Re: [osol-discuss] [New Community Proposal] - starting an OpenSolaris JDS Desktop Community
On Tue, 5 Jul 2005, Glynn Foster wrote: > Hey, > > I'd like to start the ball rolling in getting an OpenSolaris Desktop > Community launched. Let's face it, there's an awful lot of FUD being > spread around OpenSolaris not being ready for the desktop - it's time to > prove them wrong ;) > > I'd like to lead a desktop community focused on JDS. There's absolutely New Community Proposal "focused on JDS" ... gets my vote! Approved! ..... snip . > Rock on! 10-4. Good Work Glynn! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris vs. Linux
On Wed, 6 Jul 2005, Michael K Dolan Jr wrote: > I've read a pretty fair comparison of Linux 2.6 vs Solaris 10. I think I > originally got it off LinuxToday.com but just did a search and found a > link to it on IBM's site... It actually looks at everything from > technical differences, legal/licensing, and ecosystems support. In the > end it comes out in favor of Linux, but the comparison seems fairly > accurate. I tend to favor Linux too anyway (GPL is open source with > freedom, CDDL is fake open source) and so does most of this industry Puhleeze don't make inflamatory statements like the above on this forum without providing some justification for them. OpenSolaris is about intelligent engineering - not zealotry. If you'll elaborate I'll participate in an intelligent discussion. As of right now, your technical credibility has suffered a major hit. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: How would "the ARC process" look at this discussion of KSH 88-vs-93?
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Jul 28, 2005, at 1:34 PM, Darren J Moffat wrote: > > On Wed, 2005-07-27 at 18:08, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > >> Alternatively, OpenSolaris could give development autonomy to the > >> communities, wherein technical development, discussion of > >> alternatives, > >> getting it to work, and testing can all take place independent of > >> any ARC review. ARC review isn't needed until the community wishes > >> to apply the completed work to a stable release branch, at which > >> point the community product does need to adhere to the particular > >> interface requirements for that branch. [They are, of course, aware > >> of those requirements during the whole process, and thus will have > >> designed and developed for a particular set of branches.] > > > > Which is exactly how things had been working in practise inside Sun. > > That's what I thought originally, but a lot of the posts I have seen > are emphasizing the business decisions made by an ARC rather than > the technical review. Where do you see this? I don't see it? The ARC review process is fundamentally a technical review done by engineers who have a technical "investment" in the process. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: How would "the ARC process" look at this discussion of KSH 88-vs-93?
d is not a significant barrier - it's more of a mindset change. > Discovering if an interface would be changed by an integration is > a technical problem. An ARC review should certainly be looking for No - discovering "if an interface would be changed by an integration" implies a reactive, slap yourself on the head _mistake_. The ARC process is designed to predict requirements and issues early in the technical software development process and assure that integration is smooth and almost a "no brainer". > such changes. It is fine for incompatible changes to require a major > revision number to change, but the decisions on whether or not to > develop such a change and when to release new major revisions > are *business decisions*. Those are Sun-internal Solaris decisions, > not OpenSolaris-wide decisions. Therefore, OpenSolaris can let new > development happen on an unstable "next major release" branch and > only worry about the interface constraints when those changes are > proposed for back-porting to a stable branch. > > > New interfaces > > obviously don't have these constraints, which is precisely why they > > must > > be developed so carefully -- today's new interface is tomorrow's > > constraint. > > They have to be released carefully. We can have 100 monkeys > typing away at the interface and that is fine -- it costs nothing > until someone asks "can I release this as version x.y.z?", at > which point the new interface is going to have to satisfy whatever > constraints the community wants to place on it. "100 monkeys typing away at the interface" implies a complete hacker mentality to me and it the very antithesis of software engineering. Software development is an engineering discipline - and when treated as such, provides a stable, predictable and correctly behaving Operating System that the developer can deliver his/her applications on with complete confidence. Or they can extend/expand the Operating System itself knowing that they are adding value for *every* user/developer in the community and that they are *not* a cause for developers to waste their valuable time recompiling/fixing software and discovering/fixing new and devious bugs. Further I'll predict that any software developer who truly cares about their craft will benefit greatly by taking the time to understand the significant payback they'll accrue by putting in a little extra effort to maintain interface compatibility. It's not an easy sell - but I guarantee to any developer that makes the effort, it'll make them a significantly better software engineer and provide them with skills that they can/will leverage throughout their career (assuming that they have chosen software development as their career). Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: How would "the ARC process" look at this discussion of KSH 88-vs-93?
On Thu, 28 Jul 2005, Shawn Walker wrote: > On 7/28/05, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > [stop, stop, you are bringing out the verbose monster in me!] > > > You are advocating starting off the OpenSolaris community on a track that > > immediately abandons this core value. I disagree (obviously), and instead > > advocate keeping the core value, and leaving the question of creating a > > new major branch to the point in time where we find something that - in > > our community's considered opinion - can not be done under our current > > constraints. > > > > Opening Pandora's box and intentionally throwing away one of Solaris's > > key features seems extremely shortsighted, not to mention counterproductive. > > +1 +1 Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] New community proposal: Approachability
On Tue, 2 Aug 2005, Stephen Hahn wrote: >This message proposes the creation of an Approachability community >for OpenSolaris. Please discuss. +1 But you would probably need a definition of what is the difference between: 1) RFE 2) something does not behave as expected, but does behave per the docs/man pages 3) default configs and the points that you already mentioned: a) too time consuming to set up b) too difficult to setup c) inconsistant with a similar feature (set) elsewhere in the Operating System d) nuisance tasks (I always have to do xyz *every* time I setup a new box or a new zone etc) For example the case listed earlier for most of the PXE setup being done automatically: is that an Approachability item or an RFE? Is there an easy way for a user to determine it accurately? If someone asked for a PXE boot setup "sanity" checker would that go to the RFE list or the proposed Approachability list. In either case it would certainly be a useful tool and could catch many of those silly typos and blatantly incorrect and inconsistant configs that take hours to trouble shoot. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Binary model & taxonomies: Re: Can we start OpenSolaris PMS enhancement project ?
On Mon, 8 Aug 2005, John Plocher wrote: > >>1.2 auto build another application if depended by current one. > > > > That is not so straight forward. > > Rhetorical question: Why should you be required to rebuild everything? > > > Caution: The following is probably "more than you ever wanted to > know" about Sun's binary compatibility efforts :-) ... lots of good stuff snipped John, your post, and the followup, were well written and easy to understand - especially given the subleties of this, often misunderstood, topic. I certainly appreciate the time/effort it took to write. Keep 'em coming... Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Laptop community.
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > After doing extensive work on making Solaris of the x86/x64 variety more > mobile > and trying to make it the laptop of choice withing Sun (not there yet, but > in much better shape than some time ago), I'd like to propose the > > "OpenSolaris Laptop Community" +1 Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Laptop community.
On Tue, 9 Aug 2005, Roy T. Fielding wrote: > On Aug 9, 2005, at 1:21 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > After doing extensive work on making Solaris of the x86/x64 variety > > more mobile > > and trying to make it the laptop of choice withing Sun (not there yet, > > but > > in much better shape than some time ago), I'd like to propose the > > > > "OpenSolaris Laptop Community" > > At some point we need to make a distinction between creating > mailing lists/forums and creating self-governing groups responsible > for building products. Which one falls under the name "community"? Agreed. > Should we just stick with mailing list == community and choose > a different name for our governance proposal (e.g., back to what > I was calling "development groups"), or should we just call this > a laptop mailing list? I think mailing list == community - since the community will initially consist of a mailing list and then (hopefully) grow into a full fledged "development group" or "project". I like the way Apache calls it a "Project" and then gives the project a status (incubator, full-fledged etc.) We definately need to define the buzzwords - because most of them are already severly "overloaded" (pardon the Object Oriented pun). Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Update: 4 Community Proposals
onents whos behavior changes dynamically in response to system utilization or available power or system component temperature. > user group community I formed, which now has about 10 individual groups > and three more in the queue. So, one community with 10 groups, not 10 > individual communities. The effect is similar, but it's much easier to > find user groups if you simply look in the one meta user group > community. Each user group has its own mail list, and we use a meta > ug-discuss list to communicate among groups. In theory, anyway. We're > still getting going. A better example, probably, is the JDS and KDE > experience. We had a proposal for a JDS community, but after some good > discussion the suggestion was made to open one Desktop community with > JDS and KDE. That seems to have worked out pretty well, too. Could we > consider the same type of arrangement with Laptops and Solaris x86 > drivers? Perhaps there are even more elements that would fit within that > combined community? > > To clarify the "community proposal" process we are doing here: when > people started asking for new communities after the launch, I suggested > that we have a simple process where a community member would post to the > discuss list some information about the proposed community, it's goals, > scope, participants, etc. We didn't have a formal governance process in > place, so a quick public proposal of a new community seemed reasonable. > It would serve to give the community notice that this was going on, it > would encourage debate about the community so perhaps others would want > to get involved, and it could also serve as a way to make new > connections that would either expand or better focus the new community. > If no one really objects, the community would be opened and hopefully > the community leaders would consider some of the community feedback. > That's pretty much it. > > Of course, when the governance is ratified that document will drive this > process as well as clarify the definition of what a community is. Agreed. In the meantime - thanks for taking up the slack. PS: Casper just started his (well deserved) vacation. So we may not get to have his valuable feedback on the laptop related drivers. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Conference Presence
On Thu, 18 Aug 2005, Teresa Giacomini wrote: > Hi everyone, > > I'm working on a plan for participation by Sun engineers at various > conferences in the coming months. Here is a list of conferences at > which we *hope* to have an (Open)Solaris presence (now through June > 2006). What do you think? Are we missing any critical ones? Are there Do you think that the CAB should also have a presence at some/all of these events? How important is it to the community to have face-2-face access to the CAB? What would constitute a CAB presence? [Obviously having the entire CAB present would not be very practical.] What about a CAB BoF to give the community an opportunity to ask questions etc? Since we're discussing OpenSolaris I think you should expand the scope of this discussion beyond Sun engineers and look at it from the perspective of OpenSolaris participation at various conferences. > some that don't seem worthwhile to you? Are there any you plan to > attend that you'd like to tell us about? > > We aren't exactly sure what our presence will be at each event > yet...anywhere from a BoF, to a talk, to a keynote, to a full blown > sponsorship. We'd really like to have non-Sun OpenSolaris community > members at most of the events along with Sun OpenSolaris community > members. Any volunteers? > > I'd love your input and guidance, > T > > *September 2005* > > Java China13-14 Beijing + several > additional cities > > *October 2005* > > LinuxWorld UK 5- 6London, England > ACM SOSP 23-26 Brighton, England > AUUG 2005 19-21 Sydney, Australia > EuroOSCON 17-20 Amsterdam, Netherlands > Colorado Software Summit 23-28 Keystone, CO, US > > *November 2005* > > OSBC 1- 2 Newton, MA, USA > LinuxWorld15-17 Frankfurt, Germany > FOSS India29-Dec 1Bangalore, India > > *December 2005* > > LISA 4- 9 San Diego, CA, USA > ApacheCon 10-14 San Diego, CA, USA > Open Source in Government 13-14 St Paul, MN, USA > Usenix - FAST 14-16 San Francisco, CA, USA > > *January 2006* > > TPOSSCON 9-13 Honolulu, HI, USA > > *February 2006* > > LinuxAsia TBDTBD > > *March 2006* > > O'Reilly Emerging Technology 6- 9 San Diego, CA, USA > ERC6- 9 Location TBD > > *April 2006* > > LinuxWorld 3- 6 Boston, MA, USA > OSBC TBDWest Coast, USA > > *May 2006* > > SANE 15-19 Delft, Netherlands > GUADEC28-30 Barcelona, Spain > FISL TBD Brazil > > *June 2006* > > JavaOne > LinuxTag > > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Dumb Question Time
If you see some behavior you don't understand on sunsolve, wait two (??) days and try it again. After you load your (Open)Solaris box, please examine the following script and see if it meets your security requirements before running it. This is my *generic* receipe for an (Open)Solaris box after it's been booted the first time. Search on docs.sun.com (by keyword) for anything you're not familiar with. #!/usr/bin/ksh svccfg apply /var/svc/profile/generic_limited_net.xml svcadm disable svc:/network/nfs/status:default svcadm disable svc:/network/nfs/nlockmgr:default svcadm disable svc:/network/telnet:default svcadm disable svc:/network/nfs/client:default svcadm disable svc:/network/nfs/rquota:default svcadm disable svc:/network/ftp:default svcadm disable svc:/network/finger:default svcadm disable svc:/network/login:rlogin svcadm disable svc:/network/shell:default cd /etc/rc3.d S50apache stop mv S50apache s50apache S76snmpdx stop mv S76snmpdx s76snmpdx S77dmi stop mv S77dmi s77dmi S82initsma stop mv S82initsma s82initsma S90samba stop mv S90samba s90samba cd ../rc2.d S47pppd stop mv S47pppd s47pppd S95IIim stop mv S95IIim s95IIim One more tip for a (Open)Solaris newbie. If you're going to use www.blastwave.org for packages, which I would highly recommend, then make /opt a separate mount point. This will allow you to (very easily) build a zone and customize that zone with a different set of blastwave packages which get installed, by default, in /opt/csw. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Obscure umem semantics
