Re: [osol-discuss] Firefox not running without pfexec
Joerg Schilling wrote: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Travis Tabbal wrote: Firefox isn't working for me. It says it's starting up, then dies. No errors on the console when run from xterm. I even tried the latest from mozilla.com for OpenSolaris. Do you have LD_LIBRARY_PATH set in your environment? Unset it and try again, and then understand why we tell you not to do that. Is there a chance that the related bugs introduced around nv117 will be fixed? Is there a chance you'll file bug reports with enough detail for bugs to be fixed instead of making cryptic comments like this and assuming everyone knows what you're talking about? Note that all the time before there have been no problems and that firefox now fails although LD_* do not try to introduce incompatible libs. The issues I've seen from people with LD_LIBRARY_PATH set are because they are causing Firefox to load incompatible versions of libsqlite that can't read the data files written by Firefox with the version it normally uses. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Firefox not running without pfexec
Joerg Schilling wrote: Let me e.g. remind you on the bug report screensaver where I did even attach a snoop log that verifies that xscreensaver issues an open() attempt with the wrong credentials, so that the open() call is required to fail. And which made patently false claims, like xscreensaver does not work for anyone, while no one else has yet been able to reproduce your scenario, which is why it was closed as not reproducible. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Firefox not running without pfexec
Joerg Schilling wrote: Alan, it is not my fault when you don't understand scientific language and it Perhaps it doesn't translate to English the way you expect - it comes across as overstating the problem for dramatic effect in such a way that it is untrue, and makes engineers less likely to want to deal with it. does not help if you try to bend facts. The problem hits anyone who uses a NFS server that behaves as expected. It may be that in your special case your NFS server grants you local root access but this would be non standard. The fact that you have no problems with your home directory does not prove anything. Our NFS servers certainly do not allow root to access other users files: al...@also:~ [1:09pm - 121] ls -l /home/alanc/.xscreensaver -rw--- 1 alancstaff 11813 Aug 14 00:02 /home/alanc/.xscreensaver al...@also:~ [1:41pm - 122] pfexec cat /home/alanc/.xscreensaver cat: cannot open /home/alanc/.xscreensaver: Permission denied al...@also:~ su - Password: Sun Microsystems Inc. SunOS 5.11 snv_123 November 2008 r...@also.sfbay.sun.com:~# cat /home/alanc/.xscreensaver cat: /home/alanc/.xscreensaver: Permission denied You have sufficient information that proves that there is a real problem, please work on a fix. I'm sorry, I've got a lot higher priority things to work on than bugs that affect only one user of a component we're working to EOL. (xscreensaver should be replaced by gnome-screensaver in the near future - it was supposed to happen by 2010.02, but may slip until the next release.) I'm sorry that it doesn't work for you, but you are not our only user, and I've got things that affect a far higher number of users to work on instead. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] 2-button simulating middle-click feature stops working mid-session?
Sorry, but I don't know what the kernel driver guys would need to figure out why their driver is sending events for presses of a button that doesn't exist. If you need to prove to them it is reporting that, there is a dtrace script in bug 6526932 that reports the button press events the X server gets from the kernel - but that would presumably log a very large amount of data if you don't know when it happens. You could probably customize it down to just printing when fe-id == BUT(2). -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering Brian Ruthven - Solaris Network Sustaining - Sun UK wrote: Hi Alan, Finally, this just happened to me again. FWIW, I updated to snv_124 yesterday, and with no external mouse plugged in, I see the (II) 3rd Button detected: disabling emulate3Button line in /var/log/Xorg.0.log (full file attached). I've been using the system for approx 1 hour so far, and only using the touchpad. What further diagnosis would I need before filing a bug? Thanks, Brian Alan Coopersmith wrote: Brian Ruthven - Solaris Network Sustaining - Sun UK wrote: I have a Toshiba Tecra M10, and the mouse pad has two buttons. Most of the time, I can highlight some text using the left button (click and drag as normal), then I can press both buttons together to paste in a target window (i.e. simulating the middle click). This mostly works (and I usually copy-n-paste this way), but at some point during my login session, it stops working, and instead I only ever get the right-click context menu. The default configuration of Xorg is to recognize left+right as emulating a third button until/unless a third button is actually clicked, at which point it assumes you don't need it any more. Unfortunately, on builds before about 119, the default on Solaris is to open /dev/mouse and have the kernel combine all mouse like devices into a single output stream, so a click on an external mouse will disable it on all mice. With the switch to hal-based input hotplug in 119 and later, each mouse is individually opened, so it should track each one seperately. I've not worked out what changes this, and I've not got a clue where to start diagnosing this. Any messages in /var/log/Xorg.0.log about disabling 3 button emulation? ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] b124: root window terminal
Clarence CHU wrote: Dear All, I'd tried freshly installing b124/x86 using 1/2-segment DVD images and on both cases, the terminal on root window popup menu flash and exit, using Accessory-Terminal had no problems. Any hints to have that fixed? If your shell is /bin/ksh, change it to something else, perhaps /bin/ksh93? http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=10499 -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] b124: root window terminal
Clarence CHU wrote: Dear Alan, So, all the users with no shell specified in /etc/passwd had to be changed, done. next is: Accessories-Terminator doesn't work. That appears to be another bug you could have found in a search of http://defect.opensolaris.org/ (though you'd have to do advanced search in order to find bugs marked as RESOLVED in upcoming builds): http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=11673 I don't know what the workaround is for this one, perhaps someone else in desktop-discuss does. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] bizarre X windows behavior on snv_124
Dennis Clarke wrote: However ... when I started firefox I seemed to have lost control of the mouse. I tried to resize a window and poof ... the window slammed to the left and Firefox became a tall thin line with just the slightest visible graphics in it. When I tried to move my mouse to resize that window my mouse would suddenly jump back to the upper left corner. That's a well known bug on x86 CPU's with SSE support. Fortunately, Jürgen has provided a workaround: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=9862#c10 I putback a change to the X gate for build 126 that disables use of the SIGIO signal handlers altogether until the kernel guys can fix the underlying register bug. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Has something changed with root logins [b 124]
Harry Putnam wrote: I've diddled around for 35 minutes googling for the release notes for build 124 to see if something is in there about root logins. Can some kind sole please direct me. Google stings like `opensolaris release notes 2010' `opensolaris release notes build 124 and etc have brought nothing but a mess. The link to the latest release notes is usually available in the Announcements box in the bottom right corner of the front page of http://opensolaris.org/ - following the link there to the Forum should let you find them in the last few weeks worth of postings if the specific build isn't linked from the front page. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun Solaris 10 Zones - specification available?
