordpress.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/24/10 01:23 PM, Ken Mays wrote: This is an idea, but SchilliX (or a fork of it) could remain a pure server-oriented core distro (without X or desktop cruft). The desktop stuff could come by way of IPS integration and/or CSW/SFW/other packages... The kernel distribution for Blastwave maybe? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] NIC is only functional when 'snoop' is running
I haven't seen this specific problem before, but have you tried things like touch /reconfigure and reboot, or unplumb the interface and reconfigure/reboot: ifconfig e1000g0 unplumb touch /reconfigure init 6 You may or may not need to replumb after this with "ifconfig e1000g0 plumb". Otherwise perhaps the card did go bad? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/23/10 04:41 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: Why? IPS was shoved down the community's throat in a heavy handed and decidedly not FOSS manner. Sorry, but that's simply not true. The pkg(5) project has been one of the few projects that is actually very open. It was the first to use defect.opensolaris.org for bugtracking, it's licensed under the CDDL, and at the moment any contributor (even external ones) can get commit access upon approval by the project team members. It has active, external contributors to the project (including myself at one point a few years ago before I was employed for the project), and is one of the few to push almost all design and development discussions onto a public os.org mailing list. Remember that this community and the projects that provide the basis for various OpenSolaris distributions remain largely a meritocracy -- those that do the work get to make the decisions. There are plenty of open source projects that have made decisions unpopular with their user community. That doesn't make those projects any less FOSS, nor does it justify claims of "forcing" something on a community. I respect your belief that the pkg(5) system was not a good choice. However, I assert that your unjustified belief that it was "forced" on anyone, or that is is not a FOSS project, is grossly inaccurate. -Shawn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
This is an idea, but SchilliX (or a fork of it) could remain a pure server-oriented core distro (without X or desktop cruft). The desktop stuff could come by way of IPS integration and/or CSW/SFW/other packages... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/23/10 15:28, Ian Collins wrote: That's right, but I don't think you can specify the zfs or zpool version to the installer (an RFE maybe?) so the root pool will always be the latest version. you should be able to create an empty BE in a down-rev pool (with pkg image-create, as discussed in Ed P's blog entry) and populate it so you can use a down-rev zfs version. - Bill ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] NIC is only functional when 'snoop' is running
My workstation is not on a UPS and experienced a hard-shutdown the other day due to a commercial power outage. It booted up cleanly afterwards; however, my NIC is does not seem to be functional unless 'snoop' is running. I've tried setting a static IP, using DHCP, triple-checked the subnet mask, etc. If 'snoop' isn't running, I can't ping the default router, resolve hostnames, or SSH to IP addresses on my local network. I don't have a clue whether this is configuration problem, or if the NIC was somehow damaged when the power went out. My workstation is running build 134, and it is using the e1000g driver. Any suggestions would be greatly appreciated. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Why? IPS was shoved down the community's throat in a heavy handed and decidedly not FOSS manner. Moreover, interestingly enough, the most popular, by far, thing to come out of Open Solaris is Nexenta, which is most definitely not IPS based. And ironically enough, using something more familiar and mainstream probably play a significant role in explaining why Nexenta is where it's at today. Not that I'm particularly fond of Nexenta. I think the idea here is Oracle emancipation, not Oracle emulation. Who gives a hoot about Oracle and Solaris?? It's on the short list for extinction, as _every_ Sun shop I am familiar with has plans to migrate off of Sun post Oracle take over. So yeah, Solaris Next may be a legend in Oracle's mind, but not much of any place else that I'm aware of. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/24/10 10:40 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: Ken Gunderson wrote: Cool;) My test box was just about to get fresh install of FreeBSD-8.1-RELEASE, but I'll take Schillix for a quick test spin first. It still has no GDM and an old version of Xorg I compiled in late 2005. I hope that someone will compile a recent Xorg and GNOME. It may be a good idea to check Sun's sources for this as e.g. the GNOME from Blastwave only works if the locale is UTF-8 based _and_ if every string inside every program is UTF-8 based. This makes a lot of software from Europe fail with non C locales. Jörg, Good job on getting this out. I really do think you should accept the inevitable and accept IPS, otherwise SchilliX runs the risk of becoming an evolutionary dead end. If any OpenSolaris distributions are to survive post-Oracle, they must be able to share packages with each other and ultimately with Oracle's Solaris. A disparate packaging scheme shows a fractured community. We should at least strive to appear united! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Ken Gunderson wrote: > P.S.; Joerg, did I miss it or are there no md5 hashes for this? See the file README. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Stefan Parvu wrote: > thanks. I never tried previously the distro, but I will install this into one > of my test > machines. Is star part of the distro ? Hope so :) Star-1.5.1 is also available from Blastwave. The star on SchilliX has one new feature: 1) create a meta data only archive with star -c -dump -meta . > arch 2) extraxt the archive uwing star -xp -xmeta -force-hole < arch in order to create all plain files as 100% empty holes New is the combination "-xmeta -force-hole". Such a tree does nse nearly no space on disk and it is sufficient as a reference for a wget -mirror call. > Would be nice to have a list somewhere what we get as plus on top of build130, > all tools. Nothing new that was not yet part of previous SchilliX release. I created this release mainly in order to have a start base for replacing closed source stuff from Sun/Oracle. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Ken Gunderson wrote: > Cool;) > > My test box was just about to get fresh install of FreeBSD-8.1-RELEASE, but > I'll take Schillix for a quick test spin first. It still has no GDM and an old version of Xorg I compiled in late 2005. I hope that someone will compile a recent Xorg and GNOME. It may be a good idea to check Sun's sources for this as e.g. the GNOME from Blastwave only works if the locale is UTF-8 based _and_ if every string inside every program is UTF-8 based. This makes a lot of software from Europe fail with non C locales. Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [distribution-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
"C. Bergström" wrote: > Did you pull the libc work from Garrett and drop that on there? No, I just created a halfway clean base for starting with the emancipation work. > Which compiler did you use to build onnv-gate? OS-12.1 > What are you doing for c++ and are the binaries from Solaris/OpenSolaris > able to run? I supply the binary libC from Sun. > Which version of grub did you include on the ISO and or do you have any > other GPLv2 software linking against libc? GPLv2 is not a problem, as GPLv2 does not define any rule to prevent "collective works", which is what you create when you combine software from different works. GPLv3 is a problem as it tries to forbid "collective works" with something that is not a "basic system component". Thus GPLv3 seems to me to be a problem legal problem that has a noticable risk of getting sued. See: http://www.osscc.net/en/gpl.html and check the links to the papers from Lawrence Rosen, Thomas Gordon and Lothar Determan. > Where's the source to your patches? (I thought you have this all on > Berlios.. maybe) For b130, I just needed to change two lines of code in order to make ksh93 and another oss work from outside compile with OS-12.1. If people are interested in an updated version of my distro creator, I may work on a general usable set. BTW: do you have results that others may use? Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/24/10 09:47 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: On 07/23/10 14:23, Ian Collins wrote: I guess that's with an older or same ZFS version not newer in order to be able to zfs send the filesystem. It could work for recent Solaris 10 updates as well, assuming there's another update with a zfs upgrade. When I did this I migrated systems from nevada build 130 to opensolaris build 130 so this wasn't a consideration. I'm just downloading the b117 CD dorm genunix to try this with my b117 SXCE system. The following is somewhat speculative (I haven't needed to migrate from s10 to opensolaris): Being the weekend, I'm going to see how far I get with a Solaris 10 update 8 system. One thing that can be done with a Solaris host and not a nevada one is to create a FLAR of the box and import it as a branded zone on it's new self. That would make post-upgrade configuration porting easier (I'm bound to forget something!). It will also provide a home for application that don't support OpenSolaris. - remember that there are separate pool versions and filesystem versions. - You can, in general, zfs send a filesystem to a lower-revision pool; the filesystem version is what matters for zfs send. - You can create down-rev pools and filesystems using appropriate options to the zpool create and zfs create commands. That's right, but I don't think you can specify the zfs or zpool version to the installer (an RFE maybe?) so the root pool will always be the latest version. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
