Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
casper@sun.com wrote: I think that our large customers are underrepresented in OpenSolaris and I fear that the way AI-Install works complete disregards our most important customers, at least, that is what some of them say to me. I'm certainly not the largest Sun customer and still I just don't get it when it comes to AI-Install - the way I see it now it is an over-architected and too complicated thing for no real benefit. Maybe it will get better over time, maybe... ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Ghee Teo wrote: ... Having a great number for OpenSolaris 200x is GREAT for the community! However, even if the OpenSolaris 200x numbers are order of magnitude more than SXCE, it may or may not reflect that the ISV are tuned in to adapt the new paradigm as the numbers alone do not contain sufficient information to draw the conclusion per se. ISV education and recruitment is something that's been ramping up continuously as OpenSolaris has progressed. We're quite confident of resolving that problem before Solaris Next. Dave ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Shawn Walker wrote: Ian Collins wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. Do you have the numbers? If you read past postings here and there on indiana-iscuss or opensolaris-discuss, the usage indication I made here is not new or a surprise. Well I've been reading this list since the beginning of 2005, so my data a little biased. I don't read indiana-discuss. Looking a recent postings here just shows either more people have issues with OpenSolaris than SXCE, or more newcomers try OpenSolaris. I bet there's a large silent majority of SXCE users like me who don't have any problems. In particular, if you look at the stats page for pkg.opensolaris.org/release, immediately after a new one, you can get a pretty good idea of how many people are connecting to just *one* of the package depot servers to upgrade. Where are the SXCE download stats? How many people are pulling Sparc packages? I'll leave the math to you :) I'll do it when I have the data... -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Ian Collins wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. Do you have the numbers? If you read past postings here and there on indiana-iscuss or opensolaris-discuss, the usage indication I made here is not new or a surprise. In particular, if you look at the stats page for pkg.opensolaris.org/release, immediately after a new one, you can get a pretty good idea of how many people are connecting to just *one* of the package depot servers to upgrade. I'll leave the math to you :) Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Ghee Teo wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Ghee Teo wrote: So what is your 'supports' for doing the things the ways you are doing that are supposed to be helpful to Solaris users to migrate/upgrade to OpenSolaris. Have you considered also the hundreds of ISV for Solaris will now to adapt to the new paradigm? I can't answer that as I wasn't part of the initial design team, if you want to discuss the design of pkg(5), I suggest posting on pkg-discuss. With that said, every design decision that I'm aware of since I joined the team has been made with the full input and due consideration of multiple, interested parties. The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. Having a great number for OpenSolaris 200x is GREAT for the community! However, even if the OpenSolaris 200x numbers are order of magnitude more than SXCE, it may or may not reflect that the ISV are tuned in to adapt the new paradigm as the numbers alone do not contain sufficient information to draw the conclusion per se. ISVs as far as I'm aware are focused on Solaris 10 releases, and only have 'buy-in' there. So the argument of ISV buy-in for SXCE vs. OpenSolaris releases seems moot. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 2:46 AM, wrote: > >>Ghee Teo wrote: >>> So what is your 'supports' for doing the things the ways you are doing >>> that are supposed to be helpful to Solaris users to migrate/upgrade to >>> OpenSolaris. Have you considered also the hundreds of ISV for Solaris >>> will now to adapt to the new paradigm? >> >>I can't answer that as I wasn't part of the initial design team, if you >>want to discuss the design of pkg(5), I suggest posting on pkg-discuss. >> >>With that said, every design decision that I'm aware of since I joined >>the team has been made with the full input and due consideration of >>multiple, interested parties. The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x >>releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage >>speaks for itself IMO. > > That's not entirely true; quite a few people argued for "scripting at > install" and they were denied as there was clearly not a discussion > but more of a "this is the plan and we're not changing it". > > These people have unsubscribed because they felt there was no actual > discussion taking place. > > I think that our large customers are underrepresented in OpenSolaris and I > fear that the way AI-Install works complete disregards our most important > customers, at least, that is what some of them say to me. I've also heard similar concerns from colleagues at other places. A common requirement (especially at larger places) is that there should be no opportunity from install->'done' where the system is accessible in a state where it is not updated to their standards (usually for security or audit purposes). This means that during the install, there must be a way for security related settings to be applied, third party packages installed, as well as certain files altered (such as /etc/security/policy.conf) before anyone can possibly login. I saw it at previous places I've worked, and others have similar requirements. Trying to meet this via multiple reboots is simply never ever acceptable. If anyone disagrees, please document for the community the process used to install a fully populated E25k domain, meeting the above requirements, in under 2 hours (including _all_ reboot times). I think showing examples of how AI can accomplish similar levels of install complexity currently seen with Jumpstart would go a long way towards addressing people's concerns. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Tue, Aug 18, 2009 at 2:59 PM, Shawn Walker wrote: [...] > The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. > that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself > IMO. Considering that the only mention I've ever heard of Solaris Express has been on the OpenSolaris lists and one time at an event where I was handed a CD, I'm not surprised by that. fpsm ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Shawn Walker wrote: Ghee Teo wrote: So what is your 'supports' for doing the things the ways you are doing that are supposed to be helpful to Solaris users to migrate/upgrade to OpenSolaris. Have you considered also the hundreds of ISV for Solaris will now to adapt to the new paradigm? I can't answer that as I wasn't part of the initial design team, if you want to discuss the design of pkg(5), I suggest posting on pkg-discuss. With that said, every design decision that I'm aware of since I joined the team has been made with the full input and due consideration of multiple, interested parties. The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. Having a great number for OpenSolaris 200x is GREAT for the community! However, even if the OpenSolaris 200x numbers are order of magnitude more than SXCE, it may or may not reflect that the ISV are tuned in to adapt the new paradigm as the numbers alone do not contain sufficient information to draw the conclusion per se. -Ghee Cheers, ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
