Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On 8/5/07, Mario Goebbels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Regarding GIMP, 2.4 will apparently take more of a > > "Photoshop look" - > > but ultimately the only real possibility is for Sun > > to work with wine > > and improve Windows compatibility - Adobe has flat > > out refused to > > support Sun and Solaris. There is very little Sun can > > do when Adobe is > > unwilling to play ball. > > Is this a "There's no business case" refusal or a "Duh, you SUCK!" > refusal? Just wondering, because software politics become pretty stupid at > times. After all, we finally got Flash 9. I thought it was an: "Adobe, if you promise not to support other *nixes, we'll kick out Quark, and make you the new star DTP application suite." (Just kidding..) ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris "thinks" that my standalone desktop is a huge network....
On 8/5/07, Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Sivasubramanian Muthusamy wrote: > > What nonsense, if you are going to criticise something, check out the > current version first. > > > > > >> Ian > >> > > > > Ian, you sound so easily irritated. > Far from it, but I do get fed up with whingers and people who spread > FUD. Bashing a piece of software based on how it used to be is totally > inappropriate for this list. > I'm also irritated by people starting discussions about Solaris 10 on an > OpenSolaris list. Let's face it, Ian. Solaris/OpenSolaris does not have the best track record for usability. It is a preconception we are going to have to counter, person by person. If you are sick of it, you might as well unsubscribe from this list, as it's going to go on for a lot longer than it will take to fix the problems. I also feel that this list is an appropriate place, as any, for people to express their thoughts on what they think OpenSolaris is. (Even if some facts may be inaccurate, or out of date.) It takes time to overcome preconceived notions. e.g. - Apple used to be viewed as a manufacturer of underpowered, buggy, slow, overpriced machines. It took many years for people to come to respect Apple again. (In my opinion it was years after the core issues had been resolved). Now they are overpriced and, most importantly, desirable. ;) -Brian P.S. - OpenSolaris has come a long way, but it still has a long way to go.. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On 8/6/07, Mario Goebbels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Well, I've taken a look and the development of a Linux reader has pretty > much stagnated the same time the Solaris SPARC, AIX and HP-UX builds have. > All are stuck at 7.0.9, so I suppose Adobe simply just doesn't believe in > *nix. Unless you don't count Mac OS X as Unix. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On 8/6/07, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 8/6/07, Mario Goebbels <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > Well, I've taken a look and the development of a Linux reader has > pretty > > > much stagnated the same time the Solaris SPARC, AIX and HP-UX builds > have. > > > All are stuck at 7.0.9, so I suppose Adobe simply just doesn't believe > in > > > *nix. > > > > > > Unless you don't count Mac OS X as Unix. > > Before continuing this discussion, I would be really interested to know > how > Apple did pass the POSIX compliance tests on Mac OS X. http://arstechnica.com/journals/apple.ars/2007/08/01/mac-os-x-leopard-receives-unix-03-certification This isn't the current release. It is for the upcoming release, Leopard, that happens to also include ZFS. (Also it's only the x86 build.) I guess the question is, why wouldn't they pass the certification? -Brian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] An Open Letter to the Solaris Community.
On 8/9/07, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Thu, 9 Aug 2007, Derek E. Lewis wrote: > > > > > If the text of the GPL was actually read, those concerned would > understand > > > that Linux could have ZFS and DTrace now, along with any other piece > of code > > > licensed under the CDDL. > > > > No, that is not clear, and IANAL and neither are you it seems. > > > > While this aspect of the GPL has not been taken to court, AFAIK, most > > legal folks go under the assumption that the licenses are incompatible. > > The fact that some people without legal knowledge claim a general > unspecific > incompatibility should not be taken for serious. > > With the same way of thinking, a lock and a key may be called incompatible > because you cannot put the lock _into_ the key. The same key could be put > into the same lock.without a poroblem. > > Lawyers carefully look at the licenses and tell you different things. > Eben Moglen (at the press conference for a early GPLv3 draft) did explain > why there is no need for the "OS exception" in the GPL and that GPLd code > may use non-GPLd code. > > > The GPL only prevents you from using GPLd code in a non-GPL project > (called work > in compliance with the copyright law). The GPL does not prevent you from > using > non-GPLd code from a GPLd project. The latter is allowed because this way, > no > non-GPLd code becomes a "derived work" of the GPLd code. > > Do not listen to the people who like to tell you that there are problems > because you cannot put the lock into the key.understand that the GPL > is a heavily assymetric license. If I understand what you are saying, I'd have to say I interpret it differently. In order to compile a Linux ZFS kernel module, you need access to the kernel source code at compile time. Thus the resulting binary is a derivative of both the GPLed Linux kernel and the CDDLed ZFS code. The GPL expressly forbids this, so this child can not legally exist. (Both licenses must allow it) Brian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Gathering support to replace the current DHCP server daemon with ISC's
On 8/10/07, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > After struggling with some issues recently around the > > current DHCP server daemon, I am opening a discussion > > thread to garner support to replace the current DHCP > > server daemon in Solaris. > > I won't quote the rest of the reasons you stated, I believe those are real > issues and trust that you have noted them as you found them. > > What I will write is that I've done Solaris for a while, and I've read > Sun's DHCP documentation, I've tried to implement a DHCP server (admittedly, > only twice), and, simply put, I still neither understand what I was doing, > nor did I manage to get a grasp on the DHCP server in Solaris. > > While I maintain that, given enough time to experiment and troubleshoot > I'd probably manage to figure it out, it's simple: > > Sun DHCP server implementation is extremely difficult to understand. At > least for me. I'm confused by it. I'm lost in it. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > My take on the whole thing, is that the Sun DHCP server is perfect for JumpStart, but for Enterprise class deployments, I would recomend another solution. (Either ISC-DHCP or a commercial package like QIP). So, if we were to integrate ISC-DHCP, one of the first priorities, would be to integrate it into JumpStart, which is currently not Open Sourced. (I hope that can be remedied easily enough). -Brian ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Andrew Morton: no merging of OpenSolaris with Linux
On 8/11/07, Aubrey Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not a nosy person, but I'd like to post this thread to see your > comments, ;-) > Don't worry so much... IBM has brainwashed him... You don't see Andrew calling for an end to OpenBSD, AIX, HPUX, or IBM's mainframe OSes do you? In my experience, most Linux users aren't as religious about it, and will take a look at OpenSolaris as another member of the "family". Linus has a healthier view than Andrew. (Basically that competition is good for both sides. He is also saying that Sun isn't opening stuff to be altruistic. I agree. They are doing it to remain relevant. well not axectly... read on for his most recent post regarding Solaris. -Brian / DateTue, 12 Jun 2007 08:45:46 -0700 (PDT) FromLinus Torvalds <> Subject Re: Dual-Licensing Linux Kernel with GPL V2 and GPL V3 Digg This On Tue, 12 Jun 2007, Alexandre Oliva wrote: > > Per this reasoning, Sun wouldn't be waiting for GPLv3, and it would > have already released the OpenSolaris kernel under GPLv2, would it > not? ;-) Umm. You are making the fundamental mistake of thinking that Sun is in this to actually further some open-source agenda. Here's a cynical prediction (but backed up by past behaviour of Sun): - first off: they may be talking a lot more than they are or ever will be doing. How many announcements about Sun and Linux have you seen over the years? And how much of that has actually happened? - They may like open source, but Linux _has_ hurt them in the marketplace. A lot. They almost used to own the chip design market, and it took quite a long time before the big EDA vendors ported to Linux (and x86-64 in particular). But when they did, their chip design market just basically disappeared: sparc performance is so horribly bad (especially on a workstation kind of setup), that to do chip design on them is just idiotic. Which is not to say that there aren't holdouts, but let's face it, for a lot of things, Solaris is simply the wrong choice these days. Ergo: they sure as hell don't want to help Linux. Which is fine. Competition is good. - So they want to use Linux resources (_especially_ drivers), but they do *not* want to give anything back (especially ZFS, which seems to be one of their very very few bright spots). - Ergo: they'll not be releasing ZFS and the other things that people are drooling about in a way that lets Linux use them on an equal footing. I can pretty much guarantee that. They don't like competition on that level. They'd *much* rather take our drivers and _not_ give anythign back, or give back the stuff that doesn't matter (like core Solaris: who are you kidding - Linux code is _better_). End result: - they'll talk about it. They not only drool after our drivers, they drool after all the _people_ who write drivers. They'd love to get kernel developers from Linux, they see that we have a huge amount of really talented people. So they want to talk things up, and the more "open source" they can position themselves, the better. - They may release the uninteresting parts under some fine license. See the OpenSolaris stuff - instead of being blinded by the code they _did_ release under an open source license, ask yourself what they did *not* end up releasing. Ask yourself why the open source parts are not ready to bootstrap a competitive system, or why they are released under licenses that Sun can make sure they control. So the _last_ thing they want to do is to release the interesting stuff under GPLv2 (quite frankly, I think the only really interesting thing they have is ZFS, and even there, I suspect we'd be better off talking to NetApp, and seeing if they are interested in releasing WAFL for Linux). Yes, they finally released Java under GPLv2, and they should be commended for that. But you should also ask yourself why, and why it took so long. Maybe it had something to do with the fact that other Java implementations started being more and more relevant? Am I cynical? Yes. Do I expect people to act in their own interests? Hell yes! That's how things are _supposed_ to happen. I'm not at all berating Sun, what I'm trying to do here is to wake people up who seem to be living in some dream-world where Sun wants to help people. So to Sun, a GPLv3-only release would actually let them look good, and still keep Linux from taking their interesting parts, and would allow them to take at least parts of Linux without giving anything back (ahh, the joys of license fragmentation). Of course, they know that. And yes, maybe ZFS is worthwhile enough that I'm willing to go to the effort of trying to relicense the kernel. But quite frankly, I can almost guarantee that Sun won't release ZFS under the GPLv3 even if they release other parts. Because if they did, they'd lose the patent protection. And yes, I'm cynical, and yes, I hope I'm wrong. And if I'm wrong, I'll ve
Re: [osol-discuss] Gathering support to replace the current DHCP server daemon with ISC's
On 8/13/07, Dave Pickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The question now becomes how much effort and money should be expended to > catch-up or leap over, or is it better to simply adopt the ISC daemon > and contribute to *the* community around it? If the question is throw a ton of resources at Sun's DHCP or throw a ton of resources at integrating ISC, I would chose the later. If status quo were a choice that would be mighty tempting as well. (Resource reallocation from Sun issue.) That said, if someone(some group)) is actually willing to volunteer to do the ISC integration work, I feel that would be ideal. -- - Brian Gupta P.S. - To me the biggest thing is, going with the internet standard, vs rolling our own... (Unless their is a clear and significant benefit to rolling our own as in the case of Dtrace and ZFS. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Is it ok to ask when update 4 is coming out?
I don't know if this is the proper forum to address this question, but I am under the impression that S10 update 4 should be here any day now, is this still on track? Thanks, -- -Brian Gupta ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [OT] google pack contains staroffice (& not openoffice)?
Google "staroffice openoffice difference" http://www.openoffice.org/FAQs/mostfaqs.html#6 OpenOffice is based on StarOffice code. Interestingly enough, no one seems to credit Sun for this contribution. On 8/13/07, S h i v <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi, > > This is a bit off-topic, but I didn't find any other suitable forum. > > I have always wondered why SXDE packages star office and not open > office. Both I understand share bulk of the code base. > Google-pack now contains star office (http://pack.google.com) ! > > Why this when there is an open source alternative? > > regards > Shiv > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Does anyone know a time frame for open sourcing Sun Management Center?