On Sun, 21 Aug 2005, Jonathan Adams wrote: snip > Not a problem; if you have any suggestions on how to make the manpage more > clear, I'll be happy to get it changed. Hi Jonathan, What's not clear to me is when to use or avoid using it. I understand the concepts of the slab allocator and have read the code. And recently I took a look at modhash.c in src/uts/common/os which uses the kmem_cache_alloc rather than umem_cache_alloc - but it appears to be a variant on the same underlying implementation and a good example of using these interfaces. So here's a question: If I'm allocating small sized structures, like pointers or small linked list structures (^prev, ^next, ^data), that don't need any (slab) constructor or destructor functions, should I use umem_cache_alloc or just use libumem malloc/free? More about the application: It's a messaging application where user generated messages are stored in a hash table with 600011 entries. Each hash table bucket stores a double linked list of messages associated with a single subscriber. New messages are added to the front of the linked list. When a new message arrives, the linked lists are scanned to determine if this is a duplicate message in the last 5 minutes (time_t timestamps are part of the data associated with a message that is stored which is about 104 bytes in size). The lists grow to include 24 hours of messages to provide stats, rate limiting etc. When the system is less busy, the lists will be scanned and data older than 24 hours will be removed. So, upon startup, the data structures will grow for the first 24 hours and may not be pruned until the early hours of the AM when the system is idle. This app is currently load balanced on 6 servers and the average # of entries in the system, after been pruned would be around 50k, and before about 150k. We've working on consolidating the app to a single server - so the code is being rewritten [1] and efficiency is important. Currently it's a single threaded app and will probably remain single threaded. The original code runs on Solaris 8 and I'm considering taking advantage of every Solaris 10 feature that would add value - like libumem. So there are many different dynamic data structures associated with the app: 1) the hash table itself with 600k slots 2) the hash buckets (linked list with generic pdata pointer) 3) the linked list of messages with a fixed structure size and a pointer to the actual message packet. 4) the message packet. A structure of 104 bytes with many pointers. [2] 5) the message text itself - referenced by a pointer in 4) and anything from a few bytes to ~ 500 bytes with ~ 70 bytes being the average size. I'm not trying (really!) to turn this into an app specific question - but in discussing when using the slab allocator would/would-not make sense. The unusual aspect of this app, is the fact that the memory structures grow for the first 24 hours and are pruned infrequently.[3] Notes: [1] Bad Word alert! [2] The linked list header has a ptr to a list member destructor function and an overall list destructor. [3] In case it's not obvious, the app has to run 7x24x365. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Tech Lead
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Stephen Harpster wrote: > I'm proud to announce that effective immediately, Stephen Hahn > <http://blogs.sun.com/sch> will be Sun's OpenSolaris tech lead. Stephen > is highly familiar with open source issues, and was one of the engineers > involved with starting the OpenSolaris program. He is returning after > focusing on delivering, with the project team, SMF > <http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/content/selfheal/> into Solaris 10 and > exploring the idea of approachability as a design principle. Stephen's > responsibilities will include helping Sun prioritize their work on > OpenSolaris, be a technical advocate for OpenSolaris to Sun's customers, > provide technical assistance to the open source community, and grow the > developer community. > > Please give Stephen a big welcome! On behalf of the CAB, I'd like to congratuate Stephen on his promotion - and say that Sun has "chosen wisely". We look forward to working closely with Stephen in his new capacity and know that only great things can come from such a gifted/talented individual. This is great news for OpenSolaris. Contrats Stephen, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Re: GPL & CDDL - incompatibitile., what does thismean? (round 3)
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: .. original reformatted . > >Most if not all of the technical questions posted on this forum are left > >unanswered, but Sun's >engineers do find time to engage in non-technical > >matters. Perhaps most of the trashings >about Sun are well justified. > > The near-total apathy that I have sensed from the overwhelming majority > of Sun's engineers toward OpenSolaris to me serves as a clear warning as > to whether Sun is really committed to opensource. Talk is cheap. & > cheap talks invite resentments. To induce interests, someone must show > actions. > > While the GPL'ed Linux kernel does not allow proprietary device drivers > to be included in the kernel itself, they can be easilly added as > loadable modules. A number of yum/apt repositories have been constructed > to make loading these modules painless. Several Linux distributions > (e.g., Ubuntu, PCLinuxOS, etc.) even pre-load those proprietary drivers, > thus erasing one of the main advantages CDDL might have over the GPL. My personal experience tells me that this statement is totally inaccurate. Why, because with the kernel interfaces constantly changing, most Linux driver developers have been unable to provide drivers as loadable modules or in binary form. Even the module loaders requirements change. And why is this? Well because Linus believes that stable APIs and ABIs stiffle innovation. Has he looked at Solaris 10 and DTrace recently - no impact on Solaris API/ABI stability while providing *lots* of innovation! Case in point: I "tried" to build a Linux system about 12 months ago to take advantage of the excellent 3Ware 9500 SATA RAID controller. I wanted to build a system to act as disk based backup archiver and SVN (subversion) server. I picked Suse Linux Professional 9.0 (then current) and got the box up and running without too many headaches. Then here's what happened next (excuse cut/paste from an earlier email): --- begin cut/paste - after running the system for about a week, upgraded the Linux kernel to resolve a published kernel exploit and the system refused to boot. You know - after it's been running long enough that you've invested some man hours into it! + the driver is a loadable module with a "rev number" tied to the particular kernel release. Upgrade the kernel and the version #s don't match and the module won't load. - According to 3Ware tech support [7], I should have (in this order): + patched the new kernel - step 1 (did that) + downloaded/installed the corresponding kernel build environment - step 2 + built a new kernel - step 3 + downloaded the 3Ware driver source kit - step 4 + built a new driver from source - step 5 + updated the module/kernel rev level "stuff" - step 6 + then rebooted - step 7 (did that!) Of course I did step 1 & step 7. Silly me! About 2 1/2 man days later I had installed the OS onto another drive and used that to mount my RAID drive, and after several unsuccessful iterations, succeeded in doing the above and recovering the system intact. My software development schedule took a serious hit! :( Epilog: After all that I decided that this solution was also too kludgey for me to live with. Perhaps I've been spoiled by Sol x86, or perhaps there are'nt enough hours in the day to deal with Linux madness. The usual Linux story - you bleed serious man hours to get it running. You bleed serious manhours to keep it running. [7] nice guy, very knowledgeable/helpful. We both whined about Linux, talked through the recovery plan, then he wished me luck! --- end cut/paste Even the 3Ware tech support guy whined about how hard it was to try to deliver a binary driver into Linux. They wanted to - so as to reduce their maintenance burden and having to take calls from users like myself whose RAID subsystem became inaccessible after a security patch was applied. And they had been able to do so under earlier Linux releases by programming around Linux interfaces - but then those interfaces changed and forced them to deliver source code and their user community to build a new loadable module from source every time they have to patch the kernel. Some users would say (and I'm *not* saying this), that the Linux zealots will do whatever it takes to prevent someone from shipping binary only code into the Linux environment. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Re: Re: GPL & CDDL - incompatibitile., what
On Mon, 22 Aug 2005, Justin Cormack wrote: [ ... original post reformatted per normal list email standards ... ] > You do argue a lot around here, was going to ignore it, but here goes. > > alhopper, you complain about installing a 3ware card with a binary only > driver. Note No - I did'nt complain. Where do you see that? > (a) 3ware used to provide source for their cards under Linux; they sold a > lot because of this. Disappointed they no longer do. They did and they still do. Look on their site. Where did I say they "no longer do". Why did'nt you look on their site before you posted to the list. Please do your homework and at least get the facts straight. Read my post again and you'll see where I said: > + downloaded the 3Ware driver source kit - step 4 > + built a new driver from source - step 5 You need to pay more attention and read posts more carefully. > (b) They dont provide a Solaris driver at all. Rather than moaning do > something about that. ^^^ Where do you see me moan? It's incredible what you can read in my post that is simply *not there*! I have done something about the lack of a 3Ware Solaris driver - why do you assume that I have not? > (c) Most Linux users in a professional situation consider anything > without an open source driver as not only unsupported but unsupportable - > there is no Linux vendor who will give you commercial support if you use > such a driver, as none of the vendors have the source code. Even if you > believe that the driver is not causing the problem it doesnt help, as it > runs in kernel space. > (d) This is a very different situation from Sun (and it is something Sun > could leverage in the case of hardware that is likely never to have open > source drivers eg 3D graphics; as Sun can get access to source code and > has a history of working with closed source drivers). > (e) So dont complain about Linux not supporting some bit of hardware that ??? > doesnt have an open source driver - buy some other hardware. Again - if you read my post you'll understand that: 1) I got the system working right from the get go with the supplied 3Ware binary driver module. 2) I lost the system after applying a kernel security patch. 3) I retrieved the system after following the full 7 steps outlined in the post and got the system to boot off the 3Ware RAID card *again* and with my original data intact. > (f) Linux has very different priorities to Solaris. And different uses. > And a different development process. Stop complaining; try and understand ^^^ Again I have not complained. Where are you getting this krap from? > the different cultures, and look outside of your little field. Oh I think I did quite well at looking outside my "little field". I'd say that there are not that many people who could have done what I did with this system after I lost the RAID set and retrieved it intact. The 3Ware support guy was quite impressed. Also - you have no idea who I am or how broad or narrow my field is. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] No kernel source updates?
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Mike Kupfer wrote: > A few people have asked why there wasn't an email announcement for the > build 20 delivery, especially since there were email announcements for > each delivery during the Pilot program. > > The reasons were > > 1. we're trying to move to a regular delivery schedule (so special >announcements are not needed). > 2. an announcement was posted on the front page of the web site > 3. opensolaris-discuss has a lot of traffic already (people have >unsubscribed because of it), and I questioned the wisdom of adding to >the load. > > I agree that polling for changes is a pain. But if we can deliver new > updates on a regular basis, and an announcement is posted on the web > site front page, is an email announcement really necessary? If you're > not reading the announcements on the web site, there may be other useful > information you're missing... The real issue is that there was no transparency to the user community in the decision making process. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] No kernel source updates?
On Wed, 24 Aug 2005, Mike Kupfer wrote: > >>>>> "Al" == Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Al> The real issue is that there was no transparency to the user > Al> community in the decision making process. > > That's not entirely true. > > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=7212&tstart=0 Yep - you're right. Sorry Mike. :( Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris on LinuxWorld/Germany?
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Felix Schulte wrote: > Will the OpenSolaris community run a booth on the LinuxWorld/Germay > fair (well, I) don't ask Sun... their booths on both LinuxTag2004+2005 > and LinuxWorld2004 were disastrous (even the Microsoft booth was more > professional in some ways) in the last two years) ? How about making some suggestions for what you think a Sun/OpenSolaris booth should look like if Sun were to be present at those events. Post suggestions to the marketing list at: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] earlier deliveries on downloads page (was "New mailing list proposal")
On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Rich Teer wrote: > On Fri, 26 Aug 2005, Mike Kupfer wrote: > > > Question for the wider community: how important is access to the > > tarballs from prior deliveries? Mike, If you like we could make them available via genunix.org. I'm trying to find some time to put in on the site to bring it up to par. Hopefully we have it reworked in the next 'coupla' weeks. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Bug fix process overly burdonsome ?
Without bringing up every point that you've made (which has been done by others) I have a couple of points to make and I'd like to solicit your comments on. First; perception is in the eye of the beholder. If its your perception that (and I hope I don't mis-represent you here): - that the bug fix process is overly burdonsome - that the project is run by Sun and that the CAB is appointed by Sun - that the CDDL is restrictive - that 2 months is enough time to get infrastructure in place for one of the largest Open Source projects on the planet - that the CAB is not moving fast enough Then we (as in the CAB) need to work on _correcting_ these perceptions. I can assure you that, personally, I've been working my ask (?? typo) off on the OpenSolaris project as a CAB member. But I agree that it's not where it needs to be and where *I* want it to be right now. The scale of the project and the amount of work the CAB needs to do, is massive. And we don't want to screw it up! But this does not come as a surprise to me - it's pretty much what I expected given the size of the project and the number of internal Sun engineers actively working on it. Well OK - it's only two times what I expected... :) The alternative would have been to not launch OpenSolaris for another year. And then we would have launched with a full set of tools in place - such as, a workable SCM (Source Control Management) usable to both the community developers and the internal Sun developers. But as it is, the project launched and we've working like crazy to get the missing tools/infrastructure in place, to get the Charter, the Governance Model and the Development Process in place. And all this is being done in public with transparency and community participation. And yes, some of it does not look pretty! :) A small diversion and then I'll make my point: I read a comparison of MicroSofts .NET and C# versus Java, and the writer said something really insightful (not inciteful). He said that .net was where Java was at the same point in its evolvement. So, try to apply that to the OpenSolaris Project. After only two months "in the wild", I'd say that OpenSolaris is way, way further along than any other open source project at the same point in its evolution. And don't forget that development has not even paused for the launch the source code is still evolving faster than a runaway train. I'd like to thank you for your efforts on the list. Its very important to solicit other peoples perspective on OpenSolaris. Without it there's a danger that we could become dumb and happy! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 OpenSolaris Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Express 9/2005 Released
On Wed, 21 Sep 2005, Derek E. Lewis wrote: > I seem to be having problems downloading CDs 2 and 3 for x86; however > the, 1st, 4th, and Languages CD are all available. I would love to be > able to do a Live Upgrade tonight. I see the same issue. Still "broken" (Technical Term (TM)) as of 8:00 AM CDT. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Re: StarOffice 8
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > Jim Grisanzio wrote: > > >When I first got to Sun five years ago there was a fair amount of Office > >files flying around here, but mostly from agencies, contractors, and > >partners we worked with. A lot of us used to send 'em back and ask for > >text. :) There's very little now, though. It's really mostly > >StarOffice/OpenOffice these days. > > One of the places that can really make an instant difference (in > promoting StarOffice, and utimately Solaris) is Sun's legal department. ... snip Wayne - you've way off topic for this list. It would be a stretch to consider this thread on topic within OpenSolaris marketing. Please - no more OpenOfficw/StarOffice off topic posts to this list. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Problem with CVS on Solaris 8..Please HELP!!
