Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris 11 Express - Solaris 11 / iBus problems
On 12/ 8/11 04:45 AM, Rob McMahon wrote: I know this isn't really OpenSolaris related, but I don't know of a better list. I've just done the pkg image-update to take me from express 151.0.1.12. I tried a couple of weeks ago, and was left with an unusable boot environment. I was left without a graphical screen at a login prompt. My old account was rejected Login incorrect, and root said empty password not allowed. I didn't have time then to investigate, so I just booted back into the old environment for a while. I've just tried again, with the same result. Along the way were several messages about services auto-snaphot:* in conflict and in maintenance, and hostname not found: ntp.whatever. No graphics, and no login as above. I think like all the rest of us inconsequential supported customers, you'll have to wait until the support repository is fixed before upgrading. See CR 7112937 and this MOS document: | Application of Solaris 11 Express SRUs May Erroneously Cause Packages | to be Removed From the System [ID 1378614.1] From what I've heard, the hack provided works, but not cleanly. So I'm waiting rather than suffer the embarrassment of explaining away another maintenance window -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Change host name on ora-Sol 11
On 11/17/11 04:43 AM, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Harry, You might review this summary table of changes to see what else has changed and it should point you in the right direction: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/html/E24456/compare-1.html If it doesn't, let us know. Cindy, How about an Oracle Solaris 11 Express Compared to Oracle Solaris 11 page? A lot of us are familiar with the express build. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] First Cloud OS? Really?
On 11/16/11 12:49 PM, Calum Benson wrote: On 11 Nov 2011, at 05:10, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: Anybody know why they're calling it the first cloud os? Just cuz they wanted to throw in a buzzword? Here's a short blog entry that attempts an explanation... http://blogs.oracle.com/drcloud/entry/what_s_a_cloud_operating Ah, so the full title should be The First Cloud OS for Java applications :) Just when we thought we were safe from the dreaded J word... -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Where can I find a full Walk thru setting up nfs4 from scratch
On 11/15/11 05:14 AM, Harry Putnam wrote: Ian Collinsi...@ianshome.com writes: On 11/14/11 02:38 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Running openindiana b 151a as vm guest on host win7 Where can I find an up to date detailed description of setting up nfs4 from scratch on a home lan zfs server with linux nfs4 clients. There really isn't that much to it, just set snarenfs=true on the filesystem(s) you want to share. Egad... that's it? I must be mixing up with having set up the automounter for nfs .. I remember getting tangled up with some edit of files last time I did this, which by now must be a pretty while ago. The solaris box will be both server and client. Is there a good URL for whatever is involved getting the NFS client shares auto mounted? They would be on a Debian linux server. Both boxes will be both server and client. For Solaris, man automount. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Where can I find a full Walk thru setting up nfs4 from scratch
On 11/14/11 02:38 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Running openindiana b 151a as vm guest on host win7 Where can I find an up to date detailed description of setting up nfs4 from scratch on a home lan zfs server with linux nfs4 clients. There really isn't that much to it, just set snarenfs=true on the filesystem(s) you want to share. I've turned up loads of stuff googling, way too much to paw through it all. I'm running openindiana and have posted a similar request on that group. Some of the directions I've found insist on setting up nis. Do I really need nis to be setup to share fs with nfs on a home lan? No. Just make sure the file permissions are correct for clients to access the shares. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pfexec does not work any longer
On 11/12/11 06:52 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: On 11/11/11 09:37, Andrew Watkins wrote: Now on Solaris 11 it does not: == grep andrew /etc/user_attr andrewprofiles=Primary Administrator;roles=root Solaris 11 no longer includes the Primary Administrator profile. So what is the equivalent? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 07:13 AM, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Brian, Try this one: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/html/E24456/upgrade-1.html The main OS 11 library (English) is here: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/index.html Let us know how the upgrade goes. Is there an error on that page? # *Make sure your publisher is set as follows.* #*pkg publisher* PUBLISHER TYPE STATUS URI solaris origin online http://ipkg.us.oracle.com/solaris11/dev/ If you need to change your solaris publisher from a previous publisher with the same solaris name, use syntax similar to the following: # pkg set-publisher -g http://ipkg.us.oracle.com/solaris11/dev -G http://internal.co.com/solaris solaris When I tried: pkg set-publisher: The origin URIs for 'solaris' do not appear to point to a valid pkg repository. #ping ipkg.us.oracle.com ping: unknown host ipkg.us.oracle.com -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 08:17 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 11/09/11 11:11, Ian Collins wrote: On 11/10/11 07:13 AM, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Brian, Try this one: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/html/E24456/upgrade-1.html The main OS 11 library (English) is here: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/index.html Let us know how the upgrade goes. Is there an error on that page? # *Make sure your publisher is set as follows.* #*pkg publisher* PUBLISHER TYPE STATUS URI solaris origin online http://ipkg.us.oracle.com/solaris11/dev/ If you need to change your solaris publisher from a previous publisher with the same solaris name, use syntax similar to the following: # pkg set-publisher -g http://ipkg.us.oracle.com/solaris11/dev -G http://internal.co.com/solaris solaris Yes, that's wrong, I'll notify the appropriate parties. The URL should be: http://pkg.oracle.com/solaris/release Thanks Shawn. I see that page was writer by a Dr. Who fan :) -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 07:13 AM, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Brian, Try this one: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/html/E24456/upgrade-1.html The main OS 11 library (English) is here: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/index.html Let us know how the upgrade goes. No joy for me :( pfexec pkg update Creating Plan \ pkg update: No solution was found to satisfy constraints Plan Creation: Package solver has not found a solution to update to latest available versions. This may indicate an overly constrained set of packages are installed. latest incorporations: pkg://solaris/consolidation/cde/cde-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.0:20110927T191905Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/man/man-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.0:20110927T192523Z pkg://solaris/entire@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111020T143822Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/ips/ips-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.2576:20111020T063559Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/X/X-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.1215:20110927T121319Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/SunVTS/SunVTS-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.172.0.0.0.0.0:20110816T071310Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/nvidia/nvidia-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.0:20110927T192422Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/osnet/osnet-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.1:20111019T053010Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/hcts/hcts-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.154:20101203T190542Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/cns/cns-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.1.0:20111012T230319Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/install/install-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.1482:20111019T122620Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/l10n/l10n-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.1.765:20111012T043917Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/gfx/gfx-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T144752Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/cacao/cacao-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.174.0.0.0.0.0:20110921T190516Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/xvm/xvm-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T144757Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/gnome_l10n/gnome_l10n-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.0:20110927T081833Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/jdmk/jdmk-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.173.0.0.0.0.0:20110828T210111Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/sic_team/sic_team-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.172.0.0.0.0.0:20110816T070737Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/sunpro/sunpro-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.174.0.0.0.0.0:20110921T184135Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/vpanels/vpanels-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.1.778:20111012T230640Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/ub_javavm/ub_javavm-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T144756Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/gnome/gnome-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.0.0:20110927T081825Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/nspg/nspg-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T144753Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/dbtg/dbtg-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T144751Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/solaris_re/solaris_re-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T122734Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/sfw/sfw-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T144754Z pkg://solaris/consolidation/admin/admin-incorporation@0.5.11,5.11-0.175.0.0.0.2.0:20111019T144751Z Dependency analysis is unable to determine exact cause. Try specifying expected results to obtain more detailed error messages. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 09:44 AM, Alan Steinberg wrote: Do you have any packages still installed from the old opensolaris.org repositories, such as the extra repository? That could lead to dependency problems in that they may be looking for OS packages that are not present in Oracle Solaris 11. Very likely, this system started its live as an OpenSolaris box. See my reply to Shawn. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 09:46 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 11/09/11 12:39, Ian Collins wrote: On 11/10/11 07:13 AM, Cindy Swearingen wrote: Hi Brian, Try this one: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/html/E24456/upgrade-1.html The main OS 11 library (English) is here: http://download.oracle.com/docs/cd/E23824_01/index.html Let us know how the upgrade goes. No joy for me :( pfexec pkg update Creating Plan \ pkg update: No solution was found to satisfy constraints Plan Creation: Package solver has not found a solution to update to latest available versions. This may indicate an overly constrained set of packages are installed. Try: pfexec pkg update '*@latest' That will tell the package system that you're trying to update to the latest version of all packages. It will then attempt to determine why it cannot do that. If you have *any* packages installed from opensolaris.org, you'll likely need to remove them. I guess these are the culprits: pfexec pkg update '*@latest' Creating Plan | pkg update: No matching version of gnome-photo-printer can be installed: Reject: pkg://contrib.opensolaris.org/gnome-photo-printer@0.6.5,5.11-0.111:20091204T201935Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWgnome-print@0.5.11,5.11-0.111 are obsolete No matching version of openoffice can be installed: Reject: pkg://opensolaris.org/openoffice@3.1.0,5.11-0.111:20090518T062712Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWPython@2.4.4,5.11-0.111 are obsolete No matching version of virtualbox can be installed: Reject: pkg://extra/virtualbox@3.1.8,5.11-0.101:20100511T153708Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWPython25@2.5,5.11-0.101 are obsolete -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 10:08 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 11/09/11 13:03, Ian Collins wrote: On 11/10/11 09:46 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: Try: pfexec pkg update '*@latest' That will tell the package system that you're trying to update to the latest version of all packages. It will then attempt to determine why it cannot do that. If you have *any* packages installed from opensolaris.org, you'll likely need to remove them. I guess these are the culprits: pfexec pkg update '*@latest' Creating Plan | pkg update: No matching version of gnome-photo-printer can be installed: Reject: pkg://contrib.opensolaris.org/gnome-photo-printer@0.6.5,5.11-0.111:20091204T201935Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWgnome-print@0.5.11,5.11-0.111 are obsolete No matching version of openoffice can be installed: Reject: pkg://opensolaris.org/openoffice@3.1.0,5.11-0.111:20090518T062712Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWPython@2.4.4,5.11-0.111 are obsolete No matching version of virtualbox can be installed: Reject: pkg://extra/virtualbox@3.1.8,5.11-0.101:20100511T153708Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWPython25@2.5,5.11-0.101 are obsolete Yes, those would definitely cause an issue. Removing those packages should allow you to proceed. Removing now. So there isn't an OpenOffice package for Solaris 11? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 10:08 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 11/09/11 13:03, Ian Collins wrote: On 11/10/11 09:46 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: Try: pfexec pkg update '*@latest' That will tell the package system that you're trying to update to the latest version of all packages. It will then attempt to determine why it cannot do that. If you have *any* packages installed from opensolaris.org, you'll likely need to remove them. I guess these are the culprits: pfexec pkg update '*@latest' Creating Plan | pkg update: No matching version of gnome-photo-printer can be installed: Reject: pkg://contrib.opensolaris.org/gnome-photo-printer@0.6.5,5.11-0.111:20091204T201935Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWgnome-print@0.5.11,5.11-0.111 are obsolete No matching version of openoffice can be installed: Reject: pkg://opensolaris.org/openoffice@3.1.0,5.11-0.111:20090518T062712Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWPython@2.4.4,5.11-0.111 are obsolete No matching version of virtualbox can be installed: Reject: pkg://extra/virtualbox@3.1.8,5.11-0.101:20100511T153708Z Reason: All acceptable versions of 'require' dependency on pkg:/SUNWPython25@2.5,5.11-0.101 are obsolete Yes, those would definitely cause an issue. Removing those packages should allow you to proceed. So it does. I also had to remove wine, in response to pfexec pkg uninstall openoffice Creating Plan - pkg uninstall: The requested change to the system attempts to install multiple actions for dir 'usr/share/applications' with conflicting attributes: 1 package delivers 'dir group=bin mode=0755 owner=root path=usr/share/applications': pkg://contrib.opensolaris.org/wine@1.0.1,5.11-0.101:20081209T223210Z 60 packages deliver 'dir group=other mode=0755 owner=root path=usr/share/applications', including: The wording in that error is a bit confusing, shouldn't to install be to uninstall? Some form of force option may help with these petty conflicts. I hope some of the issues in this thread find their way into the release notes to assist others. Thanks for the help, -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris 11 - The First Cloud OS
On 11/10/11 11:17 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 11/09/11 13:48, Ian Collins wrote: So it does. I also had to remove wine, in response to pfexec pkg uninstall openoffice Creating Plan - pkg uninstall: The requested change to the system attempts to install multiple actions for dir 'usr/share/applications' with conflicting attributes: 1 package delivers 'dir group=bin mode=0755 owner=root path=usr/share/applications': pkg://contrib.opensolaris.org/wine@1.0.1,5.11-0.101:20081209T223210Z 60 packages deliver 'dir group=other mode=0755 owner=root path=usr/share/applications', including: The wording in that error is a bit confusing, shouldn't to install be to uninstall? Some form of force option may help with these petty conflicts. The package system has to ensure the system is in a correct state. It can't do that unless it can guarantee that all packages agree on what the correct state. I know that sucks when you have broken packages, but it's the only way to ensure that pkg fix and pkg verify work as expected (among other things). That's why pkg doesn't have any force options. I see, that makes sense. I hope some of the issues in this thread find their way into the release notes to assist others. The contrib repositories are all long gone as noted by the web page up there now. I suggest someone adds a note on how to find and remove problematic opensolaris.org packages. I'm sure anyone who has a system which started life as an OpenSolaris box with have some. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] unusual problem after updated from Solaris10 U9 to Solaris10 U10
On 10/23/11 12:28 AM, Sathees Kumar TS wrote: We found a fix that, it is because of some changes in C++ libraries with respect to function string::copy(). We made the changes to use the strcpy and it is working fine now. Any comments on this change are welcome. We want to extract the details if any, behind C++ libraries change in Solaris10 U9 and U10. See the release notes for the C++ runtime patches. Good luck finding them on the improved support site. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Intel Kernel Mode-setting (KMS) in snv173
On 10/18/11 07:37 AM, John Martin wrote:
On 10/17/11 13:38, Bruno Damour wrote:
I has tried with console=text but not the correct option as it seems ;-)
console=text still uses bitmapped graphics. From the heads up message:
Solaris now has support for high resolution and color depth consoles.
By default, your machine will boot using a 1024x768x16-bit console, unless
your video card doesn't support it in which case it will fall back to
800x600 and finally 640x480.
The type of console (and also the old VGA TEXT 640x480 console) can be
controlled through both kernel parameters and GRUB directives:
-B console={text|graphics|force-text}
selects the type of booting console. 'text' and 'graphics' both select a
high resolution console, while force-text selects the old VGA TEXT
console. ...
Is there still a public list of heads up and fag day messages?
--
Ian.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] New Solaris 11 Express 2011.10 released!
On 10/ 8/11 10:21 AM, Ron Mexico wrote: I tried installing it on VMWare Fusion 4.02, no dice. SUNW-MSG-ID: SMF-8000-YX, TYPE: defect, VER: 1, SEVERITY: major At the end of he scroll there is a link that redirects to an Oracle support URL that isn't working: http://sun.com/msg/SMF-8000-YX Ruh-roh. I'll try it on Virtual Box. The EA release works well in VirtualBox, I've been testing it in a VM for a couple of weeks. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] New update of Solaris 11, how is it?