It would be really nice of we could have these figures for OpenSolaris released to the community...can someone inside push to get these figures published? On Wed, Aug 19, 2009 at 8:19 PM, wrote: > > >Shawn Walker wrote: > >> The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the > >> Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. > >> > >Do you have the numbers? > > > > > I certainly would want to know those, also because of the number of > the SPARC vs the x86 downloads now that we have SPARC OpenSolaris > downloads. > > SXCE can only be downloaded through www.sun.com/downloads, correct, > whereas OpenSolaris can be downloaded from different locations? > > If the information isn't public, please send them to me personally,' > though I'm also trying to get the information locally. > > Casper > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
>Shawn Walker wrote: >> The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the >> Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. >> >Do you have the numbers? > I certainly would want to know those, also because of the number of the SPARC vs the x86 downloads now that we have SPARC OpenSolaris downloads. SXCE can only be downloaded through www.sun.com/downloads, correct, whereas OpenSolaris can be downloaded from different locations? If the information isn't public, please send them to me personally,' though I'm also trying to get the information locally. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
casper@sun.com wrote: That's not entirely true; quite a few people argued for "scripting at install" and they were denied as there was clearly not a discussion but more of a "this is the plan and we're not changing it". These people have unsubscribed because they felt there was no actual discussion taking place. I think that our large customers are underrepresented in OpenSolaris and I fear that the way AI-Install works complete disregards our most important customers, at least, that is what some of them say to me. The problem is that there has been all this great talk about AI, but the software is really in it very early stages and as you say does not offer all the features of Jumpstart (and may never do). AI requirements http://opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/auto_install/AI_Reqs_Final e.g. 4.2 Will provide initial install support - Does not mention scripting in any form ...etc 8.1.1 Will support http, https client/ server protocols 8.1.4 Will support boot from network but use local client profile on USB, CD/DVD 8.2.1 CD/DVD/USB automated installation will be supported -- Andrew Watkins * Birkbeck College http://notallmicrosoft.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Shawn Walker wrote: The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. Do you have the numbers? -- Ian. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
>Ghee Teo wrote: >> So what is your 'supports' for doing the things the ways you are doing >> that are supposed to be helpful to Solaris users to migrate/upgrade to >> OpenSolaris. Have you considered also the hundreds of ISV for Solaris >> will now to adapt to the new paradigm? > >I can't answer that as I wasn't part of the initial design team, if you >want to discuss the design of pkg(5), I suggest posting on pkg-discuss. > >With that said, every design decision that I'm aware of since I joined >the team has been made with the full input and due consideration of >multiple, interested parties. The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x >releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage >speaks for itself IMO. That's not entirely true; quite a few people argued for "scripting at install" and they were denied as there was clearly not a discussion but more of a "this is the plan and we're not changing it". These people have unsubscribed because they felt there was no actual discussion taking place. I think that our large customers are underrepresented in OpenSolaris and I fear that the way AI-Install works complete disregards our most important customers, at least, that is what some of them say to me. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Ghee Teo wrote: So what is your 'supports' for doing the things the ways you are doing that are supposed to be helpful to Solaris users to migrate/upgrade to OpenSolaris. Have you considered also the hundreds of ISV for Solaris will now to adapt to the new paradigm? I can't answer that as I wasn't part of the initial design team, if you want to discuss the design of pkg(5), I suggest posting on pkg-discuss. With that said, every design decision that I'm aware of since I joined the team has been made with the full input and due consideration of multiple, interested parties. The popularity of the OpenSolaris 200x releases vs. that of the Solaris Express releases in terms of usage speaks for itself IMO. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Shawn Walker wrote: casper@sun.com wrote: That's your opinion of course, I and others pretty strongly disagree. There are things that should absolutely be asked at install time. However, install time is not the proper place to ask every possible question someone might want to configure. There's a balance to be struck. Of course there are differences between an interactive install and a 'hands-off' install. I think I've provided an answer for how to configure 'anything' post-install during an automated installation. Right, have you actually read what other people have posted? I've see *no* support for your position except one or two people in your team; yet, whenever I suggest that you're wrong I get a lot positive feedback both in these lists and in private. Be a man, and admit that you're wrong and fix the code such that our customers can use OpenSolaris as that's the only Solaris they can use in future. Perhalps you should reconsider that the small number of users that subscribe to this mailing list are not an accurate, representative sample of the target audience and therefore one cannot draw accurate conclusions about 'support' for one behaviour or another based on responses? So what is your 'supports' for doing the things the ways you are doing that are supposed to be helpful to Solaris users to migrate/upgrade to OpenSolaris. Have you considered also the hundreds of ISV for Solaris will now to adapt to the new paradigm? -Ghee Cheers, ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