--- On Fri, 7/23/10, Joerg Schilling wrote: > From: Joerg Schilling > Subject: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing > To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, distribution-disc...@opensolaris.org > Date: Friday, July 23, 2010, 3:52 PM > Hi, > > today, I put SchilliX-0.7.0 out. > > > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/ > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/SchilliX-0.7.0.iso.bz2 > ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/README.install > > Changes since SchilliX-0.6.7: > > - Updated to use OpenSolaris Nevada Build > 130 > > - Updated to use new Schily tools (e.g. > cdrtools-3.00) > > - The history editor in the Bourne shell > now supports > multi byte character locales. > > - root now has the initial passwd root > > - schillix now has the initial passwd > schillix > > Please test an report problems as I am going to use > SchilliX-0.7.0 > as a base for working on a 100% free and open source based > distribution that is able to compile it's own sourcecode. > This is usually called "self hosting". > > Jörg > > -- > EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de > (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin > �...@cs.tu-berlin.de > (uni) > > joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de > (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ > URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Congratulations, Joerg!!! I almost thought you did a snv_145 refresh but this is amazing as well. You're back on the map. Good job, ~ Ken Mays ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] mplayer + VDPAU + opensolaris = ?
> On b134 + 190.53 the playback will be choppy. > Update the driver to 256.35 in a new BE (changing only > the NVIDIA driver) and the playback will be smooth. Yes, with 256.35 drivers everything works fine now. Thanks! -- Best regards, Aleksey Cheusov. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/23/10 14:23, Ian Collins wrote: I guess that's with an older or same ZFS version not newer in order to be able to zfs send the filesystem. It could work for recent Solaris 10 updates as well, assuming there's another update with a zfs upgrade. When I did this I migrated systems from nevada build 130 to opensolaris build 130 so this wasn't a consideration. The following is somewhat speculative (I haven't needed to migrate from s10 to opensolaris): - remember that there are separate pool versions and filesystem versions. - You can, in general, zfs send a filesystem to a lower-revision pool; the filesystem version is what matters for zfs send. - You can create down-rev pools and filesystems using appropriate options to the zpool create and zfs create commands. - Bill ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Hi, Did a few quick tests under VirtualBox (for now). The 64 bit version did not play well, showing unresolved symbols and dropping to recovery console. The 32-bit version was OK, though: # uname -a SunOS unknown 5.11 schily130 i86pc i386 i86pc # ifconfig -a lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu 8232 index 1 inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff00 e1000g0: flags=1004843 mtu 1500 index 2 inet 192.168.43.103 netmask ff00 broadcast 192.168.43.255 ether 8:0:27:ef:c4:f1 lo0: flags=2002000849 mtu 8252 index 1 inet6 ::1/128 - X starts, but there is a problem with the keyboard (kbd_mode not found; typing into the three X windows renders garbage; the only way to stop it is to raise 'Kill window' from the menu and kill the last xterm). The network adapter is bridged, seems to work fine. About to install it. Cheers, Chavdar -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/24/10 03:48 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: On 07/22/10 14:56, Jason wrote: I suspect they would be quite disappointed (to put it mildly) if there is no way to do something similar (at least an installer that can run in an older version to lay down the bits in unused space). The following worked for me to migrate development build servers (and a couple laptops and desktops) from nevada to opensolaris: 1) migrate from UFS root to ZFS root via live upgrade. 2) use "zfs send" & "zfs receive" to bring in a root filesystem cloned from an appropriate opensolaris install, containing a roughly comparable opensolaris build. I guess that's with an older or same ZFS version not newer in order to be able to zfs send the filesystem. It could work for recent Solaris 10 updates as well, assuming there's another update with a zfs upgrade. 3) migrate configuration from the nevada root to the opensolaris root. 4) adjust boot configuration (grub menu and/or bootfs property) to boot the opensolaris root. Thanks for the ideas, I give it a go with my last SXCE server - after grabbing some live CDs with the correct builds. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
P.S.; Joerg, did I miss it or are there no md5 hashes for this? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