On 10/ 5/11 09:33 AM, Glynn Foster wrote: On 5/10/2011, at 7:43 AM, Edward Martinez wrote: I am trying to install it over the Solaris 11 2010 version. Since solaris 11 ea is meant for companies that are Gold members and not really meant for the general public like solaris 11 express is. I think image-update from solaris 11 express to solaris 11es is not supported. This is correct. We will hope to be able to support 2 upgrade paths to Oracle Solaris 11 - Oracle Solaris 11 Express to Oracle Solaris 11 - Oracle Solaris 11 Early Adopter to Oracle Solaris 11 That second one's good to know, thanks Glynn. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any Rsync GUI's pre-compiled for OI-151
On 08/14/11 11:50 AM, Jeff Goldrich wrote: I'm using Rsync for backup between OI-151 and SolarisExpress 11. I'm not very good at troubleshooting the error messages I get when trying to compile the various front ends ie Grsync, Qsync, Luckybackup etc. They all fail for different reasons which is beyond my scope of understanding. I've tried to trouble shoot with google but did not get very far in each case. Are there any of these Rsync GUI's ready to go or pre-compiled for Opensolaris? Time to move to zfs send/receive? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Building a storage server, need some advice
[context is good!] On 04/28/11 02:48 PM, Ron Mexico wrote: FWIW, I resilvered a 2TB drive a few weeks ago that took less than two days. Pool is at about 75% capacity. Resilver time is very dependent on how busy the pool is. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Building a storage server, need some advice
On 04/26/11 08:55 PM, ENJOLRAS Fabien wrote: I would like to build a high density storage server which will be evolutive. Here is the hardware I have available: -Norco RPC-4224 chassis (rackable 4U with x24 3.5 SATA disk hotswap backplane) -Tyan Tempest i5000VF motherboard with dual 3 Ghz Xeon and 8GB ECC DDR2 Max out the memory. -3Ware 9650SE-24M8 SATA controller (24 SATA2 channels) Is the card supported? I would like to begin with x5 or x6 2TB Samsung F4 Green hard drives, to expand to full 24 drives when my storage need will grow. My first plan was to build a huge RAID6 array but my attention was pointed to Solaris platform for reliable Raidz3 support. My question was, how can I grow a raidz3 array with more drives? What is the most secure and reliable method without the need to backup all the data already stored? Add more vdevs. I've thought of creating a first raidz3 vdev with 6 drives, the adding up to 4 6-drive raidz3 vdevs. But this way I lose a lot of storage on the base 48TB? Maybe start with an 8 drive vdev and add 2 more vdevs later. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Building a storage server, need some advice
On 04/27/11 09:03 AM, Ron Mexico wrote: My storage server at work has three RAIDZ3's, each with 12 drives plus two hot spares. I use Western Digital RE4's. In the two years I've been using this configuration, I've never had more than one drive go bad at a time. At home I have a RAIDZ1 using 5 WD Caviar Green 1TB drives. Not a single disc error in over two years. IMO, a six disk RAIDZ3 is beyond overkill. Make each group a RAIDZ1 with a hot spare, or a RAIDZ2 with a shelf spare if you can't spare the extra drive slots. raidz with 2TB drives opens too big a risk window for my liking. I recently had a box take 160 hours to resilver a 500GB drive, so a similar system could take 3 weeks to resilver a 2TB device! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Virtual Box and OpenSolaris Memory instead of Swap
On 04/25/11 11:51 AM, Karl Grantz wrote: Im running Virtual box and it is sitting in Swap memory instead of physical memory. How do you know? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris Online Forum Event :: April 14th at 9am PT
On 04/19/11 07:12 AM, Glynn Foster wrote: On 18/04/2011, at 8:58 PM, joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote: Then it would be of interest to know the background for the event. From I can tell, there have been no new infos and what people would have been interested in, e.g.: - when will Solaris 11 be released? - what will be the future license situation? have not been answered. Those are the questions that you (and probably others on the list are most interested in). There's a lot of folks who don't have any detail about Solaris 11, and are interested in hearing on the lead up to the launch. Unfortunately the other information will be of little value to them if Oracle's extortionate support prices prevent potential users from deploying Solaris 11. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris Online Forum Event :: April 14th at 9am PT
On 04/13/11 02:24 PM, Nikola M. wrote: On 03/24/11 01:53 PM, Joerg Schilling wrote: If they don't list Solaris, it is most likely not a Solaris related event. It is most unlikely that Microsoft or Apple would ever try to announce an event that is not viewable on the repective own platform. Jörg Exactly what I was thinking too when I saw those specifications. So people already using Solaris variant can not see presentation at all. Didn't you read Glynn's recent post? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Reminder: Oracle Solaris Online Forum Event :: April 14th at 9am PT
On 04/12/11 06:33 AM, Glynn Foster wrote: Hey all, Reminder that this event happens this Thursday, details below. We've been working with the vendor and believe that the previous issue around Solaris support has been fixed. If anyone experiences anything otherwise, please drop me a line. Good job Glynn! From the page: Users running Solaris 10 or better with Firefox 3+ and Flash Player v10+ should be able to successfully view this webcast. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] hangs all over
On 04/11/11 10:06 AM, iwasinnamuk...@genestate.com wrote: Hi list, I've got a machine running OSOL...can't remember the exact version :/ Hasn't been updated in a while as I couldn't get access to the repositories. I normally runs just fine (except for a small problem probably related to the network card) however today it's really let me down. I tried to destroy some datasets but the command hung. Couldn't kill (-9) it. I was also trying to delete some files on another dataset (same pool) but that eventually hung too. There were a number of issues with zfs destroy hanging in older builds. It can still take an age if you are using dedup. Try booting from a live CD, import the pool, scrub and export. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] hangs all over
On 04/11/11 10:29 AM, iwasinnamuk...@genestate.com wrote: On Mon, Apr 11, 2011 at 10:20:38AM +1200, Ian Collins wrote: On 04/11/11 10:06 AM, iwasinnamuk...@genestate.com wrote: Hi list, I've got a machine running OSOL...can't remember the exact version :/ Hasn't been updated in a while as I couldn't get access to the repositories. I normally runs just fine (except for a small problem probably related to the network card) however today it's really let me down. I tried to destroy some datasets but the command hung. Couldn't kill (-9) it. I was also trying to delete some files on another dataset (same pool) but that eventually hung too. There were a number of issues with zfs destroy hanging in older builds. It can still take an age if you are using dedup. Try booting from a live CD, import the pool, scrub and export. Thanks for the quick reply. I'm downloading the image again, the original was on the machine that is down of course :D I'll try to clean it up from the livecd, but out of interest: I did some reading since I posted and would I be right in thinking that it might be trying to continue the destroy, and that it might actually finish (eventually)? Possibly, or it could have hung. You could check for activity with zpool iostat, or truss/dtrace the process doing the delete. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] hangs all over
On 04/11/11 10:34 AM, iwasinnamuk...@genestate.com wrote: Incidentally, the reason it wasn't updated much was that doing a pkg command came back with an error akin to can't access the repository. At the time I assumed it was thanks to Oracle and everything was closed down now. I don't keep up with the politics much. Are updates still available? Is it just something going on with that machine or a global thing? Start with these notes on upgrading to 11 Express: http://blogs.sun.com/observatory/entry/upgrading_from_opensolaris_2009_06 Go as far as step 5 if you want to stack with OpenSolaris. Another option is OpenIndiana. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris Online Forum Event :: April 14th at 9am PT
On 03/24/11 12:10 AM, Bob Palowoda wrote: To Register for this FREE event, please go to: ttp://event.on24.com/r.htm?e=298093s=1k=12D718A68226 85EE6AD2390FC381A7AEpartnerref=opensolaris Oh darn. I just installed Firefox 4.0 with the development help of Oracle and after registration with on24.com it indicates that it is not a valid browser to view the presentation. Is on24.com an Oracle partner that keeps up with Oracle technology? Stock Solaris 11 Express isn't recognised either. Someone really should sort this out - a presentation about Solaris not viewable on Solaris doesn't look good! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle Solaris Online Forum Event :: April 14th at 9am PT
On 03/24/11 10:06 AM, Gary Driggs wrote: FWIW, they list Linux and Mac clients as not supported as well... From the test page: System Requirements Windows XP with IE 6+ or Firefox 3.x Windows Vista with IE 6+ or Firefox 3.x Ubuntu Linux 8.x with Firefox 3.x Mac OS 10.5.x with Firefox 3.x or Safari 3.1.2 So Solaris with Firefox 3.x probably will work, but it would be nice to have it explicitly listed. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] libc thread failure: _thread_setschedparam_main() fails
On 03/19/11 08:33 PM, dengning wrote: I wrote a new memory allocation function to replace the glibc malloc() in solaris 10. (Open)Solaris does not use glibc. There are a number of alternative allocators provided (libumem for example), do any of these meet your needs? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] zpool upgrade, zfs upgrade, risks?