casper@sun.com wrote: Peter Tribble wrote: To configure 'anything' requires essentially arbitrary scripting. First you tell us that arbitrary scripting will never be allowed, then you tell us that it's necessary, but we all have to implement our own mechanisms to get it. No, we've told you that you have to move your scripting out of installation context where it only needlessly complicates the job of package management. And instead we run it on *every boot* which makes booting the system slower and maintenance of a installed system harder? No, not on every boot. The point of not running it within packaging context is that the correct context cannot be guaranteed at the point of package installation and only leads to needless complications. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
>Peter Tribble wrote: >> To configure 'anything' requires essentially arbitrary scripting. First you >> tell us that arbitrary scripting will never be allowed, then you tell us that >> it's necessary, but we all have to implement our own mechanisms to >> get it. > >No, we've told you that you have to move your scripting out of >installation context where it only needlessly complicates the job of >package management. And instead we run it on *every boot* which makes booting the system slower and maintenance of a installed system harder? (Much of what "svcs" today prints is "scripts runs at boot which would really needed to be run once when the system/package is installed"; that alone makes it a lot harder to find out all the services running as you can't see the forest for the trees) We could probably fix it by making "svcs" only print services with running processes; the other services are typically not of interest. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Peter Tribble wrote: To configure 'anything' requires essentially arbitrary scripting. First you tell us that arbitrary scripting will never be allowed, then you tell us that it's necessary, but we all have to implement our own mechanisms to get it. No, we've told you that you have to move your scripting out of installation context where it only needlessly complicates the job of package management. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
casper@sun.com wrote: That's your opinion of course, I and others pretty strongly disagree. There are things that should absolutely be asked at install time. However, install time is not the proper place to ask every possible question someone might want to configure. There's a balance to be struck. Of course there are differences between an interactive install and a 'hands-off' install. I think I've provided an answer for how to configure 'anything' post-install during an automated installation. Right, have you actually read what other people have posted? I've see *no* support for your position except one or two people in your team; yet, whenever I suggest that you're wrong I get a lot positive feedback both in these lists and in private. Be a man, and admit that you're wrong and fix the code such that our customers can use OpenSolaris as that's the only Solaris they can use in future. Perhalps you should reconsider that the small number of users that subscribe to this mailing list are not an accurate, representative sample of the target audience and therefore one cannot draw accurate conclusions about 'support' for one behaviour or another based on responses? Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Oracle 10g installs and runs OK. I installed l SUNWmfrun, SUNWgcc, SUNWxwrtl, SUNWxorg-headers, maybe some other packages , created oracle user in dba group, configured project for him (setting max shared mamory and some other things), checked , that oracle user PATH includes Solaris-tools first, run ./runInstaller -ignoreSysPrereqs -jreLoc /usr/java/jre Installed only database software (without database itself). After installer saying that some libs can't be linked, I clicked "ignore". Then I removed $ORACLE_HOME/jre and copied /usr/java/jre there. After this step dbca started successfully, and I was able to create database by running scripts. Now oracle is up and running, but several libraries are corrupted (see my previous post). For my test usage its OK. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 11:34:28AM -0400, Fredrich Maney wrote: > I will concur. The single most important issue to me with regards to > installing a system is that I be able to do it automatically and > remotely. > > I have quite literally installed thousands of Solaris instances on > dozens of hardware platforms - less than a hundred have been > interactively and probably fewer than 2 dozen have been on systems > with a graphics card installed. Making me jump through additional > (unnecessary) hoops after installation to fix a broken environment > just to make it more "linux-friendly" is not going to make me very > interested in using OpenSolaris - if I wanted to use Linux, I'd use > Linux. It is beyond me or maybe I don't understand English but ... who said that asking about your habits is equal to installing Linux ? Can anybody explain me that ? Regards Przemyslaw Bak (przemol) -- http://przemol.blogspot.com/ -- Odstraszacz Komarow! Sciagnij >> http://link.interia.pl/f22d4 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Mon, Aug 17, 2009 at 12:51 AM, Peter Tribble wrote: > On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Glenn Lagasse wrote: >> * casper@sun.com (casper@sun.com) wrote: > And the pendulum has swung way too far. Ermm.. excuse my ignorance or gmail mangling up this thread but... what does this have to do with Oracle 10g? I have about 20 emails in this thread and i was kinda hoping someone would ask how to install Oracle 10g on Solaris 5.11 and someone else would answer but all I see mentioned is what should be possible on the OS install time and what should not be... Anyway, just my two cents about installing 100s of servers without interaction, isnt that why there are things like Jumpstart and other fancy tools, I don't see the fuzz really... Or I am just tired, that's also possible. Anyway, if a way to install Oracle was mentioned in this thread, feel free to copy/paste me that off-list cause I seriously can't find