thanks. I never tried previously the distro, but I will install this into one of my test machines. Is star part of the distro ? Hope so :) Would be nice to have a list somewhere what we get as plus on top of build130, all tools. Cheers, Stefan -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Cool;) My test box was just about to get fresh install of FreeBSD-8.1-RELEASE, but I'll take Schillix for a quick test spin first. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Random system hang build 134
I did... I have now disabled it... But there was no evidence that this could be the problem from the log files... I will keep the thread updated re: this action. thanks! -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
Hi, today, I put SchilliX-0.7.0 out. ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/SchilliX-0.7.0.iso.bz2 ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/README.install Changes since SchilliX-0.6.7: - Updated to use OpenSolaris Nevada Build 130 - Updated to use new Schily tools (e.g. cdrtools-3.00) - The history editor in the Bourne shell now supports multi byte character locales. - root now has the initial passwd root - schillix now has the initial passwd schillix Please test an report problems as I am going to use SchilliX-0.7.0 as a base for working on a 100% free and open source based distribution that is able to compile it's own sourcecode. This is usually called "self hosting". Jörg -- EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin j...@cs.tu-berlin.de(uni) joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/ URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Community distro mailing list
If a community-friendly spinoff is going to spinoff, I hope the mailing list for that is created before the deadline when Oracle decides to terminate the Opensolaris community. Is somebody working to create a community distro mailing list? Personally, I want this mailing list back, for people who want to talk about opensolaris. So I want all those community distro messages to go into some outside mailing list that's related to that new OS you guys are talking about. Instead of hijacking this list to talk about creating some other project. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro mailing list
Thanks, John. I'd been checking in on that from time to time but it didn't seem like much discussion was going on following the mentioning of such at governing board meeting a while back. You're indeed correct that that would be a good place for such discussion. I assumed, perhaps erroneously, that said discussion was intentionally migrated here so as to gain exposure and participation from wider community? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Cannot import a zpool created with zfs-fuse - newer version of ZFS?
Break the mirror move the disk over to the other server create a new zpool using that disk zfs send | ssh zfs receive bring over the other disk and add as a mirror. Pop open a beer and smile. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Crash during zpool import
You would have better luck posting this to the zfs list. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Random system hang build 134
Do you have autofs turned on. Sounds like it is hanging when attempting to mount a automounted filesystem. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Random system hang build 134
Symptoms: 1. System remains pingable 2. When trying to ssh in terminal hangs after entering pass 3. At the console terminal hangs after entering pass 4. Problem persists after disabling snapshots/compression/dedup Solution: Hard reboot (A+F1 does not work) Configuration: Supermicro Mobo 24 x 2TB WD Black Drives (2 x 12 drive in RAIDZ2) Mirrored OCZ 32GB SSD drives for OS (ZFS mirrored rpool) Mirrored Intel extreme 64GB drives (ZIL) Quad Port Intel Gb NIC - aggr1 12GB DDR3 Does anyone have any idea what the problem could be or how I can track this down? Just so that you know I have 2 of these system with identical setup and hardware so I have excluded the possibility that this could be a bad piece of hardware. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro mailing list
A reminder that we *do* have a distribution community here, with a distribution-discuss alias that is a good place to hold "community distro" conversations... http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/distribution-discuss -John ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro mailing list
There was, however, threat of moderating, and/or discontinuing the list as disciplinary measures as part of select interpretation and application of the site's TOS. To which someone on list did respond by setting up a list at Free Lists so as to as least have an archive. Mayhaps that was what you referring? If so, search back in the threads. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Crash during zpool import