On Tue, 4 Oct 2005, Sapna wrote: > Hello All, > > Need some urgent help on this. > > I am using CVS on Solaris 8. > The whole thing was working fine till last week, > But now after some permission changes for some files with the repositories, > when I do a checkout of any directories, it copies only the directories under > it and not the files. All directories are empty when it is checked out.. > > I am using WinCVS to checkout. (Tries with Unix also). > > Can anyone help.. > Thanks in advance! No - not on this list. This list is for OpenSolaris. Please read: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/ Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] corrupeted sol-nv-b22-x86-v2-iso.zip file
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Alexander Zhuravlev wrote: ... snip > Anyway, is there a chance to see MD5 sum for the > sol-nv-b22-x86-v2-iso.zip file. > Unfortuntally, Sun download center does not provide such > information, that is why I'm bothering the list ;-) > I've downloaded all of the four installation discs and only > met the problem with this one. Unfortunately I don't have a copy of b22 disk 2 downloaded - and the Sun Download Center now has b23 available. Can someone else with a copy of sol-nv-b22-x86-v2-iso.zip please post an MD5 sum for it. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Fibre Channel on x86
On Wed, 5 Oct 2005, Ben Rockwood wrote: > Does anyone have or know of a complete list of Fibre Channel HBAs that > are supported on Solaris10 /X86? Looks like none of the common older > (read: cheap) HBAs have support (Tachyon and QLA2100's), some of the > Emulex do, I think some of the JNI's. A complete list would be useful. > I can scrape a list together but something definative would be nice. I don't have a complete list, but I can help you get started. The Qlogic 2200 series and 2300 series work really well with Solaris 10, out of the box. IOW, without any OS mods or cofiguration changes. Hint: If you EBay a 2200, get one with an optical SC connector - you can easily source a factory SC <-> LC fiber optical cable assembly to attach it to current FC (Fibre Channel) hardware. PS: http://www.scsi-cables.com/ is a good source for FC interconnects. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Reasons to change to Solaris
On Sat, 8 Oct 2005, Martin 'MC' Brown wrote: > > > > Unfortunately, we can't update that when we deliver new versions in > > patches, so relying on the DESC field is not useful. There is no > > generic way to find the "upstream" version of software in a Solaris > > package - you have to rely on the software to have a -v or --version > > or equivalent. > > And that is precisely my point. Or at least one of them. > > The problem with the package management system as it stands is that > it has changed little since Solaris 2 was first released and it is > almost entirely geared towards installing Sun-sourced software. This > is why we have the mismatch between the package version (which is the > version of the package, not the version of the software you are > installing) and the actual version of the software. > > If you only ever install strict Sun packages (i.e. those purely > pertaining to the OS and the core Solaris group) then the package > versioning and management features make sense. Once you start > including third-party products (including those bundled by Sun as > well as those from SunFreeware and Blastwave) it starts to get > confusing. > > I've been using Solaris since it was first released, I know the > issues and the history. But for a user migrating from Linux or even > BSD, the package management and version information, combined with > multiple potential sources for pre-packaged software, and even the > same versions of a product (Perl say) from multiple sources, all of > which install into different locations, is just a complete and > confusing mess. > > This is only going to get worse with OpenSolaris as we're going to > get more people providing and supporting the package installation > method and more and more users wanting to install pre-packaged > versions of popular FOSS software. > > We need some coherence, some improvements to the package management > software and the data that it stores, and a service that can combine > together the efforts of all the groups into a reliable way of finding > and ultimately installing the software. Agreed. Your post(s) was well written and well reasoned. > As far as I know the package management tools aren't out there yet, > but they will certainly be on my list of things to investigate and > hopefully improve or extend. Excellent. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Swtching from Windows to Solaris
On Fri, 7 Oct 2005, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > Dennis Clarke wrote: > > >I don't really know what the problem is with build 23 but somehow I > _highly_ doubt we went from "networking working fine" to "does not > configure by default" in one rev. > > I installed build 23 twice, and neither time it installed networking. > So you are calling me an IDIOT. > > If I have to become an idiot when I am trying Solaris, then there is > definitely something seriously wrong with either me or this OS. Wayne, Solaris has limited device support[1] - and you probably installed B23 on a platform with an unsupported (out of the box) ethernet interface(s). There are several third party drivers available for ethernet devices that are not supported out-of-the-box. But a simpler solution is often to simply install a supported ethernet NIC. I would recommend one of the Intel gigabit adapters - they are well supported and widely available inexpensively. B23 has been very successful for me. I "upgraded" a machine from Solaris 10 GA as a lame way of solving an "operator" induced problem[2]. I had to disable ACPI in the BIOS before I could load it. Afterwards I re-enabled it. In the last 5 days I've really beaten up on this box, built 5 zones on it, and moved tens of gigabytes of data around on it ... and it's been rock solid and a joy to work on. Currently the system hardware looks like: 1 * Tyan Thunder K8SD Pro (S2882-D) ]> These 2 items part of the 2 * AMD 2.0GHz Model 246 Opteron CPUs ]> AMD roadshow "bundle" 4 * 1Gb SIMMs (Kingston KVR400S4R3A/1G) [3] 1 * Seagate 400Gb 7200.8 UDMA ST3400832A (boot disk) 1 * LSI MegaRAID SATA 150-4 [4] 4 * Maxtor 7B300S0 SATA disks attached to the motherboard SATA ports and managed as a RAID 0+1 array under SVM providing 568Gbs of storage 4 * Western Digital WD4000YR 400Gb SATA drives attached to the MegaRAID controller providing 1.1TB of RAID-5 storage arranged as two 577Gb logical drives 1 * 3U SuperMicro SC832T-R760 rack-mount chassis 2 * cooljagusa.com SFO-M heatsinks 1 * MSI DVD/CDROM RW combo drives Misc hardware includes several Zalman (www.zalmanusa.com) fan speed control gizmos (fan mate 1) to slow down the built-in case fans - as this solution does not provide intelligent fan speed control. [1] This is a widely recognized *bug*, which is being worked on! [2] Don't ask. It was pretty stupid! [3] Running at 400MHz - but the motherboard would *not* support 4 SIMMs running at 400MHz. Very disappointing. [4] Thanks (again) to Chad Leigh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> who figured out that the LSI amr driver works with this card. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Fibre Channel on x86
On Tue, 11 Oct 2005, James C. McPherson wrote: > Ferdinand O. Tempel wrote: > ... > > Shame. The 2100 (I think I paid $15 for it on eBay) is a cheap entry level > > controller. I have one, and I attach it to a 3 disk "array" either directly > > or a FC hub. This is all done with an AL though, so nothing "real" there. > > But > > still, there's a market for it. People who just want a bucket of storage > > independent of their PC but with decent performance (like me) can make a lot > > of use from a simple FC-AL setup. And I do. So just for people like me: > > Don't > > simply drop support for these devices, but throw the sources out there! > > Sun doesn't have the source; we licensed the driver from QLogic... and they've > EOLd it so we pretty much had to as well. > > /action points fingers @ QLogic > > > > At > > least so we can keep using our stuff in Solaris. Also people wanting to > > experiment with storage can have a lot of fun with these kind of > > controllers. > > I've spent a few bucks on eBay and friends, and I've got a 3 disk FC loop > > setup for like $250 or so. That includes all the spare parts, hub (not > > needed > > for a simple loop), GBICs (copper and fiber, not needed for a simple loop > > either), backplane, disks, cabling, etc. Agreed. You can use a simple copper based Qlogic card and connect it directly to a single FC disk drive using some of the FC drive adapters that are available. In a PC case, you can bring the FC copper from the rear panel, back into the case and mount the FC drive in a well ventilated location within the PC. Makes a great, high performance disk drive. I've done this using a DB9 -> FC drive connector that was made by Seagate - with the intent that it be used to test FC disk drives. I don't know if they still make/sell it. But there are lots of alternatives around. > You could try porting a version from another opensource unixlike OS. I'm > sure there are people around who'd be willing to help in one way or another. I don't think it makes sense to resurrect the 2100 driver. The 2100 hardware has limited functionality and speed. It's a first generation FC controller. Making more sense, IMHO, is to pickup 2200 series cards on EBay for ~ $75. RIP Qlogic 2100! :) Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: StarOffice 8
On Thu, 13 Oct 2005, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > As an early activist in the Linux movement (as a means to "topple the > Microsoft tyranny") , I have noticed that the battlefield has shifted—in a > not-so-subtle way. The new religion is OpenDocument (format). And it looks > that the momentum is going to last a very very long while. > > For example, Fox News ran an article by one James Prendergast criticizing the > decision of the Commonwealth of Massachusetts to adopt OpenDocument, it was > immediately picked apart by Slashdot. Yesterday, Fox News posted readers' > responses at its front page with a very disapproving concluding remark that > “Mr. Prendergast's affiliation with Microsoft should have been stated clearly > in the article.” > > http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,172063,00.html > > Everytime the combo-word OpenDocument is mentioned, so is Sun's decision to > open-source StarOffice, as well as an inevitable (& at least implicitly > favorable) connect to OpenSolaris. Today's NewsForge even made what I > believe, a pretty big deal on OpenSolaris laptops: > > “OpenSolaris, the effort by Sun Microsystems and others to make the Solaris > version of Unix into an open-source operating system, has started branching > into the mobile computing domain. That's a notable step given that Solaris is > generally designed for much more powerful--and stationary—servers.” > > Laptops have been outselling desktop PCs, and this is an area where Linux has > great difficulties penetrating. It will be really cool to see a bunch of > notebooks running Solaris. > This message posted from opensolaris.org Wayne, This list is for OpenSolaris - not StarOffice 8. Please stop posting your StarOffice related zealotry to this list! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community Proposal: ZFS
On Tue, 18 Oct 2005, Dan Price wrote: > > Hi all, > > I'd like to propose the creation of a community for technologies related > to ZFS (Zettabyte File System). +1 There's tremendous interest in, and pent up demand for, ZFS. I think it'll generate enough traffic to justify its own community and resources. Thanks for suggesting it Dan. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.2-kit released
On Mon, 24 Oct 2005, ken mays wrote: > Is there a need for various distros of OpenSolaris? > Yes. Just like we have various versions of cars and > vacuum cleaners all built from a foundation model of > that product. > > Everybody is going to have reasons and ways to build > their own distros. > > Anyhow, back to business! > > Additional Modifications: > 1. X Org 6.8.2 > 2. GNOME 2.12.1 > 3. GRUB 1.91 > > Joerg - Please have Dennis update: > http://www.genunix.org/distributions/schillix/schillix-0.1/index.html For anything genunix.org related, either contact myself or Ben Rockwood. ... snip ... Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.2-kit released
SchilliX-0.2 is available at: http://www.genunix.org/distributions/schillix/schillix-0.2/index.html Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.2.1 ready
On Wed, 26 Oct 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote: > SchilliX-0.2.1 has just been released. > > See ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schillix/ And available at: http://www.genunix.org/distributions/schillix/schillix-0.2.1/index.html Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] community proposal: OpenSolaris storage
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, Derek Cicero wrote: > Aaron Dailey wrote: > > > I'd like to propose a community dedicated to the storage software in > > Open Solaris. This would include drivers below the filesystems/volume > > managers, and related utilities. > > > > For example, this would be: > > -target drivers such as sd, st, ses > > -SCSA framework > > -FibreChannel stack, various parallel SCSI HBA drivers, ATA/IDE > > drivers, the iSCSI initiator > > -The storage specific portions of USB and Firewire > > -Related utilities, such as fcinfo, format, luxadm, cfgadm plugin, etc > > > > I see a couple reasons to do this: > > -Generally the storage stack is a distinct part of OpenSolaris, and > > it's interesting, at least to some of us :-) > > -More specifically, the division of Sun I work in will soon be > > releasing source for FibreChannel and the iSCSI initiator, as well as > > other bits, and this community would be a good place for any > > discussion to occur. Moreover, there's a lot of code already released > > that deals with storage, which this community would include. > > It looks like there are no objections to the creation of this community > at this point. Do we have any +1 votes from the CAB? +1 The underlying problem I keep thinking about is the proliferation of communities. Lets give it a shot and if it does not generate the interest level and volume of traffic to justify its own community, we can fold it into another community later. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCR build 25 SPARC binaries removed
On Thu, 27 Oct 2005, Karyn Ritter wrote: > We recently discovered a bug in the Solaris Express Community Release > build 25 SPARC binaries which has caused a legal issue. Based on our > evaluation of the issue, we've decided to remove these binaries from the > SDLC. This bug was not present in the x86 binaries, so they remain on > the SDLC at > http://javashoplm.sun.com/ECom/docs/Welcome.jsp?StoreId=7&PartDetailId=Sol-Express_b25-x86-G-B&TransactionId=try > . > > I apologize for the inconvenience, and certainly do not plan to do > something like this again. Because the bug might damage a valuable > partner relationship for Solaris/OpenSolaris, I thought it best to just > pull the release. > > This bug will be fixed in build 26. > > Again, apologies for the inconvenience, No apologies necessary and kudos for taking prompt action. OTOH - it would be nice to keep the CAB in the loop on this type of decision making. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: b24 and b25 panic on UltraAXe
On Sat, 29 Oct 2005, Jason Wohlgemuth wrote: > So should I report a bug? Of course! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] BeleniX 0.2 Available
On Sun, 30 Oct 2005, Moinak Ghosh wrote: > James Lick wrote: > > > James Lick wrote: > > > >> Moinak Ghosh wrote: > >> > >> This URL is broken and redirecting to 127.0.0.1. I'm downloading > >> from sarovar.org, but that one is going pretty slowly. > > > > > > Ah, the correct address turns out to be: > > > > http://www.genunix.org/distributions/belenix_site/ > > > > (notice the extra / on the end) > > > > Someone really should tell genunix.org that it isn't 127.0.0.1 so > > redirections work though. > > >Al Hopper on this list is one of the contacts for genunix.org. He > should see this email soon >enough :) Not soon enough! :( Its fixed. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] community proposal: Linux Immigrants
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Adam Leventhal wrote: > There seems to be at least a loose concensus that this would be a useful > community. Any +1 votes from the CAB? +1 Great initiative Adam! > Adam > > On Thu, Oct 27, 2005 at 10:16:01AM -0700, Adam Leventhal wrote: > > One barrier when adopting a new operating system is the lack of > > familiarity with the local customs and traditions. With one's old > > operating system one accomplished a given task a certain way, but on > > foreign soil that knowledge has to be enhanced or at least augmented > > with the corresponding OpenSolaris methology. I'm hoping to create a > > community of users familiar with Linux who are interested in or have > > adopted OpenSolaris. My hope is that this community will be make the > > transition easier for themselves and others by answering the common > > questions (e.g. "ln -s truss strace"), _and_ will be a resource for > > people working on OpenSolaris to understand -- and address -- the > > comparative advantages and disavantages. > > > > Perhaps this should be a broader "Immigrant" (or "Refugee"?) community > > with sub-communities for the operating systems of origin (Linux, *BSD, > > Windows, BeOS, Amiga, etc.). > > > > I personally will find this tremendously useful as an OpenSolaris developer > > as I'm often curious about how other operating systems work, but don't > > have enough experience with them to feel that I can evaluate them fairly. > > Thanks. > > > > Adam > > > > -- > > Adam Leventhal, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/ahl > > ___ > > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > > -- > Adam Leventhal, Solaris Kernel Development http://blogs.sun.com/ahl > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Geunix Mirror Updated
On Sat, 5 Nov 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Ben Rockwood <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Genunix is mirroring B26 now.