Andre Boegelsack wrote: I was wondering if anyone knows if there is a Sun Solaris Zones specification availabe and where I might get it?! Currently I'm looking for an official document which describes the Sun Solaris Zones architecture in detail. The original design spec from 2002 is available in the Architectural Review case log at: http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/PSARC/2002/174/zones-design.spec.opensolaris.pdf Of course, there have been many changes updates in the 7 years since then, many of which should also be in the ARC case logs at: http://arc.opensolaris.org/caselog/ -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] bug submission - appropriate placement
William D. Hathaway wrote: I wanted to file a bug on the svc manifest for SUNWsquid, but it isn't clear to me what the appropriate product and classification would be on defect.opensolaris.org. Can someone point me towards the appropriate info? http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/sfw/usr/src/cmd/squid/METADATA says the right bug category is solaris/utility/squid - which would be via bugs.opensolaris.org, not defect. (You could file it in defect, but it wouldn't get fixed until copied to the internal bug database anyway.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] bug submission - appropriate placement
William D. Hathaway wrote: Thanks Alan, I submitted the bug. I didn't realize the meta info was available, that certainly makes finding the right category easy! It is for packages delivered from SFW, which is mainly the software from outside open source projects other than the X/GNOME/Mozilla desktop stack. For other packages, it's not so easy. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] How might I install perl 5.10.1 using pkg
Harry Putnam wrote: I'd like to install perl-5.10.1 but even though I am setup to install pkgs from `dev' there appears to be no pkg for perl 5.10. Is there no repo that has perl 5.10? The /dev repo does if you're on a recent enough build, though it's 5.10.0, not 5.10.1: http://pkg.opensolaris.org/dev/en/search.shtml?token=*perl510*action=Search -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] package manager - new feature request
sridhar wrote: please give me some links to decent to thorough/exhaustive open solaris documentation or normal to advanced user guide that covers everything we need to know to use open solaris(I just used windows without any guide. All things are installed using GUI, not CUI, with good enough information,options and prudent requests from user.). http://docs.sun.com/source/820-7679/ (reached by going to http://docs.sun.com/ choosing Operating Systems, then OpenSolaris) -- -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 support for Sparc
Mauro Mozzarelli wrote: Once again I am back with the same question that still hasn't found a satisfactory answer. I have sparc and no x86 based machine to spare to install OpenSolaris on it to boot/install on sparc. I tried other methods to install OpenSolaris following guidance I found on various blogs, but with unsatisfactory results. I got to a point where I can boot an installation, but there is no driver for my Expert 3D Lite FB :-( I searched for roadmap and sparc and ultrasparc on opensolaris.com without getting any meaningful (to my subject) results. I was wondering if anybody knows when an OpenSolaris installation DVD will be available for Sparc, with full support for Sun hardware and a package update manager like pkg that will help maintaining the installation up to date without need to re-install or luupgrade every few weeks (as I had to do so far with SXCE) For a machine with Expert3D graphics? Sun has no plans to ever produce an OpenSolaris version in which it supports that hardware - support for that may be provided by other distros, but that's up to them. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Need a How-to on installing a VM on top of SunOS 5.10 Generic_141445-09 i38
Ramon F. McDougall wrote: John Martin wrote: Ramon F. McDougall wrote: Can someone help me out here. I'm a new user to Solaris evaluating an Ultra 27 workstation. I would like be able to install other operating systems on top of SunOS 5.10 Generic_141445-09 i386. I can't find the correct documentation. Is there a difference between my system and openSolaris? Is there a step by step how-to? The easiest solution for S10U8 is to load VirtualBox (www.virtualbox.org). Mr Martin, can you tell if my Ultra 27 is running openSolaris? Since it says SunOS 5.10, you are running Solaris 10, a previous generation of the operating system. (OpenSolaris would report SunOS 5.11.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ATI Radeon HD 5870/5850/5770/5750 support
ken mays wrote: Hello, The actual Xorg RadeonHD 2D driver support for the ATI Radeon HD 5870/5850/5770/5750 graphic cards is not implemented yet. I usually test ATI graphic boards with the latest OpenSolaris distros and have had success in 2D support for the latest ATI graphic cards. I've had success in 2D resolutions up to 1920x1080. OSOL-snv_126 does not have official 2D driver support for those specific cards yet. I'm hoping this will be implemented by OSOL-snv_129 but this is based on announcements from the Xorg RadeonHD team. If it's not implemented yet, the odds of it being written, debugged, and released in a stable release upstream before our build 129 code freeze in three weeks are basically 0. We are planning to upgrade to the stable xf86-video-radeonhd 1.3 release around that time, but that's it. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Rainer Orth wrote: Jensen Lee hayd...@haydude.org writes: It is a shame that Sun does not support XVR-500, XVR-1000, Expert 3D and several other graphic cards on OpenSolaris because of copyright/NDA/patent issues. I think that Sun should make an effort to liase with 3D Labs to open their drivers source to allow for implementation into OpenSolaris. In the meantime could Sun at least provide binary drivers for these cards, even as separate downloads, to allow those like me with legacy Sun workstations to install, use and contribute to OpenSolaris? True. In the meantime (which will probably last forever ;-), I'll take the last SVR4 packages from SX:CE build 130 and use them (together with Xsun) on my Blade 1500 with XVR-600. It may require some hacking since I expect the SMF support for switching between Xorg and Xsun to go away, but certainly doable, and much better than turning my desktop into a brick. The SMF support for selecting an X server should stay - I have no plans to remove it since it is useful for selecting between the remaining X servers (Xorg, Xvnc, Xvfb), but Xsun will probably disappear from the list in the Xserver script at some point. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: Certainly I want to keep using my Sun Blade. Will Sun next commercial release of Solaris at least support the legacy 3D Labs cards? Solaris 10 is the last release of Solaris planned to support those cards. And by the way, due to this mess with OpenSolaris, I do not think I will ever buy Sun hardware in the future. But most importantly, being a professional, I will refrein from advising anyone to buy Sun hardware. I used to recommend it as an investment ... what a shame! No wonder why Sun is loosing money. Professionals like me have lost confidence in the company. Because like every other computer company in the world, including Sun for the past 25 years, hardware is not supported forever and at some point you must choose between hardware upgrade or software upgrade? Those cards from Sun will have OS support a lot longer than most of their contemporary video cards, and even a lot longer than some of Sun's older graphics drivers. I doubt you'll find any vendor who'll promise the video card you buy today will be supported in new OS versions coming out ten years from now. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Skype is being open sourced! OpenSolaris?
Orvar Korvar wrote: Will it be possible to port it to OpenSolaris? It will depend only upon the license they choose, right? http://share.skype.com/sites/linux/2009/11/skype_open_source.html Any license that qualifies as Open Source for an application should allow shipping on OpenSolaris - it will depend much more on if they depend on any binary only modules or Linux-specific interfaces, and until they release the source or much more detail than that simple post, it's hard to guess if it will be possible to port or not. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What is the compiler du jour for nightly ? or compiler du nuit ?
Dennis Clarke wrote: Any input would be helpful. I just watched a nightly run for 5:07:45 ( see bottom of this message ) and bomb out with many thousands of errors. There is no README.opensolaris to be seen anymore ( see below ) so I had to guess that Sun Studio 12 update 1 was the way to go. So should I go back to Studio 12 or Studio 11 ? Studio 12 Update 1 has not yet been qualified for any OpenSolaris consolidations - the official CBE for all of us is still the Studio 12 patched version available at: http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+tools/sun_studio_tools -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Unable to submit an RFE through bugs.os.o
Steven Stallion wrote: Any ideas on when this issue might be addressed? In the meantime, what is the best method for creating a new bugster entry? website-discuss would be the best place to ask about fixing website issues. As for creating bugster reports, the options for people outside Sun are: 1) bugs.opensolaris.org 2) going via Sun Service, if you have a service contract 3) find a friendly Sun engineer and ask nicely, beg, plead or offer to trade frosty beverages in exchange for filing them on your behalf -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Unable to submit an RFE through bugs.os.o
Che Kristo wrote: Isn't the community bug repo currently http://defect.opensolaris.org/ ??? Community members can file bugs there, but for most of the OS, bugs won't get worked on until they land in bugster since most OS engineers simply don't see bugzilla bugs. (In part because of organizational bugs inside Sun that have failed to get the word out, in part because the current bug categories were set up as a quick expedient set, not a useful set - kernel, software, and hardware are far too broad to be useful. Since all the tools used by consolidations such as ON, SFW, X still require bugster bug reports, there's been little incentive to fix those issues. The few groups using bugster don't use tools like WebRTI and have set up more fine grained subcategories to allow efficiently getting notice to the engineers involved with an area.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What is the compiler du jour for nightly ? or compiler du nuit ?