On 03/18/11 12:57 AM, Heinrich Rebehn wrote: Hi All, this weekend i will upgrade our main server from snv_111b to snv_151a (Solaris 11 express). This will not really be an upgrade, but a new installation. I tested the new system on identical hardware (except for the data pool) and installed it on an external USB disk, which i can simply plug into the old server and boot from it. I did a quick test and the new system boots ok on the old server. You should try asking on zfs-discuss. My questions is about our 5 TB data pool: * Is there any risk in upgrading zpool and zfs? I'm not aware of any and I've done quite a lot of upgrades. * Do the pool / datasets have to be offline while upgrading? No. * How long will it probably take? Almost instant. * What, if power fails during the upgrade? It's a tiny window for error, but as I said above, zfs-discuss is a better list to ask. Of course, i have a backup of the data pool, but i have not yet rehearsed a complete restore, so i want to keep risk at a minimum. Comparing the old and new zpool capabilities i saw: 16 stmf property support Do i need this for COMSTAR iscsi? Asides from new capabilities, have there also been enhancements of the existing ones? Yes, lots of bugs and performance niggles have been fixed. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/22/11 11:11 AM, ken mays wrote: Haryy, ECC RAM is a 'nice to have' if this is a PRO server - but not critical for home use/SOHO use. The picture is different for a ZFS server. Lesser filesystems will silently ignore corruptions cased by a memory error. ZFS will not. If your data has any value, the small additional cost of ECC RAM is cheap insurance! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/21/11 11:38 AM, Harry Putnam wrote: That helped find something on the build list: ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3674 But it still specifies unbuffered. Does that matter so much. I've read in other posts what it means and I understood it to mean that the data is buffered before release. What actually happens during that buffering... I'm not so sure. Hardly any consumer boards support ECC memory because their chip-sets don't support it. The main external difference between buffered and unbuffered ECC memory is the load each DIMM puts on the memory buses. In simple terms, you can fit a lot more buffered DIMS. Some good news is that apparently both of the 16 gb memory sets appear to offer both ECC and NON-ecc. Maybe you can say if that is what it means here: http://magicmicro.com/debay.asp?iid=3572 Almost certainly non-ECC only. Otherwise they would say. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Another [OT] Hardware Post
On 02/21/11 02:43 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Claus Assmann opensolaris+disc...@esmtp.org writes: On Sun, Feb 20, 2011, Harry Putnam wrote: ASUS M4A88TD-M /USB3,AMD 880G, Onboard Video That's basically the same what I use. ASUS M4A88TD-M, DDR3 RAM, 1333, ECC (KVR1333D3E9SK2/4G) Ahh great... good to hear from someone who speaks from experience. So at least we know ECC is available for that board. Still not sure how to get the builders to use that but I suspect I'll have to track them down and get an oral promise. But anyway there turns out to be a drawback with that one too, in that it's kind of weak in the expansion slots: 1 x PCIe 2.0 x16 2 x PCIe 2.0 x1 1 x PCI But I found another one on this builders list that appears to have ECC and better expansion slots: Unless Ian C. is right about ECC, then this board has the same notation as the other one: All I said was if they don't say ECC is supported, it isn't! In this case, they do. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Need coaching about used equipment
On 01/13/11 02:33 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Erik Trimbleerik.trim...@oracle.com writes: [...] Thanks for such a nice overview and lots of bits of informative detail from your experience I like the IBM x3400 and x3500 pedestal servers (which, while they have lots of PCI-E slots, only have x8, so no big graphics cards), or the IBM I'm not sure I understand what you mean there; the `lots' refers to PCI-E slots, but what does the `x8' refer to? 8 x PCI-E lanes. High end graphics cards use 16. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris 11 Express: xterm very slow
On 12/23/10 10:37 AM, Claus Assmann wrote: On Wed, Dec 15, 2010, Claus Assmann wrote: Oh well, maybe I put an nVidia graphics card into the box again and see how that works (it caused some problems with X and the selection It actually works ok. However, it would be nice to have the builtin graphics working properly too -- AFAICT the performance of the ATI 4250 (the drivers says it's ATI Radeon HD 4290 but the docs say it should be an HD 4250) should be better than that of an nVidia NV44 [GeForce 7100 GS]. Well you are comparing an accelerated driver with one that isn't. GPU vendors are notoriously secretive about their parts, making it nigh on impossible to write a good open accelerated driver. After all, I'm only using text based applications (software development, about 3-4 xterms each on 4 virtual pages). It shouldn't be that bad... -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Express and FlashArchives
On 12/16/10 01:39 AM, Mike DeMarco wrote: We use Flash Archives to recover servers for DR. I have noticed that the flar script is nolonger included and never worked with zfs. Flash Recovery was a cornerstone of production Solaris and one of the keys to its success in the business world. What if anything exists to give the same functionality for Disaster Recovery of the OS residing on zfs? Sending snapshots of your root pool to wherever you held your flash archives. See http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-5461/ghzvz?l=ena=view -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris 11 Express: xterm very slow
On 12/15/10 03:22 PM, Claus Assmann wrote: [Is it ok to ask questions about Solaris 11 Express here?] I bought a new machine (with AMD 880G graphics chip) and while it seems to run Solaris 11 Express (snv_151a) fine, it is very slow under X. I ran some x11perf test which show good numbers, but the thing that demonstrates the problem best is time xterm -e /bin/sh -c exit On an older machine this takes about 0.05s. On the new machine it takes 3s. Any idea what could cause this and how to resolve it? It takes about .1 second on my desktop. Run it under truss and see where it stalls. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Can we replace the libthread.so in Solaris with the one from Opensolaris ?
On 11/30/10 10:32 AM, Afantee Lee wrote: Hi, I am trying to replace the pthread library under Solaris with my own. My plan is to modify the code from OpenSolaris (adding lots of profiling code), and compile it as a dynamic lib. then, replace the one under Solaris with my own. the question is: will this replacement work ? (if I did not the pthread code from Opensolaris at all) The pthread functions are part of libc in recent Solaris releases. If you want to roll your own, either interpose the functions you want to dissect or use LD_PRELOAD to load your library ahead of libc. There's a fair chance using LD_PRELOAD to interpose libc functions will end in tears. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] How to compile libc or pthread ?
On 11/25/10 09:55 PM, Afantee Lee wrote: Hi, All With the help for my previous question, I checked out the source code tree. of libc/port/thread but, it seems that there is no way to compile pthread or libc only. there is makefile under libc, but, make all does not work. Would some one please give me some suggestion, how to compile the libc or thread ? Do I have to compile the whole open solaris OS ? What do you want to do with your compiled libc? You won't be able to replace the one in /usr/lib without making your system unstable. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] something about solaris 11 express license(OTN)
On 11/20/10 10:19 AM, Calum Benson wrote: On 19 Nov 2010, at 20:59, Edward Martinez wrote: I was going through the OTN license and I noticed something that got me thinking that solaris 11 express can only be used on one computer. what if i have was running opensolaris on two or more computers at home (non production form),like, my desktop and laptop.this means i can only use solaris 11 express only on one of them. is their a lawyer around here;-) IANAL, but the wording seems pretty clear -- one machine only. Which isn't much help for those of us developing Solaris applications that replicate data between systems! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] solaris 11 express and xvm
On 11/17/10 08:11 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 11/16/10 01:04 AM, Bruno Damour wrote: Hello, In the repository (http://pkg.oracle.com/solaris/release) I see : system/x...@0.5.11,5.11-0.151.0.1:20101105T061852Z system/virti...@0.5.11,5.11-0.151.0.1:20101105T061851Z ... Does that mean that xvm is supported to use solaris 11 express as Dom0 ? That would be a huge benefit for me, currently stuck with snv_134 The 32-bit dom0 hypervisor has been removed, per the release notes: http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/821-1479/fbdtw?l=ena=view Other details regarding xvm usage can be found there as well. Interesting. Based on the push for Oracle's alternative Xen based offering, I was expecting xVM to be completely removed. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] solaris 11 express and xvm
On 11/17/10 03:17 PM, Kent Watsen wrote: On 11/16/2010 3:24 PM, Ian Collins wrote: On 11/17/10 08:11 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: The 32-bit dom0 hypervisor has been removed, per the release notes: http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/821-1479/fbdtw?l=ena=view Other details regarding xvm usage can be found there as well. Interesting. Based on the push for Oracle's alternative Xen based offering, I was expecting xVM to be completely removed. Me too, but this is a welcomed surprise and, honestly, the one thing that has suddenly caused me to start thinking again about running Solaris 11 on my network. I've searched for some time looking for any other information about xvm support in Solaris 11 Express and have found nothing. It almost appears to be a hidden feature... The doc Shawn linked is kind of strange in that it illustrates that there was a concerted effort to remove 32-bit Dom0 support while leaving 64-bit support. It doesn't really say that 64-bit Dom0 is supported, other than saying that use of the 64-bit hypervisor won't affect the ability to run either 32 or 64 bit guest machines. I have a couple pressing questions, perhaps someone could link me to relevant docs: * if xvm Dom0 is in Solaris 11 Express, does that imply that it will also be in Solaris 11? Well it isn't listed in the Features That Might Be Removed in a Future Release section of the release notes. * how has xvm been modified since b134? - I can't tell and I know there were a few bugs in b134, but it seems that if xvm is being picked up again, then it may have been updated in way other than stripping out the 32-bit support... That might be problem, it it's still there, but not being worked on. The version is still 3.4.2 (as build 133). -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] solaris 11 express and xvm
On 11/17/10 04:29 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: Kent Watsen wrote: * if xvm Dom0 is in Solaris 11 Express, does that imply that it will also be in Solaris 11? No, we are still working through removal of EOF features. There are some major removals yet to come. (I don't know about Dom0 specifically, just the case in general.) That could be a support headache if a supported customer uses an EOF feature in production. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] solaris 11 express and xvm
On 11/17/10 05:23 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: On 11/16/2010 8:16 PM, Erik Trimble wrote: On 11/16/2010 7:39 PM, Ian Collins wrote: On 11/17/10 04:29 PM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: Kent Watsen wrote: * if xvm Dom0 is in Solaris 11 Express, does that imply that it will also be in Solaris 11? No, we are still working through removal of EOF features. There are some major removals yet to come. (I don't know about Dom0 specifically, just the case in general.) That could be a support headache if a supported customer uses an EOF feature in production. Which is why people should read the Release Notes. http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/821-1479/eos-36?a=view :-) Of course, there does appear to be specific direction as to the future of 64-bit Dom0 or any DomU. Oops. I missed inserting the word NOT. As in, no specific direction about 64-bit xvm. Support for 32–bit and 64–bit guest domUs remains unaffected on the 64–bit version of the hypervisor delivered in this release. In that section may give the wrong impression! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Update/patch policy?
On 11/16/10 05:42 PM, Dave Koelmeyer wrote: Sean M. Brannon wrote: What is the update/patch policy for Express? i.e. is an Oracle support contract required to gain access to Solaris 11 Express software/security updates? Yes. Oh, awesome. More demo software. If you don't like the conditions, don't use it! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Update/patch policy?