> >
> > Also, FYI, Genunix is also mirroring SchilliX and BeleniX. We plan to
> > be mirroring Nexenta shortly as well.
>
> But it does ot show SchilliX-0.2.1 although I did copy the files
^
> to Al Hopper. Maybe he does not check his mail on Saturday?
Sorry for the delay Joerg. I had my head down today working on some code
and suffering from end-of-project burnout
http://www.genunix.org/distributions/schillix/schillix-0.2.2/index.html>
Regards,
Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT
OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Build 27 available at www.genunix.org
http://www.genunix.org/mirror/index.html> Many congrats to team ZFS! Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.3 ready
And available at: http://www.genunix.org/distributions/schillix/schillix-0.3/index.html Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Incorporating open-source cmds/libs into OpenSolaris
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Eric Boutilier wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > >[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > > > > >>It's kinda hard to mistype "gnome-short-command-names-are-so-not-practical" > >>as "zpool destroy ..." too. > >> > >> > > > >You may be right with those "short" commands, but how about the "longer" > >commands with 2 or 3 chars that are similar to frequently typed program > >names? > > > >In any way: I don't like the GUI commends to be in /usr/bin/ > > > > > > > This view -- which lots of people seem to share -- raises an interesting > ambiguity: > > Production Solaris 10 servers generally _don't_ have the GUI commands in > /usr/bin. That's because they are based on the lightweight, server > "version" of Solaris 10 -- which is to say they are based on the > SUNWCreq installation cluster (or better yet, the new-and-improved > SUNWCrnet). > > For more details on SUNWCreq and SUNWcrnet, click on the link below and > scroll down to table 2-4. > > http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/817-5506/6mkv6ki5e?a=view#esimo > > And read this blog post by Glen Brunette: > > http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/gbrunett?entry=foundation_for_minimal_solaris_10 > > And follow the links pointed to by this Google Blog search: > > http://blogsearch.google.com/blogsearch?hl=en&q=solaris+%22reduced+network%22&btnG=Search+Blogs Will there be a test? :) Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: New Community Request
On Fri, 2 Dec 2005, Stephen Hahn wrote: > * Nils Nieuwejaar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2005-11-20 08:11]: > > > It appears that BrandX as a name is not going to fly as somebody already > > > has that name trademarked. We have an alternative name in mind, and > > > I'm told the lawyers are doing their lawyerly stuff with it now. > > > > We have gotten all the sign-offs we need to go with the new name: BrandZ. > > This is shorthand for Branded Zones so, in addition to not being > > lawsuit-bait, it actually means a little more than the original name. If > > this name is acceptable to everybody, then hopefully we'll be able to get > > the community up and running in short order. > > In the interest of wrapping this up, and in attempt to follow > > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/message.jspa?messageID=7336#7336 > > (being unable to find the message it cites, although I recall it...) > I want to get: > > - at least one CAB member to issue a +1, +1 > - a verification that the proposed community's leads and the Zones > community leads were not able to share the Zones community with the > union of those sets of leads, and > > - that investigation of an umbrella Virtualization community is not > being pursued in the near term. > > As a side note, we'll have Projects hosting support in a few weeks or > less, so technical efforts that want to start smaller can do so > without seeking wider approval. > > - Stephen Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] integrating star was: Incorporating open-source
Joerg, Have you sought out a sponsor in an attempt to get star integrated into OpenSolaris? Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Roles on Solaris
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Darren J Moffat wrote: > On Sun, 2005-12-18 at 23:01, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Hi, > > > > I am just working on a usage strategy for fine grained process > > privileges. > > > > Doing this, I did come across the term "role" which does not seem to be > > documented in the man pages well enough to allow to understand it. > > Did you read roles(1) ? > > I agree that rbac(5) as a man page is near useless, I've been > attempting to rewrite it for a while now and I'm almost finished > with it and I'll be submitting my changes as a man page bug soon. Why not post it to the list for comment? Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] KDE, GNOME, etc.
On Mon, 19 Dec 2005, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I woudn't underestimate Linus's Torvalds opinion... A lot of OSS > > developers looking at what he is saying and following him no matter > > what. I agree it will not change picture much, but KDE will definetly > > benefit from newcomers.. > > How many catholics will avoid to use the pill just because the pope > recommends not to use it? Let me tell you one thing Joerg: the very *last* topic you ever want to mention on an OpenSolaris mailing list is *religion*. Nothing will get you into more hot water. Puhhleeezzeee stay on topic! Pretty Please! :) PS: Being from Ireland, I had the pleasure of hearing an Australian girl describe it (Ireland) as "The Land Of Babies"! So I appreciate your sense of humor .... but please, no religious references on this list! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Idea for Sysadmin community for OpenSolaris
On Fri, 6 Jan 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Take a look at > >http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/governance_proposal/#Communities > >- basi > cally, if there's enough interest, the CAB pays attention and blesses us :-) > > > I'll happily +1 a Sysadmin Community. +1 Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Respect . Was Solaris and SSH
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Christopher Mahan wrote: > Dear Darren, > > Topposting for effect. > > You write below: "I will not be changing this in Solaris." > > What? You are the final arbiter of what goes into Solaris? > > People are coming forward with concern about safety and system > integrity, and you rebuff them with the "Go play with your marbles on > the other side of the courtyard and leave the big boys to the serious > business" attitude? > > I work at a fortune 200, in healthcare, and we are a large Sun > customer. Let me tell you how it is from the trenches: Sun stuff > sucks. It's much better than Microsoft or IBM, but it still blows > chunks. > We're using Solaris 8, and most of the admins here are clueless, ^^^ There's your problem ... right there! Sorry to be a smart ass ... but we recently had a Solaris 8 box root kitted - and I'm on record, with many of our clients, telling them that its almost impossible to keep Solaris 8 correctly patched - since there are hundreds and hundreds of patches issued against it. It was our *only* box still running Solaris 8 - and it was used to produce SPARC binaries only for our clients who are *still* running Solaris 8. The user/developer experience is soo much better on Solaris 10 - to the point where one should not equate any characteristics of "Solaris" with Solaris 8. > asking us inane stuff like hardcoding our user passwords in scripts > because policy says that we cannot have service accounts (not that I > am following their advice, mind you). Now, there are a hosts of > issues, and for brevity's sake, I will not mention them. Let me just > tell you that Sun's stuff is what I use when I absolutely have no > other option. I run Debian stable for my own stuff and it's so much > better for me, lemme tell you. > > So when someone comes along, on their dime, and raises issues about > security and system integrity, and not being uppity and all "We are > the BEST company in the world Yayes!" (which if you want more of > please navigate to http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/mary), and asking > in a mild manner and with the spirit of cooperation, whether a tool > used specifically for enhanced security (SSH) can have a particular > option, I the very least I expect you to demonstrate professional and > respectful demeanor. > > On the particular issue, I would consider a flag, such as "Disable OS > Identification to client" to be an acceptable option for all parties > to consider. Hiding the identity of the host running SSH will do little or nothing in terms of improving that boxes ability to fend off a determined hacker. It may slow down a script kiddie type attacker - since they will now need to run more automated attacks than if the OS version was immediately evident. So you gain ... what? The time it takes them to type in the name of the next shell script(s) that'll mount the next attack sequence. And the downside to what you are proposing, is that it'll break standards. So basically, you're asking for a change with questionable, if indeed any, benefits, that will break standards. It will not past muster - regardless of who does the technical review. I can understand Darren M saying that he won't be working on it, because: - it's a very bad use of his (talented developer) time. - there is other, more pressing, work to be done that'll bring more benefit to the OpenSolaris user community. - it'll break standards - it won't pass technical review; why even try to have it reviewed. - if it is really important to someone, they can modify the code themselves As an aside, the whole topic of hiding the identity of processes, as a means of improving security, it highly questionable. I see it often cited: - hide the revision string of Bind - hide the version string of Sendmail - hide the DNS name of a host . It buys you little or nothing, in terms of improving your computer security. Well, maybe it buys you something if your DNS naming convention is 'credit-card-oracle-9-db-server' . > Now, to be fair, you may have been having a bad day. We all do from > time to time. Just don't let your bad day affect the eagerness of > participants to make this OS/distro better. > > Sincerely, > > Christopher Mahan > [EMAIL PROTECTED] Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Idea for Sysadmin community for OpenSolaris
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, Octave Orgeron wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > Thanks Jim for the clarification on what is required to get a community > approved by the CAB. In accordance with that, below are some of the The Sysadmin community request has already been approved by the CAB, since you got a +1 from Casper and I. Best of Luck with this new community effort! > required items for the SysAdmin community. This is by no means set in > stone and I welcome feedback from the community. > > Goals: > > 1. Create an OpenSolaris Community to empower Systems Administrators in > the development, documentation, and best practices for managing > OpenSolaris. > > 2. Provide an environment where ideas and concerns related to managing > OpenSolaris can be channeled and addressed. > > Technical Scope: > > 1. Help direct efforts for the manageability of OpenSolaris (Standard > CLI's, Webmin, N1 Systems Manager, etc.) to provide a consistent and > coherent management experience. > > 2. Interface with other OpenSolaris Communities to formulate standards > and guidelines that relate to systems management. > > 3. Work closely with the all OpenSolaris Communities to enhance > documentation and procedures related to systems management. > > > *** > * Octave J. Orgeron * > * Solaris Infrastructure Architect* > * http://unixconsole.blogspot.com * > * [EMAIL PROTECTED] * > *** Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ARC Community Proposal
On Tue, 10 Jan 2006, John Plocher wrote: > Several people wrote about an alias naming fubar: > >>On Tue, 2006-01-10 at 15:59 -0800, John Plocher wrote: > >>>[EMAIL PROTECTED] New > >>> The discussion forum for the community. > > Every proposal needs something obviously wrong with it :-) > > Of course it should be [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > As I was composing the message, my brain said "...-discuss", a > co-worker stopped by and asked about an interest list for some > internal alias, and my fingers promptly typed in "...-interest". And > I didn't catch it in 3 passes of proofreading. Sigh - should have had > an ARC review it first :-) > > Back to your regularly scheduled feature broadcast... Re: ARC Community Proposal: +1 I'm really looking forward to participating in this community John. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: New Community Proposal: Appliances
On Wed, 11 Jan 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >I've not seen any CAB members vote for this one. > > > >Does that mean that we don't get it? > > > I have a VIA C3 appliance so I case I get to "+1" :-) +1 > I'm very interested in the appliance space also; having the one > VIA EPIA MS1E w/ Routerboard44 (4x VIA Rhine III Ethernet) running > Solaris 11 b29. > > (Now if someone could explain me how to migrate my Windows XP and Windows > 2000 users over to a SMB environment so they have the same environment on > all Wintel boxes, I'd be very happy) > > > (I don't like the Windows necessity either, but for now I see no other > options at home) > > Casper > Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: Visual Panels
On Wed, 18 Jan 2006, John Beck wrote: > David> I propose the creation of a new project, Visual Panels, and > David> seek endorsements from the SMF and Approachability communities. > > +1 from an Approachability community member. +1 from a CAB member. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: CIFS group creation request.
hickness"! :) > like many others, I want OpenSolaris to succeed and was concerned about > some of the perceptions that you had for community development. I think > having open discussion like this is useful though - it really highlights > the diverse community that we've created, the different viewpoints we > all have and yet, we're all pretty focused on much the same set of > goals. > > I'm just hugely aware of the number of open source projects that Sun has > started that really haven't been traditionally 'Open Source', where > we've dumped the code over the wall, and expected the community to clean > up the mess. We have this ball and chain reputation to carry around. I'm > sure there's heaps of people out there monitoring the project to see if > it will go the same way. Every indication I've seen tells me it won't ;) > > Best of luck with the CIFS community - I'm sure it'll be great. Likewise. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Proposal: OpenSolaris Articles Project
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Ben Rockwood wrote: > To be formal > > Speaking on behalf of myself, with the honorable Docs community in > mind, I do hereby Second the proposal forwarded by Mr Grisanzio from the > Great State of California. > > Great idea Jim. This is something the docs community has wanted very > much to do but the rubber hadn't quite hit the road yet. All the > enthusiasm around the idea is wonderful and I'm 110% behind it. > > I yield the remainder of my time to the Honorable Mr. Hahn. > +1 for this proposal. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Proposal: OpenSolaris Articles Project -- Wikimedia
On Mon, 23 Jan 2006, Christopher Mahan wrote: > > > --- Jim Grisanzio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I like the idea of wikis in general, and several people have > > mentioned > > this in other areas. Priorities for the website right now, though, > > are > > focused on getting support for source code management, so I doubt > > we can > > implement a wiki initially for the project I'm proposing. However, > > one > > of the reasons I want to form this project is to work these issues > > through and come up with some specific proposals, while at the same > > time > > engaging some writers and producing some articles and other > > content. > > So, let's keep talking about this (so I can understand it more > > fully). > > Initially, we'll have to use the list to get this going. > > That's fine. Focus on what's important. Keep in mind though that > solid docs as well as user-based comments are both very important. > Maybe a documentation commenting system like php.net. (see random > sample: http://us3.php.net/manual/en/security.apache.php) mySQL also works like this and is a painless way to contribute to a document. For a non-random example see: http://dev.mysql.com/doc/refman/4.1/en/cj-tomcat-config.html Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] X4200 + build 28/30?