Dennis Clarke wrote: Now then ... since the OpenSolaris.org website is entirely in the hands of Sun employees ... will someone put the README.opensolaris back ? please ? -- this thing looks dead : http://dlc.sun.com/osol/on/downloads/current/README.opensolaris That's up to the ON gatekeepers to fix, so lets see what happens if we cc on-discuss so they actually see the message. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: Let me understand Alan, why in 25 years of computing I never had this problem before. Windoze supports old hardware, Windows 7: Requires at least 1Ghz CPU, 1 GB RAM, Video card capable of DirectX 9 MacOS Snow Leopard: only supports Intel Macs - no longer supports their previous PowerPC Macs, sold until 2006. Now I chose a very expensive platform, let say the Rolls Royce of workstations, 10 years on they decide to stop selling leaded fuel, only green one. Do you think Rolls Royce would tell me my expensive car would no longer run because the fuel standard has changed or would they make it run with the new fuel? I have a 1998 Pentium II laptop that runs the latest versions of both WinXP and Linux! WinXP? That is hardly the latest Windows - I doubt that machine runs Vista or Windows 7. You'll be able to run Solaris 10 for many years to come on your workstation - that would be similar to running XP on your ancient laptop forever. 1) open the 3D Labs drivers in Europe where software patents even if existing are not enforceable, someone in Europe could pick up the work Who said anything about software patents? Copyright contract law are enforceable in Europe, but frankly, European law is irrelevant, since the contract is between two US-based companies, and is thus governed by US law, and would result in lawsuits in US court if we decided to break it. 2) include a binary package of both drivers (already available I believe) and Xsun, installable on OpenSolaris Sparc. The binary package of the drivers is available on opensolaris.org. As already noted, we cannot make the current Xsun available for separate download due to other license issues in Xsun itself. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Octave Orgeron wrote: Here's a fun test that shouldn't cost millions for Sun to do today. How about get Nvidia or ATI to build a PCI and PCI-E 3D video card that will work with OpenSolaris Xorg on SPARC. Make it work on UltraSPARC III/IIIi workstations and sell it for under $300. I'm willing to bet that this would sell like crazy and make tons of people happy. Sun's been selling ATI cards for SPARC workstations for a while, the XVR-100 (PCI) and XVR-300 (PCI-E) - both of which are supported under OpenSolaris Xorg - sales are not exciting in the least. Developing new models would cost millions, especially if it meant having nvidia port their driver to a new platform and develop OBP-compatible firmware for their hardware. It would also let Sun see that there is still a large SPARC workstation market out there that they have been ignoring. A new SPARC workstation would require a significant design effort, since the CPU's used in the previous models are simply no longer made, and workstation based on either the Niagara or SPARC64 chips would be a significantly different beast. That one hasn't been produced doesn't mean Sun's ignoring it's users, just that management hasn't believed that it could earn enough profit on such a project in the current economic climate to justify pulling engineers off other projects. This isn't rocket science, look on Ebay and check out the number of SPARC workstations being sold every week! And why? Because businesses and professionals need a SPARC workstation. But every workstation offered for sale on Ebay is a sign that someone else no longer needs one. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Jensen Lee wrote: Who said anything about software patents? Copyright contract law are enforceable in Europe, but frankly, European law is irrelevant, since the contract is between two US-based companies, and is thus governed by US law, and would result in lawsuits in US court if we decided to break it. Do these companies Sun have contracts with even exist anymore? Yes - as you yourself posted just a few days ago, 3DLabs is still around, though under a new name. If they do how can they have an interest into non disclosing information on old and no longer commercially exploited technology? That's their right to determine, not ours or yours. Do Sun care more about the apathic interest of a defunt organization or that of hundreds of thousands of pissed-off professional customers? If Sun starts ignoring our contract obligations, not only do we risk lawsuits, we make it harder to get other vendors to be willing to do business with us in the future. I also don't see hundreds of thousands of pissed off customers - most professional customers for those workstations are very slow to upgrade since the apps they run take years to get certified for new OS releases. We get far more complaints about the workstations not running Solaris 8 or 9 than about them not being able to run a new Solaris release coming out in the future, and forcing them to stay on Solaris 10 for the remaining life of their workstation. As already noted, we cannot make the current Xsun available for separate download due to other license issues in Xsun itself. Please could you expand on the license issues you mention? Why would I be denied to run on my own workstation with OpenSolaris a software component that Sun provides for other Solaris versions if these are provided or sold separately? Xsun is an X server and as such I could run it anywhere I like. I never said you were not allowed to run it. Sun is not allowed to make the current Xsun server available as a freely redistributable download, which is what's required for inclusion in OpenSolaris or the OpenSolaris IPS repository. The exact contract terms are confidential. Will then Sun prohibit OpenSolaris users to run on OpenSolaris other commercial close source applications? I am afraid this does not make sense. Of course not, that makes no sense, and I never said anything of the sort. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic card
Richard L. Hamilton wrote: Could Xorg be built to handle a particular list of loadable (separate) community-supported drivers, so that those could be added without replacing Xorg itself? That wouldn't be perfect, but it would be a lot better than nothing. Xorg has no problem loading new drivers at runtime, without recompiling. When using PCI vendor id to autoselect a driver, you'll need an xorg.conf to tell Xorg which driver to load when it's not in the builtin list. For SPARC, where /dev/fb mapping is mainly used for selecting a fb driver, you can either provide an xorg.conf or name the driver such that it matches the automatic pattern matching for kernel driver name (reported by constype) to Xorg driver name. Martin's previous work required replacing the X server because of other changes which he hasn't requested integrating into the Xorg server sources either at X.Org upstream or OpenSolaris. I don't know how many of those are still relevant in the current Xorg server. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Mauro M. wrote: If they do how can they have an interest into non disclosing information on old and no longer commercially exploited technology? That's their right to determine, not ours or yours. This is arguable. As a consumer I have the right to use the hardware I purchase in whatever way I see fit and without limitations. From a legal standpoint, it is not arguable under current laws. I understand you disagree with it, and I don't argue with that, but Sun has to follow the law, not consumer opinion. Moore's law has accelerated the aging of technology consumer products, however in real terms I would expect any goods I purchase to be usable for more than a decade. No one has said that your hardware will be unusable or unsupported. It will remain usable and supported with the software it was sold with and in most cases, a number of newer versions of that software. Sun is just not promising to make all future software releases support that hardware - you got what you paid for, you're just not getting upgrades to improve that any more (whether free or sold). If a vendor decides to no longer support a product, he should be forced to disclose the information necessary for the consumers to continue to use their product, and any IP and licenses made void and unenforceable. I hope that this will be clarified by future legislation, and I am confident that in Europe this will happen sooner or later. Sadly, I believe that if such legislation somehow managed to make it past all the lobbying of the technology media companies, the most likely result would be a lot of products no longer being sold in Europe, or companies finding other loopholes such as shutting down all their European offices, and only selling via third party importers, so they wouldn't be subject to such laws. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Mauro M. wrote: either install Xsun from SXCE on OS200yy.mm, or buy one of the officially Sun-Xorg supported cards, or one of the community supported ones (#0). What packages have to be installed on OpenSolaris (from SXCE or Solaris 10) to make Xsun work with a Sun FB? Is there a guide? You'd want the SXCE ones - they're more cleanly separated from the rest of X than Solaris 10 ones. Writing a guide would be an excellent community contribution here. I would also love to hear from one of the passionate users if you can run Xsun from a Solaris 10 branded zone, if you exported the fb devices to it, once there's a build out there with that feature in. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] XSun emancipation project proposal (Was: Re: [xwin-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards)
Mark Martin wrote: (Rough) straw project proposal for your consideration. My interest is solely as an eventual beneficiary of your work. = *XSun emancipation***Project = Name *XSun emancipation* alias: *xsun*-disc...@os.o Synopsis A project to emancipate the XSun sources and write wrappers to use XSun based drivers on Xorg. Sponsor ON CG I would think it would be the X community group, since none of this code has ever been in ON. Otherwise, the strawman seems reasonable, though I'd expect the list of contributors to change before the final proposal is submitted. For instance, while I've volunteered to work on the code release, once that's done, I won't be leading this project or probably doing much more than answering questions and giving advice. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [xwin-discuss] XSun emancipation project proposal (Was: Re: Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards)
Martin Bochnig wrote: The name FullyOpenX was once invented by Alan Coopersmith. I am admittedly guilty of chosing names based on being able to reduce them to abbreviations or acronyms that amuse me (FOX and X-cons), but that's not a requirement for anyone else to follow. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] question about ignoreeof
Alexander wrote: Hello. Does someone know why is ignoreeof set by default in bash now in /etc/bash/bashrc ? It is quite annoying :) Because you're running build 126, and don't yet have this change coming in 127 to revert that setting: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6894600 -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris SXCE 126 on X61 unusable