My system crashed while deleting a zfs volume and went into an infinite reboot loop. Suspecting a problem with ZFS, I booted from the LiveCD to try to identify the issue. I tried to import one of the pools called backup zpool import -f backup The system crashed almost immediately. Is there something that I can do to fix the zpool? mklassen -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/22/10 14:56, Jason wrote: I suspect they would be quite disappointed (to put it mildly) if there is no way to do something similar (at least an installer that can run in an older version to lay down the bits in unused space). The following worked for me to migrate development build servers (and a couple laptops and desktops) from nevada to opensolaris: 1) migrate from UFS root to ZFS root via live upgrade. 2) use "zfs send" & "zfs receive" to bring in a root filesystem cloned from an appropriate opensolaris install, containing a roughly comparable opensolaris build. 3) migrate configuration from the nevada root to the opensolaris root. 4) adjust boot configuration (grub menu and/or bootfs property) to boot the opensolaris root. You don't actually need an installer that runs on an older version to do this -- you just need to already be on a ZFS root, and have another system installed with the newer version that can "zfs send" to the older system. The key thing is that you never do anything irreversible to the system - as with live upgrade, you never overwrite a working root filesystem until you know you have another working root filesystem. Exactly what configuration makes sense to migrate in step (3) is likely to be at least somewhat installation-specific. The hard part is step (1), because ideal partition layouts for UFS+LU and ZFS are quite different; this either requires spare disks or a significant outage period. Ed P.'s blog entry: http://blogs.sun.com/edp/entry/moving_from_nevada_and_live inspired this; the main thing I'll note is that you don't need to build & run pkg yourself (his step 2) if you have another system already running opensolaris. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/22/10 05:56 PM, Jason wrote: At a previous job most of their Sparc systems were upgraded from Solaris 2.6->8->10 via live upgrade. Obviously new systems got the latest standard, and not every system that went from 2.6->8 was still around to do the 8->10 upgrade, but at one point we had around 1200 sparc systems (all servers, no desktops) that we maintained in our department (with three other groups of similar size). The reduced downtime of the update was _critical_ in allowing this to happen (otherwise the business would force us to run ancient versions forever). This was probably one of the few things that kept them from tossing Sun out the door completely (which at one point they were trying to do) -- since they were obsessed with system availability (to a sometimes absurd extent), it provide a very distinct advantage over the AIX and HP-UX systems they had. I suspect they would be quite disappointed (to put it mildly) if there is no way to do something similar (at least an installer that can run in an older version to lay down the bits in unused space). As Bart said, most don't do this, though I am aware of at least one customer who does (probably the same one, based on your description). Honestly, they're doing what we would have recommended for everyone but didn't work hard enough to get widely accepted. I'm sure we'll work with them to find an acceptable solution to their needs, but it's more likely to be a special case, not a general one. Dave Since the hardware, OS versions (including patches), as well as other software was tested and controlled rather carefully, we had very few problems with this. On Thu, Jul 22, 2010 at 4:44 PM, Ian Collins wrote: On 07/23/10 06:44 AM, Bart Smaalders wrote: On 07/21/10 15:25, Ian Collins wrote: If Solaris Next is to be IPS based, I really really hope we will see a viable upgrade path. The lack of one is the biggest hurdle to IPS adoption. In general, upgrading from UFS root w/ svr4 packages to ZFS root w/ IPS is a very difficult problem. While we can imagine cases in which we could be successful, there are a host of situations which are not readily addressable. Add to this the fact that most of Sun ^H^H^HOracle's Solaris customers generally do NOT upgrade from one release to the next, because of the reproducibility problem - production machine configurations need to be readily reproducible, and upgrading an existing S10 patched OS is not the best way of doing this. I can see that's probably true. I only ever upgraded one production box from Solaris 9 to 10 and that was a very simple configuration. Nearly all of the other production Solaris 9 boxes I've replaced have been migration for their services to Solaris 10 zones. The small remainder have been imported to branded zones. So I guess Robert is right, a branded zone is one option! I do wonder how much of a selling point (to keep people on Solaris) the ability to upgrade was, even it wasn't used? We anticipate developing and sharing migration strategies and tools, but a traditional upgrade in place DVD approach is not likely to occur. That's good. The traditional upgrade in place DVD approach has probably reached the end of the line with the increasing use of virtualisation. Treating a system (or zone) as a service and looking at how to migrate that is better approach. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro, teamwork and being clear