On Wed, 25 Jan 2006, Rich Teer wrote: > Hi all, > > I'm having problems (SCSI timeouts) installing SXCE on my X4200. ??? What is that? > I've tried builds 28 and 30 without any success (will try Solaris > 10 1/06 later tonight), so as a sanity check I thought I'd check > here to make sure that there are no known problems. > > Cheers, > > -- > Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, OpenSolaris CAB member Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community/Project Update: 1/30/06
On Tue, 31 Jan 2006, Anup Sekhar wrote: > > Sean Sprague wrote on 01/30/06 23:16: > > Hey Jim, > > > > Just a very small point wrt: > > > >> Naming Services Community > >> * Proposed 1/20/06 by Anup Sekhar > >> * Community consensus: yes > >> * CAB vote: no +/- vote yet > >> * Opening date: not currently scheduled > > > > On 1/20, John Beck suggested that this should in fact be named (sic) > > "Name Services Community", and Anup had no problem with this. > > What do the CAB members think of this proposal? Is it possible > to get approval for this community? There has been some positive > feedback regarding this proposal. Perhaps Name Services could exist as a project, rather than as a community. My concern, at this time, is the proliferation of OpenSolaris Communities, and this is why I'm reluctant to form one more. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: Jonathan Schwartz and OpenSolaris & GPLv3
My take on Jonathans GPLv3 blog is that he has fired off a "warning shot" across the bows of the GPL proponents - letting them know that he (as in Sun) is possibly willing to license the *huge* body of Sun code under an upcoming GPL v3 license. This will either cause the FSF to rev. the license in a way that deliberately excludes Sun or in a way that would be inclusive/favorable to Sun. The proverbial "ball" has been passed over to the FSF side of the court! :) Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Join us at EuroOSCON and/or OSCON in 2006 (fwd)
FYI: CFP for EuroOSCON and/or OSCON... Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 -- Forwarded message -- From: "O'Reilly Conferences" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Subject: Join us at EuroOSCON and/or OSCON in 2006 Save the dates--and send in your speaking proposals--for: OSCON, the O'Reilly Open Source Convention July 24-28 in Portland, Oregon http://conferences.oreilly.com/oscon/ and EuroOSCON, the O'Reilly European Open Source Convention September 18-21 in Brussels, Belgium http://conferences.oreilly.com/eurooscon/ The Calls for Participation for both OSCON and EuroOSCON are now open, so send us your presentation proposal/s--and tell your friends and colleagues. February 13 is the speaking proposal deadline for OSCON; you have until March 6 to submit proposals for EuroOSCON. Never has free and open source technology been so important to the computing industry. It's rocking a lot of boats and, as our initial list of topics illustrates, is finding its way into unexpected places. Let's support and expand that trend! For both conventions, we're looking for sessions and tutorials on platforms and applications around: - Multimedia including voice (VoIP) and video - AI including spam-busting, classification, clustering, and data mining - Collaboration including email, calendars, RSS, OPML, mashups, IM, presence, and session initialization - Project best practices including governance, starting a project, and managing communities - Microsoft Windows-based open source projects including .NET, Mono, and regular C/C++/Visual Basic Windows apps - Enterprise Java techniques including integration, testing, and scalable deployment solutions - Linux kernel skills for sysadmins including virtualization, tuning, and device drivers - Device hacking including iPods, Nintendo, PSP, XBox 360, and beyond - Design including CSS, GUI, and user experience (XP) - Entrepreneurial topics including management for techies, how to go into business for yourself, and business models that work - Security including hardening, hacking, root kits (Sony and otherwise), and intrusion detection/cleanup - Fun subjects with no immediate commercial application including retro computing, games, and BitTorrent EuroOSCON co-chairs Nat Torkington and Nikolaj Nyholm would also like to consider proposals for EuroOSCON that focus on the specific needs of the European FLOSS community, particularly policy and government roles. We received some excellent feedback after last year's EuroOSCON that will help us build an even more focused, relevant program addressing issues critical to the professional open source community this year. OSCON and EuroOSCON are where coders, sys admins, entrepreneurs, and business people working in free and open source software gather to share ideas, discover code, find solutions, and connect face to face. Even if you're not interested in participating as a speaker, we hope you'll come be a part of the conversation. If you weren't at OSCON or EuroOSCON in 2005, check out the great time that was had by all: OSCON: http://www.oreillynet.com/oscon2005/ EuroOSCON: http://conferences.oreillynet.com/eurooscon/coverage/ Hope to see you at one--or both--conventions, The O'Reilly Conference Team - - For news coverage and speaker presentation files from past events, visit our Conferences Archive at: http://conferences.oreillynet.com/archive.csp - - For information on exhibition and sponsorship opportunities at O'Reilly conferences, contact Andrew Calvo at (707) 827-7176, or [EMAIL PROTECTED] - - To become a media sponsor, contact Yvonne Romaine at (707) 827-7198, or [EMAIL PROTECTED] or Margi Levin at (707) 827-7184, or [EMAIL PROTECTED] *** To change your newsletter subscription options, please visit https://epoch.oreilly.com/account/default.orm and click the "Manage My Newsletters" link. For assistance, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] To unsubscribe from O'Reilly conference announcements, email [EMAIL PROTECTED] O'Reilly Media, Inc. 1005 Gravenstein Highway North, Sebastopol, CA 95472 *** --- End of Forwarded Message ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] SATA framework hardware
Does anyone know what SATA adpaters were used during development & test on the new SATA framework? Were PCI Express adapters tested? If so, what makes/models, please. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] genunix wiki online
Thanks to the hard work of our own Ben Rockwood, the wiki for OpenSolaris related activity is available at: www.genunix.org/wiki/ One of the items slated for "development" on the wiki is the OpenSolaris Governance document now known as the OpenSolaris Constitution. Leading this effort will be the CAB/OGB along with our special appointees: Ben Rockwood and Keith Wesolowski. Now jump in and participate :) Happy Friday! Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Community Forum Proposal: Packaging, Patching, and Distribution Mgmt
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Eric Boutilier wrote: > Albert White wrote: > > >Anyway, +1 from me, > > > > > > Me too. > +1 Packaging, Installation, and Distribution +1 from a CAB member. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCR > b30
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Rich Teer wrote: > > I respectfully disagree, and from an outsider's perspective, Dennis > > is right. Until I read this 2 minutes ago, all I knew was that there > > was some legal issue with build 31+, but no details. > > The lawyers really hate us publically stating "We distributed build XX > in such a way that we violated our license with ___, and had to stop." > If __ didn't notice yet, we'd be sending their legal department a > free case of ammo to fire at us, and not really helping anyone anyway. > > Other than morbid curiosity, does knowing which component is resulting > in legal delay help anyone outside Sun? There's nothing you can do > with that knowledge, just wait as long as you would have knowing that > somewhere in SX there's a legal problem waiting to be solved by Sun. Its a human perception type thing. For example, if I tell a client that: A) "productX version 1.3.1 was faulty and we've building a new release" ... all I get is grief. And I take a credibility "hit". If I tell them: B) "Yep - *I* did it - I built the bloody release on the wrong machine which only had a *backup* copy of the sources and had a bad Sun Studio installation which everyone, except me, knew *not* to use"; they are happy and they say: "Ohh ... OK". Why is this? Because explanation A) leaves too much to the imagination and can give the client, or the slightly paranoid observer, the impression that we really don't know why the build failed or what the root cause of the issue really is/was. Whereas option B) leaves nothing to the imagination and actually increases your credibility! I know its counter intuitive and option B does not really provide any real detailed information; but it provides enough information that the client can understand what the underlying issue was and does not "feel" like they need to keep digging to find out what is really going on. I refer to option B) as the "brutal honesty" approach. And brutal honesty always works. And yes, this is a real world example, not a made up, ficticious case. My point is that being upfront will always work - and it does not necessarily imply that you have to divulge details that you would rather keep private. Just a degree of humility and willingness to admit that we are all human and make human mistakes. > (I will agree that better status updates on how long you have to wait > would be a good thing.) Agreed. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Cheap SPARC development machine ?
On Tue, 21 Feb 2006, Octave Orgeron wrote: > Hi Everyone, > > I thought I'd comment on this subject because it's near and dear to my > heart. I have an Ultra60 and a Netra X1 at home that I use for testing, > designing, and every-day stuff (web, email, etc). In my profession, > it's important to stay ahead of the learning curve. While both of these > systems have performed well, I can't help but notice that they are > loud, power hungry, and take up a lot of space. When I look at our > iMac, I see something fast, silent, and unobtrusive. The only thing > that I have the comes close is my Sun Ray. While I paid very little for > all of this gear, thanks to ebay, I'd of course like something > faster/newer. It's just the way of things. > > Today I configured dual-booting on my work laptop for Nevada and > windows. I could not help but notice how much faster and all around > snappier this cheap dell laptop is compaired to my setup at home. As a > result, I can understand the common complaint about SPARC's being slow. > This has less to do with what runs in a 6900 or E25K, and more to do > with what is generally available to people for workstations. Very few > end-users will pay ~$4K-12K for a single or dual proc UltraSparcIIIi > workstation when they could just buy a V210 or V240. The pricing just > doesn't add up for the task at hand and a SB150 is just too old > (UltraSparcIIi)for most serious end-users to consider. > > I'm very happy to see the new Ultra20 and Ultra40 workstations, they > offer a lot of nice features at a more reasonable price. It's great > that Sun has made such a large portion of their software available on > Opterons, this helps out end-users a lot. However, I'd still love to > see a similiarlly priced SPARC workstation. Here is what I think should > be in such a workstation: > > Tower case like Ultra 40/45 (Must have ultra quiet fans) > 350-420W Power Supply > 1 x T1 (Dual core only) CPU > 2GB Ram Max > NVidia Graphics Card > 2 x SATA 80GB HDD's > 1 x Slim DVD-RW/CD-RW > 2 x BGE Port > 6 x USB 2.0 Ports > 2 x Firewire Ports > Integrated Audio (w/ nice speakers) > 2 x PCI-Express x16 Slot > 2 x PCI-Express x4 Slot > 2 x Conventional PCI Slot > > As much as possible should be integrated onto the main board to reduce > costs. Pricing wise, something like this should only go for > $1300-$2000. This would be a great workstation to get developers onto > the T1 bandwagon. It would also be great for sysadmins, dba's, > researchers, and engineers for testing and everyday usage. > > I know this is only a wish, but I think most people out there that have > some old SPARC gear at home would shell out for such a nice > workstation. > > For Sun, if it could market such a workstation to the above target > audiences, it could help drive awareness of Sun's products. In general terms, I'd describe your proposal as an RFE for a deskside Niagra/T1 based system. While we could debate the specifics of a desirable hardware configuration, a range of products could be offered to target different price points. All the product offerings could share the same T1 CPU, and be easily differentiated by the number of available memory, PCI, PCI-X and SATA (disk drive) slots. Seems like a good way to drive Niagra/T1 server adoption while increasing the volume of Niagra/T1 CPUs and sharing the total Niagra/T1 NRE costs over larger volumes. As has been proven time after time, putting the underlying technology, in this case the Niagra/T1 processor, into the hands of a developer, at a reasonable cost, is an effective way to increase deployments in the datacenter. Since the Niagra/T1 is all about parallelism, I am diametrically opposed to offering any form of "crippled" Niagra/T1 based product. While we've talking about the T1 processor, a range of RAID controllers, Sun Rays and other devices could be offered based on this processor family. > Alright.. back to the real world and my U60. Thanks for an inciteful post. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Call for Papers Opens for ApacheCon Europe 2006 (fwd)
Jim, Can we get this added to the OpenSolaris events page please? Presenting OpenSolaris related technical material at important/popular technical venues, seems like an ideal way to spread the OpenSolaris message! Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 --- Forwarded Message Date: Tue, 21 Feb 2006 19:21:33 +0100 From: Lars Eilebrecht <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Call for Papers Opens for ApacheCon Europe 2006 Message-ID: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Call for Papers Opens for ApacheCon Europe 2006 The Apache Software Foundation (ASF) is proud to announce that ApacheCon Europe 2006 will be held at the Burlington Hotel in Dublin, Ireland, June 26-30, 2006. ApacheCon Europe is the official conference of the Apache Software Foundation in Europe. This annual event creates a unique platform for the Open Source community in Europe to come together to gain deep insight into techniques and methodologies critical to the advancement of Open Source software, and gain skills to optimize the power and versatility of Apache software. The conference brings together ASF members, developers and contributors, business people, and power users, working with Apache and related software, to participate in a leading-edge forum to exchange ideas and network with peers. The conference begins with two days of intensive half-day and full-day tutorials, which will offer actionable techniques and methodologies pivotal to the increasing demand for Open Source software. The three main conference days offer a wide range of beginner, intermediate and advanced sessions. ApacheCon Europe attendees will have more than 70 sessions to choose from, to gain real-world insight and to learn first-hand the latest developments of key Open Source projects including the Apache HTTP Server - the world's most popular web server software. Come share your knowledge, hit upon new ideas, find solutions and connect with your peers at this educational, fun-filled gathering of users, developers, and vendors of Apache software. The ASF and the conference producer for the ApacheCon Europe conference series - Software & Support Verlag from Frankfurt, Germany - invite the Open Source community to send in session and tutorial proposals for ApacheCon Europe 2006. Apache Software Foundation members are designing the technical program for ApacheCon Europe 2006, which will feature multiple tracks and dozens of technical sessions. The program committee is particularly interested in session and tutorial proposals on the following topics: * Apache HTTP server topics (installation, configuration, migration, ...) * All ASF projects such as, Jakarta, mod_perl, XML, and SpamAssassin * Scripting languages and dynamic content (such as Java, Perl, Python, Ruby, XML, XSL, and PHP) * Security and e-commerce * Performance tuning, load balancing and high availability * Technical and non-technical case studies * New technologies (e.g., Web, Java, XML, and anti-spam) Regular sessions will be 60 minutes and tutorials will be either 3 or 6 hours. To submit a proposal, visit http://www.apachecon.com/2006/EU/cfp. The deadline for submitting is March 27, 2006 Speaker benefits include: * travel costs will be covered * accommodation depending on the number of sessions will be covered * tutorials speakers will be paid an extra fee for their efforts * conference registration fees will be waived ApacheCon Europe Team http://www.apachecon.com/2006/EU/ - - To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- End of Forwarded Message ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: Niagara1-based workstation ? / was: Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Cheap SPARC development machine ?
; > likely move the price beyond a point where normal home users can afford > > > such a machine. > > > > > okay this will need some work, maybe it doesn't need a pci-e x16 slot, > > maybe they can put a powerful gpu on the mother board, there are > > plenty of 3rd party nvidia clones that would give plenty of kick for a > > developer desktop possibly even using ram from the system. > > Erm... this will not help. AFAIK there is no PCI-Express with 16 lanes > in the chipset used by Niagara1. Neither a PCI-Express 16x slot or a gfx > chip directly on the motherboard will change that (PCI-E 8x is AFAIK the > fastest you can get - if you find matching video card drivers). You don't need a PCI-Express 16x to saturate the byte stream that the current generation of graphic cards can consume. You're off-base with this comment. It's not an issue. In fact, the ability of the T1 to provide sustained bandwidth with low latency is one of its strengths. > > The most important aspect of the niagra for the desktop is the > > multi-core aspect of it. I have a 2.613 Ghz u20, with 2GB of ram and > > 2x 250GB sata drives (large config). Yet without much work i push the > > box so that mp3 stutters and the mouse locks up under heavy IO. > > Offtopic: Try to make the mp3 player as "realtime" process (see > priocntl(1)) and/or try copying the mp3 files to /tmp (e.g. tmpfs) > before playback... That does not resolve the issue - it simply shifts the issue elsewhere. The T1 processor resolves the issue - becuase it can provide the necessary, sustained byte streams to multiple processes concurrently and continuously. Roland, what I find interesting about your posts on this topic, is that you seem to be reaching for reasons to explain why this is not viable. It is completely viable today - but there will always be limitations with every system architecture. The big win is from a developers perspective: a T1 based workstation would provide an absolutely ideal environment to develop multi-threaded applications and to identify limitations with the software architecture/design/implementation. Issues like excessive locking or lock contention could be resolved on this workstatation. The resulting code would then have superior operational characteristics for deployment on a T1 based server or a 4-way to 8-way AMD based server. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Cheap SPARC development machine ?