Joerg Schilling wrote: I have the impression that since about a year, when the transition to the new X server happened, many bugs have been introduced but never fixed. I'm not sure what you're talking about. The transition from Xsun to Xorg on x86 happened 5 years ago. Since then we've made a number of Xorg version upgrades and many bug fixes, as you can see on the changelogs we post: http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+x_win/changelogs I'm sorry if you have bugs that haven't been fixed, but our engineers work off bug reports submitted through bugs.opensolaris.org with enough detail to reproduce, not e-mails to opensolaris-discuss. (For instance, X61 is a bit unclear - are you referring to a Thinkpad laptop model or some other device?) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris SXCE 126 on X61 unusable
Joerg Schilling wrote: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: I have the impression that since about a year, when the transition to the new X server happened, many bugs have been introduced but never fixed. I'm not sure what you're talking about. The transition from Xsun to Xorg on x86 happened 5 years ago. Since then we've made a number of Xorg version upgrades and many bug fixes, as you can see on the changelogs we post: In case you don't know, let me help you: I am talking to the _new_ Xorg version. Try harder - which new Xorg version? snv_107 - Xorg 1.5.3 snv_116 - Xorg 1.6.1 snv_120 - Xorg 1.6.2 snv_121 - Xorg 1.6.3 snv_126 - Xorg 1.6.5 Would you accept it if a user said Ever since upgrading star it's broken and didn't give any more information than that about which version? But since you're convinced we never fix bugs and would rather be obtuse and insulting than reporting a bug, I'm not sure why I'm even asking. (For instance, X61 is a bit unclear - are you referring to a Thinkpad laptop model or some other device?) Well, I did mention that I am talking about a Lenovo X61 several times before. Did you miss this information? Sorry, but it wasn't in the e-mail you sent, and I do not memorize the contents of every mail sent to opensolaris-discuss. While you may remember everything you send in e-mail, you can expect that no one else does. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris SXCE 126 in VirtualBox
W. Wayne Liauh wrote: I am running OpenSolaris in Jaunty (Ubuntu 9.06) now Kamic (Ubuntu 9.10) under VBox (fully updated, now to 3.0.10). Here's a brief summary of the problems: 1. no problem with os08011 liveCD and subsequent installation, 2. image-updated to snv_121 thru snv_125, failed to boot, not even happy face (also failed to boot from the iso image in a separate VBox vdi), 3. image-updated to snv_126, finally saw the happy face, but only booted into text mode. Those problems were observed with previous versions of VBox. Any suggestions that I may try? Thanks. Did you reinstall the guest additions from the 3.0.10 Virtual Box guest additions iso? Changes in both the OS VirtualBox require the guest additions to be updated from previous versions. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris SXCE 126 in VirtualBox
W. Wayne Liauh wrote: W. Wayne Liauh wrote: I am running OpenSolaris in Jaunty (Ubuntu 9.06) now Kamic (Ubuntu 9.10) under VBox (fully updated, now to 3.0.10). Here's a brief summary of the problems: 1. no problem with os08011 liveCD and subsequent installation, 2. image-updated to snv_121 thru snv_125, failed to boot, not even happy face (also failed to boot from the iso image in a separate VBox vdi), 3. image-updated to snv_126, finally saw the happy face, but only booted into text mode. Those problems were observed with previous versions of VBox. Any suggestions that I may try? Thanks. Did you reinstall the guest additions from the 3.0.10 Virtual Box guest additions iso? Changes in both the OS VirtualBox require the guest additions to be updated from previous versions. -- -Alan Coopersmith- Thanks Alan. I always installed GA after the first boot, but in these cases, since I was unable to boot, no GA was installed. What kind of things would you try if you couldn't boot OpenSolaris into graphic mode on a bare metal? If I couldn't boot at all? I'd bug the kernel guys. If it boots, but stops at the text mode login prompt, I'd check for errors in starting gdm or Xorg by running: svcs -xv(especially the gdm service) less /var/log/gdm/:0.log less /var/log/Xorg.0.log -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [xwin-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, legacy graphic cards
Dr. Robert Pasken wrote: Actually I think there are quite a few of us sparc users who would rather not give up performance and reliability for the really lackluster performance and problems associated with Solaris-X86 and intel in general For desktop usage, I can't imagine you can get any SPARC workstation to outperform a Ultra 27 Nehalem system. It's not a fair comparison since there hasn't been a new SPARC workstation model in years, so you're stuck comparing a 1.2Ghz UltraSPARC IIIi with a 8-way 3.0 Ghz Intel Core i7, but my Ultra 27 absolutely blows away my Sun Blade 2500. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [xwin-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, leg
ken mays wrote: We can easily use the newer XVR boards like the XVR-300 to replace many older PCI-E boards and the XVR-2500 board for others. The PCI boards can be replaced as well. What older PCI-E boards would it replace? The only PCI-E graphics cards Sun ever sold for SPARC workstations were the XVR-300 for 2D users and the XVR-2500 for 3D users. I think of XSun as a legacy Xserver from Xorg 6.x source with added 'closed' and/or 'licensed' supplemental modules from Sun Engineering. That is it. We don't need legacy XSun today for the majority of SPARC users - if the XSun/Xorg migration is done the RIGHT way. Xsun is not based on Xorg - the device independent layers are from the same X11R6 parentage, but everything under hw/ is quite different, especially the interfaces between the server and the loaded driver modules. - Community supported (somewhat sketchy as I put this together a few days ago when the project pages were being slashed together recently for SPARC graphics support) (Open source radeonfb/radeon-based drivers) •Sun XVR-100 •PGX64 Graphics Accelerator (M64) •Sun XVR-200 Graphics Accelerator (mko) XVR-200 is not an ATI card. It uses a Matrox G550 chipset. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [xwin-discuss] Sun UltraSparc: XVR-500, Expert 3D, leg
Martin Bochnig wrote:
If Alan tells me what he can open src (in his spare time, as soon as
he might have some),
I released the source to Xsun's /usr/openwin/server/lib/libserverdga.so.1
this week, it's just well hidden and not yet buildable 8-).
I've not checked, so can't promise, but believe I should be able to release
the sources to all of the current SUNWxsun-server package, except for these
files:
/usr/openwin/lib/X11/*.{ps,upr,VM}
/usr/openwin/lib/X11/XatmEncodingMap
/usr/openwin/lib/X11/fonts/*
/usr/openwin/server/etc/*.{im1,im8,im1.Z,im8.Z} [splash screen images]
/usr/openwin/server/lib/libserverdps.so.5
/usr/openwin/server/lib/libfont.so.1
/usr/openwin/server/lib/libtypesclr.so.0
You'll lose the DPS extension and F3 font support. You'll get to come up with
new splash screens that don't have trademarked logos, and have to replace the
encumbered libfont.so.1 with the open source libXfont.so.1 (using FreeType for
Type1 TrueType rendering instead of Xsun's encumbered backends for those).
I won't be working on releasing any of that until after the X11R7.5 release
is done and until after the community shows enough commitment to have set up
the project.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] /usr/netbeans/bin/netbeans /bin/bash: : No such file or directory
Robert Monical wrote:
This one has been driving me crazy for a couple of hours. I have been running
OpenSolaris 2009.6 in a bare metal install from the provided CD. I just
installed the NetBeans 6.6 using the package installer. I want to move my
NetBeans development from Windows to Solaris. I get this error when executing
the netbeans startup script. This is the portion of the script:
if [ -x /bin/bash ]
then
sh=/bin/bash
fi
if [ ${founduserdir} = yes ]; then
exec $sh $nbexec $@
else
exec $sh $nbexec --userdir ${userdir} $@
fi
It looks like this when I execute:
rmoni...@dell690:/usr/netbeans/bin$ ./netbeans
/bin/bash: : No such file or directory
What is $nbexec set to? From the extra : , I'll bet that's bash trying
to report that the script you're passing as the first argument is coming
through as , which is not found.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Unix for Dummies
Alex wrote: Hello all, I couldn't find a answer. Who can help me What means the content in the brace at the man-pages? Where can I find the description? e.g. zpool(1M) -- 1M basename(1) -- 1 basename(1B) -- 1B file(1) -- 1 file(1B) -- 1B It's the man page section for the reference. For instance, there's both a program named printf and a C function call named printf, so in order to tell you which man page to read, the program is listed as printf(1) and the function call as printf(3c) and when you need to force a particular section (because there's multiple choices), you run man -s 3c printf - see man man and man intro for more info. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Legacy GRUB v GRUB2
Joerg Schilling wrote: Isn't GRUB2 GPLv3 and isn't GPLv3 a bigger risk when using with OpenSolaris than the GPLv2 is? Bigger risk of what? OpenSolaris includes a number of GPLv3 components already. (The patent clauses of GPLv3 do require projects using it to need additional review when shipping in a Sun project to make sure we don't have any conflicts with existing patent licenses, since Sun has so many existing patent licenses/cross-licenses with other companies.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What version of a program in IPS?
Marco Almeida wrote: I wonder why the versioning information on packages like emacs, nano, iozone, mysql, etc. uses the source code numbering while gnome-* and firefox do not... Because not all packages have had their version numbers set yet, so many still just use the 0.5.11 default. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What version of a program in IPS?
At the moment, for packages in the main repo (/release, /dev), the package creator gets no choice or control - package versions are assigned by the SVR4 - IPS conversion, and the team doing that hasn't researched each of the thousand packages to find what version number to publish or make sure they stay up to date. This should improve as the consolidations start being converted to generate the IPS packages directly, and they can then set the versions themselves when creating the packages. -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering Che Kristo wrote: Should we not have stricter controls over this? Seems a bit loose to me that you can just choose whether or not to report the version on your package. On Sat, Nov 28, 2009 at 04:06, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com mailto:alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Marco Almeida wrote: I wonder why the versioning information on packages like emacs, nano, iozone, mysql, etc. uses the source code numbering while gnome-* and firefox do not... Because not all packages have had their version numbers set yet, so many still just use the 0.5.11 default. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com mailto:alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org mailto:opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Bootable Sparc DVD?