Thanks, Brian -- - Brian Gupta ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is not a Solaris helpdesk
On 8/15/07, Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Artem Kachitchkine wrote: > > > I think it's a bit too late, just go with the flow and leave -discuss > > alone. Lobbies are always crowded and noisy, and those arriving in Hotel > > Solaris need to feel welcome in order to want to say. Who cares what > > version of Solaris they happened to try first, give them a chance to > > figure stuff out. Gently directing questions to -help or another more > > appropriate list should be preferred, but if someone decides to answer a > > questions here and now, I don't see why not. > > I disagree, I suspect many people have unsubscribed because of the > unacceptable S/N ratio, and as a result we no longer have any good way > to reach those people. I feel that even if we came to a consensus on this, it would be difficult, if not impossible, to enforce. What about a low traffic opensolaris-announce mailing list, as an alternative for those times when you need to get a hold of the entire OSOL community? (There is a strong precedence for this in the Open Source community.) Cheers, Brian Gupta ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] This is not a Solaris helpdesk
On 8/15/07, Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Sean Sprague wrote: > > > Snapped off www.opensolaris.org 30 seconds ago: > > > > "Join dozens of lively discussion forums for conversations on almost any > > topic. You may wish to subscribe to opensolaris-announce, if you're a > > new member. Or join the fray in opensolaris-discuss. You can also join > > the conversation via IRC on irc.freenode.net." > > > > Needs a rewrite - especially "Or join the fray in opensolaris-discuss" > > IMO - its not a "fray" - its a targeted discussion forum. Newbies will > > actually get bugger-all from opensolaris-announce anyways. And > > "conversations on almost any topic" should be "conversations on any > > OpenSolaris-related topic". > > The subscribe link is broken for a start... > > I think we probably need a new page for people looking for install help, > then we can link to it from the appropriate places. I've drawn up a > list of potentially useful URLs, if people have any > suggestions/corrections, lets have 'em. > > http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=31 > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/advocacy/immigrants/ > http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/home/ > http://developers.sun.com/sxde/sys_req.jsp > http://forum.java.sun.com/forum.jspa?forumID=841 http://opensolaris.org/os/community/documentation/ http://www.genunix.org/wiki http://opensolaris.org/os/community/documentation/newbie_faq/ http://solaris-x86.org/documents/ http://www.blastwave.org/docs/s10u3_howto.html http://opensolaris.mynoteb00k.com/ http://www.solarisinternals.com/wiki/index.php/Solaris_Internals_and_Performance_FAQ/ -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is not a Solaris helpdesk
I forgot a few appropriate lists:: Usenet Solaris forum: - http://groups.google.com/group/comp.unix.solaris/topics Sun Managers for people who manage Sun Workstations and Servers: - http://www.sunmanagers.org/ Solaris-Users mailing list is part of the Solaris Users Group in Plovdiv, Bulgaria. It covers Sun Microsystems Solaris Operating Environment for SPARC and x86, also discusses Sun's hardware products: desktops and workstations, servers, storage and networking. - http://www.filibeto.org/sun/listrules.html#solaris-users%20rules On 8/15/07, Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Alan Burlison wrote: > > > OK, here's a first stab, not currently linked to from anywhere else on > > the site. > > > > http://www.opensolaris.org/os/newbies/ > > Updated with Brian's list of links. > > -- > Alan Burlison > -- > ___ > ogb-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is not a Solaris helpdesk
On 8/16/07, Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Proper googleable FAQs, guides, and tutorials will reduce the noise, not > > creation of other lists or unsubscription or whatever other hiding > > mechanism... > > We already have the first, we aren't creating any new lists and nobody > is hiding anything. All I am doing is making it easier for people to > find the existing forum for help. What exactly is the problem with that? I hate to say it, but the FAQs are not FAQs. We aren't taking the most frequently asked questions on opensolaris-discuss and posting them to the FAQ. In the ideal world, when ever someone asked a question, we would point them to the FAQ. If there is no entry in the FAQ, you would put an entry in the FAQ and then point them to the FAQ. > > P.S. just BTW: what do you mean by "OpenSolaris Content", isn't > > installation an opensolaris issue numero uno (#1)? > > General community discussion - proposals for new projects, suggestions > for things we should address as a community etc. Most everything > *except* installation questions. I think that I partly disagree with that. Project proposals go in requisite community groups. Things that we should do as a community is fine, but there are other avenues to reach people (like announce). It seems that if we start blowing off people, the problem will get worse, as people will be less likely to have their questions get answered, and the likelihood of them getting frustrated and going back to Linux/MacOS-X will increase. That said, I have made some minor suggestions on website-discuss that would relieve some of this, but I was told that we have to wait for a complete site redesign. (In particular, I wanted a link to the docs community homepage, next to the download icon on the top right of the page.) I would talk to Michelle about incorporating more newbie stuff on the docs homepage, and that would neatly resolve some of these issues.. I feel that www.opensolaris.org's homepage really needs to get a complete makeover as a user targeted website. (While still providing a link to a developer "homepage") (Maybe have a redirect, dev.osol.org, as well) I know there is a feeling of Solaris is for the elite, but if we want OpenSolaris to remain relevant, and leading edge, we need widespread adoption, and anything we can do to assist in that, would be helpful. (I might even say that marketing should hire someone to answer newbie questions full time.) > -- > Alan Burlison > -- > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] This is not a Solaris helpdesk
> You've made some good points - I try to do my bit - when I 'trip over' > features in Solaris I plonk them on my blog in a hope that maybe it'll > help others; I know a thing or two about UNIX but in terms of the > 'Solaris features' I'm very much a beginner. I appreciate that you blog them, but it will probably be better if we centralize this things.and post them in the wiki: http://www.genunix.org/wiki I am currently actively adding howtos to the howto section. Cheers, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] This is not a Solaris helpdesk
On 8/16/07, Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brandorr wrote: > > >> We already have the first, we aren't creating any new lists and nobody > >> is hiding anything. All I am doing is making it easier for people to > >> find the existing forum for help. What exactly is the problem with that? > > > > I hate to say it, but the FAQs are not FAQs. We aren't taking the most > > frequently asked questions on opensolaris-discuss and posting them to > > the FAQ. In the ideal world, when ever someone asked a question, we > > would point them to the FAQ. If there is no entry in the FAQ, you > > would put an entry in the FAQ and then point them to the FAQ. > I await your rewritten content. I'll be happy to post the changes for you. I am actually working on implementing a prototype of this, I just don't have something to present yet. (It will be self service, meaning that anyone can add a question to the FAQ, so that people can swing by and answer questions at their convenience.) > >>> P.S. just BTW: what do you mean by "OpenSolaris Content", isn't > >>> installation an opensolaris issue numero uno (#1)? > >> General community discussion - proposals for new projects, suggestions > >> for things we should address as a community etc. Most everything > >> *except* installation questions. > > > > I think that I partly disagree with that. Project proposals go in > > requisite community groups. > > And if there isn't one, or people don't know which one is appropriate? Fair enough, but I still think no matter what we do, Newbies will continue to post to osol-discuss. RTFM, is only a partial solution, as in today's world, how many people go to the manual when they install Microsoft Windows? Until the OpenSolaris installation process is as smooth, or smoother than installing MS-Windows, we are going to have to accept that there will be many people asking questions. > > Things that we should do as a community is > > fine, but there are other avenues to reach people (like announce). It > > seems that if we start blowing off people, the problem will get worse, > > as people will be less likely to have their questions get answered, > > and the likelihood of them getting frustrated and going back to > > Linux/MacOS-X will increase. > > You obviously misread what I wrote. Nobody is talking about 'blowing > off people'. I am talking specifically about observed behavior. I have seen many of the "helpful' posts that basically say, "Wrong place, go post on comp.unix.solaris" > > That said, I have made some minor suggestions on website-discuss that > > would relieve some of this, but I was told that we have to wait for a > > complete site redesign. (In particular, I wanted a link to the docs > > community homepage, next to the download icon on the top right of the > > page.) > > There's already a link in the LH sidebar. Yes, with many other links. There is a reason for those big icons at the top of the page. (They draw attention to very important links) > > I would talk to Michelle about incorporating more newbie stuff on the > > docs homepage, and that would neatly resolve some of these issues.. > Then you should start by becoming a member of that community, then you > can make the changes yourself. I am a member of the docs community, and plan to work to incorporate some of the links in this thread in the homepage. (I am a "contributer", not a community leader, so no edit access. Thus, I do most of my work at www.genunix.org/wiki, and then let Michelle know, so that she can link to it.) The main point was that we need to start directing newbies to docs, via the "ICON" at the top of the page. In the mean time, I will work to incorporate the content from this thread within the docs community. > > I feel that www.opensolaris.org's homepage really needs to get a > > complete makeover as a user targeted website. (While still providing a > > link to a developer "homepage") (Maybe have a redirect, dev.osol.org, > > as well) > > Fine, I suggest take this up on website-discuss. I will. > > I know there is a feeling of Solaris is for the elite, but if we want > > OpenSolaris to remain relevant, and leading edge, we need widespread > > adoption, and anything we can do to assist in that, would be helpful. > > (I might even say that marketing should hire someone to answer newbie > > questions full time.) > > I have *no* idea why you think Solaris is for the elite, I certainly don't. I have a strong sense, that many people feel that OpenSolaris.org is for developers not users. Personally
[osol-discuss] IBM to ship Solaris with x86 servers
IBM and Sun today announced that IBM will distribute the Solaris(TM) Operating System (OS) and Solaris Subscriptions for select x86-based IBM System x servers and BladeCenter servers to clients through IBM's routes to market. http://money.cnn.com/news/newsfeeds/articles/prnewswire/AQTH08016082007-1.htm -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Soft Partitions
Check http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/HOWTOs_and_Guides If that doesn't give you the info you need, then post a follow question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ On 8/16/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hello, > > I am new to opensolaris and am wanting to try and set up soft > partitions. I have been trying to read through various docs and am > just not grasping how it is done. > > I am using vmware and only a single disk. > > Can I let it auto partition or do I need to set up the partitions > manually leaving a large block of free space for soft partitions? > > Do I need to create just one large slice and then create a soft > partition and then create my default slices? > > I am also having a helluva time understanding solaris partitioning, I > am seeing 3 swap partitions which is just confusing me all the more. I > am not opposed to reading and would prefer it if possible. If someone > can point me in the direction of a good explanation of why it is set > up like this I would very much appreciate it. > > I know I am asking basic questions but if someone can just help get > going in the right direction I will do whatever it takes to figure it > out on my own. > > Thanks for any advice, > > Jon > > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Unix belongs to Novell - any impact for Solaris?
[b]Bruce Lowry, Novell Spokesman, Aug 2007[/b] "We're not interested in suing people over Unix," Novell spokesman Bruce Lowry said. "We're not even in the Unix business anymore." http://www.pcworld.com/article/id,135959-c,unix/article.html On 8/16/07, Al <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > [b]Darl McBride, SCO CEO, April 2005[/b]: > > "We have seen what Sun plans to do with OpenSolaris and we have no problem > with it. What they're doing protects our Unix intellectual property rights." > > [b]Jack Messman, Novell CEO, in November 2004 on Sun's plans to open source > Solaris[/b]: > > "We are going to be interested in seeing how they do that because we own > Unix. We own the copyrights and the patents." > > [b]Scott McNealy, Sun CEO, in November 2004[/b]: > > "There were hundreds of encumbrances to open sourcing Solaris. Some of them > we had to buy out, others we had to eliminate. We had to pay SCO more money > so we could open the code -- I couldn't say anything about that at the time, > but now I can tell you that we paid them that license fee to expand our > rights to the code." > > [b]Judge Dale Kimball, August 2007[/b]: > > "The 2003 Sun Agreement purports..."to amend and restate" a Software License > and Distribution Agreement, signed March 17, 1994, between Sun and Novell. > Id. Recitals. In the 1994 Sun Agreement, Sun obtained a license that included > certain UNIX System V technology. The 2003 Sun Agreement re-licenses the SVRX > technology licensed in the 1994 Sun Agreement and licenses additional SVRX > technology to Sun. Id. Ex. 10SCO did not contact Novell for approval > before executing the 2003 Sun Agreement or the 2003 Microsoft Agreement. And > Novell did not authorize either agreement." > > "...the court concludes that Novell is the owner of the UNIX and UnixWare > copyrights." > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Sun hardware to disappear?!?!
On 8/16/07, Giles Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > First we get the new T2 being GPL'ed. > > Now it looks like we will have IBM servers preloading Solaris. > > http://www.physorg.com/news106499717.html > > Is Sun planning to leave the hardware market? Jonathon Swartz said: "Despite having what's arguably the single biggest competitive advantage our systems business has ever had, we've separated out our microelectronics business - and told them to win on the open market, as well. We signed our first OEM agreement with Marvell, through which we'll be collaborating to take our networking advancements to the marketplace. More broadly, our microelectronics team is free to sell to our competition. For the record, we'd be thrilled to supply, for example, a Niagara blade to HP or IBM for their blade servers - as well as to the larger market of networking, storage, automotive and industrial applications. It's a commodity market, after all - vast, growing, and in search of differentiation." In a word, "No". -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Sun hardware to disappear?!?!
On 8/17/07, Kaiwai Gardiner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Fri, 2007-08-17 at 13:21 -0400, Brandorr wrote: > > On 8/16/07, Giles Turner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > First we get the new T2 being GPL'ed. > > > > > > Now it looks like we will have IBM servers preloading Solaris. > > > > > > http://www.physorg.com/news106499717.html > > > > > > Is Sun planning to leave the hardware market? > > > > Jonathon Swartz said: > > > > "Despite having what's arguably the single biggest competitive > > advantage our systems business has ever had, we've separated out our > > microelectronics business - and told them to win on the open market, > > as well. We signed our first OEM agreement with Marvell, through which > > we'll be collaborating to take our networking advancements to the > > marketplace. More broadly, our microelectronics team is free to sell > > to our competition. For the record, we'd be thrilled to supply, for > > example, a Niagara blade to HP or IBM for their blade servers - as > > well as to the larger market of networking, storage, automotive and > > industrial applications. It's a commodity market, after all - vast, > > growing, and in search of differentiation." > > > > In a word, "No". > > Hmm, so SPARC will have to actually compete rather than hiding under the > shadows of other divisions; maybe someone will take responsibility for > the abysmal SPARC performance which leaves it at the bottom of the TPC > benchmarks. T2 is pretty darn good especially considering it has on-die 10GigEthernet, and Rock should be phenomenal. Sparc has plenty of life in it beyond lecacy support. If Sun continues to push the multicore CMT trajectory, I could see some very interesting chips come out over the next 1-5 years. -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Newbie here with some questions.
Please ask questions like these on the opensolaris-help mailing list. You can find the subscription info here: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/discussions/ -Brian On 8/17/07, Daniel Atencio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I just ran into a little setback.Upon installation,one of the disks is not > being recognized by the system and when I tried to format it I get a disk not > recognized message.I then went on to do an auto select since the exact drive > is not in the list and it said that auto configuration had failed.So I don't > know what to do since the system is obviously seeing that there is a drive > and when I did an inquiry it showed: > > Vendor:NETAPP > Product:X235-SCHT5073F10 > Revision:NA07 > > I wonder if it's a drive firmware issue.Any ideas?I now have installed > Opensolaris but would like to use this drive as well... > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] HCL is pretty anemic...
I am putting together an x96 server, and almost every component I look at isn't listed on the HCL. (I'd prefer not to shop from the HCL) Is there a list of what has been tested and verified not to work? That would be a great help. Thanks, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Is it within the realm of feasible for OpenSolaris contributers to get a HW discount on Sun gear.
I think it would be great if we could get a good discount on one x86 and/or one Sparc Niagra server or workstation. (Of course I think it would be great) I am tired of trying to cram a bunch of different VMs on my laptop, and would like to be able to purchase a low end server running VMWare and be able to spin up a bunch of OpenSolaris VMs for testing and builds. I would then only use my laptop as a remote terminal, which means I could greatly extend my battery life, by taking full advantage of speedstep. (In the Sparc case LDOMs) Cheers, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] HCL is pretty anemic...
On 8/22/07, Tim Scanlon <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I've had good results with Tyan boards, with Opterons on them. The speeds > I've seen on them have been outstanding. Multi-cpu systems worked out of the > box with them too. I've heard got things about Tyan and AMD. (I have an old ASUS SK8N myself) > It's sort of important to look at what a manufacturer has been doing in the > past with multi-cpu systems now that multi-core systems are becoming more > common. Tyan has a decent track record with them allready. > > If speed is really important I'd go with Opterons, it's a nice combination > with Solaris, and they're capable of better performance than Intels are. > They're also more tuneable than Intel's are, and that's kind of nice to have > going on. So what do you think of this board? ;) http://www.tyan.com/product_board_detail.aspx?pid=496 16 cores and 64GB in 1U!! ($1500 for the barebones). (It's out of my personal budget). > It probably doesn't matter much now, but one hint with the HCL and x86 > hardware is to look for drivers for other versions of Solaris. I have used > Dell x86 drivers for Solaris 7 on Solaris 10 with no problem for instance, so > that's something you can potentially do when looking at hardware reuse. I assume this would only work for 32 bit systems? -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about SIGs for OpenSolaris?