it and I'd be very interested in knowing how to get that working cause I don't think it's officialy supported by Oracle and I don't think it will be... Cheers, Patrick ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 6:26 PM, Glenn Lagasse wrote: > * casper@sun.com (casper@sun.com) wrote: >> > >> "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. > > No, but a package which once installed as part of the automated > installer that creates an smf service and method to do post-install > customization would work. So AI is going to provide this package as a standard feature, right? Expecting everyone to independently implement this feature seems wasteful. >> The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed >> is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken >> to a point that is not usable. > > That's your opinion of course, I and others pretty strongly disagree. > There are things that should absolutely be asked at install time. > However, install time is not the proper place to ask every possible > question someone might want to configure. There's a balance to be > struck. And the pendulum has swung way too far. The current Solaris installer isn't too far off. What is needs is a clean user-friendly interface, not removing completely. > Of course there are differences between an interactive install > and a 'hands-off' install. I think I've provided an answer for how to > configure 'anything' post-install during an automated installation. To configure 'anything' requires essentially arbitrary scripting. First you tell us that arbitrary scripting will never be allowed, then you tell us that it's necessary, but we all have to implement our own mechanisms to get it. -- -Peter Tribble http://www.petertribble.co.uk/ - http://ptribble.blogspot.com/ ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
> Be a man, and admit that you're wrong and fix the code such that > our customers can use OpenSolaris as that's the only Solaris they > can use in future. While I wouldn't put it quite as harshly, I certainly agree. Now if "everything" could be configured by deploying proper IPS packages during installation, I would be equally happy. What we need is a cookbook/blueprint/howto that walks us through the various tasks like editing a file, adding a driver, adding and configuring SMF services, etc. Many tasks are already covered in IPS, some aren't. But maybe this discussion had better move to the caiman and packaging lists... Regards -- Volker -- Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Sun Solaris Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim Email: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 45 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J. H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
>That's your opinion of course, I and others pretty strongly disagree. >There are things that should absolutely be asked at install time. >However, install time is not the proper place to ask every possible >question someone might want to configure. There's a balance to be >struck. Of course there are differences between an interactive install >and a 'hands-off' install. I think I've provided an answer for how to >configure 'anything' post-install during an automated installation. Right, have you actually read what other people have posted? I've see *no* support for your position except one or two people in your team; yet, whenever I suggest that you're wrong I get a lot positive feedback both in these lists and in private. Be a man, and admit that you're wrong and fix the code such that our customers can use OpenSolaris as that's the only Solaris they can use in future. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Octave Orgeron schrieb: [snipp] Again.. more focus has to be put on Data Center deployments and management than desktop usage. I would love to see OpenSolaris compete with Windows or MacOS X on the desktop. But realistically, not even Linux is making a dent.. so where is the return on making an enterprise OS into a desktop OS? That's not to say putting effort into the desktop doesn't make sense. Just that it shouldn't be the deciding factor in important features like provisioning or management. I second this. Solaris as a desktop is illusionary. What am I supposed to do with it? Have you asked Adobe,Autodesk,Avid,$vendor to support Solaris? What is the timeframe? There would be plenty of opportunities to create value for a server product. Where is the Server part of OpenOffice à la sharepoint? A replacement for OS X Server might be interesting too... Linux is a mess wrt standardized management/monitoring/ provisioning but as of now Solaris has made very little effort here. WBEM or VisualPanels? What the heck is it good for to have both? cheers Paul *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: "casper@sun.com" To: Shawn Walker Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 3:13:10 AM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11) The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to be done. "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken to a point that is not usable. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
* casper@sun.com (casper@sun.com) wrote: > > > >The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. > >They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, > >or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force > >them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about > >installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system > >going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. > > > Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be > customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to > be done. The graphical installer isn't going to solve this problem. The automated installer however would. > "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. No, but a package which once installed as part of the automated installer that creates an smf service and method to do post-install customization would work. > The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed > is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken > to a point that is not usable. That's your opinion of course, I and others pretty strongly disagree. There are things that should absolutely be asked at install time. However, install time is not the proper place to ask every possible question someone might want to configure. There's a balance to be struck. Of course there are differences between an interactive install and a 'hands-off' install. I think I've provided an answer for how to configure 'anything' post-install during an automated installation. Cheers, -- Glenn ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Shawn Walker wrote: casper@sun.com wrote: The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to be done. "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken to a point that is not usable. Customers want hands-off installs should use Automated Installer; we're talking about the LiveCD installer AFAIk. Before I forget, even if someone *was* talking about the automated case, configuration beyond the very minimum still doesn't belong in the installer itself. And from what I understand, SMF is going to be used for configuration for AI. The same philosophy is followed in pkg(5) for good reasons ... Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