Ken Mandelberg wrote: Haven't heard any more. Can anyone confirm that OpenSolaris does not now (or will not in a future release) support the XVR100 on a Sparc SunBlade 1500? OpenSolaris 2009.06 and /dev include XVR-100 support. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] any work on bug ID 6807184
On a different note I don't know why Sun doesn't just give Masayuki Murayama core device driver contributor status so that he can freely work on fixing bugs in NIC drivers without having to run through the whole sponsorship obstacle course. If you look at how many Solaris device drivers he has written over the years, I think he has earned it. Sun cannot grant Core Contributor status - only the members of one of the community groups or the OGB can do so, and the Drivers community has already done so for him. The only rights that gives him though are a vote in OpenSolaris elections and the decisions of that community. It does not give him a VPN tunnnel through the Sun firewall to allow direct putbacks to the OpenSolaris ON master gates. Direct putback access without a sponsor depends on the master gate being outside the Sun firewall, as it is for the Desktop consolidation and several projects (like IPS) - not on the status of the contributor. -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering -- This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] how to use SUNWnetcat to capture network traffic?
solarg wrote: My question is why does Sun deliver this kind of package? Because it's more useful than not delivering it. What about this package makes you think we shouldn't deliver it? And why with no man pages? he...@tara:~$ pkg contents SUNWnetcat PATH usr usr/bin usr/bin/nc Many parts of Solaris still ship man pages in separate packages from the commands, due to the way Solaris 2.x releases installed long ago. We're working through converting them to ship with the software they document, but with a couple thousand packages that's a lot to do, and it's not top on the priority list. al...@also:/export/alanc/hg/7.5-merge [7:49am - 276] pkg search nc.1 INDEX ACTION VALUE PACKAGE basename file usr/share/man/man1/nc.1 pkg:/sunw...@0.5.11-0.123 [] -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SVN_128 Inline Data De-duplication
Fred Koch wrote: Does anybody know when svn_128 will be released? It is supposed to contain inline dedupe for ZFS. The dev repository usually updates every two weeks. Is the delay due to the Holidays, The delay is due to the respins for the dedup issues reported on opensolaris-announce as the reason SXCE was being skipped (since it wasn't respun), and the respins pushing the work into the Thanksgiving holiday weekend in the US. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] crontab
Dr. Martin Mundschenk wrote: Hi! I searched the OpenSolaris Bible and the internet but didn't find a suitable answer to how to configure cron jobs in OpenSolaris? Any hint? What are you missing? You provided the answer in the subject of your message - the crontab command - is there something more you need to know? -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] crontab
Joerg Schilling wrote: Dr. Martin Mundschenk m.mundsch...@mundschenk.de wrote: Am 03.12.2009 um 11:39 schrieb Joerg Schilling: Are you talking about /etc/default/cron ? I don't know that file. Is is equivalent to /etc/crontab? I have never seen /etc/crontab. What should this be for? I remember having it on really old systems, before crontab was split into per-user files and the crontab command provided for each user to edit theirs and to notify cron when it was time to re-read them. I haven't seen in 15+ years though. (Apollo Domain/OS is the one I'm remembering, but I could be remembering poorly.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] when NEW OpenSolaris 2009.12 will get out and also when free CD available ?
Che Kristo wrote: The next release is 2010.02 which you can expect towards the end of February if all goes to plan. That should say 2010.03 in March. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] when NEW OpenSolaris 2009.12 will get out and also when free CD available ?
Yes, the schedule was changed a couple months ago. -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering Che Kristo wrote: Aha...I see we have shifted it back On Fri, Dec 4, 2009 at 10:02, Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com mailto:alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Che Kristo wrote: The next release is 2010.02 which you can expect towards the end of February if all goes to plan. That should say 2010.03 in March. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com mailto:alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Expecting NVDAgraphics v190.42 soon??
Ken Mays wrote: Hello, The latest Nvidia 190.42 driver is not included on the latest snv_128a development ISO yet. It integrated to 129. The next IPS update is expected to have the latest Nvidia 190.42 driver. I'm expecting this IPS update will come out right before the Xmas holiday. 129 should be a bit before that. The Xorg 7.5/Xserver 1.7.3 update will come after that AFAIK. It integrated to 130. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
Jörg Stephan wrote: 4. Why doenst Alt+F1 switch to an console? Or better question... Where is the console? Because you're using 2009.06 and the implementation of virtual consoles wasn't finished until after that. To get to the text console in 2009.06, stop gdm X by running 'svcadm disable -t gdm' - restart them with 'svcadm enable gdm'. If you upgrade to a development build, then you'll be able to enable virtual console switching between X text consoles. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] BFU to b128a
Ian Allison wrote: I've submitted a bug report at bugs.opensolaris.org. It seems to be in the system (CR 6908102), but I can't find a URL for it by searching. I'll post it if I find it (or if I can fix the bug :) bugs.opensolaris.org only updates from the internal database once a day, so it may take up to 24 hours for your bug to become visible on the web site. When it is, it should appear at: http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6908102 Sun employees can view it right away in the internal database though. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Expecting NVDAgraphics v190.42 soon??
Masafumi Ohta wrote: Hi Alan, I filed my report to bugzilla 12196 - need to add pci10de,6f1,so are you going to add it to driver lists? That question needs to be addressed to John, not me - I can't change what devices the nvidia driver binds to - only John or Nvidia can. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
UNIX admin wrote: OpenSolaris will never make it to the top of the food chain because it has severe architectural issues, starting with the software management subsystem, continuing with breaking compatibility with Solaris, and causing tremendous engineering and software development effort for third party ISVs, of which I am one. There are few compatibility breaks that affect ISV's - what is breaking your software? I dislike that fact that default is GNU. For the one user created by the installer on the local system for the benefit of places that don't already have all their user accounts set up in LDAP or NIS, and only until that user creates a .profile or .cshrc with their own custom $PATH. I dislike the fact that root's shell is /bin/bash. Then don't change it to bash - OpenSolaris doesn't ship that way. I dislike the fact that the hundreds of System V packages we toiled so hard for are now worthless, all that automation - worthless, all that system engineering - worthless, because someone thought that Solaris should be hip. How are they worthless? They all install fine, since compatibility was kept with the System V packaging system. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
UNIX admin wrote: There are few compatibility breaks that affect ISV's - what is breaking your software? What happens on OpenSolaris when one tries to install a System V package that runs a CREATE DATABASE inside of postinstall and SQL*Plus? The same thing as on SXCE, since it's the same pkgadd command being used to install the System V packages. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
UNIX admin wrote: I guess I failed to make my point - you can't engineer an enterprise piece of software, for example for a bank or an insurance agency, or the any Fortune 100 company, then come to the sales presentation and tell them that they must use OpenSolaris. Banks for instance will laugh you right out of the conference room - they won't touch anything but Solaris 10. So if one wants to earn a living, software MUST run on an enterprise OS - in this case, that enterprise OS is Solaris 10. Banks should continue to use Solaris 10 *for now* for their database servers and mission critical systems - OpenSolaris releases, like Solaris Express releases before it, are previews of the next enterprise release of Solaris - they're works in progress, good enough for many tasks, but not ready for deployment to scenarios where you want to run the same OS for years without upgrading to new releases. There's a reason it doesn't say Solaris 11 on the CD labels yet. You're getting to see the process from the slaughterhouse through the kitchen, instead of just getting the steak delivered on a plate when it's fully cooked like you did before - it's going to be messy, but hopefully we'll end up with a better product in the end. [BTW, like everything else you see on this mailing list, from everyone else involved, this is *me* speaking, one person, not the voice of the company. If you want an official Sun statement, contact the press office for a finely tuned press release in which all the content is scrutinized and sanitized.] -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
UNIX admin wrote: Agreed, and you're right. Perhaps you might answer me this: 1. SX:CE, the closest one has ever come to Solaris 11, is being killed But the next release of Solaris will use the new packaging systems and installers, so SXCE is farther from Solaris 11 than OpenSolaris is. 2. it has been stated on more than one occasion, that OpenSolaris the distribution is the way forward. But with OpenSolaris a) being radically different Radically? It's a different packaging system and installer, and a few default preferences different - something like 99% of the binaries are bit-for-bit identical. (Assuming you don't count the ones like Xsun CDE that aren't in both.) what do you believe, or what is your personal vision of what will replace Solaris 10 in the enterprise space? I believe the next version of Solaris will be based on the code you see today in OpenSolaris, with a lot more work done to complete the new features that are still in development. With SX:CE, the ISVs like myself have at least had a chance to test our software and prepare for the future, and be ready for Solaris 11 (such as it was until now); now, with the decision to kill SX:CE, the very ground we stand on is being pulled from underneath us! That's exactly what OpenSolaris gives you today - a chance to test your software and prepare for the future and be ready for Solaris 11. It's closer to that future than SX:CE is, and ending SX:CE simply stops you from wasting your time on dealing with the things that are known not to be part of the next Solaris enterprise release. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will AMD PowerNow be supported on processors families 15hex and below?