On 11/16/10 07:46 PM, Sean M. Brannon wrote: Thank you for the answers guys. Not that I'm happy about their content. :-( OpenSolaris and the future Solaris 11 had me interested in Solaris as a server platform again. Even though Oracle had bought it, and quashed OpenSolaris, I still felt Solaris could prove itself able to provide features that would be compelling enough to move away from Linux for certain workloads. It still does, whether you consider they justify the cost of support only you can say. Alas, it isn't to be I'm afraid. My work environment precludes the attachment to our network of any OS that could not be patched should security vulnerabilities arise. So you wouldn't have been able to attach an OpenSolaris system either. Even on test machines. Much of the US Federal gov't has the same requirements; whether or not all admins adhere to the rules is another question. In any case, I'm not going to buy a support agreement in order to put up a test environment. And I'm not sure I want to deal with a vendor that won't provide patches for test machines. It doesn't speak well of the corporate culture and their attitude toward customers. Hell, even Microsoft provides updates and security patches with their 120-day evals. I can't argue with that. One would think customer feedback from an express program would be worth the cost of providing patched and updates. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Is there live cd rescue that understands zfs
On 11/ 3/10 04:13 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Is there a sort of standard approach when one needs to boot a machine running opensolaris with some sort of rescue disc that understands zfs? Use the b133 or 134 LiveCD. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] luupdate specific list of preserved data
On 10/28/10 06:10 AM, Mr. Housey wrote: Hi, I am trying to obtain the list of files that are preserved during a Solaris Live Update using the luupdate command. Live Upgrade isn't part of OpenSolaris any more (it never was open source), so you should try one of the Solaris forums or news groups. Or you could just give it a try, your current BE will still be there to compare against. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Quick question about the future
On 10/26/10 09:54 AM, stephen bond wrote: so will the update manager of an official release 2009.06 update to a sol11 express or that will be like a new os install? Who (or at least who can speak publicly) knows? We will have to wait and see. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] virtual windows on a hot Osol machine
On 10/13/10 11:15 AM, Harry Putnam wrote: Dmitry G. Kozhinovd...@desktopfay.com writes: What I'm asking here is if running a virtual windows 7 would be able to take good advantage of the 24 GB or ram? I think that VirtualBox will be fairly able to allocate most of the 24GB of RAM to guest Windows 7 64bit. I did try myself though. Thanks for the input. And I'm curious. If you haven't tried it, what do you base the assesment on. You know someone who has done this, or heard of it being done somewhere? VirtualBox will display the current installed RAM when configuring a VM. It warns you when you go above 60%, but doesn't stop you allocating more. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] virtual windows on a hot Osol machine
On 10/13/10 01:01 PM, Harry Putnam wrote: Alex Smith (K4RNT) shadowhun...@gmail.com writes: You'll only be bound by the Windows maximum memory addressing limit. According to the Wikipedia article on Windows 7, Home Premium 64-bit edition is limited to 16GB, and higher editions are limited to 192GB. YMMV, I run a 64-bit Windows 7 Professional host with 4GB RAM. [...] Ahh good input thanks. What are you running the win7 host on? What do you do on the virtual win 7? I'd like to be able to do video editing at least as well as I'm now doing that kind of work on an i7 Q820 (Sager laptop) that has 8 GB ram. i7 Q820 1.73 Ghz and 8gb ram seems plenty powerful but even then there some kinds of timelines that cannot play in real time. I'm trying to kill two birds with one stone, and get both a nice powerful NAS and a video editing machine. The best pro-sumer editing tools all run on windows only at this time. Like the Adobe suites or the Sony (vegas, dvdarch) tools. So hoping to run them with plenty of poop by installing plenty of ram and going the virtual route. Are there any PV drivers for win7? Thinking XVM rather then VirtualBox. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Quick question about the future
On 10/13/10 04:27 PM, samantha brekel wrote: when will the recent builds be completed What recent builds? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Does opensolaris support whole zone and sparse zones?
On 10/ 4/10 08:48 PM, Sarah kho wrote: Hi, Can you please let me know whether OpenSolaris support whole zones and sparse zones or just sparse zone? OpenSolaris zones are closer to whole root zones. Sparse root zones are not supported. Also, how I can create a solaris9 branded zones? I don't think you can on OpenSolaris. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris 11 Express
On 10/ 4/10 08:49 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: Robert Milkowski writes: I don't know - perhaps Oracle should consider a special license for up-to 2-socekt x86 servers which would allow production deployments for free with no support? No, they should make available such a special license, but for $199 one-time fee, just the RTU and access to basic patches, nothing else. I believe they could sell a lot of these licenses. Add to that telephone support at a realistic $/min rate and people will soon realise the true value of support! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] cannot install a zone because of repository returns error 503
On 10/ 4/10 10:36 AM, Sarah kho wrote: Hi, I am trying to install a zone and when I invoke the zoneadm -z zone_r install command it start downloading packages but at some point it shows the following message in the terminal: Sanity Check: Looking for 'entire' incorporation. Installing: Core System (output follows) DOWNLOADPKGS FILES XFER (MB) SUNWcs 0/20 1566/3021 9.33/42.55 pkg: An unexpected error happened while preparing for install: pkg: An error was encountered while attempting to retrieve package or file data for the requested operation. pkg: Could not retrieve filelist from 'http://pkg.opensolaris.org/release' HTTPError code: 503 - Service Unavailable ERROR: failed to install package Can you please let me know what should I do about this error? Try again, 503 indicates the server was unable or unwilling to service a request. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] dtcalc grabs mouse and won't let go
On 09/30/10 03:01 AM, Mike DeMarco wrote: build 134. dtcalc was left out of this build so I copied the binary over from my build 121. whenever I press the right mouse button inside of dtcalc application the mouse pointer changes and becomes bound inside the application box. Only way I have been able to get it back is with a reboot. This is a common problem with CDE applications displaying on OpenSolaris hosts. Is the cause known? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Help:Solaris 9 not fully coming up
On 09/29/10 02:59 PM, Moe Abdel wrote: Hello folks; I have Solaris 9 box that after power outage last week, won't come back up, it starts fine and reaches the point where it says System is coming up with no errors then says LDAP Domain is my companycomain.com then hangs there forever. You are way off topic here, try one of the Sun Solaris forums, or comp.unix.solaris. Make sure your LDAP server is reachable and running. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Illumos loosing the SystemV heritage, fork (was: Re: Is anyone planning an alternative to Illumos or a fork?)
On 09/22/10 07:57 PM, Knut Reinert wrote: On Mon, Sep 6, 2010 at 3:50 PM, David Blake davidblakeaus...@googlemail.com wrote: Hello, is anyone planning an alternative to Illumos or a fork? Given the ongoing BSD'tification of Illumos userland utilities I'd say it may be time to fork. So what to you propose as an alternative to the closed source bits of OpenSolaris? Solaris and it's descendants should stay with it's SystemV heritage and POSIX. That makes no sense, how can an open source project keep someone else's closed binaries? Where's the deviation from POSIX? but I see Illumos is slipping. Well in that case, you can write your own System V replacement bits, whatever that might mean. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] now seems official- OpenSolaris name retired
On 09/22/10 10:57 AM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: My concern would be more that Oracle may well continue to change the rules whenever they think there's more money to be squeezed. I of course think that's short-sighted, and trades money today for shrinking market share tomorrow. I think just about everyone, excluding Oracle execs, thinks the same! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Merge other distros to OpenIndiana?
On 09/17/10 07:03 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: Shawn Walkershawn.wal...@oracle.com wrote: On 09/16/10 05:00 AM, joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote: Richard L. Hamiltonrlha...@smart.net wrote: Well...there are probably people that prefer for example * traditional Solaris command set default vs GNU command set default This is why few Solaris users did accept Indiana. Based on what data do you make that assertion? From talking with *many* Solaris users. The only Indiana users I know are Solaris newcomers. I'm certainly no a newcomer and I while I never used Indiana when it was around, I have a lot of OpenSolaris systems in various production uses. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Merge other distros to OpenIndiana?
On 09/17/10 12:00 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: Richard L. Hamiltonrlha...@smart.net wrote: Well...there are probably people that prefer for example * traditional Solaris command set default vs GNU command set default This is why few Solaris users did accept Indiana. * SVR4 packages vs IPS vs whatever packaging scheme Nexenta uses (there too there's a problem, inasmuch as other tools like beadm and zonecfg are also involved, although I gather it ought to be possible to come up with different versions of them for each packaging scheme that some distro or another uses) SVR4 packages support sparse zones, IPS does not. OpenSolaris doesn't have sparse zones, so there nothing to support. If I remember the threads at the time, they were (rightly) considered unnecessary now we use ZFS for zone roots. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenIndiana - a new OpenSolaris Distribution!
On 09/14/10 09:23 PM, Edward Martinez wrote: That's today the presentation!!! :) the press conference will be held in London at 6:30pm UK Time. so in my area, Los Angeles that converts to about 10:30 am here is a time converter so no body will miss this conference. http://www.timezoneconverter.com/cgi-bin/tzc.tzc Except for those of us who don't fancy getting up at 5:30AM! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenIndiana Announcement
On 09/15/10 06:59 AM, Hillel Lubman wrote: Where will you publish release notes / upgrade instructions etc.? http://wiki.openindiana.org:8080/display/oi/Installing+or+Upgrading -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Indiana - what comes closest to it?
