Re: [osol-discuss] /bin/sh was Re: [osol-announce] No update on SXCE Build 79
On Feb 7, 2008 9:16 PM, Alan Hargreaves [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The bit that everyone putting forward this argument seems to overlook is the sheer number of scripts in ON that are written for the bourne shell. Each and every one of these would need to be verified against the new shell. We are not talking a handful of scripts here. This would be a monumental task. So far I have seen people proposing the change, but no volunteers to do this verification. It won't do itself folks. If we are going to do something, then we need to look at the *whole* job, not parts of it. I haven't over looked it. As far as I know, that testing has already been started. Roland has certainly been involved: http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=142 http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=442 I don't think folks realise just how much work Roland has already done towards this goal. I'm sure he would welcome help though for those parties that are proficient in the relevant areas. Really, any changes to the existing shell, whether its outright replacement or otherwise need a lot of testing. I myself even created a patch to add support for export BLAH=FOO syntax to the current /bin/sh: http://icculus.org/~eviltypeguy/sh_export.patch Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] /bin/sh was Re: [osol-announce] No update on SXCE Build 79
On Feb 8, 2008 6:01 AM, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Really, any changes to the existing shell, whether its outright replacement or otherwise need a lot of testing. I myself even created a patch to add support for export BLAH=FOO syntax to the current /bin/sh: http://icculus.org/~eviltypeguy/sh_export.patch Your patch is not OK as it would bypass consistency checks if you use export BLAH=FOO instead of BLAH=FOO. ...which is why I never tried to get it integrated. I'm not an expert on shell syntax. It was a hack for my own personal system :) Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [osol-announce] No update on SXCE Build 79
On Feb 8, 2008 4:04 AM, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Chris Linton-Ford [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm afraid I'm no POSIX expert, so I'm not clear on whether the Bourne/Korn test below implies POSIX compatibility *only* if Korn-style is returned; but if using a POSIXy shell for /sbin/sh will cause widespread Windows Update-style brokenness then this should be a clear This test verifes no more than that there is no unique behavior with /bin/sh on other platforms (in contrary to what was claimed by Shawn). I have made no such claim Joerg. You misunderstood me. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] CIFS vs SAMBA for home NAS: Who is faster?
On Feb 10, 2008 5:27 AM, Orvar Korvar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: DCLARKE, Just curiuos, which desktop GUI are you using? Your desktop looks nice. Any special downloads, or is it pure Opensolaris? Orvar, Dennis is showing screenshots from a Windows Vista Desktop. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview 2 Available
On Feb 13, 2008 11:10 AM, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: o ksh93 is the default *system* shell (bash remains the default user shell) What do you understand by *system* shell? /sbin/sh, /usr/bin/sh are now really ksh93. The old shell is now: /usr/has/bin/sh ...since it is a hasbin :) -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] [indiana-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview 2 Available
On Feb 13, 2008 1:21 PM, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hey, Joerg Schilling wrote: Brian Nitz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Joerg Schilling wrote: Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: o ksh93 is the default *system* shell (bash remains the default user shell) What do you understand by *system* shell? My fault for not figuring out the right terminology. Let me asume that you are talking abut /sbin/sh and /bin/sh. Changing this to ksh93 will break compatibility. BTW: I vote against allowing to replace /sbin/sh by something different than a 100% compatible Bourne shell for distributions that like to use the OpenSolaris trademark. Remember, this is a developer preview - so we're using these releases to figure things out, and understand more about the system. Not only that, it is valuable to figuring out *what* incompatibilities exist. Remember, compatibility can be broken as long as there is a well though-out plan for dealing with it. In some cases, that means restoring certain aspects of compatibility in others it means ignoring incorrectly written programs that don't follow the documentation and should have never worked anyway. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview 2 Available
On Feb 13, 2008 3:12 PM, Brian Cameron [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Brian Joerg is referring to the fact that ksh93 and bourne shell have some minor incompatibilities. It is possible to write a script that will work differently in the two shells. Academics have even written some scripts to demonstrate these incompatibilities really exist. The three users in the universe who actually have scripts that exhibit such problems will likely take a break from fixing their punch-card reader, and after complaining, will end up fixing the handful of scripts that actually have problems running in one shell or the other. ...or just a developer who doesn't do what they're supposed to and the user has to suffer. The request script for the Marvell Yukon Ethernet Adapter has some bad syntax that fails ksh93's POSIX-compliant printf behaviour. Of course it doesn't matter since changes coming soon to Solaris will break that anyway :) Still, it isn't difficult to find programs that will break or have unexpected behaviour. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] We aren't an Open Community, because we don't control our Trademark and Website. (And it's not Sun's fault).