Jensen Lee wrote: Is anyone taking any interest in OpenSolaris' power management and carbon emissions? The engineers working on the Power Management project are, but they're off in pm-discuss, away from all the noxious emissions of this mailing list. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
Volker A. Brandt wrote: Shawn Walker writes: Volker A. Brandt wrote: Yes, Sun has made two big mistakes: Implementing IPS in Python, and ditching scripting capability in the packages. I'm sure these seemed I continue to see assertions that pkg(5) should not have been written in python with little justification for this claim. Hmmm... I will readily admit that you're working on fixing the performance issues, and improving overall efficiency, so the situation is better now than it was when pkg(5) was first released into the wild. However, there is also the fact that Sun had already committed to a scripting language, Perl. There was a statement that Perl was a core part of Solaris and would always be present on the miniroot. (I am not saying that Perl would be markedly faster here.) And there can be only one? Doesn't that mean perl was also a mistake since Sun had already committed to sh as a scripting language available on the miniroot? (Just taking your argument to its logical conclusion - I'm a heavy perl user myself, so think both perl python have their place in the core OS.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
UNIX admin wrote: Because if we want to be ready for the future, we must now maintain two sets of packages for every component - one for the enterprise, which is what feeds us and pays the bills, one for being ready for the future. And if it wasn't IPS, then it would be some other feature in Solaris 11 that would make you have to choose between the least common denominator and supporting all the new features. This is the same dilemma every OS provides with new releases - Do I have one common binary for all versions, or customized ones that take advantage of newer features in newer releases? - it could be Solaris 8 vs. 10 (see the blastwave dilemma on linking to open source libraries in the OS there for instance) or Windows XP vs. 7. But that costs tremendous amounts of effort and money; it's very expensive. pkgadd(1M) could have been incrementally improved with the backgraph algorithm in AWK and the C programming language books which the make(1) tool also uses, why wasn't this done instead? pkgadd(1M) could have been incrementally improved, based on pkgtrans(1), to have knowledge of true package clusters instead of the loose package metacluster (like SUNWCall), why wasn't this done? pkgadd(1M)'s capability to install packages via http:// protocol could have been extended further, coupled with the dependency resolution algorithm, to automatically install any and all needed packages over the network, like yum install and pkg_get(1M) do; why wasn't this done? Why did Sun have to create ZFS instead of just extending UFS more? Why did Sun have to create SMF instead of just extending init.d scripts more? Why did Sun have to move to GNOME instead of just extending CDE more? Why did Sun have to move to SVR4 instead of just extending SunOS 4 more? Why did Sun have to create SPARC instead of just building more 680x0 machines? Change is inevitable in IT - sometimes the amount of change you need to make is so great that replacement is the most viable option (allowing side-by-side implementations during the transition and for customers to transition at their own speed).Some of these have been more painful than others, but the end result was better than hacking new features into an old design they didn't fit into. I understand you might not have the answers to these questions; but surely someone inside of Sun Microsystems knows! Yes, and Stephen and Bart have explained it quite a bit - if everything they've said and written about their investigations of the options and the requirements they gathered from the various major enterprise customers they talked to hasn't convinced you, my third-hand repeating of what they said isn't going to help. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
Volker A. Brandt wrote: Alan Coopersmith writes: Volker A. Brandt wrote: However, there is also the fact that Sun had already committed to a scripting language, Perl. There was a statement that Perl was a core part of Solaris and would always be present on the miniroot. (I am not saying that Perl would be markedly faster here.) And there can be only one? Doesn't that mean perl was also a mistake since Sun had already committed to sh as a scripting language available on the miniroot? (Just taking your argument to its logical conclusion Good point. I actually would have preferred a C implementation for pkg(5). % find . -name '*.c' ./util/misc/extract_hostid.c ./util/distro-import/ksh-wrapper.c ./brand/support.c ./modules/actions/_actions.c ./modules/arch.c ./modules/pspawn.c ./modules/liblist.c ./modules/elf.c ./modules/elfextract.c ./modules/solver/py_solver.c ./modules/solver/solver.c The parts that benefit from being in C are in C. What gets lost in this discussion is the need for a bridge over the gap between you Sun engineers in your ivory tower designing pure and well-defined systems and us consultants and software developers needing to implement automation during system installation in some reasonable reproducible way. Isn't that why we have opensolaris and the community discussions? -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OSOL SNV_130: You've come a long way, baby...
ken mays wrote: Although OSOL 2010.03 is still a few months away, we are starting to get down to some of the main features we may see in the final product release. We are still a week away from OSOL SNV_130. So time to jot down the notes on what we'd like to see and improvements Sun needs to make before they 'nail the coffin' shut. For most consolidations, code freeze for snv_130 was a week ago, and the final packages (after respins for any issues found in QA over the last week) were due a few hours ago. We're mostly in feature freeze now for 2010.03, so there's room for RFE's and smaller things, but no more major upgrades or projects until after 2010.03 for most of the OS. (Things like IPS outside the main consolidations operate on different schedules, and have a later freeze.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
Joerg Schilling wrote: BTW: RFE 5007466 was closed, does this mean that star is now included in Solaris? No, according to the bug database, it was closed due to lack of interest, since no one from the community responded to the mail the responsible manager sent trying to propose a way forward. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] star [was: Some Why?-Questions]
Joerg Schilling wrote: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: BTW: RFE 5007466 was closed, does this mean that star is now included in Solaris? No, according to the bug database, it was closed due to lack of interest, since no one from the community responded to the mail the responsible manager sent trying to propose a way forward. Well, there was no such mail. There is of course interest. Check your moderation queue and spam filters then, for a message with these headers: Subject: [Star-developers] Discussing and defining future star enhancements From: Fred Thornborrow fred.thornbor...@sun.com Date: Mon, 05 Oct 2009 12:30:41 -0700 To: star-develop...@lists.berlios.de CC: Bonnie Corwin bonnie.cor...@sun.com -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] star [was: Some Why?-Questions]
Dennis Clarke wrote: As a voice from the community I see star as a *need* and not just a want. It archive and extracts/packs just about anything. Since none of Sun's paying customers have expressed such a requirement to Sun, it's going to be up to the community to do much of the work to satisfy this need - I'm sure Joerg will appreciate your help on the work required for the integration. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
UNIX admin wrote: No we won't, because this is costing money. Where can I send the bill, please? To the customers who are paying you for new versions. Isn't that where you'd send the bill for adding support for other new features in new OS releases? -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
UNIX admin wrote: How about migrating the Python code to C? What would the benefit of that be? There's already C code for the portions of IPS where that is beneficial - and those portions change over time as needed, but forcing a mass rewrite to a new language just because seems hardly worthwhile, and only likely to delay adding actually needed features. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
a b wrote: It seems that the type of engineer at Sun did change since the days of Bill Joy. It certainly appears so. And it also does not look like the change was for the better. Please take your insults of the members of this community elsewhere. They are not welcome here. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] pkg scripts are evil :-) (was Some Why?-Questions)
Peter Tribble wrote: But that problem arises not because SVR4 packaging supports scripting but because it only does so badly. What's needed is: 1. For the packaging system to fully support scripting as a first-class citizen. Which could include actually providing the most common functions as builtins. 2. For all scripts to be written assuming they're running in the live context, which is easy to do and the only place most script writers will bother to test. 3. For the packaging system to itself take on the responsibility of ensuring that scripts are run in the correct context. SVR4 fails here because it shirks the responsibility, passing it onto every script writer. But that wouldn't be terribly hard to fix. IPS ought to do this right, and is pretty much there because it actually does have the framework to do everything correctly, but claims that scripting is forbidden and therefore doesn't provide the public hooks, again forcing every script writer into carrying the responsibility themselves. Actually that's pretty much what IPS does, it just leverages SMF as the mechanism for ensuring that custom scripts are run in the correct context, using actuators to start the SMF service immediately after package installation or allowing SMF to start it on first boot if not installing to the live image. The most common functions are builtin actions, like the one to install a device driver. So the biggest gap in IPS is the long acknowledged lack of documentation examples. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] star [was: Some Why?-Questions]
Joerg Schilling wrote: Ignacio Marambio Catán darkjo...@gmail.com wrote: perhaps you should integrate smake into jucr first and then have the spec file for star BuildRequire it? and while you're at it, you can place it in /usr where it should be? Well, smake compiles without the need for a make program as it first creates a boostrap smake using shell scripts and then uses this to make a standard compile. The question would be how to call a just compiled smake later in the autmated build process from another package. If your spec file for smake installs it as /usr/bin/smake, then the spec file for star just calls /usr/bin/smake, provided you listed it in BuildRequires. If you install in another path, adjust appropriately. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
Craig S. Bell wrote: I can't see vendors updating all of their software, though -- we still install S8-built commercial packages today, and they have actions. The vendor doesn't care to update them. Will they spend the effort for pkg? It's a potential barrier. That's why pkgadd company are still provided for installing existing SVR4 packages. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] http://wiki.genunix.org down?
