Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris vs SXCE (was: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11))
Alan Coopersmith writes: > > last time I forgot about: > > - dtterm which is not available in opensolaris > > That's an example of one which was ARC'ed - the EOL of CDE was ARC'ed > in 2005, and the release notes for Solaris 10 update 4 and later contain > the "CDE may not be in future releases of Solaris" warning. > > We saved some effort on the SVR4->IPS conversion by not converting > packages we'd just turn around and remove since they were being EOL'ed - > that includes Xsun and most of CDE in the part of the system I know best. > > We also accelerated the /usr/openwin -> /usr/X11 migration in the IPS > packages, since many of the legacy bits still stuck in /usr/openwin (like > Xsun) weren't coming forward to IPS, and moving the rest in the conversion > was easy. (Though as discussed recently in xwin-discuss, the next step > will be migration from /usr/X11 -> /usr.) One issue that bothers me here for SPARC desktops: with Xsun removed, what will happen to machines whose framebuffers have only closed drivers (e.g. I'm currently using a Blade 1500 with XVR-600 (jbf) running snv_114). Will I be able to continue using it or will I be just out of luck? Rainer -- - Rainer Orth, BFaculty of Technology, Bielefeld University ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris vs SXCE (was: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11))
Ignacio Marambio Catán wrote: > I'm not interested in bashing opensolaris the distribution, I'm more > interested in detailing the differences so we know what to expect. I > know a lot of things are in the works, but none of them went through > arc afaik Some have gone through ARC, others are working on it. (IPS for instance had a pre-inception ARC review, but has not yet finished preparing the documents needed to move on to the next stage of ARC review.) > last time I forgot about: > - dtterm which is not available in opensolaris That's an example of one which was ARC'ed - the EOL of CDE was ARC'ed in 2005, and the release notes for Solaris 10 update 4 and later contain the "CDE may not be in future releases of Solaris" warning. We saved some effort on the SVR4->IPS conversion by not converting packages we'd just turn around and remove since they were being EOL'ed - that includes Xsun and most of CDE in the part of the system I know best. We also accelerated the /usr/openwin -> /usr/X11 migration in the IPS packages, since many of the legacy bits still stuck in /usr/openwin (like Xsun) weren't coming forward to IPS, and moving the rest in the conversion was easy. (Though as discussed recently in xwin-discuss, the next step will be migration from /usr/X11 -> /usr.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris vs SXCE (was: Oracle 10g on OpenSolaris (Solaris 5.11))
Fredrich Maney wrote: >> -LU is now dead > > I hadn't heard this. Is this just a temporary issue due to IPS not > supporting it? Or is this actually on the longterm roadmap? If so, > what is the intended replacement for this functionality? The LU command set/implementation is dead - it was both encumbered and highly tied to the SVR4 package system. However, the LU concept is not only not dead, it's core to the IPS architecture. "pkg image-update" is the equivalent of LU - makes a zfs clone of your current boot environment, upgrades that clone, and then tells you to reboot when ready to use it. "beadm" (boot environment administration) replaces most of the other lu* commands. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