On 08/31/10 03:52 AM, Matthias Pfützner wrote: Right, but in all cases, Oracle never really announced stuff so much in advance as Sun did... So, that's a change in external behaviour, but not necessarily an indication of a different underlying attitude towards the product Solaris itself... Let's just hope for their sake they understand the OS platform market and its flow of information is way different from the database market. It is very hard and very expensive to migrate a business from one database platform to another, so customers are effectively locked in. One of my clients is spending many man years and a small fortune doing this. It is comparatively easy and cheap to swap OS and hardware. The further customers can see what's coming to plan ahead the less likely they are to move. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] The last of the 5000?
This message is directed to old old timers who understand my subject line! I stumbled upon my first 5000 T-shirt this morning at that made me think that now that this ride that has been OpenSolaris is coming to an and end, we should have a photographic record of the survivors. Would it be possible setup a page on the OpenSolaris site where we could upload our photos, wearing our faded and possibly too small first 5000 T-shirts? Just a daft idea for the weekend, -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris cancelled, to be replaced with Solaris 11 Express
On 08/18/10 11:51 PM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: * even BSD drivers are different from Solaris drivers, although probably closer than anything else. But Mac OS X, although borrowing a lot from BSD, has a driver interface like nothing else: IOkit, an object oriented device driver environment, allowing (with limitations) drivers to be implemented in C++. So, not only would all drivers have to be massively rewritten, but each interface can probably do some things that the other can't (without a lot of work). With limitations, Solaris drivers can also be implemented in C++. I know because I've done it! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris cancelled, to be replaced with Solaris 11 Express
On 08/19/10 07:47 AM, Dmitry G. Kozhinov wrote: Let me guess what the Solaris 11 Express will be: The demo version of commercial Solaris 11. Utilizing only limited amount of RAM, disk space, and limited number of CPU cores. Unlikely; too much effort would be required to maintain two streams and the feedback would be pretty useless. Most companies use express or beta releases as free QA. The benefits from customer testing outweigh any losses from license abuse. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Oracle sues Google over Java!
On 08/16/10 11:27 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: From: Alan Coopersmith [mailto:alan.coopersm...@oracle.com] Sent: Sunday, August 15, 2010 1:56 PM Edward Ned Harvey wrote Was java anything other than a money pit for sun to dump cash into? Did anybody ever pay for it? Yes - for instance, all the cell phone makers who paid Sun to license Java for their cell phones. It was dumb of me to assume nobody pays for java - just as it is sometimes dumb when people assume nobody pays for solaris. Out of curiosity (and I know this is OT) ... Java is free to use, develop on, and distribute. What do people pay for? When a cell phone mfgr pays for java, what are they using, that wasn't available for free? The brand? Support? http://java.sun.com/logos/ http://java.sun.com/javase/licensees.jsp -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris cancelled, to be replaced with Solaris 11 Express
On 08/14/10 08:45 AM, Paul Gress wrote: On 08/13/10 03:45 PM, Petros Koutoupis wrote: As much as I am disappointed with the end result of this whole OpenSolaris drama, I still cannot find myself to agree with the above excerpt. Oracle works heavily with Linux. In fact they are sponsoring Chris Mason's development of the GPL'd Btrfs file system. They also developed and GPL'd the OCFS. This is on top of other lesser known management tools which all are focused toward their Red Hat based Unbreakable Linux distribution (and in some cases outside of that). While all of this never defined them as an open source company, they seem to spend a lot of time and money contributing back to the community. What the real reason(s) for not wanting to work with OpenSolaris arethis answer we may never figure out. I also agree with Petros. Oracle was only looking to gain control of Opensolaris. It looks to me, they tried balancing their goals with somewhat of the Opensolaris community goals in that they said they will release development binary snapshots called Solaris 11 Express and source, at an unspecified interval. If the memo is to be believed, the source will follow full releases of our enterprise Solaris operating system how ever far apart they are. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris cancelled, to be replaced with Solaris 11 Express
On 08/14/10 09:25 AM, Erik Trimble wrote: Frankly, at this point, I'd be all for Oracle spinning out the Solaris group as a fully-owned subsidiary, responsible for paying its own way. You'd see Solaris make lots of interesting product/marketing decisions and far more cash than I think Oracle is going to make with what they're doing now. That's an interesting thought Eric. It would make collaboration much easier. I think the root cause of this debacle was Sun allowing OpenSolaris to get too far ahead of Solaris 10. I can just imagine a conversation between an Oracle exec and a Sun one; So you have all this world beating OS technology, how are you monetising it? Er, we're not, we're giving it away Ho mum... We need this in the market now! If I were the Oracle exec I'd want to focus my resources on getting some return for all that wonderful technology. While I agree getting Solaris 11 out should be the priority, I still think cutting off the OpenSolaris community is incredibly short sighted, probably driven by the US corporate obsession with the next quarter's results. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Where too now?
On 08/14/10 01:39 PM, Mark Bennett wrote: So Oracle has pulled the plug. That makes for a really black Friday 13th down this end of the planet. Or Saturday 14th at this end. Where too from here ? Could the community rally togeather and actually release an OpenSolaris 2010 ? We have the bits that it was to be in 134, but do we have the desire ? For most uses, build 134 is a better choice than Solaris 10, so I see no reason to stop using it. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris cancelled, to be replaced with Solaris 11 Express
On 08/14/10 02:19 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris- discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Alasdair Lumsden This memo was circulated internally within Oracle (and subsequently leaked). Leaked where? http://pastebin.com/YtuvZkUJ -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] upcoming web event:strategy for Oracle's Sun Servers, Storage and solaris
On 08/13/10 08:04 AM, Paul Griffith wrote: I expect Oracle to give us more info during OpenWorld. I am expecting more to come regarding OpenSolaris, I don't think they will call it OpenSolaris. No! I don't have any inside knowledge, just thinking out loud. Based on current form, Oracle OpaqueSolaris. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] upcoming web event:strategy for Oracle's Sun Servers, Storage and solaris
On 08/11/10 08:22 AM, Paul Gress wrote: Forgive me if I don't get excited. But thats for Solaris 11, for all we know, based on Larrys expectations, it will probably be tuned for Database and Servers. Oracle may well remove most desktop and laptop functionality, after all, it's not required and makes support much harder. From http://blogs.sun.com/jimlaurent/entry/solaris_11_in_2011 Solaris 11 will be based on technologies currently available for preview in OpenSolaris http://www.opensolaris.org including: * Image packaging system * Crossbow network virtualization * ZFS de-duplication * CIFS file services * Enhanced Gnome user environment * Updated installer and auto network installer * Network Automagic configuration * and much more Also, if I read in between the lines for this statement Solaris 11 will be a superset of what is in Opensolaris, it say's to me, Oracle is not open with Opensolaris any more. There will likely be proprietary extensions added not in Opensolaris. So? No change there. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The Illumos Project
On 08/ 5/10 06:32 PM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: The nVIDIA device driver is written by nVIDIA, not Oracle! Solaris/OpenSolaris is not specifically a Server or Workstation OS, it's an OS. People use it. Oracle/Sun currently only sells server-hardware. So, trying to derive from that fact, that Solaris/OpenSolaris is only a server OS is a conclusion done by someone. But, if people would be using Solaris/OpenSolaris more for Desktop, then that would be helping nVIDIA in porting/migrating (my guess). AFAIK, the Ultra 27 (fairly powerful x86 tower, notwithstanding the name) and Sun Rays (thin client, used together with a server) are still sold, so Oracle/Sun currently only sells server-hardware isn't accurate. I thought the U27 had vanished form the portfolio, I couldn't find it on sun.com last time I looked. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Access to Sun Studio tools for building ON is broken
On 08/ 5/10 08:56 PM, Chavdar Ivanov wrote: On 4 Aug 2010, at 21:48, Maurilio Longo wrote: Alasdair, what about this link http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/sunst udio/downloads/studio12-update1-136165.html Ohh, yes, that works perfectly! Nice, thanks :-) Not for me, any full SunStudio (Express downloaded fine, though). http://www.oracle.com/technetwork/server-storage/sunstudio/downloads/index.html still shows Free Download; from here onwards when I select any of the options to download, I am lead to the login page; using my personal credentials I always get User not authorized on http://sunsolve.sun.com/messageHandler.do ... That's odd, it works for me with my subscription free login. The patches are still available as well. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Trouble formating usb external hard drive.