Halton Huo wrote: I can not access http://wiki.genunix.org for several days, anybody know what happens? See the notice in the first news item on http://www.genunix.org/ -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some Why?-Questions
Craig S. Bell wrote: Alan, what will happen with old-style packages with dependencies on other SUNW* packages -- will there a way to artificially fulfill these? It seems like it will take some ongoing effort to continue supporting the SysV format. IPS currently puts entries into the SVR4 package database for the packages installed via IPS that have information about the legacy package they replaced, so that package dependencies can be satisfied. Let me play devil's advocate: If people have the option to continue using the old package system (with it's action scripting capabilities), then could that slow adoption of the new pkg format? Or is that just the cost of providing compatibility? Did providing SunOS 4 binary compatibility slow the adoption of providing Solaris 2 native binaries? (I don't know - it was before my time - I suspect it's just part of the cost of providing compatibility.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OS 2009.06 - b129 update: broken gnome terminal and xterm
Karel Gardas wrote: My question is: is it a well known bug somewhere reported already or shall I report it somewhere? Yes, it's a well known bug described in the build 129 release notes: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/2009-December/017158.html Scroll down to the description for: 12380 image-update loses /dev/ptmx from /etc/minor_perm for more information and instructions to fix. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] star [was: Some Why?-Questions]
Joerg Schilling wrote: Alan Coopersmith alan.coopersm...@sun.com wrote: The question would be how to call a just compiled smake later in the autmated build process from another package. If your spec file for smake installs it as /usr/bin/smake, then the spec file for star just calls /usr/bin/smake, provided you listed it in BuildRequires. If you install in another path, adjust appropriately. If it works this way, I would expect that the build process has root privileges. How does it prevent bad packages from doing unwanted things or even destroy the build machine? You'll have to ask the sourcejuicer mailing list for details, but my understanding is a new zone is created for each build so all you can do is destroy your temporary zone, and since they have the OpenSolaris account name of the user who submitted the spec file, they know who to blame for things that appear to be malicious and not just mistakes. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Invisible Gnome-Terminal Problem
W. Wayne Liauh wrote: Check out this bug http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/ 2009-December/017158.html Scroll down to the description for: 12380 image-update loses /dev/ptmx from m /etc/minor_perm for more information and instructions to fix. Yes, snv_129 seems to have solved this known bug, but invoking the input method seems to have re-triggered it. Manually changing the attributes of /dev/ptmx seemed to be a quick fix, but I am not sure whether there are side effects. The bug is in the pkg command handling of upgrades, so once you've upgraded to 129 and it's fixed version of the pkg command, further upgrades should not lose the entry from minor_perm, but if it was lost before you got there, you may still have it. -- -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 update policy
Michael Disserman wrote: Can someone please explain me an update policy for OpenSolaris release builds. In example, I've tested 2009.6 in the test environment and can install it in the production but I'm afraid of the bug # 6882364 (networking wedged up behind blocked taskq_thread() in Xen Dom0). This bug has a state 10-Fix Delivered:Verified (Fix available in build) but where to get the update? Of course I don't want to switch to the development branch. As well as don't want to wait 6 months to get a release build with the bug fixed. Does someone provide a bugfix patches for the release versions? Maybe there is some commercial support for this? I've found commercial opensolaris support offers on sun.com however there's a note the patch could be available within a 6 months, which's actually a period when stable branches of osol are released. I've tried to talk with Sun support in webchat, they don't know anything except a phone numbers. Support on the phone don't know the details, they can just read for you an info from the public website. 2009.06 was built from snv_111 - since that bug fix is delivered in snv_125, it came after the 2009.06 release. As you've already discovered, you can get it for free by updating to the development branch builds (which are currently up to snv_129). Sun's commercial support does offer bug fix releases for 2009.06 - I'm not sure why the web page indicates 6 months for fixes, when currently updates are released approximately monthly. While this fix isn't currently in a Support Repository Update (SRU), I believe if you have bought a support contract you can request to escalate the fix into an SRU - they usually include all security fixes by default, and then any other fixes that customers have escalated or support deems critical to include. You can see the current lists of available updates at: http://sunsolve.sun.com/show.do?target=opensolaris -- -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 update policy
Mike Disserman wrote: Thank you. But can I purchase a support plan for the machine purchased not from Sun? There's a Serial number field in the support plan ordering form and you can't leave it blank.. You should be able to, but obviously, I've never had to buy support myself, so I don't know how the web form works. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Trouble with svc:/system/intrd:default on b 129
Harry Putnam wrote: Harry Putnam rea...@newsguy.com writes: Tim Haley tim.ha...@sun.com writes: Not sure about the intrd, but your apache problem may be 6907454 apache22 fcgid fails to load, daemon starts, stops and restarts ad nauseum I'm not getting any hits on 6907454 or on apache22 at: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/buglist.cgi Sorry a straight up google search on `apache fcgid' turned it up. And it does show that bug number. However I rechecked at http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=6907454 and still shows no results... not sure why. 7 digit bug numbers are in the bug database found at bugs.opensolaris.org. The separate bug database at defect.opensolaris.org is only up to 5 digit bug ids so far. http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6907454 -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] X hangs on snv130
Anon Y Mous wrote: Does anybody have any idea when an OpenSolaris Indiana version based on snv_131 will be put on genunix.org and in the /dev repository so we can either install or pkg image-update to it? Due to the holiday break, 131 is open for putbacks until January 4, then there's a week of build and pre-integration testing before all the packages are due to the people who make the OS images. After that, it's normally 1-2 weeks until they're posted, but since this is the first post-SXCE build, we're in new territory where there are no previous examples to rely on. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] X hangs on snv130
The engineers who work on dri can be found on the dri-discuss mailing list, so I'm cc'ing this there to bring it to their attention (until someone files a bug in bugs.opensolaris.org under graphics/drm that is). For the folks on dri-discuss, there were a lot more messages after this one in the opensolaris-discuss thread with more information: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=120664tstart=0 -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering Daniel Rock wrote: Hello, after upgrading to snv130 (from snv129) X hangs on startup. The Xorg process seems stuck. The kernel prints messages like: WARNING: GPU hang detected try to reset ... wait for irq_queue seqno 2, now seqno 1 WARNING: drm_irq_install: irq already enabled WARNING: GPU hang detected try to reset ... wait for irq_queue seqno 2, now seqno 1 WARNING: drm_irq_install: irq already enabled When killing Xorg (have to kill it with SIGKILL) the kernel finally prints out: WARNING: hardware wedged Copying back drm + i915 kernel modules from snv129 helped for me to make X work again. Daniel ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] build 130 nonsense
andrew wrote: So OpenSolaris 2010.02 will not even support printing out of the box, I now need to download and install several meg of packages just to print? Of course 2010.03 will support printing - is your problem a printer not supported by the included CUPS drivers? We've had 3 releases of OpenSolaris already and we've still got 2 copies of all the packages on the live CD, We've never had 2 copies of all the packages on the live CD - why do you think there are? And where can I find a list of stuff that has been jettisoned for 2010.02 since there is obviously no way to get them put back in. install-discuss and/or indiana-discuss would be the place to ask about what's on or off the LiveCD. The list is changing build to build as work is done, so that would be where discussions about adding things back may be most productive. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] build 130 nonsense
andrew wrote: We've never had 2 copies of all the packages on the live CD - why do you think there are? Because I was under the impression that there are two copies of each piece of software on the live CD - executable directly from the CD and as cpio archives for installation. The inability of the packaging system to support installation from a local filesystem is something which should have been addressed before the 4th release, I would suggest. As should some way of getting rid of one of the copies on the live CD. That's how the old Solaris installer works (the one in SXCE and Solaris 10), but it has a much more limited miniroot that is booted, without a lot of the LiveCD functionality, so it minimizes the duplication (not enough so that it can fit the miniroot plus initial packages on a single CD in recent Nevada builds, which is why SXCE has been DVD only for a while). As Shawn already explained, that's not the way the OpenSolaris LiveCD works. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_130
On 12/31/2009 10:49 AM, Ron Halstead wrote: Will there be a OpenSolaris Nevada sxce snv_130 or is it dead? Last I heard SXCE 130 was planned for release after the Sun US employees responsible for the release get back into the office next week. (Sun's US offices are closed for a winter holiday break from Dec. 25 - Jan. 1, so all this week.) 130 is the final SXCE release planned though, as previously announced. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_130
On 12/31/2009 1:11 PM, Anon Y Mous wrote: Happy New Year all. Will there be a OpenSolaris Nevada sxce snv_130 or is it dead? --ron I hope not. They should probably just skip snv_130 and go straight to snv_131 if the Solaris Express version is going to be anywhere near as buggy as the bleeding edge Indiana version was. If they skipped snv_130 it might save you the wasted time and effort of using live upgrade to upgrade in to a buggy system. Skipping 130 won't give you SXCE 131, it would just end the SXCE line at 129 instead. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_130
Volker A. Brandt wrote: Happy new year every1! 130 is the final SXCE release planned though, as previously announced. Which is too bad, really. Maybe the infrastructure to build SXCE can be kept in place a little bit longer. The final release of SXCE could then be cut in sync with the official OS 2010.02 release. The problem is it's dividing our attention - by ending SXCE at 130, that concentrates all testing and development on OpenSolaris for builds 131-136 for the OpenSolaris 2010.03 release. And once ON converts it's gate to build IPS packages instead of SVR4, it won't be possible to build SXCE anymore, since they're not planning on maintaining two sets of packaging metadata in the ON gate. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] snv_130
casper@sun.com wrote: I've noticed that more and more things have stopped working in SXCE; specifically X which is now only partially delivered (no Xnest) and, We've always only delivered the Xnest built on Xsun, so it's there on SPARC, been gone on x86 since we removed Xsun on x86 in snv_118. Xnest hasn't really been maintained in years, and is missing support for many of the newer extensions required by modern desktops, which is why we choose to EOL it in favor of the newer and more capable Xephyr, built from the current Xorg sources. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] X problem fixed in build 131? (bug 13598)
Luca Morettoni wrote: As reported in bug 13598[1] (opened by me) the changes in build 130 introduce a bug related to DRM with Intel video card, any hope to see that fixed in build 131? Thanks! [1] http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=13598 Since build 131 closed last night and is being built and tested now, not really, unless someone else reported it and it was already fixed. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Change Logs (or something similar) for dev releases?