On 07/22/10 04:24, Dennis Clarke wrote: Update 10 ? Really ? The marketing people at ORacle are worse than the ones at Sun. We have no clue when an update is coming or a damn thing but at least there are readme files that leak out from time to time. I don't understand your point. Hasn't it been said over and over that it is Oracle policy not to make forward looking statements about product releases? Solaris 10 is solely an Oracle product, without any community involvement; does it surprise you that it would adhere to that policy? Without making any comments on whether or not or when any particular update is due to be released, I will say that an update takes many months to produce, and preparation for the next update will generally start several months before the previous update is released. So, what is your point? -- blu It's bad civic hygiene to build technologies that could someday be used to facilitate a police state. - Bruce Schneier ---| Brian Utterback - Solaris RPE, Oracle Corporation. Ph:603-262-3916, Em:brian.utterb...@oracle.com ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro mailing list
A Hettinger wrote: > Apparently I missed the memo the Oracle was dropping this site. > > If it turns out I didn't miss the memo, and this is something you are > completely making up, please stop. Oracle has made no announcements of ending opensolaris.org. Oracle has announced that the separate site opensolaris.com is going away, folding the content from there into either opensolaris.org or the Oracle Technical Network, but that was always a site that was separate from the community efforts, hence the separate domainname. -- -Alan Coopersmith-alan.coopersm...@oracle.com Oracle Solaris Platform Engineering: X Window System ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] VLC building help
Hello, VLC packaging is handled over in desktop-discuss. For DVD playback, we use VLC and Mplayer (people like a few choices). VLC 0.8.6/1.1.1 and Mplayer 1.0.0 were ported for Solaris 10 and OSOL 2009.06. Check the VLC spec-file for recent updates to v1.1.1. Some changes may take advantage of the newer Boomer audio backend in OSOL Dev snv_134. Most of us have tested the packages with 1080p streams and the Nvidia 256.35 driver. Some old links: http://wyang0.blogspot.com/2009/08/vlc-on-solaris-10.html ~ Ken Mays P.S. Blu-Ray players are going for about $50-$75 USD now... -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro mailing list
Apparently I missed the memo the Oracle was dropping this site. If it turns out I didn't miss the memo, and this is something you are completely making up, please stop. This is the type of stuff that gets posted on slashdot then I have to go around the office and explain that it's just someone being melodramatic on OSOL-Discuss (really, it's best to just ignore that ML). Thanks. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Community distro mailing list
If a community-friendly spinoff is going to spinoff, I hope the mailing list for that is created before the deadline when Oracle decides to terminate the Opensolaris community. Is somebody working to create a community distro mailing list? Personally, I want this mailing list back, for people who want to talk about opensolaris. So I want all those community distro messages to go into some outside mailing list that's related to that new OS you guys are talking about. Instead of hijacking this list to talk about creating some other project. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
Hi Peter, GNU/kFreeBSD relates moreso to the Nexenta community (OpenSolaris kernel/Ubuntu (Debian) userland) - which also is known as GNU/Solaris. To help create the next community distro, I'd talk to Nexenta. Take a look at Nexenta Core Platform 3.0 RC2 and see what can be improved from it. The Belenix project is another group that can be of assistance. Lots of experience and software engineering skillsets there on building and designing distros. The other projects like Milax and EON can also give some guidance. There is also the upcoming Oracle OpenWorld and some Hackathons going on. Even if people are 'non-developers/programmers', feedback and encouragement is better than 'sitting on the benches and whining'. If people really want to help, just make a list of what you want to see if 'the community' did create a 'version' of OpenSolaris 2010.X. Start asking distro communities what they need help on an if they want to build an updated distro. As for OpenSolaris 2010.03, read up on these docs: http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+indiana/Renamed+Packages+in+Build+133. http://wikis.sun.com/download/attachments/78086473/OSOLRELNOTES.pdf?version=1&modificationDate=1268857930181 ~ Ken Mays -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Technical contact for OSOL mailing lists