On 8/22/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > What is a SIG? Special Interest Group. > > Why should we consider SIGs for OpenSolaris? > At present the only level of abstraction that we have in > the OpenSolaris community is that of communities. We > have communities for high level concepts (networking) > and for very specific products (zfs) as well as groups of > people (sysadmin). > What I would like for people to consider is to allow the > idea of SIGs to form within communities. Why should > a SIG form within a community rather than be a community > in its own right? Size. I see SIGs as being composed > of a smaller subset of people. For example, an approriate > SIG in networking might be ipfilter (;-) or email or routing. Does IP filter go in Networking or Security? > And in formalising the role of SIGs in OpenSolaris, I'd like > to suggest that people take pause to consider the current > structure of OpenSolaris into the various communities and > ask themselves if it is correct or is it just the only way to > map OpenSolaris into our existing structure? First instinct is to say it doesn't matter one way or another, as I seriously doubt we can change all four tires at the same time while we are jockeying for the pole position. (No pit stops for us I'm afraid) > In short, the current formation of OpenSolaris has largely > been to fit various projects inside Sun and not to model > groups of interested people. Agreed > For example, why shouldn't SMF be a SIG inside the > sysadmin community, as afterall, SMF is well and truely > in the province of system administration. Not so sure about this one, but I can see it. > Or where would someone go that wanted to work on VFS > and/or the interfaces that support filesystems in OpenSolaris? > Shouldn't there be a filesystem community that brings together > ZFS, UFS, CIFS, and many of the other filesystems as SIGs > inside it? Yes. > Why isn't there a developer community, that can be broken > down into kernel development, library development, tools, > build environment, etc, as SIGs? How about a user community as well? -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Adobe Acrobat for Solaris x86
On 8/23/07, Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Kaiwai Gardiner wrote: > > > *shrugs* As much as I would love to see Adobe listen, they don't listen. > > A company run by, quite frankly, arrogant pricks, are not going to > > listen to the lone voice in the woods - the best one can expect is for > > companies like Sun, Red Hat and Novell to donate money, setup a working > > group and develop complete replacements in an opensource manner. > > http://blogs.adobe.com/acroread/2007/08/launching_the_adobe_reader_on.html > > "It's time to get the ball rolling for the much awaited blog for Adobe > Reader on Unix platforms. The purpose of this blog is to provide a > platform for developers and the users of the product to share ideas, > experiences and feedback about the product for the benefit of everyone." > > Posted by Gaurav Jain on August 23, 2007 02:30 PM Thanks Alan! This is definitely an encouraging sign. I made a friendly comment on the blog. Hopefully if all Solaris x86 users could provide a nice post encouraging them to release a Solaris x86 version, things might go our way. (Do not bitch and moan to them, they know they dropped the ball). Spewing bile on this list, or on comment sections doesn't help. Everyone knows that the past is the past. Let's focus on the future. Cheers, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Summit Oct 13 - 14
On 8/23/07, Sara Dornsife <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Because we are at a university, we may not have the phone lines available. > We are investigating. We are also looking into video taping the sessions. We > can then post those after the event. If anyone has any other ideas of how we > can broadcast. Open IRC channel? Please let me know. Although there are many options for Linux or Windows, this is the only Open source software I could find that supports VOIP chatrooms, that might work with osol clients. http://sourceforge.net/projects/mumble/ If Linux and Windows clients are allowed, we can go with a commercial product like Teamspeak. (Interestingly enough these programs were written to cater to the gaming communities). > > I live in Austin, TX, so I know what you mean about the location. For > better or worse, there is a large concentration of developers in the Bay > Area and makes it a logical first choice. We would like to do these every 6 > months to plan for the next release. We will move it around so that > different people can participate in person. > Sara > > > Shawn Walker wrote: > On 23/08/07, Sara Dornsife <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > I am very pleased to announce the first OpenSolaris Developer Summit to be > held in the Bay Area on October 13 and 14th, 2007, sponsored by Sun > Microsystems. This Summit, held at University of California, Santa Cruz, is > not a conference with presentations or exhibitors, but an in-person, > collaborative working session to plan the next release of Project Indiana. > > I would like to hope someday that Sun might consider having one that > wasn't conveniently located near their offices, such as, I don't know, > the midwest :) > > It seems like every conference or convention is on the west or east > coast, which leaves us folks in the middle of the country or on the > opposite coast to wherever it is at rather annoyed. > > What options will be available for those of us unable to physically attend? > > > > ___ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Single sign on equivelent for OpenSolaris
On 8/24/07, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I am wondering whether anyone has thought about the > > possibility of OpenSolaris acting as a replacement > > for a Windows domain controller. Typically the > > response to this would be to use Samba but as we all > > know configuring samba as a PDC or BDC is an overly > > convoluted process well beyond the reach of many sys > > admins. > > > > In the past I was impressed with the ability to have > > single sign on across Linux, Mac and Windows platform > > using Novells 'Netware Client' to sign onto Novell > > Directory Services (eDirectory). Could we in the > > OpenSolaris community develop something similar to > > this? > > > > I am not proposing anything here, just asking if > > anyone has any ideas. > > You're basically looking at configuring an LDAP directory server which would > have to contain Microsoft-specific information, as it is found in Active > Directory. Actually it's not quite that simple. AD is Microsoft's tweaked combination of LDAP/DNS/Kerberos. (Tweaked meaning, proprietary.) One of the biggest problems is that you prety much need AD to run a Mocrosoft shop,with Exchange servers, SQL, etc. That said, Sun does make a SSO product called Identity Manager. It currently hasn't been open sourced, not has it been made no cost. (It's very expensive). Being that Sun has stated that all software will be open sourced soon, I personally am just waiting for this. (One thing that I am worried, is that it might need an AD server anyway). -Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Memory requirements to install Solaris
I think it's time we took this discussion to install-discuss. Please remove opensolaris-discuss from replies. Instead of requiring that we unpack to a RAM based miniroot, have we explored the option of mounting compressed filesystems on the CDROM, and using symlinks in the miniroot, when the system is under a certain amount of RAM. (Generally, compressed filesystems increase IO throughput, in exchange for CPU cycles. This is particularly true on "slow" storage media). I think it is possible that this option has not been explored, because there may not have been a supported compressed filesystem before the recent changes to ZFS. Thanks, Brian On 8/28/07, Sarah Jelinek <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Richard and All, > > Just a few comments inline... specific to the steps we took in the > Caiman installer related to this discussion. > > >>> Oh C'mon. 512Mb is not enough to run Windoze XP > >>> reasonably - even if > >>> you can actually install it. With 1Gb memory > >>> > >> DIMMs > >> > >>> around $50 (or > >>> less), expecting to run a state-of-the-art OS in > >>> 512Mb is "absolutely > >>> unacceptable". If you're serious about > >>> (Open)Solaris, then you're > >>> serious about your hardware. > >>> > >> We should never, under any circumstances, defend > >> regression. > >> > >> Regression is an error. A severe and serious error. > >> Dealing with regression has been one of the main > >> selling points of Solaris. If Solaris starts > >> regressing now, it will have lost one of the most > >> crucial competetive edges. > >> > >> > We didn't regress with Dwarf Caiman. We are within the existing memory > checks that the Solaris installer has had in them for some time. This is > our current requirements: > > 1. SXDE3 (Dwarf)- 786MB - we do exit out if the user doesn't have > enough memory. We tell them to go to the text based installer. Now, 768 > is a high limit for Dwarf. We know we can run under less memory, but not > on any reasonable boundary where we can lower this requirement at this > time. But, we are working on this. > > 2. SXCE - Interactive GUI - 768MB(same as it has been for a long time) > > 3. Text installer - windows based - 512MB > > 4. Console based text installer - > 256MB - its not quite 256MB any > longer. Not sure exactly the numbers though. > > >> We should also stop defending every bad decision and > >> hiding behind "engineering" for everything that just > >> plain isn't right: > >> > >> making that installer Java-based and Java-dependent > >> was just plain bad decision and it caused regression. > >> Rather than hiding behind claims that Java is great > >> and that it's "engineering", the responsible > >> person(s) should admit the error and fix it. > >> > > > > > With Dwarf and subsequent Caiman projects we have moved from the Java > based GUI to Gnome and C. This should help some, but it doesn't mitigate > all the size issues in the miniroot. > > No disagreement with most of that, except that I'm not sure I see > > increases in memory requirements (even for the duration of installation) > > as regression as such, even if they may a real obstacle. Unless of course > > working on a specified minimum configuration is a distro objective that was > > violated. > > > > I see a lot of tradeoffs here (ease of use, flexibility, speed, minimum > > hardware requirements, development resources needed to optimize the > > balance of the previous, etc). The present situation may suck, but a > > balance that would satisfy all interests may not be feasible. > > > > Or to put it another way, for whatever you want, what would you be > > willing to give up? :-) > > > > Part of the problem may be RAM-resident miniroot bloat. Seems to me > > that only volatile data _needs_ to live there; everything else could be > > on the installation media. However, optical media is slow in the face > > of a lot of seeks. Dividing miniroot space requirements into volatile > > data vs cache for performance might help; the latter could be built in > > increments based on available resources, so that a system with ample RAM > > could install very quickly, but a slimmer system would still install, if > > slowly. That is, divide the possible miniroot contents into multiple > > cpio (or tar, as you prefer) archives on the installation medium, grouped > > so the most benefit comes with the initial increments. Depending on > > how much RAM is available, load zero or more of those into the miniroot > > (over and above the skeleton needed to hold e.g. device files, symlinks, > > directories, config files needed during installation, etc); set $PATH so > > that those tools would be found first on the miniroot, and if not there, > > on fully-populated versions of the miniroot directories stored on the > > installation media. RPATH would be set in the executables to look for > > libraries similarly. > > > > > Actually, what you describe is what we do, partially. As part of the > work on Dwarf I separated out what nee
[osol-discuss] Is Sun's LDAP Directory server open source?
If so what consolidation is it part of? (I want to see how it compares to other open source directory servers.) Thanks, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The open Microsoft XPS document format ?
On 8/29/07, andrewk9 <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Microsoft's fight to lock in users is starting to seriously annoy me. Microsoft is doing what they think they need to do to survive. The computer industry is very fickle, and fortunes can change in an instant. Everybody who i is relevant in the computing industry tries to find ways to drive user lock in. It doesn't matter if you think they are good guys or bad guys. (Google (Gmail), Apple (Itunes), IBM (Mainframe, AIX, IDM), Sun (Sparc ABI, and all of their software, open or closed), Microsoft, Cisco, F5, basically every commercial website on the internet). (Another word for lock-in is stickiness.) It's just matter of who's the better kisser. (Microsoft isn't that good of a kisser) -Brian > Cheers > > Andrew. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Should B72 be here any day now?
On 8/30/07, James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I suppose it'd be possible to toss likely-broken bits out there > faster, as soon as the first untested WOS is built, but I'm not sure > who we'd be helping if we did that. Possibly yourselves. (If you ever want to move the smoke testing role into the community). Of course they wouldn't be pushed to the standard download sites, and would be aimed only at smoke-testers, who are part of the smoke "tasters" community. ;) Realistically I don't know how many people are interesting in smoke "tasting". :) So, it might not be worth the effort to push this into the community. Cheers, -Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris howtos, installation and customisation (WAS: Writing DVD +/-R D
I try to keep links to external sources of info in the FAQ. Also, I noticed that if you Google for "OpenSolaris FAQ", the FAQ I am working on comes up third on the list. Also, "OpenSolaris HOWTOs" search brings up an email that talks about the genunix howtos page. We are still figuring it out... (The FAQ is going through some review, but my plan is to have a link to it put on the opensolaris.org docs page, and the opensolaris.org download page.) One thing about good community driven docs, is that they generally will spread by themselves, especially with Google's page ranking algorithm. I don't really want to spend energy at this point getting the word out about the docs, because that will take care of itself as they become more useful, and the effort would be better spend working on them... (I don't have a lot of spare bandwidth at this point in time). Cheers, Brian P.S. - In anyone comes across any good externel docs content, feel free to send me or [EMAIL PROTECTED] an email. On 9/6/07, Douglas Atique <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > But it doesn't have to be a sun supported wiki - > > ANYBODY can do it. > > Completely agreed. My point in fact is that I would like to go to > opensolaris.org and see a link there saying e.g. "Resources" or "How to..." > that would link to a page with links to genunix.org/wiki (that I have just > learned, thanks Brian) and other sources of information. It's just a matter > of being able to easily locate this (externally contributed) information. > > -- Doug > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Books or documents for university students
I'm going to forward this to docs-discuss, as there is some material particularly written to address the needs of University students. -Brian On 9/7/07, Ganesh Hiregoudar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi All, > > Could you please suggest me which is the best book on open solaris for > beginners which we can give it to university students in India. Also any > good material which I can print and give it to students/Professors from > opensolaris.org? > Appreciate your response. > > Regards > Ganesh. > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris howtos, installation and customisation (WAS: Writing DVD +/-R D
> Yes, of course, Sun documentation is very good and I use it very often. But I > mean maybe some kind of Wiki, where people who get to know something > remarkable about Solaris (e.g. how you burn a DVD+R DL http://www.genunix.com/wiki is currently the closest you will find to what you are looking for. The opensolaris.org docs community makes regular use of this wiki: http://www.genunix.org/wiki You can find the, in-progress, new user FAQ here: http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/FAQ_Prototype And the beginnings of a guides and howtos section here: http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/HOWTOs_and_Guides Cheers, Brian > > -- Doug > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Virtual server farm (Free VMs) for use in OpenSolaris development and testing. (Any interest?)
It seems no one is providing this service to the OpenSolaris community. If I am correct in the fact that this service doesn't exist, and if there is enough interest, there is a very good chance that I will be able to find a way to this service available to the community. If you are interested, or know others that are interested, please speak up now. (I know I would be interested, if it meant I didn't have to maintain my own ratsnest server farm of obsolete Sun hardwarein my house.) :) Some of my thoughts on why this would be useful: 1) A place to test code against various OS builds. 2) Build box for compiling individual contributions. (e.g. - sfwnv packages) 3) Having available Solaris "machines" for upstream software providers to build and test Solaris packages. (IE: Giving the GNU maintainers their own VM to build, test and package their software on Solaris) 3) VMs for building and testing entire distros. 4) Multiple instances to compare behavior of different OS versions. 5) Instances where docs community members like myself can experiment with the OS to validate said procedures. 6) Instances to test OS features like zones. 7) Place for people to setup multiple instances to test routing and other networking features. 8) A place to test building and installing builds against VMWare ESX, for those that don't have access. 9) Provide a standardized hardware platform for testing 10) Lower barrier of entry for OpenSolaris development. (No need to find your own compatible hardware, and develop Solaris sysadmin/installation skills). (This is more for people who want to add apps and what not) 11) If you just want to play with an updated SXCE build, you can just play with it in a VM, before deciding to install it to native hardware. Possible other uses: - 1) Place for people to test iSCSI (Not sure if this is possible from within VMWare) 2) Place for people to test pNFS (Not sure if this is possible from within VMWare) 3) Potentially a place to test ZFS, but I'm not sure the feasibility (Not sure if this is possible from within VMWare) 4) If people need things like wikis, source repositories, etc, it will be easy enough to set that up for them. (Or let them set it up themselves) Cheers, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] [OT] Need a place to discuss off-topic stuff... Was: The next really really big thing. Was OT: Sun joins the dark side :-D
This was an interesting fork in the conversation that just stopped dead. Yes it wasn't OpenSolaris related, but to some it was an interesting diversion. I have proposed in the past an offtopic or lounge mailing list to give these types of conversation a place to play out, so they don't generate traffic on the main dev-lists, nor do they require people to stop conversations in midtrack. How about a new list opensolaris-lounge?? -Brian On 9/14/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Darren J Moffat wrote: > > > > Not on this please please, this has nothing what so ever to do with > > OpenSolaris. > > > Sorry. You're absolutely right. Usually I don't let myself get sucked > into this nonsense. I don't know > what came over me... > > max > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] User facing website prototype.