On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Ian Collins wrote: > Rich Teer wrote: > > >On Fri, 24 Feb 2006, Ian Collins wrote: > > > >>X2? > >> > > > >X2 is the name of AMD's dual-core Atahlon series. > > > Ah.. > > Well to answer the original question, the prices of the dual core > Opteron 100 serial are close to the equivalent X2 part, so sun should > offer the Ultra 20 with dual core CPUs. Agreed. My x2 4400+ (1Mb cache/core) based Ultra20 [1] is an awesome box: $ psrinfo -v Status of virtual processor 0 as of: 02/23/2006 17:13:58 on-line since 01/22/2006 08:02:33. The i386 processor operates at 2211 MHz, and has an i387 compatible floating point processor. Status of virtual processor 1 as of: 02/23/2006 17:13:58 on-line since 01/22/2006 08:02:38. The i386 processor operates at 2211 MHz, and has an i387 compatible floating point processor. $ [1] BFG GeForce 7800GT OC at 2560x1600 NVIDIA-Solaris-x86-1.0-8178.run Plextor DVDR PX-716AL, slot-loader Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ZFS removed back to SVM
... reformatted ... On Wed, 1 Mar 2006, Brian wrote: ... snip ... > and put the s2 solaris partition back ? Or can I download ZFS for the > 1/06 release of Solaris 10 ? ZFS will be available with Solaris 10 Update 2. You won't be able to boot from a ZFS filesystem until Update 4 - assuming that the Patch and Install developers can keep to their schedule. Update 2 should ship around April/May - but this is only my (WAG) guess. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Band of Brothers DVD--Update
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Sean Sprague wrote: > Chandan B.N. wrote: > > On Thu, 2006-03-16 at 18:11 +, Sean Sprague wrote: > >> Has Chandan done the artwork for the Band of Brothers t-shirt yet? > > > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/chandanlog/76005188/ ? Reformatted. > Very nice indeed! Just one small point: the word "Nexenta" is rather > small in comparison to the grandeur of the other two. The giraffe theme Agreed. > kinda lends itself to having the word "Nexenta" arranged vertically along > its neck. Or some other solution Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] opensolaris-{code, rfe, bugs} (was Community proposal: solaris-internals)
On Thu, 16 Mar 2006, Mike Kupfer wrote: > >>>>> "sch" == Stephen Hahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > sch> I think I would like to hear about how to eventually close some > sch> of the program-wide aliases, as consolidations and communities > sch> evolve their own code submission discussions. > > I think opensolaris-code can just go away. It was originally created Agreed. > during the Pilot program, when there was a single consolidation and a > lot fewer people. When I proposed it, I thought of it as a stopgap > measure to deal with the high traffic, much of it non-technical, on > opensolaris-discuss. Now that we have multiple consolidations, each > with (at least) its own "discuss" list, and a whole lot more people, > opensolaris-code serves only to confuse people about where they should > post. > > I'd like to see opensolaris-bugs and opensolaris-rfe go away, too. Bugs > and RFEs should get posted to the bug database, not mailing lists. And they can be discussed on opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, if necessary. Re: solaris-internals I see a need for a *very* technical, high signal-to-noise ratio list where (only) highly technical issues and their underlying architectural and design decisions are discussed. I don't expect the resulting list to have broad appeal - I would expect it to appeal to a much smaller audience that is highly technical and highly qualified. And to ensure that it remains so, I would suggest that this new community be 100% moderated. This will ensure that only highly technical posts make it to the list and that the high signal/noise ratio is maintained over the long term. The resulting list would be designed to attract talented developers because of its highly technical content and retain those members because of the consistant quality of the ongoing discussions and presented material. The ratio of (list) lurkers to posters would probably be unusually high - and many of those lurkers would be constantly challenged by the technical content of the topics discussed and presention data made available. Potential topics for discussion would include such topics as virtual memory management and ... well ... the sort of technical topics that make it into the upcoming version 2 of the book "Solaris Internals"! If we have enough moderators associated with the group, then the burden of list moderation can be spread over a large pool of willing volunteers and they would be encouraged to direct off-topic posts to the most relevant list - rather than telling them to 'go away'. I know that some will read this post and accuse me of technical elitism. My answer to that is simple: if we don't impose some low water mark (in terms of the technical level), then how can we expect to attract "name brand" highly technical developers to the list and why should we expect them to remain active and engaged if we subject them to hundreds of off-topic posts ranging for "Linux is better at..." to "my 8-year old Pentium II computer with 128Mb of RAM and an 18Gb disk won't boot b36" etc. etc. The nature of the highly technical and talented developer is that they have limited tolerance to posts like "my computer won't boot"[1] and limited time to participate in the many, *many* lists that are competing for their attention. [1] so let me take out my crystal ball and determine the make/model date of manufacture, hardware configuration, software configuration blah, blah and give you the 'correct' answer first time! :) Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Image uploading on the genunix wiki
On Fri, 17 Mar 2006, Venky wrote: > Would it be possible to allow image uploading on the genunix wiki? > > Enabling image uploads is normally just a simple matter of setting > the "wgDisableUploads" variable to "false" in the mediawiki > "LocalSettings.php" file and making sure that the "images" directory > is writable by the webserver. OK. We'll get it done Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Genunix Wiki being linkspammed
On Mon, 27 Mar 2006, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > Roland Mainz wrote: > > This is why I hate Wiki - it's totally out of control, assumes that > > people will always fair and altruistic - and provides no real way to > > track changes (e.g. no commit list for diffs etc.). > > I've had no problems subscribing to the RSS feed for genunix.org to see > the diffs - that's how I found out which pages were being linkspammed > in order to go remove it, but it got overwhelming this weekend and the > spammer was going much faster than I could keep up, so I quit. > > (So you can also put me down as +1 to Venky's call for doing something > to block this.) I know nothing about mediaWiki and I'm hoping to work with Venky (offlist) to resolve the spam issues Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Slowaris vs. Solaris
On Wed, 29 Mar 2006 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >But the Solaris installer doesn't read the data at that rate. If it > >got the drive going then it would be fine, but it spends half its > >time jumping all over the place, and even when doing nothing but reading > >a simple data stream it's at a very much slower rate. The problem > >is in the install process being slow, not in how fast the media is. > > And it uses the media in a way which is particularly bad for > DVDs. What needs to happen is to have the DVD data streamed to a RAM disk (by one thread) and then have the (stupid) installer run from the RAM disk. Since its not uncommon to have machines with 1 to 8Gb of RAM these days, the installer should be able to maximize the use of available RAM. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: [tools-discuss] Distributed source code management selection, draft
On Fri, 7 Apr 2006, Stephen Hahn wrote: > > Commentary is encouraged. We can start to look at specific > SCM-dependent tools next week, unless we are more distant from > consensus that I believe... > > Enjoy the weekend; my thanks to all. ... snip > Therefore, we have decided to select Mercurial as the DSCM for > OpenSolaris. In the coming time, we hope to work with the Mercurial > community to address any issues we may find while integrating > Mercurial into the OpenSolaris repository framework and converting > existing source bases to use it. . snip Indeed. Many well-earned Thanks to all who participated in the SCM tool selection and to Stephen Hahn for taking the lead role. I think that Mercurial is the worthy winner of the evaluation. The passion of its developers and their willingness to vigorously defend the tool in the face of the competition and yet provide detailed email clarifications and meaningfuly contributions during the evaluation process, also makes them deserving OpenSolaris DSCM champions. I continue to be impressed by their ability to provide OpenSolaris relevant support for their "product" without even being asked to. No doubt that bugs/deficiencies will be discovered as we get comfortable with Mercurial and apply it to the *huge* body of open source that is the OpenSolaris project. But I feel comfortable that the Mercurial developers, along with the OpenSolaris community, will quickly overcome any discovered hurdles and, in the process, make Mercurial into an even stronger product/project. Getting a DSCM into production for OpenSolaris is a huge priority. Please help in any way you can to make it happen. Again - many Thanks to all the participants. Happy Friday! Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] technical (kernel?) discussion list progress?
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, Eric Lowe wrote: > Peter Buckingham wrote: > > There was some discussion about having a more technical mailing > > list/community ala freebsd hackers/lkml/... > > > > Was there any progress made on that? I'm definitely interested in > > discoverying/learning more about the internals of Solaris. > > It has been discussed, but there is some grumbling that > opensolaris-discuss is still OK for this kind of discussion since we > haven't reached the threshold of pain yet as far as traffic. There has > also been a fair amount of this type of traffic on opensolaris-code, > although that list should be going away soon... I would like to propose a highly technical kernel related mailing list/project - name TBD (chosen via discussion) per the original (failed community) proposal by Eric Lowe. Essentially I am proposing the "Eric Lowe" project/list of his behalf or by proxy, if you will. The list would be a moderated list to ensure that the signal to noise ratio is maintained over the long term. This would be our first OpenSolaris moderated list and it should be considered an experiment that will be successfull or unsuccessfull based on the number of active participants, the quality of the postings and the ability of the moderators to ensure timely postings and to refer off-topic posts to other, more appropriate, unmoderated, lists. Ultimately the community will decide if they like the list being moderated. And it could be "converted" into an unmoderated list in the future if the experiment is deemed unsuccessful. IMHO we need a highly technical list with good signal/noise ratio and it will attract those talented developers/contributors based on its technical content and retain them based on the fact that they won't have to wade through tons of off-topic or low-tech posts. In my experience there is a co-relation between telented developers, their available time to participate on mailing lists and their tolerance towards list "noise". As an aside, I've noticed that everytime someone proposes a new project they are immediatly "punished" for the "we have too many communities/projects/lists already", previous committed, "sins" of others. IMO we should not punish the proposer(s) of a new community/project for lists/projects they likely had no part in creating. Dealing with the 'too-many-projects-lists" issue is a separate issue which must/will be dealt with in time. PS: I will also make myself available as a moderator for the proposed list. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Solaris on Intel Macs??
On Tue, 11 Apr 2006, [UTF-8] Jürgen Keil wrote: snip . > any I'm able to boot in Intel iMac into a snv_34 failsafe kernel boot > archive ! Nice Work JK!! :) Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Sun to use Intel chips was Re: AMD buys ATI....
On Sun, 21 Jan 2007, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: > According to the rumor mill: > > http://www.theinquirer.net/default.aspx?article=37089 > > (Major Intel, Sun deal to be announced Monday) Confirmed - but you need a subscription to read the WSJ URL below: TECHNOLOGY ALERT from The Wall Street Journal. Sunday, Jan. 21, 2007 Sun and Intel have been negotiating an agreement under which Sun would buy Intel chips for use in server systems. Such a deal would be a blow to AMD, currently Sun's exclusive supplier for chips based on the popular x86 design used in most PCs and servers, and signal renewed competitiveness for Intel's chips. http://online.wsj.com/article/SB116942865146783283.html?mod=djemalert Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: What does OpenSolaris Success look like to you? (was Re: [Fwd: Re: [osol-discuss] GPLv3?])
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, Stephen Harpster wrote: > Who maintains the code on that CVS server? If there's a bug in virtual > memory, who fixes it? The experts are here in Sun, and they will > continue to work on opensolaris.org. OpenSolaris is too large and That's a dangereous assertion. What it Jeff Bezos[1] decided to spend more than the (??) $480m he spent last year on software development and made some people at Sun an offer they could not refuse. Or decided to put half of his software development $s into creating a Ubuntu like OpenSolaris alternative. Then there is Google with enough budget to put 3,000 people to work on any project they wish to... Who was it that said (something like) no one company can have all the technical talent (on staff). > complex for even a small set of people to maintain an entire separate fork. Simply not true and not borne out by history. Was'nt ZFS developed by a small team. Dtrace by 3 people. BSD, before it was open sourced was a 5 or 6 person (??) team. > OK, they could pull bug fixes from opensolaris.org, but what happens to > them once one of their changes doesn't work with our changes? That's > the biggest danger of a fork. You're constantly playing catch-up. Not true. In a race you're either leading or following. It's only wishful thinking to suggest that Sun will always be the leader (altough I'd _like to_ think it would). > If someone wants to do that, they can do that now. Knock yourself out. > ... snip [1] there is some evidence to suggest that he is the ultimate geek who just likes to build software systems and rockets and anything else that strikes his fancy and does not seem compelled to justify his technobudget to anyone. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: What does OpenSolaris Success look like to you? (was Re: [Fwd: Re: [osol-discuss] GPLv3?])
mplemented and the flaws in the actual implementation. - Numereous DVD/movie encryption algorithms. - the ill-fated wireless WPA and WPA2 encryption algorithms. - Cisco and the well published case of the "kill the presenter" of IOS security flaws/exploits. I could go on and on [0] Summary: "you violated our patents - we can sue you into total extinction or .. you can give us the Alpha CPU IP and the right to hire its architects". > The history of those other forks has shown that, even if the original > is seen as "better" in some respects, over the longer haul, that > simply does not matter. That's what I meant by saying that I've seen > this movie before. The hero dies in the end. Agreed. The history of computing is littered with the dead bodies of technically "better" ... everything. The only way to be the leader is to spend every waking minute of every day running like hell to stay ahead of the pack. Develope a "technical magnet" to attract top-tier technical talent to the Project and forget about licensing or any other "quick fix" panacea. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: What does OpenSolaris Success look like to you?