On Jul 23, 2010, at 6:39 AM, Daniel Taylor wrote: > Hello, > > I'm trying to find the technical contact(s) for the OSOL mailing lists, > > I've been having quite a few issues with bounced email from this list (and > other OSOL lists), and checking our mail server logs it is always because of > DomainKey (DKIM) rejection. > > Believe it might have something to do with this... > > http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=300103&aid=1287546&group_id=103 > > Obviously I would like to get this fixed. > > Does anyone know who I should be talking too? That would be me and please forward me the logs you refer to and any rejected messages with the full headers intact. The only place DKIM would be a factor on our system would be via spamassassin and it wouldn't reject your messages, though if it has enough other parts rating a score, it might mark it as spam. Mailman doesn't strip DKIM headers so I'll need more details from the logs and the headers before I can determine what might be happening. I don't see any rejections for email from your address in the past week in any of the logs, though I do see bounce scores which is mail getting rejected by your system in the opposite direction, so I'm curious as to what might be happening. e. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
I am one of those approvers. Last I looked I had at least commented on anything mentioned in both SJ-Discuss and Porters-Discuss as ready for review. I will review my emails, but unless some have come in over the last week, there are none that have not been either approved (with or without my vote) or I have at least commented on. When you compare the number of packages in /pending and /contrib, you have to realize that if a porter is actively working on a package, but they do not feel that it is ready to be promoted, we do not even look at it (despite it possibly being installable from /pending). In addition once a package has been approved, the actual promotion must occur (this is a manual process, I do not recall who is responcable for it). I believe it is on hold pending the new /release The issue of number approvers came to a head in the SJ community earlier this year, and as a result a number of individuals (myself included) where added to the list. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [xen-discuss] Xen EOF?
Looking at the fact, that OVM is free, and has a way better graphical management system, and also comes with already predefined "Images", I don't see that many problems. Who would really be using ZFS in the Dom0, if you build bigger environments? You would place the binaries/images on some network device, so no disadvantage here. Dtrace in Dom0 would be useful for the device-drivers only. The Dtrace interface to Xen was based on an asynchronous message bus, with no guarantee of getting all messages, not even in time. Crossbow might be the only advantage, that's not deployable in an OVM-like environment. But given the advantages of predefined image-sets for OVM and the already available graphical interface for managing OVM, I really like the engineers working on making Solaris a better DomU, than working on porting Xen 4.0 to Solaris. You also no longer buy your PC based on whether it runs an AMI BIOS or an AWARD BIOS. That's something, that's simply there... ;-) Again: This is all my private thinking! Matthias You (Justin Lee Ewing) wrote: > Wow, that is really disappointing... especially with all the features of ZFS, > the intergration of Crossbow, etc. One would think you would deprecate > OracleVM in favor of the combined Solaris/Xvm and try to consolidate. I was > definiately looking forward to getting rid of VMware... but no point in that > if I'm not moving towards a single OS/command set. -- Matthias Pfützner | Tel.: +49 700 PFUETZNER | By 2000 Apple will be Lichtenbergstr.73 | mailto:matth...@pfuetzner.de | acquired by Wal-Mart. D-64289 Darmstadt | AIM: pfuetz, ICQ: 300967487 | Germany | http://www.pfuetzner.de/matthias/ | Ted Nelson (Chief Ed. Byte) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Technical contact for OSOL mailing lists
Hello, I'm trying to find the technical contact(s) for the OSOL mailing lists, I've been having quite a few issues with bounced email from this list (and other OSOL lists), and checking our mail server logs it is always because of DomainKey (DKIM) rejection. Believe it might have something to do with this... http://sourceforge.net/tracker/?func=detail&atid=300103&aid=1287546&group_id=103 Obviously I would like to get this fixed. Does anyone know who I should be talking too? Thanks, - Daniel Begin forwarded message: From: opensolaris-discuss-requ...@opensolaris.org Date: 23 July 2010 10:41:12 BST Subject: confirm fedae9db9f97ed1c1baee5f057aeea4dac021607 Your membership in the mailing list opensolaris-discuss has been disabled due to excessive bounces The last bounce received from you was dated 23-Jul-2010. You will not get any more messages from this list until you re-enable your membership. You will receive 3 more reminders like this before your membership in the list is deleted. To re-enable your membership, you can simply respond to this message (leaving the Subject: line intact), or visit the confirmation page at http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/confirm/opensolaris-discuss/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro, teamwork and being clear