I have rented one Joyent accelerator for the purpose of putting up various prototypes of a user facing website/portal. (server: b1.brandorr.com) Please let me know if you are interested in assisting this project, and I will give you access. (Especially if you have MoinMoin experience.) Shawn Walker, and Shiv are interested in working on this also, but there is a lot to work out, so the more the merrier. Cheers, Brian P.S. - The Summit topics related to this are listed below. No User portal.. Opensolaris.org is aimed at developers: "As Sun is marketing/pushing Indiana, Solaris, and OpenSolaris, we are seeing many people that aren't developers coming to this site. As this is the first thing they see when they get here, I feel that this should be the logical location for a user oriented welcome page. I also propose that this welcome page is much simpler, as the current page is a bit overwhelming for newcomers. (Hard to find certain links) Developers would still have access to a developer homepage that is linked off the new homepage. (We might even setup a redirect: dev.opensolaris.org) Opening care and feeding of Infrastructure to non-Sun employees: -- Currently the Opensolaris.org infrastructure (www.opensolaris.org and the mailing lists being two example pieces of infrastructure) is completely maintained by Sun employees. This limits available resources. There are many of sys-admin types out in the community that are capable, and most likely willing, to help out. (As well as businesses that might be willing to fund contract employees to aid in this endeavor) Might we explore a path to opening Opensolaris.org's care and feeding to the greater community? -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] User facing website prototype.
On 9/24/07, Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brandorr wrote: > > > I have rented one Joyent accelerator for the purpose of putting up > > various prototypes of a user facing website/portal. (server: > > b1.brandorr.com) Please let me know if you are interested in assisting > > this project, and I will give you access. (Especially if you have > > MoinMoin experience.) > > Did you get a chance to follow up the mail I cc'd you on 21st August, > pointing to the proposals for the restructuring of the current website? > (http://opensolaris.org/os/project/website/website_restructuring/) The > whole purpose of that proposal is to make it easier to do what you are > trying to do. > > I also suggest we move this thread over to website-discuss. > > > Shawn Walker, and Shiv are interested in working on this also, but > > there is a lot to work out, so the more the merrier. > > > > Cheers, > > Brian > > > > P.S. - The Summit topics related to this are listed below. > > Unfortunately I won't be at the summit, and I haven't seen the topics > below on website-discuss, my comments are below. > > > No User portal.. Opensolaris.org is aimed at developers: > > > > "As Sun is marketing/pushing Indiana, Solaris, and OpenSolaris, we are > > seeing many people that aren't developers coming to this site. As > > this is the first thing they see when they get here, I feel that this > > should be the logical location for a user oriented welcome page. I > > also propose that this welcome page is much simpler, as the current > > page is a bit overwhelming for newcomers. (Hard to find certain links) > > > > Developers would still have access to a developer homepage that is > > linked off the new homepage. (We might even setup a redirect: > > dev.opensolaris.org) > > > > > > Opening care and feeding of Infrastructure to non-Sun employees: > > -- > > Currently the Opensolaris.org infrastructure (www.opensolaris.org and > > the mailing lists being two example pieces of infrastructure) is > > completely maintained by Sun employees. This limits available > > resources. > > > > There are many of sys-admin types out in the community that are > > capable, and most likely willing, to help out. (As well as businesses > > that might be willing to fund contract employees to aid in this > > endeavor) > > > > Might we explore a path to opening Opensolaris.org's care and feeding > > to the greater community? > > I've been trying to engage people for some time, and so far I haven't > had much of a response. As well as sysadmins we also need Java hackers, > but I expect they are pretty thin on the ground in this community... > > Anyone interested, please take a look at > http://opensolaris.org/os/project/website/ and post followups to > website-discuss. > > Thanks! > > -- > Alan Burlison > -- > > > -- Forwarded message -- > From: Alan Burlison <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > To: Pradhap Devarajan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Tue, 21 Aug 2007 10:31:08 +0100 > Subject: Re: [website-discuss] Proposal: Change homepage orientation towards > Solaris/OpenSolaris users. (vs. devs) > Pradhap Devarajan wrote: > > > I agree with Brain.. navigation in OpenSolaris.org is not user friendly ... > > major FOSS projects websites http://debian.org http://www.ubuntu.com/ are > > more user friendly.. If OpenSolaris.org is meant for developers, can we have > > a site http://users.opensolaris.org which will more towards end-users who > > are not developers. > > The aim is to break the current opensolaris.org monolith into smaller > webapps, so that different bits can be done by different people. I > posted this a while ago, but it didn't elicit all that much of a response: > > http://opensolaris.org/os/project/website/website_restructuring/ > > -- > Alan Burlison > -- Alan, I am trying to just get going with one piece of this, without having to reinvent the world in the whole process. I also don't agree with all of the website redesign goals/methods. In particular: - I don't think a consistent look and feel should be mandatory (Limits choices, and imposes development overhead, not to mention freedom of expression). - The current authentication method plan (http://opensolaris.org/os/project/website/website_restructuring/opensolaris_authentication.txt ) won't work for many of us, as LDAP is much ea
Re: [osol-discuss] Porting OpenSolaris To OLPC XO AMD Geode Laptops
Not happening. You only have 1G of storage. Solaris would need some
serious trimming to fit. (And maybe compression). With 256M of RAM it
would be crazy.. Here Linux really is the best choice. (The eee on the
other hand, might be doable).
On 9/28/07, nospam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) project had released XO Laptops for the public
> using G1G1 ("Buy 2 Get 1").
> One laptop will be sent to the buyer, another laptop will be sent to a child
> in developing country.
>
> Unfortunately the XO AMD Geode LX laptops is different from other laptops:
> 1. There is no BIOS inside the laptop.
> 2. There is no VGA/EGA/CGA mode.
> 3. Non standard boot procedure.
> 4. Nobody knows if it is possible to boot the laptop from external CD-Drive.
> 5. Ordinary / off-the-shelf OpenSolaris can't run on this laptop. Linux run
> on XO with patched/modified kernel.
>
> Is it possible to port OpenSolaris to XO laptops?
> Who can do this project?
> Thank you.
>
>
> This message posted from opensolaris.org
> ___
> opensolaris-discuss mailing list
> opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
>
--
- Brian Gupta
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Porting OpenSolaris To OLPC XO AMD Geode Laptops
On 10/1/07, Roland Mainz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Brandorr wrote:
> > On 9/28/07, nospam <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > OLPC (One Laptop Per Child) project had released XO Laptops for the
> public using G1G1 ("Buy 2 Get 1").
> > > One laptop will be sent to the buyer, another laptop will be sent to a
> child in developing country.
> > >
> > > Unfortunately the XO AMD Geode LX laptops is different from other
> laptops:
> > > 1. There is no BIOS inside the laptop.
> > > 2. There is no VGA/EGA/CGA mode.
> > > 3. Non standard boot procedure.
> > > 4. Nobody knows if it is possible to boot the laptop from external
> CD-Drive.
> > > 5. Ordinary / off-the-shelf OpenSolaris can't run on this laptop.
> Linux run on XO with patched/modified kernel.
> > >
> > > Is it possible to port OpenSolaris to XO laptops?
> > > Who can do this project?
> > > Thank you.
> >
> > Not happening. You only have 1G of storage. Solaris would need some
> > serious trimming to fit. (And maybe compression). With 256M of RAM it
> > would be crazy..
>
> Why ? I only have 256MB in my Ultra5 and crafted most of the
> ksh93-integration stuff on that machine. And disk space shouldn't be a
> big problem since much stuff can be trimmed, redundant stuff removed
> (e.g. the extra libc, 64bit stuff, includes etc.), Xserver linked
> statically etc.
I never said it's impossible. I said "it's not happening". I can not imagine
that someone would take on this project.
Basically with all the trimming you would need to do to fit, and the amount
of RAM modern browsers take to run, combined with the performance
characteristics of the device, it would be a lot of work for little benefit.
256MB is passable for a server, but not so hot for a day to day desktop.
(GUI apps: Browsing/flash video/javascript heavy apps/mp3s, OpenOffice,
etc).
Cheers,
Brian
>
> Bye,
> Roland
>
> --
> __ . . __
> (o.\ \/ /.o) [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> \__\/\/__/ MPEG specialist, C&&JAVA&&Sun&&Unix programmer
> /O /==\ O\ TEL +49 641 7950090
> (;O/ \/ \O;)
>
--
- Brian Gupta
http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] setup syslog to another server?
On 10/5/07, Richard L. Hamilton <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I thought it was as easy as setting the hostname > > "loghost" to point to the right machine. If you look > > at /etc/hosts, you should see the local host defined > > as "loghost". But then again, it's been many years > > since I've needed to do this. > > The default syslog.conf does use loghost; and > according to syslog.conf(4), if loghost exists and > has the same IP as one of the system's interfaces, it > defines the m4 constant LOGHOST, allowing conditional > expressions depending on whether one is on the loghost or not. > > AFAIK, the problems with the vanilla syslogd for remote logging > are that it doesn't offer enough control to separate out what > came from where (as the loghost), and (as either) it only uses > UDP, which means it can't handle a whole lot of clients without > dropping packets. > > An alternate implementation, syslog-ng (not included with Solaris AFAIK) > addresses those problems. However, the transition wouldn't be > painless - I think the configuration file format is incompatible, the > default configuration is very different, the logged message format > may differ some, and I'm not sure how well it integrates with Solaris. > There used to be some problems getting it to work on Solaris, but > I gather most of those have been taken care of, give or take the > differences in configuration and output. In other words, > I haven't tried to set it up myself, although I've seen a few systems where > someone did. We use standard syslog on the clients, and syslog-ng on the central server. The plan is to eventually move to syslog-ng clients, but there is alot to be gained by just upgrading the loghost. > There had been some questions once about whether syslog-ng would be > integrated into Solaris eventually; I don't know that they ever reached > a conclusion. I think someone needs to find the cycles to run with it. I'm pretty sure we could get enough people to vote for it, if someone would do the work. (Remember syslog-ng doesn't need to replace syslog. The packages can coexist if there is a need.) > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] user management in solaris
Personally, I do it the old school way (unless I am scripting, in which case I use the commands): 1) create an entry in /etc/passwd (using /usr/ucb/vipw) 2) run pwconv to create the /etc/shadow entry 3) passwd username to set initial passwd 4) Create homedir (Must match /etc/passwd) 5) Optional: Copy rc scripts into homedir 5) chown -R username:groupname homedirpath On 10/8/07, Ché Kristo <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > useradd - http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/man-cgi?useradd+1M > usermod - http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/man-cgi?usermod+1M > userdel - http://bama.ua.edu/cgi-bin/man-cgi?userdel+1M > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] user management in solaris
I skip the second part of vipw to save a little time. On 10/8/07, Matt Kolb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Oct 8, 2007, at 2:49 PM, Brandorr wrote: > > > Personally, I do it the old school way (unless I am scripting, in > > which case I use the commands): > > > > 1) create an entry in /etc/passwd (using /usr/ucb/vipw) > > 2) run pwconv to create the /etc/shadow entry > > Is this really necessary? vipw does the right thing, afaik step 2 is > not needed. > > ./mk > > -- > Matt Kolb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Academic Computing & Network Services > Michigan State University > > > > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Mail list owners: SpamAssassin implemented; Action recommended
Awesome!! Great job... One thing though Where am I going to go now to find cheap Chinese sneakers(shoes)? Cheers, Brian On 10/11/07, Eric Boutilier <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Basic spam filtering with SpamAssassin is now running on the > Mailman server. As a result, we recommend that mail-list owners > (moderators) reinstate "friendly" handling of non-subscriber > posts, as follows: > > - Go to the Privacy -> Sender Filters screen and change the >"generic_nonmember_action" option from reject or discard to hold. > > (In my experience, this is generally the preferred way for > mailing lists to handle posts by non-subscribers.) > > Of course some spam will still get through (to the moderation > queue) that you'll have to inspect and discard by hand, it > should now be very manageable. Plus: > > - With the recent upgrade of Mailman to version 2.19 came another >key improvement in spam handling: The moderation (held >messages) screen now has a option called "Discard all messages >marked Defer". Use this when all the remaining messages in the >moderation queue are spam. It'll discard them all at once. > > - We plan to further fine-tune SpamAssassin in the coming >weeks/months, reducing the amount of spam that gets through >even more. > > Eric > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Why disk partition method can affect Solaris OS bootable or not
I'm not sure that Solaris can be installed in an extended partition. (Something from recent memory makes me think that the installer doesn't support this). -Brian On 10/16/07, Tom Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Shawn, > > We wiped out anything on the hard disk first then partitioned the disk to > allocate spaces for Linux and Solaris. Solaris is installed after > re-partition but unable to boot somehow. We don't know why. Is the partition > method wrong or some other reasons? > > Tom > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some questions on new Sun Fire server
On 10/17/07, Ian Collins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Dennis Clarke wrote: > > > > This maillist and OpenSolaris.org have become the *defacto* home for the > > Solaris Community. I think you would be beating a dead horse to tell people > > to go away and go elsewhere and don't ask questions here. > > > > > If we carry on like this, this will become yet another Solaris help > desk. Don't forget Sun Solaris != OpenSolaris. There are better places > to ask. > > > Other maillists can be selective .. sure .. but the OpenSolaris-discuss list > > should be an open door policy for anyone that has anything to do with > > Solaris. > > > > > That is the the path to anarchy and people who want to discuss > OpenSolaris issues unsubscribing and going elsewhere. > > > How else do you think we will ever embrace people ? By telling them to take > > their stuff elsewhere ? > > > > > No, by pointing them to the most appropriate place, be that > opensolaris-help, a community list or one of the other sources of > Solaris help. Dennis/Ian, How I suggest handling these requests for assistance is to go ahead and reply to requests for help if you feel you can help, while ccing opensolaris-help in your response. I would also say in your response: "Please remove opensolaris-discuss from the cc list in any further responses to this thread" That said, I don't think Wendy will find alot of people with Video cards in recent model Sparc rackmount servers, so I think it is going to have to be a bit of trial and error, unless she has a support contract.. -Brian P.S. - "Please remove opensolaris-discuss from the cc list in any further responses to this thread" > Ian > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] solaris 10 zone and /tmp
I am not exactly sure what you are asking. Please elaborate. On 10/18/07, Laura Scallion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > was this actually released this summer? > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Apple's new focus on making server administration "easy peesy".
Hmmm.. first Apple gets ZFS, then they get certified as UNIX, now this.. It seems that they are going after Windows, Linux and Solaris all at the same time. http://blogs.zdnet.com/Apple/?p=955 -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Parallels vs Fusion?