On 08/ 4/10 04:55 AM, Mike DeMarco wrote:
I'd say correct sequence of commands should be:
pfexec fdisk /dev/rdsk/c10t0d0p0
In fdisk, select and delete (all) partition(s), then
create one
partition of FAT32 ('C') type. Save, exit.
mkfs -F pcfs -o fat=32 /dev/rdsk/c10t0d0p0:c
Note that you instruct mkfs to use p0, not p1.
However, some other scheme might be more reliable or
convenient, ie you
could format drive with ZFS, leave it attached to
Solaris machine and
share its contents over SMB/Windows network with
Windows machine. Or
vice versa (with NTFS).
I am using one machine duel boot so can't share it out
I have created and still use a 1TB fat32 drive formatted on OpenSolaris,
so the command above should work.
By the way, a duel is a formal fight between two persons armed with
deadly weapons. I assume your operating systems aren't engages in
mortal combat!
--
Ian.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] build 134 Music issue
On 07/27/10 05:27 AM, Mike DeMarco wrote: Installed Build 134 on my wifes laptop. She is unable to transfer the music CDs that she burned using Windoes media player. When she starts the copy using sound juicer it just hangs at 0% complete. She is also unable to see any of the music on here sansa drive. Sansa and other media players have two modes, USB and an other who's name I forget that works with windows. You can change the mode to USB on a windows box. I can't remember how I did it, but the information was easy to find. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/25/10 02:57 AM, Ken Gunderson wrote: To all those who seemed to have been confused by my reply to Ian's post please note the following: 1) My comments were intended as a response to Ian's assertion of the 'inevitability of IPS'. The inevitability of IPS I was alluding to is Oracle's Solaris. My main reason for raising the subject was Jörg's comment about having to use an old Xorg. When a project has one contributor doing 99% of the work, not following their packaging scheme is a Quixotic gesture that will doom a distribution that lacks significant resources. Someone has to build packages. Nexenta's call to use Debian/RPM was a sound business decision. They can concentrate on adding value at the core while others supply the essential, but non-core packages. 2) The example I provided, Nexenta, is pretty strong evidence that incorporation of IPS is not requisite for a successful Open Solars derivative. True, but as I said, it's strong evidence for using a widely supported packaging scheme. 3) My comments did not even touch vaguely upon any issues of technical merit of package systems. Neither did mine, I am posting with my manager hat on! 4) I was here when Indiana was released. My recollection is that there was quite a bit of uproar about IPS, among other things, specifically in the context of the manner in which Sun played their trump card. Others are certainly free to interpret those events differently. There was, but it was largely piss and wind; no one put up an alternative. I disliked it at the time and said so, but now I have belatedly adopted it, I won't be going back (even if I could). 5) Funny that I'm accused of stirring the pot when the fact of the matter is that Ian used the ruse of a pat on the back as a thinly veiled cover for effectively telling Joerg that he'd better toe the Oracle IPS line. At least that was my read. Hence my response. Your mileage may vary. No, I didn't, there was no ruse I respect the work Jörg has done. I was expressing my view that if Jörg's distribution is to succeed, it needs to be able to draw on existing components from other sources. The OpenSolaris community outside of Oracle is too small to do any of devising, implementing or supporting yet another packaging scheme -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/25/10 10:27 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 07/24/10 06:37 AM, Moinak Ghosh wrote: ... To stir the pot here, since we are discussing a Community Distro as opposed to a SUN/Oracle distro, IPS when used remotely from halfway across the world has large performance issues. For example in Bangalore I personally know no one outside the SUN India office who have successfully updated packages on their OpenSolaris installations let alone do an image-update in a sane amount of time. In comparison things like YUM or Apt-Get are reasonable even over 512Kbps. Having said that I am not going to make vague statements. I will do my own testing over a 2Mbps broadband link and post measurements. The version of pkg(5) that will be part of b144 should deliver somewhere around a 20% or greater performance improvement in transport performance when used with a properly configured web and/or depot server. If we ever get to see b 134! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/25/10 11:23 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: On 07/24/10 04:17 PM, Ian Collins wrote: On 07/25/10 10:27 AM, Shawn Walker wrote: The version of pkg(5) that will be part of b144 should deliver somewhere around a 20% or greater performance improvement in transport performance when used with a properly configured web and/or depot server. If we ever get to see b 134! The source is there, and you can build it you know ;) The source is also here, and I'm getting close to the point where I will! Once upon a time in a land far away I worked for a small company who chose to base a product on their own Linux distro. I warned them it would all end in tears, but they went ahead anyway. The support and testing costs killed it in the end. That's why I shy away from building my own OS! Alternatively, you could use the bits someone made available on genunix.org for b142: http://genunix.org/dist/richlowe/README.txt http://genunix.org/dist/richlowe/ I've seen that and it's a job very well done. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/24/10 03:48 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: On 07/22/10 14:56, Jason wrote: I suspect they would be quite disappointed (to put it mildly) if there is no way to do something similar (at least an installer that can run in an older version to lay down the bits in unused space). The following worked for me to migrate development build servers (and a couple laptops and desktops) from nevada to opensolaris: 1) migrate from UFS root to ZFS root via live upgrade. 2) use zfs send zfs receive to bring in a root filesystem cloned from an appropriate opensolaris install, containing a roughly comparable opensolaris build. I guess that's with an older or same ZFS version not newer in order to be able to zfs send the filesystem. It could work for recent Solaris 10 updates as well, assuming there's another update with a zfs upgrade. 3) migrate configuration from the nevada root to the opensolaris root. 4) adjust boot configuration (grub menu and/or bootfs property) to boot the opensolaris root. Thanks for the ideas, I give it a go with my last SXCE server - after grabbing some live CDs with the correct builds. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/24/10 09:47 AM, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: On 07/23/10 14:23, Ian Collins wrote: I guess that's with an older or same ZFS version not newer in order to be able to zfs send the filesystem. It could work for recent Solaris 10 updates as well, assuming there's another update with a zfs upgrade. When I did this I migrated systems from nevada build 130 to opensolaris build 130 so this wasn't a consideration. I'm just downloading the b117 CD dorm genunix to try this with my b117 SXCE system. The following is somewhat speculative (I haven't needed to migrate from s10 to opensolaris): Being the weekend, I'm going to see how far I get with a Solaris 10 update 8 system. One thing that can be done with a Solaris host and not a nevada one is to create a FLAR of the box and import it as a branded zone on it's new self. That would make post-upgrade configuration porting easier (I'm bound to forget something!). It will also provide a home for application that don't support OpenSolaris. - remember that there are separate pool versions and filesystem versions. - You can, in general, zfs send a filesystem to a lower-revision pool; the filesystem version is what matters for zfs send. - You can create down-rev pools and filesystems using appropriate options to the zpool create and zfs create commands. That's right, but I don't think you can specify the zfs or zpool version to the installer (an RFE maybe?) so the root pool will always be the latest version. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/24/10 10:40 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: Ken Gundersonkgund...@teamcool.net wrote: Cool;) My test box was just about to get fresh install of FreeBSD-8.1-RELEASE, but I'll take Schillix for a quick test spin first. It still has no GDM and an old version of Xorg I compiled in late 2005. I hope that someone will compile a recent Xorg and GNOME. It may be a good idea to check Sun's sources for this as e.g. the GNOME from Blastwave only works if the locale is UTF-8 based _and_ if every string inside every program is UTF-8 based. This makes a lot of software from Europe fail with non C locales. Jörg, Good job on getting this out. I really do think you should accept the inevitable and accept IPS, otherwise SchilliX runs the risk of becoming an evolutionary dead end. If any OpenSolaris distributions are to survive post-Oracle, they must be able to share packages with each other and ultimately with Oracle's Solaris. A disparate packaging scheme shows a fractured community. We should at least strive to appear united! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SchilliX-0.7.0 ready for testing