On Tue, 6 Feb 2007, Roy T. Fielding wrote: lots of wise words elided . > > Otherwise, stick with the CDDL. GPLv3 cannot be evaluated seriously > until it is actually approved by the FSF and published in final form. > Even then, dual-licensing wouldn't make any sense, but at least we'd > have an idea of the actual impact of a switch from CDDL to GPLv3. Here is my opinion on dual licensing OpenSolaris and I am hopeful that we can agree between the CAB/OGB members on publishing an official/majority position (paper) on dual licensing and GPLv3 in the near future. I believe that there is little, if any, benefit to dual-licensing OpenSolaris with CDDL and the yet to be approved/upcoming GPLv3 license - aside from possible good press for the project. In addition, I believe that there are significant downsides to dual licensing, including, but not limited to, license complexity, confusion and the possibility of bad press from any exception language that such a license would inevitably require. Further, I believe that GPL* licensing OpenSolaris would be yielding to a small vocal minority of FOSS developers who use the lack of GPL licensing, purely as a means of fostering FUD towards OpenSolaris and who will, in all likelyhood, find some other workable mechanism to continue to foster FUD towards the project. I believe that there are higher priority action items to be completed in order to build developer mindshare and that this opinion is held by a large number of current OpenSolaris contributors and acts as a barrier to other potential contributors. I recommend that any option related to GPLv3 dual licensing be re-assessed no sooner than 6 months after the GPLv3 has been published and approved and that any further discussions related to it postponed until that general timeframe. In addition I believe that further discussion on GPLv3 is merely a diversion/distraction that should be discouraged, so as to allow the community to concentrate on the higher priority action items, until that timeframe. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: What does OpenSolaris Success look like to you?
On Wed, 7 Feb 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > > > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > >> > >>> > >>> >I still don't understand why Sun did device to move to Hg while > >>> >it looks simple to ehance sccs. The problem is that the SCCS source > >>> >has not been made available fast enough to allow people to point to > >>> >possible solutions. > >>> > >>> "Sun" did not decide to move to Hg; it was pretty much an open process > >>> which led to the selection of Hg. > >> > >> I am not aware of a real discussion on that. > > > > Nor I. > > > The tools-discuss group discussed this issue at length, including > the criteria for selection and how the other candidates fell by the > way side. Agreed. I followed that discussion, downloaded the SCMs and was a proponent of git to begin with. But git failed miserably in testing. Personally I had hoped for git to succeed - but it failed on its own demerits in fair and open testing against the competition. > Was it really necessary to wait until SCCS or teamware were opensourced? > > Teamware was pretty much in doubt as there had been no development for > years; it was clinging to existance solely because we use it at Sun > internally. Using teamware would have required to extensively webify > it; any mechanism which required NFS through firewalls would have failed > us. I was told the Teamware was 98% ready to be open sourced well over 20 months ago. As the CAB, we asked Sun management to prioritize making it available in August 2005 [1]. But it never has been. Its proponents, both within and outside Sun, failed to give it any chance at competing with the tools available at the time of the selection process by not open sourcing it early and allowing the community to bring it up to par. As Casper says - it would have needed considerable development to be competitive. I've seen Joerg expound the virtues of SCCS many, many times on OpenSolaris and I know he is enthusiastic about it and has not been swayed in his opinion. And that's fine by me - its good to see someone stick to their convictions over the long term. However, SCCS/Teamware was not an option at the time of the selection process and *still* is not today. The selection process was fair, open and very well organized and Mercurial won based on its merits. To infer that the selection process was flawed or unfair, or that the outcome somehow pre-ordained, is unfair and untrue. [1] http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=8208‐ Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] CAB/OGB Position Paper # 20070207
CAB/OGB Position Paper # 20070207 version 0.6 Topic: Should OpenSolaris be dual licensed via CDDL and GPLv3 Published by: OpenSolaris CAB/OGB current members: Casper Dik, Al Hopper, Roy Fielding, Simon Phipps, Rich Teer Background: Over the past week or so a heated and passionate debate has taken place on the opensolaris-discuss mailing list [1] relating to the possibility of dual-licensing OpenSolaris, and in particular with GPLv3 as the 2nd license, in addition to CDDL, under which OpenSolaris is currently licensed. The CAB/OGB (henceforth referred to as simply the OGB) has observed this discussion carefully and individual OGB members have been active participants. Now that this discussion is winding down, the OGB, as the elected representatives of the OpenSolaris project, will render an OGB statement of position and provide guidance to the community to bring closure to this discussion and to determine the communities near term future licensing direction. Discussion summaries (the pros and the cons): The Pro dual licensing community members assert that dual licensing will: - increase developer mindshare - attract active developers currently working on other FOSS projects - promote code exchange across FOSS boundries - end the constant anti-CDDL campaign waged by GPL* license proponents The Anti dual licensing community members assert that dual licensing will: - increase licensing complexity and futher complicate this already legally complex licensing landscape - lead to endless continued debates related to various "what if" code inclusion/exclusion scenarios - allow a one-way code fork by acquiring the OpenSolaris body of code, manipulating, removing or modifying the (eventual, but currently unknown) GPLv3 license terms in a way that prevents or impedes the changes being propagated back to OpenSolaris. - *not* entice or attract GPL* proponent FOSS developers, who want to ensure that other Operating Systems (they actively work on) flourish, to OpenSolaris. --- The OGB, having heard arguments from both sides, concludes: o Discussing GPLv3 is pre-mature as the license does not exist at this time. o That there is little, if any, benefit to dual-licensing OpenSolaris with CDDL and the yet to be approved/upcoming GPLv3 license - aside from possible short term good press for the project. o There are significant downsides to dual licensing, including, but not limited to, license complexity, confusion and the possibility of long term bad press from any exception language that such a license would inevitably require. o GPL* licensing OpenSolaris would be yielding to a small vocal minority of FOSS developers who use the lack of GPL licensing, purely as a means of fostering FUD towards OpenSolaris and who will, in all likelyhood, find some other workable mechanism to continue to foster FUD towards the project. o There are higher priority action items to be completed in order to build developer mindshare and that this opinion is held by a large number of current contributors and acts as a barrier to other potential contributors. - The OGB having carefully weighed the available options concludes and decrees that: o any option related to GPLv3 dual licensing be re-assessed no sooner than 6 months after the GPLv3 has been published and approved. o Further discussions related to any form of dual licensing be postponed until after the GPLv3 has been published and approved and should take place on the OGB discussion forum only. o Further discussion on GPL* is merely a diversion and distraction that should be discouraged, so as to allow the community to concentrate on the higher priority action items - especially those that will improve developer mindshare. --- [1] begin here - it will take approximately 5 hours to read all the related threads: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2007-January/023879.html MOTION To adopt the CAB/OGB Position Paper # 20070207 version 0.6 by Al Hopper seconded by Rich Teer. Motion carried unanimously (In favor: Rich Teer, Casper Dik, Row Fielding, Al Hopper. Absent Simon Phipps). ------ Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Compiling fails with undefined gethostbyname errors
On Fri, 16 Feb 2007, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > > Frank Mash wrote: > > Hi all, > > > > I am trying to compile bitkeeper free client on Solaris 10. However I keep > > getting the following errors: > > > > bash-3.00# CC=cc > > bash-3.00# export CC > > bash-3.00# make > > cc -O2 -Wall -Wno-parenthesesbkf.c -o bkf > > cc: Warning: option -2 passed to ld > > cc: illegal option -Wall > > Those are gcc flags. Studio cc equivalents are -xO2 and -v. > > > Undefined first referenced > > symbol in file > > gethostbyname /var/tmp//ccgyLdOf.o > > socket /var/tmp//ccgyLdOf.o > > connect /var/tmp//ccgyLdOf.o > > ld: fatal: Symbol referencing errors. No output written to bkf > > collect2: ld returned 1 exit status > > make: *** [bkf] Error 1 > > -lsocket -lnsl Followup: In general, if you've looking for a "mysterious" undefined symbol within Solaris, the general "brute force" solution is (something like [assuming ksh as your shell]): for i in /lib/*.so do /usr/ccs/bin/nm -Ag $i |grep -v UNDEF |grep gethostbyname done which yields: /lib/libnsl.so: [3121] |128512| 174|FUNC |GLOB |0|11 |_switch_gethostbyname_r /lib/libnsl.so: [2848] |110172| 44|FUNC |GLOB |0|11 |_uncached_gethostbyname_r /lib/libnsl.so: [2647] |110704| 89|FUNC |GLOB |0|11 |gethostbyname /lib/libnsl.so: [2689] |110266| 222|FUNC |GLOB |0|11 |gethostbyname_r /lib/libresolv.so: [1585] | 78996| 38|FUNC |GLOB |0|11 |res_gethostbyname /lib/libresolv.so: [1397] | 79034| 41|FUNC |GLOB |0|11 |res_gethostbyname2 /lib/libxnet.so: [79] | 0| 0|FUNC |GLOB |0|ABS |gethostbyname Note that a bunch of shared libraries have been moved to /lib in Solaris 10; for older releases you'll need to (first) concentrate your search in /usr/lib. And now I'm sure that the real linker-saavy experts are going to show us both a better way to accomplish this. But I've been doing this since I first started working with Solaris many moons ago... :) If you're really desparate - you can use a find command to search every *.so file on your system! This is the last resort[1] solution/substitute for lack of *Solaris specific knowledge. :) But also a good way to explore *Solaris shared libs. [1] I say: let the *machine* do the work! Happy Friday! Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] OGB March 2007 Election
Up to now, there has not been an official announcement of the OGB elections posted to os-discuss and os-announce even though some details of the election have been posted on cab-discuss (and elsewhere). However, I realize that there are many community members who are not subscribed to cab-discuss or who probably don't read the cab-discuss archives on a regular basis. So this email is on behalf of the OGB where we'd like to announce the OGB March 2007 election and provide some basic information. If you have any follow-up questions on this announcement, please post them (preferably) to cab-discuss and we'll do our best to answer them. Currently the OGB is accepting nominations for an OGB seat - there will be 7 OGB seats available and we hope to fill them all. The nomination process is simple: a) Post an email, preferably to cab-discuss, if you wish to nominate someone for the OGB election. Self nomination is OK. b) A current Core Contributor must second your nomination. Currently Stephen Hahn, acting as the Secretary of the OGB, is the keeper of the verified contributor list - which he recently published at: http://poll.opensolaris.org/> (click on the tab marked "Grants") c) The nominee may accept or decline nomination, up to the deadline defined as "Election Voting Open" on the official election calendar at: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/OGB_Election_Status/#electioncalendar> The next event in the election process, is the closing of nominations on Monday March 5th at 24:00 hrs Pacific. d) The election is being held per the OpenSolaris Constitution at: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/governance/> Attention Voters: In order to vote in the OGB elections you must be a current Core Contributor. So please check your status as in section b) above. If you don't find yourself listed as a core contributor, you may seek core contributor status via the process outlined in section 7.8 of the Constitution. If you don't fit within the current Community/Project structure because, for example, you contribute to many different projects, you may seek core contributor status by requesting it of the OGB by sending an email with your list of contribution achievements to cab-discuss (please put "Request to be recognized as a core contributor" in the Subject field). After you've verified your member status, please read the instructions at: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/website/poll_instructions/> and get your SSH key registered sooner, rather than later. What's coming up next 1) We'll be testing the poll/voting infrastructure, before using it for the OGB elections, with a simple test ballot structured as a poll. We've hoping to use this test/poll to acquire some feedback from the community - so please try and participate. 2) The OGB Constitution has been ratified by Sun, but has yet to be ratified by the community. So do not be surprised when you see a separate ballot item on the OGB election asking you if you wish to ratify the Constitution. We decided to combine ratification of the Constitution with the OGB election on one poll. While this may sound like a contradiction [1] it's simply not an issue. It's common to combine items on a ballot like (silly example) "vote yes to allocate $10m in funding on a Route 70 off ramp at xyz" with another ballot item like "vote yes to build an off ramp at xyz on Route 70". 3) I'm maintaining an OGB election status page at: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/OGB_Election_Status/> If you see any errors or omissions, feel free to email me directly. Notes: [1] A community member scratches his/her head and asks: "Hey we've conducting an OGB election under the terms of a Constitution which has not been (community) ratified and we're also ratifying the Constitution at the same time? How can that work?" - Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Conference in Germany
On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Jim Grisanzio wrote: > I've been here in Berlin all week at the OpenSolaris Developer Conference run > by the German Unix User Group. It was an excellent event, and a first for the > OpenSolaris community because Sun didn't run the show. The presentations were > very good and so was the community participation. Hopefully, this will become > an annual event that travels to other cities in Europe. > > Some pics: http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/entry/opensolaris_in_germany Hi Jim, Is there any information to explain who the people are who are predominately featured in your pictures? While a picture is worth a 1,000 words, a picture of an OpenSolaris presenter without a name is not very useful? Is there any other coverage of the Conference in Germany available? Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Conference in Germany
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Jim Grisanzio wrote: > > > Al Hopper wrote: > > On Fri, 2 Mar 2007, Jim Grisanzio wrote: > > > >> I've been here in Berlin all week at the OpenSolaris Developer Conference > >> run by the German Unix User Group. It was an excellent event, and a first > >> for the OpenSolaris community because Sun didn't run the show. The > >> presentations were very good and so was the community participation. > >> Hopefully, this will become an annual event that travels to other cities > >> in Europe. > >> > >> Some pics: http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris/entry/opensolaris_in_germany > > > > Hi Jim, > > > > Is there any information to explain who the people are who are > > predominately featured in your pictures? While a picture is worth a 1,000 > > words, a picture of an OpenSolaris presenter without a name is not very > > useful? > > > Hi ... > > It may be easier to look at the images in flickr than in my blog: > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimgris/sets/72157594565019062/ Excellent - many Thanks Jim. I got a heads up from Martin (martux) Bochnig earlier and it was great to see his photo along with others I've worked with on OpenSolaris like Roland Mainz and Moinak Ghosh. I really appreciate you efforts in taking these photos and making them available. One idea I thought about would be to use a long zoom lens and followup one picture with a close-up of the persons name badge. But then it would be more work to post edit and combine the images... Just an idea. > Or even from the main page and then working backwards: > > http://www.flickr.com/photos/jimgris/ > > I put in as much info as I could remember or from stuff I wrote down > (which was very little). I wanted to get the images up there as soon as > I could. Things were a bit busy. I'll add stuff as I go. Also, each > image has a comment field so people at the conference can fill in things > that I miss. I've shot over a thousand images for OpenSolaris, and it's > actually pretty time consuming at that volume, so many times I just give > up on trying to figure out all the names of everyone in the crowds. I > think I have most of the individuals I met from this conf, though. > Hopefully, people will leave comments and I can fill in more names. > > Info on all the speakers is here: > > http://www.guug.de/veranstaltungen/osdevcon2007/abstracts.html > > > > Is there any other coverage of the Conference in Germany available? > > > Although I was there for almost a week, I doubt my German is up to the > level I'd need to find German blogs on this :) I'm sure the GUUG guys > will be around, though. > > Jim Thanks again Jim, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [cab-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Last Day for Nominations
On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Keith M Wesolowski wrote: > On Mon, Mar 05, 2007 at 10:25:28AM -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > > In this case, I think it's still a follow-on of the poor initial setup > > of Communities - instead of a Xen community, we should have a Virtualization > > community with Xen & qemu projects. > > Completely agree. Nothing precludes the formation of such a community > today under the existing process, followed immediately by the creation > of a QEMU project, endorsement, and grant of Core Contributor status > by the Community's new leaders. If such events transpire, I would > expect the Xen Community (acting jointly with the new Community) to > petition the OGB for coalescence under an agreement specifying the > leadership roles and status of contributorship grants and project > endorsements under the unified Community. I would also expect that > petition to incorporate a request that Xen be reclassified as a > Project. It seems more likely than not that the Xen Community would > not retain that status following a thorough review by the next OGB, so > there is little incentive for anyone to defer cleaning this up. > Keith - I like your "Can Do" attitude. Yes there were mistakes made, yes the OGB could have done better - but my (personal) attitude at the time was to be as inclusive as possible and to err on the side of having little or no barriers to the initial growth of the project. On the other hand, we could have formed a commission, spent a bunch of time hashing out a better Community/Project organizational tree ... and, guess what, after a year it would have needed an overhaul anyway - simply because of changes in technology and the natural evolution of OpenSolaris. Keith has the right attitude and the right solution. Treat it just like any other "bug" and work the *solution* going forward. In the meantime, let's do everything possible, so that potential voters and valuable contributors like Martin (Martux) Bochnig don't feel disenfranchised or poorly treated. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Re: [cab-discuss] Board Election 2007/Constitution Ratification results
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Stephen Hahn wrote: > >Complete results posted at > >http://poll.opensolaris.org/2/ > >Summary > >- With respect to Question 1, the Constitution is deemed ratified and > in effect, with 145 Ayes, 4 Nays, and 4 Abstaining. With 268 Core > Contributors, 135 Ayes were required for an affirmative majority. Whew - as Al breathes a sign of relief! :) >- With respect to Question 2, as evaluated by Meek STV, the 2007 - > 2008 Governing Board, in alphabetical order, are > > * James D. Carlson, > * Alan Coopersmith, > * Casper Dik, > * Glynn Foster, > * Stephen Lau, > * Rich Teer, and > * Keith M. Wesolowski. Let me be the first to congratulate our new OGB Board members! Congratulations to you all! Many, many Thanks to all who took the time and made the effort to vote. Welcome to the next phase of OpenSolaris. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [cab-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] polls are closed !