casper@sun.com wrote: The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to be done. "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken to a point that is not usable. Customers want hands-off installs should use Automated Installer; we're talking about the LiveCD installer AFAIk. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Yup, I opened a bug on this exact issue.. 10543. It makes no sense to be unable to do that with the "create-client" subcommand to installadm. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Ethan Erchinger To: Tom Georgoulias ; opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 10:29:53 AM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11) > I'd love to do the same for my few opensolaris systems, but we use > static IPs so I can't use AI. I hope that gets fixed soon. > Maybe this was mentioned already, but why can't you statically assign IPs in DHCP, then use AI? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
And who's going to go run around with this USB stick in a data center? Doesn't sound like a realistic solution. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Paul Gress To: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 9:34:08 AM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11) casper@sun.com wrote: > >> The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're >> just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere >> else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of >> the install process. Installation should be about installation and the >> minimum amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond >> that is a pollution of the process IMO. >> > > > Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be > customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to > be done. > > "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. > > The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed is > a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken to a > point that is not usable. > Just a thought, couldn't you use a USB Stick to save configuration files, so the next 99 installs take data from there? Paul ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 10:47 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: >> > "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. >> >> Just a thought, couldn't you use a USB Stick to save configuration >> files, so the next 99 installs take data from there? > > Hmmm the 100s of systems will usually be installed *simultaneously*. > Also, it's no fun to crawl through a datacenter and plug a stick > into a server at rack unit #0 :-) Particularly when the systems are scattered over multiple cities/states/countries/continents. :) fpsm ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
I will concur. The single most important issue to me with regards to installing a system is that I be able to do it automatically and remotely. I have quite literally installed thousands of Solaris instances on dozens of hardware platforms - less than a hundred have been interactively and probably fewer than 2 dozen have been on systems with a graphics card installed. Making me jump through additional (unnecessary) hoops after installation to fix a broken environment just to make it more "linux-friendly" is not going to make me very interested in using OpenSolaris - if I wanted to use Linux, I'd use Linux. fpsm On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 9:35 AM, Octave Orgeron wrote: > Totally agree Casper! The power of Jumpstart has enabled customers to deploy > servers from scratch with little to no manual configuration after doing a > "boot net -install". AI has to be as flexible and hopefully easier to > configure by learning from what customers do with Jumpstart (take a look at > JET as a starting place), otherwise OpenSolaris will be seen as a complete > PITA to deploy and just another reason to look at some other OS. I really do > think that AI can be extended to encompass 90% of what a competent > provisioning system does, but without scripting. Possibly more if an > intelligent framework is put in place. > > Again.. more focus has to be put on Data Center deployments and management > than desktop usage. I would love to see OpenSolaris compete with Windows or > MacOS X on the desktop. But realistically, not even Linux is making a dent.. > so where is the return on making an enterprise OS into a desktop OS? That's > not to say putting effort into the desktop doesn't make sense. Just that it > shouldn't be the deciding factor in important features like provisioning or > management. > > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > Octave J. Orgeron > Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant > Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com > E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com > *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* > > > > - Original Message > From: "casper@sun.com" > To: Shawn Walker > Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 3:13:10 AM > Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11) > > > >>The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. >>They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, >>or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force >>them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about >>installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system >>going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. > > > Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be > customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to > be done. > > "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. > > The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed > is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken > to a point that is not usable. > > Casper > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > > > > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On 08/14/2009 11:29 AM, Ethan Erchinger wrote: I'd love to do the same for my few opensolaris systems, but we use static IPs so I can't use AI. I hope that gets fixed soon. Maybe this was mentioned already, but why can't you statically assign IPs in DHCP, then use AI? We aren't running a DHCP server on our network. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