Joseph Mocker wrote: Hi Folks, I'm curious if there is a good location that contains a list of changes, enhancements, bug fixes, etc for each OpenSolaris dev release? The email that comes out on opensolaris-announce, as far as I can tell, only includes IPS bugfixes, etc. I've also found the Flag Days pages, http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+on/126-130, which are a little more inclusive, but don't appear to have been updated for the latest releases. The scripts that update that were broken by the transition from the old website to the new one and are in the process of being fixed still. Is there a better place I can look? Some consolidations publish their changelogs, but most don't. The ones that I know of that do: ON (The kernel, drivers, and core utilities): http://dlc.sun.com/osol/on/downloads/b129/on-changelog-b129.html X Window System: http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+x_win/changelogs-nv_120 Desktop (GNOME, Mozilla, Evolution, etc.): http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/jds/spec-files/branches/gnome-2-28/ChangeLog http://src.opensolaris.org/source/xref/jds/spec-files-other/branches/gnome-2-28/ChangeLog Of course, internally you can see the RTC's filed for each build, which lists all the bugster bug ids for the consolidations that use it, but that's only helpful for people with access behind the Sun firewalls. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Bug 6695198 regarding the Intel SS4200
Laurens Vets wrote: Hello, Bug 6695198: OpenSolaris / Nevada do not probe Intel SS4200-EHW on-board PATA controller. The last entry I can see is this: Is it possible to access this machine remotely for debugging? I'm not sure who to tell or ask this, but I can provide a remote serial connection to an Intel SS4200 if this might help fix this bug... I've cc'ed the engineer who added that comment to the bug so that he can connect with you to debug further. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [osol-help] 128a was the latest fairly stable
Joerg Schilling wrote: My impression is that Sun is currently leaving the server market by ceasing the distribution of Solaris Express while the supposed successor (Indiana) is not ready for either he server market or the desktop. That would be incorrect, since Solaris 10 has been and continues to be Sun's server OS. Solaris Express Community Edition was explicitly for the OpenSolaris community to be able to build the OS and test the latest bits - since it's no longer needed for either of those, and in the near future will no longer actually work for either of those purposes, it's no longer needed. That other people used it for other reasons is unfortunate, but has never been part of the SXCE goals. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [osol-help] 128a was the latest fairly stable
Joerg Schilling wrote: Dennis Clarke dcla...@blastwave.org wrote: snip My impression is that Sun is currently leaving the server market ... Jörg Do you really think that Oracle will be running on anything less than a multi-core and multi-socket Sparc server? I am certain that Solaris, as a server OS, will be around for a nice long time. Certainly Fujitsu would also expect it to be. I am not sure whether you know what before OpenSolaris exists, Sun did have a lot of people (mainly interested in server appications) that did beta testing. This was continued with the SXCE series of the Solaris developer edition. Now, SXCE is withdrawn. What kind of impression do you believe this creates? That SXCE was the wrong thing to use for this. The releases that Sun provides for those who want a preview of the next Solaris release were originally Solaris Express, then once SXCE was created for the OpenSolaris developer community, the preview releases became Solaris Express Developer Edition to distinguish it from SXCE, and were then replaced by OpenSolaris releases. OpenSolaris isn't yet a fully-featured replacement for Solaris 10, but it's closer to the next enterprise release of Solaris than SXCE is - it at least uses the same packaging system and installer that the next release of Solaris will use, and no longer includes many of the EOL components that Sun has said won't be in future Solaris releases. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] solaris SXCE compile IPS for osol and problems with pkg command
philo neo wrote: hello, I installed a solaris sxce an intel q6600, appears the pkg command is not installed, I know how to install the packet pkg? Wipe the hard disk and install OpenSolaris 2009.06. SXCE is the older version, with the old SVR4 package system (pkgadd, not pkg), and is being ended this month, so for new installs you really want OpenSolaris now. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Nevada: What's going, what's staying, what's changing, what's not
There's been some confusion over the upcoming changes as SXCE ends while Nevada builds continue to be published to the IPS package repositories, so this is an attempt to clear up some of that. (Just in case it's unclear, I am writing this is as an engineer trying to explain our work - I am not any sort of official spokesman, nor am I announcing any policy changes.) What's changing at build 131: - The OS install images will only be available in IPS packaged formats. This means installs will be done via LiveCD (x86) or Automated Installer (SPARC or x86) - the old Install DVD, network install, jumpstart, and live upgrade all rely on the SXCE/SVR4 packaged images, which will not be available after build 130. Most consolidations provide the same packages via both mechanisms, though the IPS versions have some changes, such as merging the split / (root) and /usr filesystem packages into one combined package. A number of packages that were already scheduled for removal from the next release of Solaris, or which are not redistributable due to third party license encumbrances, are not included in the IPS repositories. For instance, for X, we've not packaged Xsun or the legacy SPARC graphics drivers in IPS format, so once this changeover is done, SPARC platforms will only have Xorg, and only have the graphics drivers for astfb (AST2000, 2100), efb (XVR-50, 100, 300), and kfb (XVR-2500). CDE has similarly only had IPS conversions done of the packages for the non-EOF portions (Motif, Tooltalk, dtksh, etc.) and most of the CDE desktop applications environment will go away in the transition. What's not changing at build 131: - Build schedules - still every two weeks (except at holidays), still following the same Nevada build schedule and build sequence - the builds continue to be numbered snv_131, snv_132, etc. See http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Community+Group+on/schedule for the ongoing schedules for when the code freezes occur and the packages are delivered to the release engineers who build the ISO images and IPS repositories. As before, these are *build* schedules, not release schedules, and release of the built product remains about two weeks behind the build date shown. - Bug tracking - the release is still solaris_nevada, and the builds have the same names as before. Developers won't start ignoring all nevada bugs, but once the changeover happens bugs that only affect the SVR4 install methods (live upgrade, pkghistory, postinstall scripts, etc.) may be either marked with the no-snv+ keyword to indicate they are not Nevada bugs if they affect prior releases of Solaris, or closed as will-not-fix if they only applied to the Nevada versions. Bugs for most of the OS should still be filed into Sun's bugster database via the http://bugs.opensolaris.org/ website, though IPS, OpenSolaris Installation, and Desktop bugs should continue to be filed in the bugzilla database at http://defect.opensolaris.org/ - Code repositories - the Nevada gates/repositories for all the consolidations will still be used - onnv for ON, XW_NV for X, sfwnv for SFW, etc. - The packages created by building the code - for the next few builds, all consolidations will continue to generate SVR4 packages for their builds, and the IPS team will continue to convert them to IPS, just as they have been since the IPS builds started for the first OpenSolaris release. ON will be changing generate IPS packages first, after the 2010.03 release of OpenSolaris, as noted in: http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/on-discuss/2010-January/001461.html The rest of the consolidations will change in later builds, once we see what issues ON hits, and the necessary infrastructure is in place for delivering IPS packages from consolidations to the central Release Engineering repository. X, Desktop, SFW are next in line after ON, and have been working with Liane the ON/IPS team on planning for our changeovers. I hope this helps with confusion people have had - if not, try asking your questions on the appropriate OpenSolaris.Org mailing list or web forum. -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] 128a was the latest fairly stable build
Bruce wrote: 1) Progressivly longer boot times snv_111b 2.5 mins to login snv_128 4.5 mins to login If anyone wants to point me to bugs, and if I can add myself I will. Well, there's this: Bug 13946 - Solaris Boot time needs to be looked at more seriously now. http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=13946 but that's really a request for a project, not a bug that can be simply fixed, so it probably will go nowhere (especially since it's filed in the bug database that the kernel team doesn't pay attention to). -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] When will osol-131 be published ?
Tomas Bodzar wrote: And only 2(!) new packages. It will be fine to know how much important it is to use this page http://pkgfactory.opensolaris.org/ . It doesn't look that they follow our votes and what's worst that users don't vote at all :-( That's 2 new packages in the /dev repo update - pkgfactory packages go into the /contrib repo, not /dev, so that's unrelated. (And since 130 was the last build for big new projects to deliver for the 2010.03 release, you should expect to see fewer new packages in /dev updates between now and 2010.03.) -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] zones in b131 and bug 6912829
Bruno Damour wrote: The bug is still unavailable ? It's flagged as a security-sensitive bug so will not be published outside Sun. I would have contributed the workaround, but... ...you can't edit bugs from outside Sun anyway, even if you can see them. -- -Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersm...@sun.com Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