On 23/07/2010 03:33, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: I don't know, but probably more people contributed to SFE and/or /contrib in the last couple of years than to Blastwave. Without getting into pointless comparisons (I've used both), the problem I have with /contrib is the huge bottleneck that appears to be present getting stuff from /pending to /contrib, and that even /pending seems to have been in limbo for awhile. http://jucr.opensolaris.org/statistics/promoted_packages http://jucr.opensolaris.org/pending/en/index.shtml Catalog Packages1174 Last Updated2010-04-27 17:14:53 http://pkg.opensolaris.org/contrib/en/index.shtml Catalog Packages351 Last Updated2009-12-15 07:01:09 If /contrib is to be a meaningful alternative, it should get updated more often, and contain a larger percentage of the number of packages in /pending. That, even if not supported, one might want some control so that people might have confidence in /contrib, is understandable. That the appearance is that most such control is a resource that can vanish at a corporate whim is not acceptable. Are there any outside approvers, or a process to get them trained and blessed? 100% agree with you. The problem is 2010.H1 and... One of the problems was a clean-up of some contrib packages with bad dependencies as osol 2010.h1 was supposed to have /contrib configured by default and some packages would prevent an future upgrade. Then all the others issues around osol and frankly nothing has been prmoted in last 6 months or so. I think we need to wait a little bit longer and see what happens to the osol and the source juicer. There is expected to be some kind of an announcement on the SJ pages soon. I have no clue if it is going to be a good one or a bad one. Assuming that osol and the sj will survive /contrib is the way to go imho. To answer your other question - there are some non-sun people who have a right to review and vote on packages. Then the idea was that if package got +2 and none negative votes it would get promoted to /contrib once a month or so automatically more or less. But all of that has been frozen for now. -- Robert Milkowski http://milek.blogspot.com ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Can opensolaris do CDP
On Fri, Jul 23, 2010 at 10:21 AM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: >> now i know how to do auto-snapshot on opensolairs. >> Can anybody tell me if opensolairs has any tool to >> implement CDP? >> thx a lot. > > By what definition? AFAIK, the extreme definition > implies being able to restore to any single completed write > operation: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_data_protection#Continuous_vs_near_continuous > > AFAIK, that's not possible, and rarely practical or useful. > > However, you can have a _lot_ of snapshots, provided you have > a lot of space to accomodate copies of all the changes. > > But even there, what good is going truly snapshot-crazy > unless the snapshots are synchronized with the applications > being in a state at which they can be restarted? There's > no generic checkpoint/restart mechanism. Best you could do would > be give each application its own filesystem, and write the application > to be responsible for taking the snapshots at times when the application's > storage was logically consistent on disk. At the LOSUG meeting on Wednesday, Luke Marsden was talking about a scheme in which dtrace catches writes to a filesystem and triggers a snapshot which then gets replicated using zfs send/receive. Of course, there's some heuristic behaviour about when to take snapshots. Clearly not after every single write operation, so if there's a continuous stream you either wait for a gap (the upload stops or the overall change finishes, for example) or say you don't wait longer than N seconds. The talk will be placed here shortly, I expect: http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/User+Group+losug/v-2010 -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Can opensolaris do CDP
> now i know how to do auto-snapshot on opensolairs. > Can anybody tell me if opensolairs has any tool to > implement CDP? > thx a lot. By what definition? AFAIK, the extreme definition implies being able to restore to any single completed write operation: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Continuous_data_protection#Continuous_vs_near_continuous AFAIK, that's not possible, and rarely practical or useful. However, you can have a _lot_ of snapshots, provided you have a lot of space to accomodate copies of all the changes. But even there, what good is going truly snapshot-crazy unless the snapshots are synchronized with the applications being in a state at which they can be restarted? There's no generic checkpoint/restart mechanism. Best you could do would be give each application its own filesystem, and write the application to be responsible for taking the snapshots at times when the application's storage was logically consistent on disk. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Can opensolaris do CDP
> now i know how to do auto-snapshot on opensolairs. > Can anybody tell me if opensolairs has any tool to > implement CDP? Continuous data protection? -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