> I'd love to do the same for my few opensolaris systems, but we use > static IPs so I can't use AI. I hope that gets fixed soon. > Maybe this was mentioned already, but why can't you statically assign IPs in DHCP, then use AI? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On 08/14/2009 10:47 AM, Volker A. Brandt wrote: "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. Just a thought, couldn't you use a USB Stick to save configuration files, so the next 99 installs take data from there? Hmmm the 100s of systems will usually be installed *simultaneously*. Also, it's no fun to crawl through a datacenter and plug a stick into a server at rack unit #0 :-) Nope, especially when you don't own your datacenter or it is too far away to visit it. :) Seriously, any interactive install that cannot be automated is a major roadblock in a horizontally scaled environment. I can do hands off provisioning of Linux servers in minutes using cobbler and kickstart. I'd love to do the same for my few opensolaris systems, but we use static IPs so I can't use AI. I hope that gets fixed soon. All these suggestions for interactive installers and firstboot login config might be fine for low node count vertical solutions, but for large node count, horizontally scaled environments they are a show stopper. Tom ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Volker A. Brandt wrote: "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. Just a thought, couldn't you use a USB Stick to save configuration files, so the next 99 installs take data from there? Hmmm the 100s of systems will usually be installed *simultaneously*. Also, it's no fun to crawl through a datacenter and plug a stick into a server at rack unit #0 :-) Regards -- Volker Me being an Electro/Mechanical Engineer have designed robotic systems that have a feature called "gear following". What that means, is if one motor spins another motor will follow it exactly step by step by using optical encoders to tell the position of each motor. The following motor can be programmed to multiply steps or divide steps to follow as if gears were in place. So, why couldn't the other 99 computer follow the lead of the first computer? Paul ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
> > "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. > > Just a thought, couldn't you use a USB Stick to save configuration > files, so the next 99 installs take data from there? Hmmm the 100s of systems will usually be installed *simultaneously*. Also, it's no fun to crawl through a datacenter and plug a stick into a server at rack unit #0 :-) Regards -- Volker -- Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Sun Solaris Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim Email: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 45 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J. H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
casper@sun.com wrote: The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to be done. "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken to a point that is not usable. Just a thought, couldn't you use a USB Stick to save configuration files, so the next 99 installs take data from there? Paul ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Totally agree Casper! The power of Jumpstart has enabled customers to deploy servers from scratch with little to no manual configuration after doing a "boot net -install". AI has to be as flexible and hopefully easier to configure by learning from what customers do with Jumpstart (take a look at JET as a starting place), otherwise OpenSolaris will be seen as a complete PITA to deploy and just another reason to look at some other OS. I really do think that AI can be extended to encompass 90% of what a competent provisioning system does, but without scripting. Possibly more if an intelligent framework is put in place. Again.. more focus has to be put on Data Center deployments and management than desktop usage. I would love to see OpenSolaris compete with Windows or MacOS X on the desktop. But realistically, not even Linux is making a dent.. so where is the return on making an enterprise OS into a desktop OS? That's not to say putting effort into the desktop doesn't make sense. Just that it shouldn't be the deciding factor in important features like provisioning or management. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: "casper@sun.com" To: Shawn Walker Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 3:13:10 AM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11) >The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. >They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, >or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force >them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about >installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system >going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to be done. "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken to a point that is not usable. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
This is something that should be configurable globally and when an account is created. Globally in cases where it's required for applications (think monitoring software, commercial apps, etc.). That should be done with a command like the netservices and through an AI variable for network installations. Account wise, it should be a flag in useradd to select the corresponding profile data in /etc/skel to populate the account home directory with. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* From: Che Kristo To: Shawn Walker Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org Sent: Friday, August 14, 2009 3:41:55 AM Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11) + 1 for the visual panel idea. I still think however that by default Solaris and OpenSolaris should present it's own "personality" rather than putting "linuxiness" before quality On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Shawn Walker wrote: przemol...