On 07/24/10 01:23 PM, Ken Mays wrote: This is an idea, but SchilliX (or a fork of it) could remain a pure server-oriented core distro (without X or desktop cruft). The desktop stuff could come by way of IPS integration and/or CSW/SFW/other packages... The kernel distribution for Blastwave maybe? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/23/10 06:44 AM, Bart Smaalders wrote: On 07/21/10 15:25, Ian Collins wrote: If Solaris Next is to be IPS based, I really really hope we will see a viable upgrade path. The lack of one is the biggest hurdle to IPS adoption. In general, upgrading from UFS root w/ svr4 packages to ZFS root w/ IPS is a very difficult problem. While we can imagine cases in which we could be successful, there are a host of situations which are not readily addressable. Add to this the fact that most of Sun ^H^H^HOracle's Solaris customers generally do NOT upgrade from one release to the next, because of the reproducibility problem - production machine configurations need to be readily reproducible, and upgrading an existing S10 patched OS is not the best way of doing this. I can see that's probably true. I only ever upgraded one production box from Solaris 9 to 10 and that was a very simple configuration. Nearly all of the other production Solaris 9 boxes I've replaced have been migration for their services to Solaris 10 zones. The small remainder have been imported to branded zones. So I guess Robert is right, a branded zone is one option! I do wonder how much of a selling point (to keep people on Solaris) the ability to upgrade was, even it wasn't used? We anticipate developing and sharing migration strategies and tools, but a traditional upgrade in place DVD approach is not likely to occur. That's good. The traditional upgrade in place DVD approach has probably reached the end of the line with the increasing use of virtualisation. Treating a system (or zone) as a service and looking at how to migrate that is better approach. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/22/10 07:52 PM, Robert Milkowski wrote: On 21/07/2010 23:25, Ian Collins wrote: If Solaris Next is to be IPS based, I really really hope we will see a viable upgrade path. The lack of one is the biggest hurdle to IPS adoption. Would a Solaris 10 branded zone do? As a back stop, yes. I've used Solaris 8/9 branded zones for old servers that were too much trouble to migrate. Branded zones are a great way to cut power bills! They are also undersold in my opinion. I get fed up explaining zones (branded or otherwise) to Linux and windows types, they just assume zones are another VM and don't know the advantages. The ability to quickly and easily migrate an old machine to a branded zone should promoted on Oracle's front page! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/22/10 02:43 AM, Alan Coopersmith wrote: joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote: I am not sure about where you live but in the real world, there is NO IPS in Solaris. IPS was introduced in Indiana (why not in Solaris) and Indiana is a nice proof of concept on how to slow down things by working against the community. In the world I live in, IPS is in Solaris Nevada, the development branch of the next release of the Oracle Solaris commercial product, and the source of the code that Oracle releases to the OpenSolaris project. That's interesting. While I have come to terms with IPS and now like it despite its foibles it doesn't appear to have gained traction with other teams inside Oracle (or maybe it has and their work hasn't been released?). One particular annoyance for me as a developer is the lack of an IPS version of the latest Studio Express, or updates to Studio 12. I have to keep my development server running SXCE in order to get patches. If Solaris Next is to be IPS based, I really really hope we will see a viable upgrade path. The lack of one is the biggest hurdle to IPS adoption. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/21/10 08:42 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: SMF was a good idea in 2004 and it did speed up things a lot. Today, Solaris with SMF is slow compared to Linux. Do we need to throw away SMF? I believe no, we rather need to work on the existing software to make it readiy for the future. In what way is Solaris with SMF is slow compared to Linux? I managed a large Linux based project and SMF would have made life so much easier. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/21/10 10:00 AM, Jason wrote: On Tue, Jul 20, 2010 at 4:46 PM, Ian Collinsi...@ianshome.com wrote: On 07/21/10 08:42 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: SMF was a good idea in 2004 and it did speed up things a lot. Today, Solaris with SMF is slow compared to Linux. Do we need to throw away SMF? I believe no, we rather need to work on the existing software to make it readiy for the future. In what way is Solaris with SMF is slow compared to Linux? I managed a large Linux based project and SMF would have made life so much easier. I've heard some rumblings (I haven't investigated this myself, so consider it hearsay), that the booting time is still longer on Solaris than Linux. If I had to guess, it might be tied to either overly restrictive dependencies, or simply too many for the current implementation to handle quickly (assuming it's actually an SMF issue). ISTR there were a few services that seemed to be unusually sluggish to start in a few builds, which could also be an impact. There was some work done before in this area, if it's a big concern, I'm sure some of the tools used for that could be used again to see what's going on. It's never been an issue with me, so I've never looked into it a whole lot. The biggest drag on (Open)Solaris booting is mounting ZFS filesystems. As you say, getting dependencies wrong can cause services to delay things. But that is the fault of the service, not the process. I lot of good work was done to start (and stop) services in parallel which made a huge difference to boot and shut-down times. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Community distro
On 07/21/10 10:38 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: Jasonja...@ansipunx.net wrote: I've heard some rumblings (I haven't investigated this myself, so consider it hearsay), that the booting time is still longer on Solaris than Linux. If I had to guess, it might be tied to either overly It is again slower than on Linux. In September 2004, SMF caused much faster booting than with Linux. Um, so I waste an extra few seconds once a year when I reboot a server -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Benchmarking OpenSolaris and Solaris 10?
On 07/11/10 12:06 PM, Ken Mays wrote: This is what we started putting together to check with Phoronix: Lenovo ThinkPad T61 notebook with an Intel Core 2 Duo T9300 Penryn dual-core processor clocked at 2.50GHz, 4GB of system memory, a 100GB Hitachi HTS72201 SATA HDD, and NVIDIA Quadro NVS 140M graphics. PHP5 v5.3.2 used. Solaris 10u8 with the 5.10 kernel, GNOME 2.6.2, X Server 1.7.2, GCC 4.4.4, and a ZFS file-system. Don't Sun/Oracle get snotty over publishing unofficial Solaris benchmarks? OpenSolaris 2009.06 is based upon Solaris Nevada 111b with the 5.11 kernel, GNOME 2.24.2, X Server 1.5.3, GCC 4.4.4, and a ZFS file-system. OpenSolaris 2010.DEV is based upon Solaris Nevada 134 with the 5.11 kernel, GNOME 2.28.2, X Server 1.7.7, GCC 4.4.4, and a ZFS file-system. OpenSolaris 2010.DEV is based upon Solaris Nevada 144 with the 5.11 kernel, GNOME 2.28.2, X Server 1.7.7, GCC 4.4.4, and a ZFS file-system. Phoronix Tests: snip A few tests need implementing. ZFS works for now (awaiting official word). What do you mean by ZFS works for now? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] I think Oracle needs a new name for [Open]Solaris ..
On 07/ 8/10 01:18 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote: Calum Bensoncalum.ben...@oracle.com wrote: It certainly happened, here's the latest mapping of old Sun names to new Oracle names: http://www.oracle.com/us/sun/sun-products-map-075562.html I'm not a great fan of some of them, but Oracle does at least have a rather better history of picking product names and sticking with them than Sun ever did, so I doubt they'll change again anytime soon. And some of those Sun product names really did need some suckage extracted :) Well Sun Studio is now called Orcale Solaris Studio (OSS). A really naff name for a cross-platform product! Does this mean there is now a real chance to make it OSS? :) -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris 10 set
On 07/ 8/10 03:26 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: [context would be nice] You seem to be operating under the delusion that a commercial support contracts are magic bullets for protection from unplanned outages. Let me assure you in reality it is far from it. Indeed, in many instances in house experts can offer more expedient resolutions, especially for issues that don't qualify at the highest levels, e.g. 'Priority 1' of the SLA. If it's my itch I'm motivated to scratch it. First hand experience doing exactly that with both Oracle and Red Hat (since those two seems to get frequent mention as examples). I think a big part of the impetus, indeed if not the primary reason many enterprises commit to support contracts is for the indemnity aspect - in other words, somewhere else to point the finger if/when something goes horribly wrong. This can be as simple as saving a sysadmin/engineers job to saving a company from bearing sole liability arising from costly lawsuits. Commercial support contracts are not the holy grail. My $0.02, ymmv That has not been my experience. All of the Solaris cases I have been involved with have required a new patch, which had to come from Sun's support engineers. Sure I have been able to narrow down the cause and on on occasion use the OpenSolaris code to get close to the problem, but Sun still had to provide the patch. So our primary motivation is to get timely fixes. I agree a commercial support contracts isn't a magic bullet for protection from unplanned outages, but it is required to stop repeats! -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The Possibilities
On 07/ 6/10 04:48 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: Opensolaris and solaris are for servers. Not desktops. Yes you can use it for a desktop if you want, but it's not designed for that purpose, and not good compared to other products in that arena. So what do you suggest I use for my Solaris development work? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] So who is ready to be let down?
On 07/ 5/10 02:36 AM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote: From: Ian Collins [mailto:i...@ianshome.com] No. Trolls encourage FUD. An information vacuum encourages FUD. If that's true, please define what you're afraid of. I think Ken Gunderson's later post on this thread sums up my concerns. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Help with Faulted Zpool Call for Help
On 07/ 4/10 07:40 AM, Sam Fourman Jr. wrote: Hello list, This is my first post to a Open Solaris list I have a Fileserver that runs FreeBSD 8.1 (zfs v14) after a poweroutage, I am unable to import my zpool named Network my pool is made up of 6 1TB disks configured in raidz. there is ~1.9TB of actual data on this pool. I have loaded OpenSolaris svn_134 on a seprate boot disk, in hopes of recovering my zpool. on Opensolaris 134, I am not able to import my zpool almost everything I try gives me cannot import 'Network': I/O error I have done quite a bit of serching, and I found that import -fFX Network should work however after ~ 20 hours this hard locks Opensolaris (however it does return a ping) here is a list of commands that I have run on Open Solaris http://www.puffybsd.com/zfsv14.txt if anyone could help me use zdb or mdb to recover my pool I would very much appreciate it. Have a search through the zfs-discuss archive and follow up over there if you don't get any joy. There have been quite a few threads on recovering pools. -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