What is the better Virt engine for Solaris? -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Parallels vs Fusion?
On 10/22/07, Claus Guttesen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > What is the better Virt engine for Solaris? > > Vmware's fusion does seem a tad faster than parallels. So I'd go for fusion. > > -- > regards > Claus Thanks! > > When lenity and cruelty play for a kingdom, > the gentlest gamester is the soonest winner. > > Shakespeare > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Parallels vs Fusion?
Ok.. :) One vote for Fusion, one fot for Parallels. Hmmm... On 10/22/07, Stephen Lau <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brandorr wrote: > > What is the better Virt engine for Solaris? > > > > > I wasn't able to get snv_73 to work successfully with Fusion on my > MacBook. It installed fine but never got anywhere past GRUB. It seems > to work fine under Parallels though. > > cheers, > steve > > -- > stephen lau | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | www.whacked.net > > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Will OpenSolaris work on a intel desktop Quad processor
Dennis, there are no quad core Opterons... (yet) On 10/24/07, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > I am finally biting the bullet and ditching my work machine - a 9 year > > old Ultra 10 - for a new system I thought I would go for the fastest cpu > > on the market. > > At the risk of getting into endless loops of debates about "fast" I just > have to ask why you think that is the fastest processor in the market? > > When you get it .. run the Radiance benchmark which is heavy number > crunching and then we shall see. Thus far no one and nothing can touch an > AMD Opteron running Solaris 10. > > see : http://www.blastwave.org/articles/BLS-0059/index.html > > > Dennis > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] [OFFTOPIC] Google is finally rolling out IMAP access.
http://gmailblog.blogspot.com/2007/10/sync-your-inbox-across-devices-with.html I know this is completely off topic... forgive me Cheers, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] I guess "the community" decided to go with my original suggestion?
Updated Usage Guidelines - version DRAFT 0.03 NOT APPROVED FOR USE The intent of this trademark and branding policy is to encourage compatibility among the various distros being developed within the OpenSolaris community. This compatibility is important to users, ISVs and developers; it encompasses both the concepts of "over time" and "across various distros". Being branded with one of the OpenSolaris trademarks implies that the item so branded meets some set of measurable requirements, and meets (or does not meet) certain levels of compatibility. The list of markings that follows is ordered from "most compatible" to "least". John's suggestion [edit] The OpenSolaris ___ Distro If your distro is constructed exactly and exclusively out of one of the OpenSolaris-Community ratified distro recipes, using the unmodified packages from the reference OpenSolaris repository, then you can use the OpenSolaris-xxx branded label associated with that recipe. Examples: The OpenSolaris GNOME Laptop Distro The OpenSolaris KDE Laptop Distro The OpenSolaris Enterprise Distro [edit] ___ - Built on the OpenSolaris ___ Distro If your distro is a strict superset of one or more of the OpenSolaris-Community ratified distro recipes, using the unmodified packages from the OpenSolaris repository for the associated OS.o recipes, then you can use the phrase "Built on", the branded labels associated with those recipes along with a required description of your additions to that recipe. Examples: Built on the OpenSolaris Core Distro with GNOME, KDE, WebServices and Java Built on the OpenSolaris Enterprise Distro with Clustering [edit] ___ - Built with OpenSolaris Technology If your distro uses a modified OS.o recipe, or if it uses a recipe that is not (yet?) ratified, or if you use packages modified from that found in the OpenSolaris repository, then you can use the "Built with" branding. Examples: The Plocher Model Train Appliance - Built with OpenSolaris Technology [edit] Other Items [edit] OpenSolaris The unadorned OpenSolaris name is reserved by the OpenSolaris Community to be used as the name of the OpenSolaris Community itself. It may not be used as the name of any particular distribution, product, service [edit] Derivative Code Any derivative of OpenSolaris Community code itself outside of the uses defined above is not entitled to use the OpenSolaris trademark in any way. [edit] Branding is not required Nobody is required to use the OpenSolaris trademark, it is a privilege, not a requirement. Alternatives [edit] Core = OpenSolaris * Compatibility is at the core of the OpenSolaris brand. The trademark OpenSolaris applies to a core[1] set of functionality that is required to exist in a distro. If your distro contains this unmodified functionality, and passes the OpenSolaris Compatibility test[2], then it is allowed to use the OpenSolaris trademark. Examples: * OpenSolaris - for a distro containing only the Core * Belinix OpenSolaris, Indiana OpenSolaris, ... - for distros that are supersets of the unmodified Core [edit] Parking Lot issues [edit] Parking lot item #1: Define Core We need to define what is in this Core. We don't need the definition right now, but we will before we can actually use the mark on a distro. For our immediate need, assume that this Core is less than all of Solaris10, and more than simply ON+bootloader+shell. Need to deal with edge cases such as "x64 doesn't use SPARC OpenBoot, PowerPC uses different/modified low level kernel files", yet all should be able to be in the Core [edit] Parking lot item #2: Define Compatibility Test Suite As above, presume that this is something like "did you build it with the Core recipe using the official OpenSolaris packages?", but with actual for the actual behaviors. [edit] Parking lot item #3: Need guidelines for devicee and appliances [edit] Parking lot item #4: Enthusiest usage What about Business cards, T-Shirts and other enthusiast usage? [edit] Parking lot item #5: Other usage What about Usergroups, Foundations, tradeshow groups, training and consultants? On 10/26/07, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Brandorr wrote: > > It seems this discussion is not leading anywhere. And Sun is doing > > what Sun is going to do. > > So, lead it where you want it to go. Make a proposal! > > Don't just sit there and complain. > > > I'll tell you why. It's a falicy, OpenSolaris is actually the more > > valuable brand at this point. > > Glad you think so. And, maybe to you, it is. All the more reason for > you to suggest how you think we should use it! > > You obviously don't like my suggestions: > > 1) Don't wish to use the name /.*OpenSolaris.*/ ? > no problem, do
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] I guess "the community" decided to go with my original suggestion?
On 10/26/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 26/10/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 10/26/07, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Brandorr wrote: > > > > It seems this discussion is not leading anywhere. And Sun is doing > > > > what Sun is going to do. > > > > > > So, lead it where you want it to go. Make a proposal! > > > > > > Don't just sit there and complain. > > > > > > > I'll tell you why. It's a falicy, OpenSolaris is actually the more > > > > valuable brand at this point. > > > > > > Glad you think so. And, maybe to you, it is. All the more reason for > > > you to suggest how you think we should use it! > > > > > > You obviously don't like my suggestions: > > > > > > 1) Don't wish to use the name /.*OpenSolaris.*/ ? > > > no problem, do what you want... > > > > > > 2) Wish to use it, and are "compatible"? > > > Use "___, an OpenSolaris Operating System" or > > > "Compatible with OpenSolaris" > > > > > > 3) Wish to use it, and aren't "compatible"? > > > Use "Built on OpenSolaris" or > > > "Built with OpenSolaris Technology" or > > > other phrases that don't imply compatibility. > > > > > > so again I ask you - please make a counter proposal. Be part of > > > the solution! > > > > Proposal: No distro will be named OpenSolaris. The definition of > > OpenSolaris will not be changed just to suit Sun's marketing needs. I > > First of all, this isn't about suiting "Sun's marketing needs." This > is about meeting user expectations and the needs of the OpenSolaris > community. Having a reference distribution is about meeting user > expectations. Having it named OpenSolaris is about meeting user > expectations. It is 100% about Sun's marketing needs. To think otherwise is completely naive > > know this isn't a discussion of what is and isn't Sun's prerogative, > > but you asked for a proposal, and I am asking Sun *NOT* to do > > something, and I feel that a counterproposal should have a viable > > alternative. Part of that counterprosal is a name that works. > > Sun is not involved here other than being owner of a trademark and > asking the community to help define the usage guidelines. Really? Sun is basically trying to figure out how to call their distro OpenSolaris. When I say Sun's distro, I mean the distro that was speced out, prototyped and developed (for most of it's life at this point) behind Sun firewalls. This distro does have proprietary closed source bits. (Last I checked they haven't been removed yet). Sun has made no indication that "Open"Solaris will be 100% open source, even though article II of the constitution states that any OpenSolaris software must be 100% opensource. It's as much a Sun distro as SXCE is. It's also just as much OpenSolaris as SXCE is. > > How about naming Sun's new distro "SolarisNG"? > > Sun doesn't have a distro; the community has a distro. What Sun distro > are you talking about? Project Indiana is a *proposed* distribution by > members of the OpenSolaris community, many of which happen to work for > Sun. > > > > > Why doesn't someone > > > > > > Why don't *you*? What do *you* want? Not, what do you think someone > > > else might want... > > > > I want what everyone else wants. I want to belong to an inclusive open > > source community, where decisions aren't driven by Sun's undisclosed > > business needs. > > > John's proposal, as I understand, is that only people/teams that can > > use the OpenSolaris trademark as a standalone brand, are people/teams > > that make a product that only consists of Sun's binaries. > > Wrong. You need to get this idea that Sun is the one behind this; > they're not. It's just saying that only the distribution designated as > the reference distribution *by the OpenSolaris community* would be > called OpenSolaris. Huh? If not Sun and Sun management, then whom? > The community has the ability to through communities to get a vote to > happen to change what the reference distribution is. In addition, > there is nothing that says Sun has to be the one to produce the > binaries. > > > If the decision to use OpenSolaris as a distro name is for Sun or > > noone, then I'd rat
[osol-discuss] Voice your opinion on whether the Indiana distro project should be called "OpenSolaris"
At the heart of it is the questions, "Should the OpenSolaris brand/trademark refer to a runnable OS?", and "If, so, do we limit to distros that are binary copies of the Indiana distro?" The official discussion is happening on [EMAIL PROTECTED] To post you will need to subscribe by sending an email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Name Change?
On 11/1/07, John Sonnenschein <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Since Murdock and the rest of Sun's marketing department decided to > stab the community in the back by defining by executive fiat what > exactly "OpenSolaris" meant, perhaps it's time to rename what the old > bits used to be. > > Anyone on OGB or other committees, what's the likelihood we can > reclaim ON et al. with a new name to allow people like Nexenta to > continue to be part of the community. > > Sun can call their distro OpenSolaris if they like, but perhaps the > solution to keep them happy and not anger and split the community is > to ignore "OpenSolaris" as being the Sun Microsystems product it is, > and call $foo the community and the code It will be tricky. OpenSolaris.org isn't a legal entity that can register trademarks, we would need some organization to register them for us. (Probably a new $foo foundation). Since we'd have to spend money to incorporate, and file trademarks, we would have to shell out a few thousand dollars, which would probably have to come directly from personal donations. (I figure 40 x $100 would be enough to get it going.) That said I am tentatively in favor of starting a $foo foundation, and registering $foo.org, and filing for $foo trademarks. I propose that we send a proposal to the OGB to establish an independent foundation. -Brian P.S. - If Sun is willing to transfer the trademarks to a non-profit foundation, we can drop the $foo name. > comments? > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Name Change?
On 11/1/07, Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John Sonnenschein wrote: > > Since Murdock and the rest of Sun's marketing department decided to > > stab the community in the back by defining by executive fiat what > > exactly "OpenSolaris" meant, perhaps it's time to rename what the old > > bits used to be. > > > > Anyone on OGB or other committees, what's the likelihood we can > > reclaim ON et al. with a new name to allow people like Nexenta to > > continue to be part of the community. > > > > Sun can call their distro OpenSolaris if they like, but perhaps the > > solution to keep them happy and not anger and split the community is > > to ignore "OpenSolaris" as being the Sun Microsystems product it is, > > and call $foo the community and the code > > You'll have to come up with a completely new name (not just NetSolaris > or FreeSolaris) unless you can convince Sun management to allow use of > a derivative of the Solaris trademark. Correct, the goal of this would be to find a trademark, that can be used as the $foo community sees fit. > Once you have that name, doing a trademark search to make sure it's not > infringing someone else's trademark is (if I recall correctly) a 4-6 > digit number of US dollars, depending on how many jurisdictions you want > to search in.If you find a conflict with another trademark, then it's, > stop/rinse/repeat, costing another iteration of the search fees, until > you get a good one. Let's assume for a minute that the Trademark is filed in the US. (I know that's not perfect, but it is a starting place). If you pay outside council to do the search, and file the applications, it will cost many thousands of dollars. If you do it yourself, the trademark search is free. (And all the lawyers will do is search the USPTO website anyway). Also, filing a trademark application does not require an attorney, and costs ~$700 per application to file. Add to that the costs for filing with the IRS for a non-profit corporation, and you are going to get close to $4-5K. (This number assumes it's an all volunteer organization, and that group does all of it's own work.) > So is it possible? I don't know why not. Is it going to be cheap or > easy? Probably not. I agree that it won't be cheap or easy, but it doesn't need to be as expensive as people are thinking. The much easier route would be for Sun to back away from this divisive decision to bypass the existing "democratic process". If anyone wishes to pursue/lead this, I can help/advise on the trademark side, as I have done a lot of research to prepare for the Trademark and Naming/Branding Development project in the Advocacy CG. (BTW - I must say the Internet is awesome... this wouldn't have been possible 10-15 years ago.) Cheers, Brian P.S. - The fact is that this will most likely not get off the ground, unless there is a large outswelling of support from within the community. > -- > -Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Name Change?
On 11/1/07, Jim Grisanzio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > John Sonnenschein wrote: > > I'm relatively sure I did name him, it's Murdock that betrayed the > > community with that announcement the other day so I'm going to place > > the blame at his feet. > > > Your comments were unprofessional. It's ashame we are using this type of > rhetoric to undermine each other. I don't agree with how the Indiana > team has communicated any of this, While I agree with your pronouncement, most of us volunteers get emotional from time to time, and will apologize if we get out of line. (When I say volunteers, that includes Sun volunteers). The man is stating his feelings. He did not insult Ian as far as I can see, nor did he grossly mis-characterize the situation. (He probably should tone down his rhetoric if he wants to be taken seriously though.) Jim, you have to admit from a non-Sun point of view, it does seem that Ian did talk about doing everything via community process, and then at the last minute made a pronouncement, presumably by pulling rank within Sun, vs getting greater community buy in. That is the perception, for better or worse. > but the bottom line is that the OGB > has been silent and the Members have been silent, too. I certainly haven't been silent. When it became clear that this was going to be dictated to the community, I and a number of others raised our concerns. (I even raised my concerns about other distros, at the summit, during the naming session). I also raised my concerns the other day, when it was let slip that the plan was to call Indiana OpenSolaris from the first developer preview, without community buyin. At that time it was stated by Sun's community representative for trademarks and branding (SaraD) that this would be resolved through community process. Thus the Trademark and Branding project/discussion began, and was continuing to make progress until yesterday, when the "OpenSolaris label" was unilaterally slapped onto Indiana. As for the OGB, they haven't been silent, I see that they have been raising concerns at every turn down the road. (I for one didn't realize who was/wasn't OGB members, as they didn't speak with one voice). As I understand, it was only recently that they were able to establish any contact with upper level Sun management. (If I understand this happened only in the past month or so). Cheers, Brian P.S. - Funny thing is, this is the most united I have seen the community in the 8 months I've been involved. ;) Pretty much the only people who don't have an issue with the branding process are Sun marketing and a few people defending them. P.S.S. - It also seems that the OGB is getting ready to finally take a stand on behalf of the greater community. :) > Jim > -- > http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Name Change?