@poczta.fm wrote: > >>>On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:57:07PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: >> >>>>>Jan Friedel wrote: >>> >>>>>>>On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: >>>> >>>>>>>>>> >>>>>>AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has /usr/gnu/bin in >>>>>>front of the rest >>>>>> >>>>>That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS >>>>>installer. >>>>>>>>>>As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools >>>>>>>>>>they like, >>>>>>>>>>and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools >>>>>>>>>>they need >>>>>>>>>>so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. >>>>> >>>>I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? >>>>>>>>Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 >>>>>>>>installation. >>>> >>>If you read past discussions on the installer, you'll see that one of the >>>goals was to keep the install process as simple as possible. Configuration >>>options like this belong in the firstboot configuration setup, or in visual >>>panels where they don't add to the complexity of the installer. >>> >>>>But one of the (hidden ?) goals of OpenSolaris is to attract linux users. >>>>So one additional screen during installation which asks about your habits >>>>(PATH, etc.) >>>>shoudn't make it really more complicated. >> > >The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're >just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere >else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of the >install process. Installation should be about installation and the minimum >amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond that is a >pollution of the process IMO. > >>Cheers, >>-- >>Shawn Walker > >>___ >>opensolaris-discuss mailing list >opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
+ 1 for the visual panel idea. I still think however that by default Solaris and OpenSolaris should present it's own "personality" rather than putting "linuxiness" before quality On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Shawn Walker wrote: > przemol...@poczta.fm wrote: > >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:57:07PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: >> >>> Jan Friedel wrote: >>> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has /usr/gnu/bin in >> front of the rest >> > That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS > installer. > As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools > they like, > and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools they > need > so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. > I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 installation. >>> If you read past discussions on the installer, you'll see that one of >>> the goals was to keep the install process as simple as possible. >>> Configuration options like this belong in the firstboot configuration >>> setup, or in visual panels where they don't add to the complexity of the >>> installer. >>> >> >> But one of the (hidden ?) goals of OpenSolaris is to attract linux users. >> So one additional screen during installation which asks about your habits >> (PATH, etc.) >> shoudn't make it really more complicated. >> > > The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're > just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere > else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of > the install process. Installation should be about installation and the > minimum amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond > that is a pollution of the process IMO. > > Cheers, > -- > Shawn Walker > > ___ > opensolaris-discuss mailing list > opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org > ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
> Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be > customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to > be done. > > "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. > > The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed > is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken > to a point that is not usable. I agree 200% -- thank you for this clear and unambiguous statement. Note that the "hands-off" requirement extends to any third-party application that the customer might want to deploy during initial installation. So far, that requirement could be catered for by using the mechanisms available in SVR4 packages (i.e. pre/post-Scripts, CAS). Regards -- Volker -- Volker A. Brandt Consulting and Support for Sun Solaris Brandt & Brandt Computer GmbH WWW: http://www.bb-c.de/ Am Wiesenpfad 6, 53340 Meckenheim Email: v...@bb-c.de Handelsregister: Amtsgericht Bonn, HRB 10513 Schuhgröße: 45 Geschäftsführer: Rainer J. H. Brandt und Volker A. Brandt ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
>The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. >They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, >or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force >them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about >installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system >going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Our customers want an "hands-off" install; an install which can be customized to a point where the system reboots and nothing needs to be done. "Visual panels" do not work when you need to install 100s of systems. The fact that you are required to configure a system after it is installed is a bug. Any system which requires post-install configuration is broken to a point that is not usable. Casper ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Fri, Aug 14, 2009 at 01:49:40AM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > przemol...@poczta.fm wrote: >> On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:57:07PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: >>> Jan Friedel wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: >> AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has >> /usr/gnu/bin in front of the rest > That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS > installer. > As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools they > like, > and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools they > need > so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 installation. >>> If you read past discussions on the installer, you'll see that one of >>> the goals was to keep the install process as simple as possible. >>> Configuration options like this belong in the firstboot configuration >>> setup, or in visual panels where they don't add to the complexity of >>> the installer. >> >> But one of the (hidden ?) goals of OpenSolaris is to attract linux users. >> So one additional screen during installation which asks about your habits >> (PATH, etc.) >> shoudn't make it really more complicated. > > The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. > They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, > or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force > them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about > installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system > going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Shawn, if "polluting" of the process (by one screen !) is going to attract more linux - I would go for it. Unless just after first boot the Visual Panel which helps to setup linux-related things is automatically run. Or, to make it more general, _during_installation_ I would ask if you want to run (just after first boot) series of config dialogs which let you setup your environment (e.g. similar to Linux) etc. Don't force linux users to look for information (how to change that or that or ..). Put those information in front of their faces and they will be happy because of this special treatment. Regards Przemyslaw Bak (przemol) -- http://przemol.blogspot.com/ -- Szukasz pracy? Sprawdź nasze oferty! http://link.interia.pl/f22b8 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