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote: > "Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Now comes the really hard part .. the waiting ! > > Was somebody able to do a real OGB voting after he did > finish the prevoting on March 12th? Hi Joerg, I'm confused by this email - I have no idea what you mean by "prevoting". Looking at the Election Timetable [1] I don't see any reference to prevoting and the Election opened on Monday Mar 12th at 00:00 hours (Pacific). If you have any problems of any type with the OGB election - please let me know and I'll [2] work directly with you to resolve them to your complete satisfaction. [1] http://opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/OGB_Election_Status/ [2] will doubtless need Stephen Hahns help Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [cab-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] polls are closed !
On Tue, 27 Mar 2007 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >I did set up everything and when I connected via ssh, I did see a menu that > >allowed me to select between the "test vote (constitutuion" and the final OGB > >election. I selected the first and answered the question. The last question > >was > >a question for the OGB candidates which looked to me like the announced test > >vote and so I did reply with test data. > > No; the first question was the test vote and the second the real vote; > I think I voted both at the same sitting. > > There was no test OGB vote. > > Casper > Joerg, Unfortunately, by majority decision, the OGB has decided that your vote be treated as a "spoiled ballot" in this election. I understand and agree that the overlapping of the "Community Priorities/Polling Test" with the Board Election was the root cause for your spoiled ballot and recommend to the new OGB that no overlapping polls be conducted in the future. I sincerely apologize for this situation and I'm sure you are very disappointed because of it. In retrospect, the overlapping of the two polls was a mistake - because of the potential for confusion. Joerg - I hope that this unfortunate event won't dampen your enthusiasm for the OpenSolaris Project - you are a highly valued Core Contributor, and indeed a champion of Open Source Software in general. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] GPL in BusinessWeek article
Heads up: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/apr2007/tc20070430_095211.htm Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory Board (CAB) Member - Apr 2005 OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Feb 2006 to Mar 2007 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] BeleniX meets Indiana (Was: About Project Indiana)
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Brian Gupta wrote: > > Well, Belenix is a project run by a Sun employee. Do you believe it is > > not a Sun project? > > Well, the homepage is hosted by Blastwave: ^^^ No its not. See: http://sol10frominnerspace.blogspot.com/ You might reach that conclusion by looking at the DNS registration. Dennis Clark took the initiative and registered the name while the discussion took place on the mailing lists as to what we would call it. Genunix.org is a community run, independent resource, with the broad goal to further the OpenSolaris project in any way that makes sense. PS: I'll be putting more effort into this resource over the coming months. If you have any ideas on how we might make better use of this community resource, please email me directly. > http://www.genunix.org/distributions/belenix_site/?q=about > > No mention of Sun in the about page. > > Personally I didn't think it was a Sun project, just as my involvement > in OpenSolaris is not representative of my employer. > > Does it really matter. It is one of two distros that meet the needs of > a community distro. Nexenta being the other. Fully OpenSource, and > very feature rich. > > -Brian > Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] NexentaOS Alpha 7 is now available
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Alex Ross wrote: > http://www.gnusolaris.org/Download alternatively: http://www.genunix.org/distributions/gnusolaris/index.html PS: the VMWare image will take a while longer to mirror. Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun to make Solaris more Linux like
On Tue, 15 May 2007, Rich Teer wrote: > On Tue, 15 May 2007, Ian Murdock wrote: > > > Oh! None taken. We clearly don't know what we're doing, and it shows. > > I hereby offer my services as a consultant in this process--on a fee-paying > basis (I'm currently "resting" between gigs and could really use the cash). > I'm currently the only non-Sun employee on the OGB, which presumably indicates > the community has at least a modicum of confidence in my ability to represent > them. ;-) Rich - please keep your sales pitch off this list. And your current work status is equally off-topic and inappropriate. As an OGB member you should be displaying a higher standard of examplary behavior. Very poor form indeed. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: BeleniX 0.6 Released
On Sat, 26 May 2007, ken mays wrote: I've been testing Belenix 0.6 for almost a week and I only a few things (right now) I'd like to see fixed: 1. Evince 0.4.0 - update to Evince 0.9.0 2. GIMP 2.2.10 - update to GIMP 2.3.16 3. KDE 3.5.1 - update to KDE 3.5.7 4. ksh93 features comparable to other ports The move to GIMP 2.3.16, KDE 3.5.7, and Evince 0.9.0 will be a MAJOR benefit to Belenix 0.6.1. The educational and scientific apps that come with KDE 3.5.7 will spearhead the UNIX desktop capabilities on Solaris. Reference: http://www.softpanorama.org/Articles/Linux_vs_Solaris/summing_up.shtml Thanks Ken for your time and constructive comments. Much appreciated. For anyone who has not tried Belenix ... 0.6 is *the* version to try. Its incredibly useful. Moinak - many congrats on your latest BeleniX release. You should be very proud of what you have achieved. BTW: the 0.6 iso has been an incredibly popular download on genunix.org. We were pushing 10Mb+/Sec for about 48 hours straight. And 99% of it was Belenix 0.6. I'll put up a download stats page at the end of this month. Expect to see big numbers Now to get the site better equipped to handle the 0.6.1 release... :-) Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [approach-discuss] Re: [osol-discuss] Re: [ogb-discuss] Project Proposal - (what is/was Indiana)
On Thu, 31 May 2007, Simon Phipps wrote: On May 31, 2007, at 15:24, Brian Gupta wrote: One other comment. Generally, a project proposal, would be posted to the interested communities for comment, before being submitted fait acompli to the OGB. (I have cc'ed in those communities that I think, at a minimum, should be included Actually, I agree with James that the project is so far-reaching that it's a community-wide issue - I think Glynn did the right thing approaching the OGB Agreed - it's a community-wide issue. I would have preferred to have seen Glynns proposal go through some discussion and refinement via osol-discuss before being presented to the OGB. It currently feels unrefined, disorganized and very "last minute" in its current form (IMHO). Which is strange - since its been widely anticipated for weeks now. and osol-discuss lists, although it's good to see which lists you think are affected too. I'd like to see the OGB give positive, supportive guidance (as well as to see your proposal and Glynn's harmonised), probably by selecting or creating a community to work on the proposal you and Glynn are pioneering. Agreed. Lets see the OGB say "this is how to proceed". But even if it was the wrong choice, I'm eager to have us all channel this "stop energy" and suspicion of Sun into something positive. For goodness sake, Sun's executives are agreeing with you and investing in the idea you were discussing! Both these project proposals are only good news for OpenSolaris. And its really exciting to see that resources are being made available from the very highest levels of Sun management. For folks on those lists Brian added that aren't on OSOL-Discuss: Glynn's proposal can be found at: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-discuss/2007-May/030366.html One point I'd like to emphasize, is that if the OGB say (something like) "process A has to be followed" then they should ensure that the implementation resources are pre-allocated to ensure that this happens smoothly and quickly. IOW the resources to ensure that "process A" can be implemented and completed in a timely manner. And this would include having people with the necessary tools/training etc. be ready, willing and able to perform the necessary duties to get it done expeditiously. Then announce it. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: [ogb-discuss] Project Proposal - (what is/was Indiana)
On Thu, 31 May 2007, James Carlson wrote: Roy T. Fielding writes: As I said, the proposal is obviously wrong. One of these days, Sun marketing will stop trying to run this project from the peanut gallery, but that doesn't change the fact that the proposal cannot be accepted by OpenSolaris as written. On the plus side, it looks like ogb-discuss is a direct pipe to the pages of news.com.com. We could do worse. OR - we could have OGB members that think with their brains and not with their fingers (over the keyboard) and do much, much better when it comes to writing project proposals for highly visible OpenSolaris initiatives. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Re: [ogb-discuss] Project Proposal - (what is/was Indiana)
On Thu, 31 May 2007, Ian Murdock wrote: On 5/31/07, Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: On Thu, 31 May 2007, James Carlson wrote: > Roy T. Fielding writes: >> As I said, the proposal is obviously wrong. One of these days, Sun >> marketing will stop trying to run this project from the peanut gallery, >> but that doesn't change the fact that the proposal cannot be accepted >> by OpenSolaris as written. > > On the plus side, it looks like ogb-discuss is a direct pipe to the > pages of news.com.com. We could do worse. OR - we could have OGB members that think with their brains and not with their fingers (over the keyboard) and do much, much better when it comes to writing project proposals for highly visible OpenSolaris initiatives. Please cut us some slack. On the one hand, you want transparency. So, we're being transparent, and you're seeing what's going on in real time. We want to spin up a project so we can talk about product requirements rather than simply present them to you, which by definition means much of what's being proposed isn't fully formed, and you criticize the proposal for being vague. What if Glynn had posted a fully fleshed out PRD? Would you not be criticizing him for not getting community input? You can't have it both ways. [Hi Ian M] Re "both ways": I (personally) want it one way. I want OpenSolaris to be successful. I want it to florish and be self-sustaining. I want it to be *the* model FOSS Operating System on the planet. I want it to act as a magnet and draw in other developers because of its broad accross-the-board appeal and superior technology, features, facilities, performance and (most importantly) participants. And I want to it to be seen as the FOSS project that outshines, outlives and out-"everythings" any/every similar effort. And from this perspective, top level Sun executives willing to commit resources to it is a very Good Thing (TM) and, project Indiana, or any other OpenSolaris based new distribution, is only Good News for OpenSolaris. And I'm very much in favor of new ideas and new perspectives - such as the Indiana initiative. This is one of the reasons I stepped aside from the OGB - I believe that for OpenSolaris to be successful we need to attract new OGB members with new ideas, new energy and new perspectives. [that has already been accomplished] But what I don't want to see is a half baked proposal presented on a public mailing list as a fait accompli signed by an OGB board member. And what I'm really miffed at is stuff like this: "While many of those decisions can be made within that specific project area, based on requirements, there may be a real need for a sole arbitor, Ian Murdock" Why? Because I've spent two years (along with many others) trying to persuade the masses that OpenSolaris is a community run project and not an extension of Sun Corporate. As Roy has already pointed out, there is no concept of a "sole arbitor" within OpenSolaris. And that concept of a "sole arbitor" is diametrically opposed to *everything* that FOSS is about. And OpenSolaris is a community FOSS Project - not a playground for a new, well connected, Sun employee with visibility/accountability to the highest levels of Sun executive management (meaning you of course). What I anticipated, from what I read over the last several weeks, was a technically correct and competent proposal that was compliant with all the OpenSolaris rules, best practices and implied intentions which should serve as a model for anyone else to follow (remember OGB members are role models). Instead what was presented is a political nightmare. And it succeeded only in bringing the Indiana initiative to a dead stop. Shoddy workmanship like this (proposal) will not attract developer mindshare and does not faciliate forward progress. And the ensuing political debate is a further unnecessary diversion - as expressed most elegantly by the illustrious Bryan Cantrill. With all that said, AFAIK, it's water under the bridge and now we need to look forward and move forward with the Indiana initiative as quickly as possible. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Genunix.org download stats
Want to know how popular the BeleniX 0.6 distribution is? Then take a look at the download stats just published for 2007. There's a link on the main page at www.genunix.org. Again - many congratulations to Moinak Ghosh and his team. Regards, Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED] Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT OpenSolaris Governing Board (OGB) Member - Apr 2005 to Mar 2007 http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/ogb/ogb_2005-2007/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