On 11/1/07, Matt Kolb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 1, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Brandorr wrote: > > P.S. - Funny thing is, this is the most united I have seen the > > community in the 8 months I've been involved. ;) Pretty much the only > > people who don't have an issue with the branding process are Sun > > marketing and a few people defending them. > > As one of those members of the "silent majority" I thought I'd better > speak up now (thus removing myself from the silent majority...boy, > this is confusing already). > > I am a user of the OpenSolaris bits, and have yet to contribute any > code back to the project. I am not Jörg, nor Martin, nor Roland, > etc. I am just a guy using this code, to run production services at a > large University, and I have been using them in some capacity since > b14. I have no issue with the way that Mr. Murdock et al are handling > this. I don't want to be lumped into the "I'm-not-a-sun-employee-and- > I-hate-this-plan" side of this fight. I don't have a ton to say about > this issue, but I want to make it clear, that there are probably more > than a few people who feel the same way that I do as well, who are in > a similar position. Thank you Matt! This is good. More people need to stand up and make their opinions known. This is a key and pivotal sign of health for the OpenSolaris community. I do have one question for you. Do you consider OpenSolaris to be a "Sun project"? (I will add there are also those who don't care about naming.) Cheers, Brian > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re: [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 11/1/07, Derek Cicero <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > >> Joerg Schilling wrote: > >>> This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level > >>> of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris". > >> The Linux world asserts that this is a feature. Do you see it as a > >> bug or a feature for OpenSolaris? > > > > The OpenSolaris community is not in a fight, so I would like to see > > that there is a help on www.opensolaris.org on this topic. > > > > There is more than one distro, so I would like to see something like > > a "get Opensolaris" page that explains the background. We already > > have something similar in the "download" section. > > Each distro has their own site (many courtesy of Genunix) where they can > explain the specifics of what they offer in detail. Our downloads page > has pointers to each of those sites. > > I don't think we need to add every distro to the os.org home page > anymore then we'd put every distro on the Nexenta home page. Why not? Is there something special about Sun's distro, that gives it the right to sit on the homepage? Is it more functional than the other distros? More complete? More stable? Or is it that it's just because it is a "Sun distro" that Sun is implicitly buying advertising space on the homepage? (And usurping the community's name for it's distro in the process). > > Derek > > > > Jörg > > > > > -- > Derek Cicero > Program Manager > Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division > ___ > advocacy-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/advocacy-discuss > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] screwdrivers - Re: [advocacy-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 11/1/07, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joerg Schilling wrote: > > This is also a good example as "gimme a screwdriver" has the same level > > of incompleteness as "gimme OpenSolaris". > > The Linux world asserts that this is a feature. Do you see it as a > bug or a feature for OpenSolaris? > > If it is a bug (as I believe), how do we fix it? John this reads as if you believe the existence of Nexenta, Shillix, MartUX and Belenix are bugs? If so, I don't think it's the best way to get your point across to Joerg. ;) > If you don't think it is a bug, then we will have to agree to disagree. > I don't believe this disagreement is necessarily fatal to our ability to > work together. John, in our trademark discussions you stated that OpenSolaris should not be used as a standalone noun. As in Joerg's screwdriver analogy. Am I missing something. -Brian > >-John > ___ > trademark-policy-dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Name Change?
On 11/1/07, Matt Kolb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 1, 2007, at 3:32 PM, Brandorr wrote: > > > On 11/1/07, Matt Kolb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> On Nov 1, 2007, at 3:15 PM, Brandorr wrote: > >>> P.S. - Funny thing is, this is the most united I have seen the > >>> community in the 8 months I've been involved. ;) Pretty much the > >>> only > >>> people who don't have an issue with the branding process are Sun > >>> marketing and a few people defending them. > >> > >> As one of those members of the "silent majority" I thought I'd better > >> speak up now (thus removing myself from the silent majority...boy, > >> this is confusing already). > >> > >> I am a user of the OpenSolaris bits, and have yet to contribute any > >> code back to the project. I am not Jörg, nor Martin, nor Roland, > >> etc. I am just a guy using this code, to run production services > >> at a > >> large University, and I have been using them in some capacity since > >> b14. I have no issue with the way that Mr. Murdock et al are > >> handling > >> this. I don't want to be lumped into the "I'm-not-a-sun-employee- > >> and- > >> I-hate-this-plan" side of this fight. I don't have a ton to say > >> about > >> this issue, but I want to make it clear, that there are probably more > >> than a few people who feel the same way that I do as well, who are in > >> a similar position. > > > > Thank you Matt! This is good. More people need to stand up and make > > their opinions known. This is a key and pivotal sign of health for the > > OpenSolaris community. > > > > I do have one question for you. Do you consider OpenSolaris to be a > > "Sun project"? > > > In exactly the same way I saw mozilla as a Netscape product (which > means: no. I never felt like Marc Andresen, or Netscape had some kind > of death grip on mozilla). I don't feel that way about OpenSolaris > either. The difference is that Netscape created a standalone foundation (non-profit org). They also didn't name the new community OpenNetscape. They named it Mozilla and let a community develop with the new identity. Next the Mozilla foundation did not name their products Mozilla. They named them Sea Monkey, Thunderbird, Firefox, Penelope, Bugzilla, Filezilla, etc.. and when there are forks they even allow those forks to sit on Mozilla infrastructure. Netscape never gave Mozilla a product and dictate what it was to be named. Cheers, Brian P.S. - I think that Mozilla may have had a product named "Mozilla something" at some point. > I think it's awesome that all of these Sun employees are spending > their time (work and non-work) on this project. Don't get me wrong, > I'm not totally naive. I mean, I've seen IBM's strategy in this > space: "hire the people who are doing the work in the opensource > space, then assign them to it full time, then tell them what to do, > thus driving the project." I have to admit that makes me a little > nervous, but I haven't seen anything to date here in the OpenSolaris > community that makes me feel like that's happening at Sun in some kind > of subversive way (who knows, maybe it is, but I have much more faith > in Mr. Schwartz than I did in ye ole McNeeley). I would not say I trust either of them any more or less. I would just say that Jonathon has a better grasp on the new business trends. (I have no opinion, other than if Jonathon is supporting Ian in this unilateral naming action, then I don't trust that he fully supports an independent OpenSolaris community). > I don't know, until very recently, it seemed like this community "felt > right." Right now though, brotherly love is certainly being put to > the test on a few of these threads. Yep, it seemed "right" up until the moment that Sun(Ian) took unilateral action to name their distro OpenSolaris, without following the existing community procedures to get signoff. (Which they, most likely, easily could have gotten). > ./mk > -- > Matt Kolb <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Academic Computing & Network Services > Michigan State University > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Democracy and open source - nit - Re: Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 11/1/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 01/11/2007, Menno Lageman <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > John Plocher wrote: > > > Brian Gupta wrote: > > >> In other words, Ian seems to have decided that democracy is a bad way > > >> to run an open source project, and wants to install himself as > > >> "benevolent dictator". > > > > > > OpenSource efforts are invariably meritocracies. > > > > > > Those that /do/, lead. > > > > > > Ian and the OpenSolaris Project are out there /doing/. They > > > chartered a Project to do this, found several CGs to endorse > > > their vision, and have just delivered the first distro built > > > by the community out of the community's source code. > > > > I don't mind them /doing/. In fact, having just tried the LiveCD on a > > recent laptop, I'm fairly impressed with their product. What I object to > > is the fact that the *project* Indiana seems to have unilaterally taken > > possession of the name OpenSolaris, and even the homepage of > > opensolaris.org as if there weren't any other OpenSolaris distributions. > > Should we accuse Ubuntu.com of taking possession of the name since > they don't list the other Ubuntu-based distros on their homepage? > > Is Mark Shuttleworth evil for making decisions about Ubuntu without > consulting the community? Arguably, Ubuntu is either a "Linux distro", or a "DebianLinux distro". In either case, a new name was chosen for the distro. Ubuntu is not known as simply "Linux" or simply "DebianLinux", so you analogy is flawed in my opinion. > Ah, double-standards... > > -- > Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst > http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ > > "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all > junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics > are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 10/31/07, John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Martin Bochnig wrote: > >> This is like calling the automobiles built in the BMW Factory "BMWs". > > > > Only when considering the 2nd layer (the distro-creating projects and > > associated ones, rather than OS/Net src base maintainers). > > That is exactly what I am doing. I'm NOT trying or intending to associate > the name OpenSolaris with simply the OS/Net src base... > > > Then the OS/Net sources should not have the identical name "OpenSolaris" > > any longer. > > Where is the OS/Net consolidation currently being named "opensolaris"? > I agree with you - if it is, then it should be changed. > > The community name is Nevada. Sometimes spelled "nv" > The common name is either ON or OS/Net. > The BFU image is snv_76 or nv_76 > Inside Sun, it was called ON; sometimes "the WOS". > The name "Solaris" was always used for the complete system that > was sold to users; Solaris always included a GUI desktop, utilities, > nameservers, routing and email daemons, etc etc etc. > > > If you want to be FullyOpen, then you may have to accept this. > > Being a FullyOpen community member, I accept that others in the > FullyOpen community may do things to which I disagree. FullyOpen > does not mean "everyone has a veto". It also does not mean "every > decision is made by consensus". Sometimes people see a need, and > go on and fill it, whether or not others agree with them... > > > And honestly: Do you understand / consider the existing distro projects > > as hostile competition, rather than as (positive, supporting) part (and > > partially also parts-supplier) of the whole ONE ? > > I see them as being positive, value added and supporting alternatives > to a community that is focused on providing a best-of-breed generalized > reference distro; however, they are NOT the primary focus or design > pattern for the majority of the community. > > > That's almost pretty much a joke, given that > > I thought about using Ford instead of BMW in my analogy, but I didn't > because I don't like Fords. I should have, though, because then I > could have concluded by saying > > Of course, custom car makers like Ferrari, Lotus and > Rolls Royce don't consider Ford to be a competitor > because their customer base simply doesn't buy Fords. > > I consider MartUX, SchilliX and Nexenta to be similar to those > boutique automobile builders - they are what you install and use > if you have requirements that are not being met by the Fords of > the world. And, you know what? Many people use Ford or Chevy > engines in their customized vehicles - Ford is also a pretty > large parts retailer too. Now you are telling another $foo distro maker, that all the other $foo distro makers that they are marginal $foo players. And that only Sun can make a real $foo distro? Am I misinterpreting your statement? >-John > ___ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
On 11/1/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 01/11/2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > >Sorry, but that would not be true. Indiana is the result of work from > > >more than just Sun folks. It includes ksh93 for example, and it > > >includes efforts by other non-Sun affiliated folks as well. Calling it > > >Sun OpenSolaris would be inaccurate. > > > > > > What bits does Indiana include which are not Sun originated which are > > not also found in say, SXCE? (I.e., ksh93 and caiman do not count) > > That seems like arbitrary criteria. It seems will have to agree to disagree. How about this one. Sun Solaris contains bash, gtar, gzip, etc. Does that make it not Sun Solaris? RedHat Enterprise Linux, contains bash, gtar, gzip, etc. Does that not make it *RedHat* Enterprise Linux? I don't see what there is to disagree about. Making these kinds of analogies only hurts your credibility. It seems you are making up arguments to justify your position that OpenSolaris=Indiana, and that it is not Sun/Ian Murdock/Sun Marketing execs unilaterally making this decision. (BTW - Just because you happen to agree with the decision doesn't mean you are making it either.) Fact is going into the Summit, I was for it also, but the heavy handedness of how Sun's OpenSolaris marketing team is handling the Indiana naming process, has turned me off on the whole idea of OpenSolaris = Indiana. Cheers, Brian > -- > Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst > http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ > > "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all > junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics > are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall > ___ > trademark-policy-dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Even those in favor of Indiana==OpenSolaris feel there should be a vote. Let's focus.
On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The team responsible (Ian and Sara) for this divisive action have > > actually been ridiculing those who don't subscribe to their world > > view. This cavalier attitude is doing nothing put inflaming this > > issue. > > I don't believe that to be true. Please show me precise references to > where they have met any definition of "ridicule" in their > communication to anyone in this community. I suggest you choose more > accurate and less inflammatory descriptions of actions taken. Ridicule - This is a rhetorical tactic which mocks an opponent's argument, attempting to inspire an emotional reaction (making it a type of appeal to emotion) in the audience and to highlight the counter-intuitive aspects of that argument, making it appear foolish and contrary to common sense. This is typically done by demonstrating the argument's logic in an extremely absurd way or by presenting the argument in an overly simplified way, and often involves an appeal to consequences. If the team in question disagrees with this characterization of some of their statements, I would be happy to take it up with them. > -- > Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst > http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ > > "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all > junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics > are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Even those in favor of Indiana==OpenSolaris feel there should be a vote. Let's focus.
We all need to put our differences on naming aside to focus our energy on trying to give Sun an opportunity to address and acknowledge the community's disapproval. For me this is the biggest concern. Whether we are for or against anyone's naming proposal, the perception among the OGB and the members is that Sun chose a less than desirable method of making it's wishes reality. If we are to hope to have Sun treat as a community we need to support the OGB's efforts, in finding an amicable resolution to this immediate firestorm, so that we can reengage Sun in finding a solution that the community as a whole can find acceptable. There have been some drastic options put on the table, as the OGB does not have much recourse, unless Sun steps up to the plate. The team responsible (Ian and Sara) for this divisive action have actually been ridiculing those who don't subscribe to their world view. This cavalier attitude is doing nothing put inflaming this issue. At this point, I feel the Project Indiana leadership group is out of control, and out of touch with the community. The OGB needs to address this with the highest levels of Sun leadership. Cheers, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Let's focus. (2nd Draft)
Apologies to everyone for draft one. Sending it was a mistake. (I realized that without letting bygones be bygones, we can not make forward progress, and my statements were only adding fuel to the flames). We all need to put our differences on the actual naming policy aside to focus our energy on trying to give Sun one last opportunity to address and acknowledge the community's and OGB's disapproval. For me this is the biggest concern. Whether we are for or against anyone's naming proposal, the perception among the OGB and the members is that Sun chose a "less than desirable" method of making it's naming wishes reality. If we are to hope to have Sun treat as a community we need to support the OGB's efforts, in finding an amicable resolution to this immediate firestorm, so that we can reengage Sun in finding a solution that the community as a whole can find acceptable. There have been some drastic options put on the table, as the OGB does not have much recourse, unless Sun steps up to the plate. In my opinion I would say that anything less than complete removal of all OpenSolaris branding on Indiana by the end of today, can be considered a failure, as each extra day that it is there on the website only exacerbates the perception, that discussion is pointless, and the outcome is inevitable. Cheers, Brian -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Does Project Indiana have a logo ?