przemol...@poczta.fm wrote: > On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:57:07PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: >> Configuration options like this belong in the firstboot configuration >> setup, or in visual panels where they don't add to the complexity of the >> installer. > > But one of the (hidden ?) goals of OpenSolaris is to attract linux users. > So one additional screen during installation which asks about your habits > (PATH, etc.) > shoudn't make it really more complicated. Another one is to produce an OS that can be preinstalled on computers shipped by companies like Sun, Toshiba, Fujitsu, etc. Putting it in a first-boot dialog instead of an install dialog allows that to work and give hardware purchasers the same option as those who install the OS themselves. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
przemol...@poczta.fm wrote: On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:57:07PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: Jan Friedel wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has /usr/gnu/bin in front of the rest That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS installer. As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools they like, and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools they need so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 installation. If you read past discussions on the installer, you'll see that one of the goals was to keep the install process as simple as possible. Configuration options like this belong in the firstboot configuration setup, or in visual panels where they don't add to the complexity of the installer. But one of the (hidden ?) goals of OpenSolaris is to attract linux users. So one additional screen during installation which asks about your habits (PATH, etc.) shoudn't make it really more complicated. The point is that they don't *need* or have to be in the installer. They're just as beneficial and useful at firstboot, in a Visual Panel, or somewhere else. There is no overwhelmingly great reason to force them to be part of the install process. Installation should be about installation and the minimum amount of configuration to get the system going. Anything beyond that is a pollution of the process IMO. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Thu, Aug 13, 2009 at 12:57:07PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote: > Jan Friedel wrote: >> On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has /usr/gnu/bin in front of the rest >>> That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS >>> installer. >>> As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools they >>> like, >>> and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools they need >>> so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. >> >> I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? >> Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 >> installation. > > If you read past discussions on the installer, you'll see that one of > the goals was to keep the install process as simple as possible. > Configuration options like this belong in the firstboot configuration > setup, or in visual panels where they don't add to the complexity of the > installer. But one of the (hidden ?) goals of OpenSolaris is to attract linux users. So one additional screen during installation which asks about your habits (PATH, etc.) shoudn't make it really more complicated. Regards Przemyslaw Bak (przemol) -- http://przemol.blogspot.com/ -- Wrozki czekaja na Ciebie! Sprawdz >> http://link.interia.pl/f22c2 ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Jan Friedel wrote: On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has /usr/gnu/bin in front of the rest That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS installer. As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools they like, and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools they need so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 installation. If you read past discussions on the installer, you'll see that one of the goals was to keep the install process as simple as possible. Configuration options like this belong in the firstboot configuration setup, or in visual panels where they don't add to the complexity of the installer. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
Agreed. It should be an installation option. Or a flag for useradd to use the GNU or Solaris profiles from /etc/skel. *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* Octave J. Orgeron Solaris Virtualization Architect and Consultant Web: http://unixconsole.blogspot.com E-Mail: unixcons...@yahoo.com *-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-*-* - Original Message From: Jan Friedel To: Alan Coopersmith Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org; music_anal...@yahoo.com; glenn.laga...@sun.com Sent: Thursday, August 13, 2009 2:26:30 AM Subject: [osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11) On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has /usr/gnu/bin in front > > of > > the rest > > That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS installer. > As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools they like, > and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools they need > so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 installation. /j. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] OT: Re: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11)
On Wed, Aug 12, 2009 at 05:04:26PM -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > AFAICT, Indiana by default comes with a PATH that has /usr/gnu/bin in front > > of > > the rest > > That is the default environment for the new user created by the OS installer. > As always, users are free to change their $PATH to any set of tools they like, > and shell scripts are encouraged to declare the paths to the tools they need > so they are not broken by users with different $PATH settings. I'm just curious, why this cannot be an installation option? Sth. like ability to set netservices(1M) during the S10 installation. /j. ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