"Flying Pig" SaraD has the graphics. ;) On 11/2/07, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I was wondering if the Indiana pre-release has any sort of graphical logo or > if simply "Indiana Pre-Release" was correct? Or maybe "Indiana Beta Rev > 0.1" or similar. > > Anything at all or shall I make something up ? > > - > Dennis Clarke > > ___ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Let's focus. (2nd Draft)
On 11/2/07, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > In my opinion I would say that anything less than complete removal of > > > > > all OpenSolaris branding on Indiana by the end of today, can be > > > > > considered a failure, as each extra day that it is there on the > > > > > website only exacerbates the perception, that discussion is pointless, > > > > > and the outcome is inevitable. > > > > > > > > Please define exactly what you mean by branding. Do you mean any usage > > > > of the trademark whatsoever? (I would think not). > > > > > > > > Do you mean it can't be part of the distribution name? > > > > > > > > What specifically do you mean? > > > > > > > > If you literally mean remove all branding, you're being unfair as > > > > other distributions already use the branding in many different ways. > > > > > > I meant that it should not be named with OpenSolaris. Nor should it be > > > claimed that it is the community distro. > > > > So, specifically, you do not want the *name* to contain the trademark. > > > > i.e. > > > > It cannot be "XX TradeMark". > > > > It could be, however, "Project Indiana, an OpenSolaris-based community > > distribution" which is the same way Belenix, et al. are sometimes > > described. > > > > Am I correct? > > > > Obviously you may not agree with the community part but that is your > > personal viewpoint. > > For clarification: Project Indiana should not be named with > OpenSolaris as part of its *NAME*. Nor should it be claimed that it is > *THE* community distro [until such time us a naming and branding > policy can be finalized.] ... and ratified by the community and Sun. > > I did not suggest that Indiana be held to a different standard than > other OpenSolaris distros. > > -Brian > > P.S. - It is still "a community distro", as a Sun distro still > qualifies as a community distro, due to the fact that Sun is a large > part of the OpenSolaris community. (By far the largest I would say) > -- > - Brian Gupta > > http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] Even those in favor of Indiana==OpenSolaris feel there should be a vote. Let's focus.
On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > The team responsible (Ian and Sara) for this divisive action have > > > > actually been ridiculing those who don't subscribe to their world > > > > view. This cavalier attitude is doing nothing put inflaming this > > > > issue. > > > > > > I don't believe that to be true. Please show me precise references to > > > where they have met any definition of "ridicule" in their > > > communication to anyone in this community. I suggest you choose more > > > accurate and less inflammatory descriptions of actions taken. > > > > Ridicule - This is a rhetorical tactic which mocks an opponent's > > argument, attempting to inspire an emotional reaction (making it a > > type of appeal to emotion) in the audience and to highlight the > > counter-intuitive aspects of that argument, making it appear foolish > > and contrary to common sense. This is typically done by demonstrating > > the argument's logic in an extremely absurd way or by presenting the > > argument in an overly simplified way, and often involves an appeal to > > consequences. > > I think most folks are aware of the possible dictionary / encyclopedia > definitions. > > Specifically, you have not provided examples of *how* you are being > "mocked". Ridicule is also a very subjective thing; one person > considers something ridicule which another does not. For the record I was not the target of said ridicule. If you really need to know, contact me off list, as I wish to keep the public conversation looking and moving forward. Please see thread "Let's focus. 2nd draft." > I would also caution you against saying they've mocked the those that > don't agree with them because not everyone that doesn't agree with > them feels that way, thus you are misrepresenting a group of people in > the same way you accuse Project Indiana of doing. > > -- > Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst > http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ > > "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all > junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics > are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall > ___ > ogb-discuss mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/ogb-discuss > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Let's focus. (2nd Draft)
On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > In my opinion I would say that anything less than complete removal of > > > > all OpenSolaris branding on Indiana by the end of today, can be > > > > considered a failure, as each extra day that it is there on the > > > > website only exacerbates the perception, that discussion is pointless, > > > > and the outcome is inevitable. > > > > > > Please define exactly what you mean by branding. Do you mean any usage > > > of the trademark whatsoever? (I would think not). > > > > > > Do you mean it can't be part of the distribution name? > > > > > > What specifically do you mean? > > > > > > If you literally mean remove all branding, you're being unfair as > > > other distributions already use the branding in many different ways. > > > > I meant that it should not be named with OpenSolaris. Nor should it be > > claimed that it is the community distro. > > So, specifically, you do not want the *name* to contain the trademark. > > i.e. > > It cannot be "XX TradeMark". > > It could be, however, "Project Indiana, an OpenSolaris-based community > distribution" which is the same way Belenix, et al. are sometimes > described. > > Am I correct? > > Obviously you may not agree with the community part but that is your > personal viewpoint. For clarification: Project Indiana should not be named with OpenSolaris as part of its *NAME*. Nor should it be claimed that it is *THE* community distro [until such time us a naming and branding policy can be finalized.] I did not suggest that Indiana be held to a different standard than other OpenSolaris distros. -Brian P.S. - It is still "a community distro", as a Sun distro still qualifies as a community distro, due to the fact that Sun is a large part of the OpenSolaris community. (By far the largest I would say) -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Let's focus. (2nd Draft)
On 11/2/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On 02/11/2007, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > In my opinion I would say that anything less than complete removal of > > all OpenSolaris branding on Indiana by the end of today, can be > > considered a failure, as each extra day that it is there on the > > website only exacerbates the perception, that discussion is pointless, > > and the outcome is inevitable. > > Please define exactly what you mean by branding. Do you mean any usage > of the trademark whatsoever? (I would think not). > > Do you mean it can't be part of the distribution name? > > What specifically do you mean? > > If you literally mean remove all branding, you're being unfair as > other distributions already use the branding in many different ways. I meant that it should not be named with OpenSolaris. Nor should it be claimed that it is the community distro. How about: Project Indiana aims to be Sun's new rapid release Solaris binary distribution. Project Indiana aims to incorporate many of the packaging and installation enhancements that the BSD and Linux communities pioneered. Primarily the ability to install additional software off network repositories, without worry of tracking down dependencies. In addition one of the goals is to have this release be based completely on freely open, and redistributable code. It is Sun's intention to contribute Project Indiana to the OpenSolaris community, and petition the community to adopt it as the primary "OpenSolaris" community distro. The stated goal, is that when someone wants to download "OpenSolaris" they will not have to make any confusing choices. At this point the original goals of the OpenSolaris community have yet to be reconciled with Sun's new goals for Project Indiana. > -- > Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst > http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ > > "We don't have enough parallel universes to allow all uses of all > junction types--in the absence of quantum computing the combinatorics > are not in our favor..." --Larry Wall > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] Even those in favor of Indiana==OpenSolaris feel there should be a vote. Let's focus.
On 11/2/07, Glynn Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Brandorr wrote: > > The team responsible (Ian and Sara) for this divisive action have > > actually been ridiculing those who don't subscribe to their world > > view. This cavalier attitude is doing nothing put inflaming this > > issue. > > > > At this point, I feel the Project Indiana leadership group is out of > > control, and out of touch with the community. The OGB needs to address > > this with the highest levels of Sun leadership. > > I respectfully disagree with you Brian, and I believe that is a very unfair > reflection of both Ian and Sara's work. Please focus on the *real* issues, not > profile attacks. Did you miss my email apology? If so, see the first email in thread: "Let's Focus: Draft Two". (I know there is a lot of email to cycle through). -Brian > Glynn > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [trademark-policy-dev] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] screwdrivers - Re: Project Indiana and the OpenSolaris name
Derek Possibly I am misunderstanding. I thought the minisite, was not a "distro minisite", but was rather a cleaner and simpler homepage to capture the growing number of non-developers that are being attracted to the community. IE: a simpler OpenSolaris homepage. Not a new distro homepage. At least this is what I had in mind when I initially proposed a new "user facing" website as a summit topic. -Brian On 11/4/07, Jim Grisanzio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Derek Cicero wrote: > > >As I mentioned at the summit and on the website-discuss list, once this > >project gets out of the 'preview' phase we'll probably move the > >OpenSolaris distro to a separate mini-site on os.org and revert the old > >/os/ home page back. > > > > > > > I like this idea. > > Jim > -- > http://blogs.sun.com/jimgris > ___ > trademark-policy-dev mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/trademark-policy-dev > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] A proposal for ensuring sustained Community
On Nov 6, 2007 11:59 AM, Anthony Juckel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Anthony Juckel wrote: > > > > > Again, as a relative outsider to the community > > (though I acknowledge > > > that the simple fact that I'm reading and posting > > here means I'm more > > > engaged with the community than someone who first > > browsed > > > opensolaris.org today), the questions that I'm left > > with from this > > > paragraph are, why are these discussions still on > > the drawing board? Why > > > haven't they happened yet? > > > > The OGB are discussing this tomorrow, as far as I > > know. > > Glad to hear it. > > > > Honestly, I understand that others are upset that > > more discussion did > > > not take place, and that some feel that _no_ > > discussion took place, but > > > for me, the question isn't why did Sun choose to > > brand Indiana as the > > > OpenSolaris Developer Preview without consulting > > the community, but more > > > why are these issues of branding so unclear between > > Sun and the > > > community after all this time? > > > > As far as I know, no formal proposal was put to the > > OGB - it's difficult > > to discuss something that hasn't been raised > > proposed. > > I think this gets back to the distinction between arbiter and leader. If it > was not the responsibility of the OGB to raise the issue of the community's > vested interest in the OpenSolaris trademark as it relates to Project > Indiana, who's responsibility was it? In my view, this is part of the > discussion that Shawn is trying to spark. > > I agree that the community needs more than just a way to arbitrate > disagreements. The community needs to have the sort of leadership (whether > by a single individual or a joint body) that actively champions the interests > of the community, and can work to avoid disagreements such as this. > > It seems to me that many are of the mind that this particular issue was > easily avoidable. So, what can we do today to attempt to avoid this sort of > issue in the future? I feel that this discussion is a good move in that > direction. I read his post, and see much talk about how to empower the > community to be more proactive than reactive. I'll try and help you understand, why the community may seem more reactive than proactive. Sun created a community site. This community was established with a charter and a constitution. Over the 2.5 years since then the community has dramatically grown, and there is a relatively common understanding that "Sun" is a citizen of the community, not the ruler of the community (despite the legal structure currently not guaranteeing any such thing). (This feeling seem to me to be especially among the Sun rank and file engineers. These guys and gals like to say, "We may work for Sun, but we are inidividuals, and individual members of the community".) To date Sun has played by the rules that Sun helped develop and approve. Also ,Sun has played the part of "benevolent sponsor" of the community almost perfectly. In fact they have done a much better job than anyone could have predicted, considering their rocky history and reputation within the greater FLOSS community. The fact is we are on a road Sun and the community have been traveling together, without *major* incidents, or prolonged misunderstandings. Saying the recent conflict is atypical, is a vast understatement. Also, you are correct to note that there is, and was, no formal Trademark policy. Since Sun reps made clear their intentions early, that no one should or would be allowed to name a distro "OpenSolaris", (including Sun) I don't think it ever hit anyone's radar as a major issue. I don't know for sure whether this issue was easily avoidable. I do know that it would have taken some time to change the naming policy. I do know that Individual(s) representing Sun's various interests were working with the community to develop a naming policy. (I am one of these individuals). During these discussions to develop a naming policy, Indiana was pushed out as "OpenSolaris dev. prev." This was despite the fact that the naming policy being discussed was a) not complete, b) didn't yet have full provisions to allow such use, and c) hadn't been ratified by the OGB/community. Considering that we still have a number of divergent views that still need to be reconciled, this move can at best be considered premature. I dearly hope this is all the result of a misunderstanding, but fear that this may just be a sign of things to come, and an official change in policy at Sun's corporate headquarters. As it is today, Sun decision makers must be aware of the community's concern, fear and pain, but have done nothing to offer even a few words to ease them. It would be very simple to at least acknowledge the community's concerns, but it seems that the current plan is "Full speed ahead, community be damned". (Silence in this case is deafening, and causes me to wonder what Sun decision makers truly have in mind for OpenS
Re: [osol-discuss] [ksh93-integration-discuss] ksh93-integration 2007-10-31 test binaries available for download (for Nevada B61-B71) ...
Roland, do you know if the version of ksh93 at blastwave is recent
enough to get a feel for the interactive shell?
On Oct 31, 2007 8:10 PM, Roland Mainz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Hi!
>
>
>
> [If you run Solaris 11 >= B72 please ignore this]
>
> A new set of tarballs containing an OS/Net version of ksh93 [1] (based
> on ksh93s+_beta_20070418 [2]) is now available from
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/ksh93-integration/downloads/2007-10-31/
>
> These tarballs are intended to be installed over an existing OpenSolaris
> i386 or SPARC installation (>= Nevada B61 and < Nevada B72 ; this
> tarball is no longer neccesary if you run Nevada B72 or higher!!) and
> provide ksh93s+_beta_20070418 [2] for testing and evaluation purposed
> ONLY.
>
> Please report any problems/errors/bugs/comments to the ksh93-integration
> project bugzilla [5] or the ksh93-integration mailinglist [4].
>
>
> ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ##
> WARNING: These tarballs are NOT needed if you run Solaris 11/B72 or
> higher (ksh93 was integrated in B72 [6]) - these tarballs are only
> intended as a quick way to add ksh93 to existing pre-B72 machines (such
> as the Sun OS/Net buildfarm machines).
> ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ## ##
>
>
> ** Install instructions:
>
> 1. Download the tarball:
> + i386/AMD64:
>
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/ksh93-integration/downloads/ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_i386.tar.bz2
> + SPARC:
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/ksh93-integration/downloads/ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_sparc.tar.bz2
> 2. Verify the MD5 checksum:
> + i386/AMD64: MD5
> (ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_i386.tar.bz2)=
> 3dce7c8cf3cfef92224d9da54589bfe6
> + SPARC: MD5
> (ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_sparc.tar.bz2)=
> 9265f2aa0957427a394f44084d85268e
> 3. Login as user "root":
> 4. Change directory to / and unpack the tarball with /usr/bin/tar
> using the "xvof" option ("o" is very important to set the file
> ownership to "root")
>
> Example for i386/AMD64:
>
> $ cd /tmp
> $ wget
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/ksh93-integration/downloads/ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_i386.tar.bz2
> $ /usr/sfw/bin/openssl md5
> ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_i386.tar.bz2
> MD5(ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_i386.tar.bz2)=
> 3dce7c8cf3cfef92224d9da54589bfe6
> # cd /
> # sync ; sync
> # bzcat -xvof -
> # sync ; sync
>
> Example for SPARC:
>
> $ cd /tmp
> $ wget
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/ksh93-integration/downloads/ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_sparc.tar.bz2
> $ /usr/sfw/bin/openssl md5
> ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_sparc.tar.bz2
> MD5(ksh93_integration_20071031_snapshot_sparc.tar.bz2)=
> 9265f2aa0957427a394f44084d85268e
> # cd /
> # sync ; sync
> # bzcat -xvof -
> # sync ; sync
>
>
> ** Documentation:
> End-user documentation for ksh93s+ can be found at
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/ksh93-integration/docs/ksh93s/
>
>
> ** Notes:
>
> * This tarball matches ksh93s+ (=ast-ksh.2007-04-18) with many
> many changes since the last version. Please test the binaries
> extensively.
> * The binaries now are build from a B61-based tree and require
> SXCR B61 or higher
> * Sources/diffs:
> + The diffs between Solaris Nevada B61 and the current
> ksh93-integration tree can be obtained via
> svn diff -r 676:885
> svn://svn.genunix.org/on/branches/ksh93/gisburn/prototype005/usr
> or as unified diff from
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/ksh93-integration/downloads/svn_genunix_org_on_branches_ksh93_gisburn_prototype005_rev_676_885.diff.txt
> (12MB, MD5 checksum is bf01ae796575aa72137c9cd54315a74d).
> * 64bit binaries and libraries are now included (and used by
> default if the hardware is 64bit capable)
> * AST l10n utilities are stored in /usr/ast/bin/.
> * Starting with ksh93s+ multibyte characters can be used for
> variable/function/etc.-names. Please test this functionality
> extensively.
> * was added to emacs/gmacs mode to clear the screen
> (per community requests and to be in sync with bash)
> * If you wish to use ksh93 as login shell you have to create the
> file /etc/shells (see shells(4) manual page) to include it in
> the list of "allowed" system login shells:
> Example /etc/shells file (created using $ cat usr/src/lib/libc/
> port/gen/getusershell.c | egrep '.*".*/(bin|sbin)/.*".*' | sed
> 's/[",]//g' | sort -u #):
>
> /bin/bash
> /bin/csh
> /bin/jsh
> /bin/ksh
> /bin/ksh93
> /bin/pfcsh
> /bin/pfksh
> /bin/pfsh
> /bin/sh
> /bin/tcsh
> /bin/zsh
> /sbin/jsh
> /sbin/pfsh
> /sbin/sh
> /usr/bin/bash
> /usr/bin/csh
> /usr/bin/jsh
> /usr/bin/ksh
> /usr/bin/ksh93
> /usr/bin/pfcsh
> /usr/bin/pfksh
> /usr/bin/pfsh
Re: [osol-discuss] IA64laris, anyone ? (an RFC)
On Nov 11, 2007 2:07 PM, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Is anyone other than myself interested in seeing an > > IA64/Itanium port > > of OpenSolaris? > > Would that be cool? Why, yes it would! > > Would it be a justifiable return on investment? No. > > Here's the deal: > > who's running IA64? Only two firms, sgi and hp. Actually, believe it or not, IA64 seems to have found a niche with worldwide Mainframe builders. (excluding IBM). http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/3705016 > hp's servers are WAY TOO EXPENSIVE to buy just to run HP-UX, let alone > (Open)Solaris. Take a look at USED rx Integrity servers on ebay, even those > are expensive enough to make one's nose bleed (as much as I would love to run > HP-UX on Itanium!) > > Where it might make sense to run (Open)Solaris on Itanium, it would be the > sgi Altix servers. That's sgi's NUMAflex hardware with Itanium CPUs, > currently running a "sgi Propack" Suse Linux because sgi is in so much > financial trouble (and too stupid) to have ported IRIX 6.5 to Altix. > > Has anyone heard anything about Polaris, the PPC port lately? Um, nope. Why? > Because once people got into the port, they realized that it's a lot of work; > and that's even with the existing prior work done by Sun for Solaris 2.5.1. > > If you can muster enough developers to work on the port of (Open)Solaris to > sgi Altix, then sure, go for it. But where are you going to get the people > who know enough about Altix hardware? sgi's hopped up on Linux, I doubt any > help would come from them. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] IA64laris, anyone ? (an RFC)
On Nov 11, 2007 4:30 PM, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > On Nov 11, 2007 2:07 PM, UNIX admin > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > Is anyone other than myself interested in seeing > > an > > > > IA64/Itanium port > > > > of OpenSolaris? > > > > > > Would that be cool? Why, yes it would! > > > > > > Would it be a justifiable return on investment? No. > > > > > > Here's the deal: > > > > > > who's running IA64? Only two firms, sgi and hp. > > > > Actually, believe it or not, IA64 seems to have found > > a niche with > > worldwide Mainframe builders. (excluding IBM). > > http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/37050 > > 16 > > 200,000 pieces? That's miserable. > > Love this quote: > "Despite its low profile, RISC-based processing continues to hold between 45 > and 50 percent of the market and the revenues are still substantial" > > Yeah, no kidding, the IA64 based hardware is way, waaay overopriced! When > will companies, Sun INCLUDED, finally get it into their head that the days of > fat profit margins are GONE. > > Expensive SILICON DOESN'T SELL. > > It has to be CHEAP and MASS PRODUCED, or else forget it!!! While I would agree that the growth is in the commodity spaces, IBM has proven time and time again, that mainframes aren't going anywhere. Do you think Sun, IBM, and HP would still be making this hardware if customers weren't still buying it? I would guess the majority of Fortune 500 corporations still have Mainframes in the basement running some hypercritical processes. Also another interesting trend in Enterprise IT is that most of the innovation going is basically reinvention of 30 year old mainframe technologies on commodity hardware. ;) (Virtual Machines, fiberchannel/isci, JCL, thin-client computing, utility computing, high availability, throughput computing, etc.) Cheers, Brian > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] IA64laris, anyone ? (an RFC)
On Nov 11, 2007 4:52 PM, Brandorr <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Nov 11, 2007 4:30 PM, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Nov 11, 2007 2:07 PM, UNIX admin > > > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > Is anyone other than myself interested in seeing > > > an > > > > > IA64/Itanium port > > > > > of OpenSolaris? > > > > > > > > Would that be cool? Why, yes it would! > > > > > > > > Would it be a justifiable return on investment? No. > > > > > > > > Here's the deal: > > > > > > > > who's running IA64? Only two firms, sgi and hp. > > > > > > Actually, believe it or not, IA64 seems to have found > > > a niche with > > > worldwide Mainframe builders. (excluding IBM). > > > http://www.internetnews.com/ent-news/article.php/37050 > > > 16 > > > > 200,000 pieces? That's miserable. > > > > Love this quote: > > "Despite its low profile, RISC-based processing continues to hold between > > 45 and 50 percent of the market and the revenues are still substantial" > > > > Yeah, no kidding, the IA64 based hardware is way, waaay overopriced! When > > will companies, Sun INCLUDED, finally get it into their head that the days > > of fat profit margins are GONE. > > > > Expensive SILICON DOESN'T SELL. > > > > It has to be CHEAP and MASS PRODUCED, or else forget it!!! > > While I would agree that the growth is in the commodity spaces, IBM > has proven time and time again, that mainframes aren't going anywhere. > Do you think Sun, IBM, and HP would still be making this hardware if > customers weren't still buying it? > > I would guess the majority of Fortune 500 corporations still have > Mainframes in the basement running some hypercritical processes. > > Also another interesting trend in Enterprise IT is that most of the > innovation going is basically reinvention of 30 year old mainframe > technologies on commodity hardware. ;) (Virtual Machines, > fiberchannel/isci, JCL, thin-client computing, utility computing, high > availability, throughput computing, etc.) That all said there are far most interesting, (IMHO) targets for porting. Like MIPS and ARM. (I suggest these if we wish to compete with Linux in the high volume embedded space. e.g. Linksys routers, smartphones, toasters...) ;) If anyone is interested, in pursuing alternate hardware platform ports, you would probably be well educated, by having a talk with Tom Riddle, who's team did the PPC port, which to date is the only cross-compiled build of OpenSolaris. (It is built exclusively with GCC on x86). Cheers, Brian > > Cheers, > Brian > > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > > ___ > > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > > > > > > > -- > - Brian Gupta > > http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] How to edit files inside a ISO-image?
http://wiki.linuxquestions.org/wiki/Mkisofs On Feb 11, 2008 2:10 AM, Roman Morokutti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Hi Joerg, > > you wrote: > > > Warning: > > ==> Never use cpio to do this kind of work! < > > > > cpio has a bug with hard link handling that will cause real > > problems if you use the outdated mkisofs that currently comes > > with Solaris. > > Just to understand this right. Do you suggest not to use > cpio at all? If not, what else? Or can cpio be used in conjunction > with a recent mkisofs? > > > If you do not use Rock Ridge, you will loose a lot of meta > > data information. > > How to use Rock Ridge? Which flags should be set? > > Roman > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_New_User_FAQ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Increase swap space when its mirrored
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 2:27 PM, Michael Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Why do you want to mirror swap? I would take swap off of mdb and use the two > partitions as swap. What happens when you have important process pages temporarily swapped out to disk and that disk fails? (Two swap partitions, creates a larger VM table, vs. higher availability.) > > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_New_User_FAQ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any reason to keep my Ultra 10?
Well, he can run a more up-to-date version of Macromedia/Adobe Flash!! :) (Currently ISV support is still better for Sparc/Solaris than x86/Solaris. (Although this is slowly changing). If you aren't going to be running commercial/proprietary software, or needing to develop for a production Sparc environment, then an older Sparc's advantages are diminished. Cheers, Brian P.S. - I still use a 500 MHz UltraSparc IIi based system, with 512MB ram as a small server. (Otherwise I am all x86). On Feb 17, 2008 6:16 AM, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > I'm just wondering, what am I giving up if I dump the > > U10 w/ > > Solaris10? Reliabilty? Does the U10 have any unique > > capabilities > > worth considering anymore? > > An Ultra10 has no "unique capabilities", that is, unless you consider the > OpenBoot PROM and the SPARC(R) V9 processor to be "unique capabilities". > > It is old, obsolete, and slow. If you can get someone to give you maybe $50 > for it, you can consider yourself extremely lucky. > > If you want to stick with a sparc based system, forget the workstation class > hardware and get yourself a V240. Otherwise, any intel or AMD based server > will do. > > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > ___ > > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_New_User_FAQ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Status update: OGB Nominees 2008 Elections.
For those that aren't following Bugzilla, in order to become a candidate for the OGB, a person needs a nomination from a core contributor, *TWO* +1s from core contributors, and then needs to accept the nomination. (You do not have to be a core contributor to be nominated.) (http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/buglist.cgi?query_format=advanced&short_desc_type=allwordssubstr&short_desc=&classification=Community&product=ogb&component=nominations&target_milestone=2008&long_desc_type=substring&long_desc=&bug_file_loc_type=allwordssubstr&bug_file_loc=&status_whiteboard_type=allwordssubstr&status_whiteboard=&keywords_type=allwords&keywords=&deadlinefrom=&deadlineto=&bug_status=UNCONFIRMED&bug_status=NEW&bug_status=INCOMPLETE&bug_status=ACCEPTED&bug_status=CAUSEKNOWN&bug_status=FIXUNDERSTOOD&bug_status=FIXINPROGRESS&bug_status=FIXINSOURCE&bug_status=FIXINBUILD&bug_status=REOPENED&bug_status=RESOLVED&bug_status=VERIFIED&bug_status=CLOSED&emailassigned_to1=1&emailtype1=substring&email1=&emailassigned_to2=1&emailreporter2=1&emailqa_contact2=1&emailcc2=1&emailtype2=substring&email2=&bugidtype=include&bug_id=&votes=&chfieldfrom=&chfieldto=Now&chfieldvalue=&cmdtype=doit&order=Reuse+same+sort+as+last+time&field0-0-0=noop&type0-0-0=noop&value0-0-0=) (Feel free to respond to this email to either accept your nomination, or give folks +1s) So far the following folks have the requisite +1s and have accepted their nominations: - Glynn Foster - Michelle Olsen - Simon Phipps - Joerg Schilling - John Sonnenschein - Shawn Walker The following folks need additional +1s from OpenSolaris.org core contributers: - Justin Erenkrantz (needs 1 additional) - Moinak Ghosh (needs 1 additional) - Brian Gupta (needs 1 additional) - Richard Hamilton (Needs 2 additional) - John Plocher (needs 1 additional) - Guy Shaw (needs 1 additional) Need to accept nomination: - - John Beck - Bryan Cantrill - Alan Coopersmith - Jim Grizanzio - Roland Mainz - Ben Rockwood - Rich Teer - Peter Tribble Declined nomination: - - Martin Bochnig - James Carlson - Roy T. Fielding - Keith Wesolowski Cheers, Brian P.S. - I went ahead and made a wiki page, to make it easier to check the status. http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/2008_OGB_Election_candidates (I don't know, something about listing people as defects, just seems wrong.) -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_New_User_FAQ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [ogb-discuss] Status update: OGB Nominees 2008 Elections.
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 9:53 PM, Glynn Foster <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > Brandorr wrote: > >> For those that aren't following Bugzilla, in order to become a > >> candidate for the OGB, a person needs a nomination from a core > >> contributor, *TWO* +1s from core contributors, and then needs to > >> accept the nomination. > > > > From where do you get the requirement for two +1's? All I see > > in the constitution (section 6.3) is that they must be nominated > > by one current Member (aka Core Contributor) - no seconds or additional > > support is listed as required. > > Huh, I guess I must have made that up. I'll close out some of the people who > have achieved and accepted this. No worries Glynn, I have updated the wiki with the new status. I added Stephen Lau, as it looks like he has been nominated and accepted his nomination. (I also realized we missed Michal Bielicki, his name has been added to the list of those who have accepted the nomination.) Glynn, please verify that we have the same info.. http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/2008_OGB_Election_candidates So far the following folks have the requisite +1 and have accepted their nominations: * Michał Bielicki * Glynn Foster * Brian Gupta * Stephen Lau * Michelle Olsen * Simon Phipps * Joerg Schilling * John Sonnenschein And the following folks have the requisite +1, but need to accept their nomination: * John Beck * Bryan Cantrill * Alan Coopersmith * Justin Erenkrantz * Moinak Ghosh * Jim Grizanzio * Richard Hamilton * Roland Mainz * John Plocher * Ben Rockwood * Guy Shaw * Rich Teer * Peter Tribble * Shawn Walker Declined nomination: * Martin Bochnig * James Carlson * Roy T. Fielding * Keith Wesolowski > > > Glynn > -- - Brian Gupta http://opensolaris.org/os/project/nycosug/ http://www.genunix.org/wiki/index.php/OpenSolaris_New_User_FAQ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