On Feb 13, 2008 10:35 PM, Brian Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Based on Sun's recent decisions, it has become clear to me that Sun has exercised their right to break the illusion that OpenSolaris is a community run project. (It is rather, a community influenced project). I'm sure Sun's executives have discussed this, and have convinced themselves that this is best for the community, and best for Sun. However, this does not change the fact that the OpenSolaris community (directly or indirectly through it's elected representational body the OGB) does not have control over it's own website or name. The community was never given control over their trademarks. As such, I don't see how Sun exercising their trademark rights == community dissolution as you suggest. Until I see an action by Sun that is contrary to a decision made by a Community Group over an area that is not within Sun's control, I will have to disagree with your conclusion. I am willing to work towards making this happen, but I am not willing, or able, to do so alone. I think your actions are divisive. Since your are a member of the Advocacy Community Group, I would think you would want to discourage, not encourage the fragmentation of our community. This silly battle over a trademark that is Sun's to control seems a waste of time at best when there are far more important and valuable things to be doing. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview 2 Available
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 3:54 AM, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The old shell is now: /usr/has/bin/sh Well, then Sun seems to start an incompatible fork from OpenSolaris. Sigh. We have made no statements about compatibility with anything, either past or future, in the preview releases. It's an experiment. Sun did make statements about long term compatibility and many Solaris users did stay with Solaris _because_ of these statements. Those statements only apply to production releases of Solaris; not to active development by anyone. In addition, Sun's statements are not without qualification. If you read through Sun's compatibility promises, there are certain provisions that do allow them to break compatibility under certain circumstances and their guarantees only apply to specific things. The negativity some of you have towards experiments just amazes me sometimes. You may like to call it negativity from the view you have on the problem. I call it negativity because your claims are not yet justified. Until all of the changes made in Indiana become part of a production release of Solaris or are integrated into the mainline Solaris tree, it is premature at best to make the claims you have. Guarantees and compatibility can't apply to active development; only to a finished product. You however cannot test a /sbin/sh /bin/ksh93 change inside Solaris only. I'm not aware of any rules that say you can't. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] We aren't an Open Community, because we don't control our Trademark and Website. (And it's not Sun's fault).
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Brian Gupta [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 5) We are independent. Decisions within the project are made independently from those concerning Sun's business. Sun's management controls the business aspects of the Solaris product, but will not exert undue influence within the OpenSolaris community. Ask yourself are they being followed? Yes, they are, as well as human beings can be expected to follow them. Time and time again #5 is betrayed, and people seem to not care. I No, it isn't. The community is independent in its decisions over the things it controls. It does *not* control anything related to trademarks. believe in these principles. This isn't a silly argument about a name, it is a discussion about what we stand for. Sun's recent actions, on multiple fronts, work in direct opposition to #5. It is a silly argument because Sun has every right to the name and we were never given the right to control it. You are trying to assert that the community controls something that they do not own. You are confusing property ownership of a trademark with an independent community. Control over a trademark is not necessary for an independent community to function. If the community wanted that, they should have asked for that control at the beginning via delegation or insisted on a non-profit foundation. Please note the very clear distinction between Sun's Solaris product, and OpenSolaris. We are independent. Decisions within the project are made independently from those concerning Sun's business. Sun's management controls the business aspects of the Solaris product, but will not exert undue influence within the OpenSolaris community. I hope and pray that Sun gets religion, and agrees to live by these principles. I hope we all at least try. To me they are as best as I can expect right now. I don't believe some things should have taken so long, but they are in progress and that is good enough for me. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview 2 Available
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Andrew Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-) I see Indiana is an experiment well I think it is more than that! Marketing and engineering don't always have the same message -- you know that :) -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview 2 Available
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 10:26:15AM -0500, Dave Miner wrote: Andrew Watkins wrote: The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-) I see Indiana is an experiment well I think it is more than that! Eventually, we expect it will be more, that's what Larry is saying. Which part of the quote below do you think is contradictory to that? I don't see why it has to replace SXCE/SXDE at all, given that it's just an experiment. Maybe because it costs Sun too much money to maintain multiple release preview trains? Dunno. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [indiana-discuss] Trying to install Indiana (My Observations)
On Feb 16, 2008 8:41 AM, Al Snow [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 1. My 17 flat screen is too small for the language choices screen. This issue has either been logged or resolved in developer preview 2 that was just released. 2. I have no idea what Took interface e1000g0 down means. I believe it means that your network interface was inactivated by OpenSolaris. 3. When I picked on Install OpenSolaris, I see no disks listed. I looks on the OpenSolaris web site to see how to solve this, but did not see anything. This is probably a PC issue, but it would be good to at least point folks to a solution so the overall user experience is good. So I quit out of the install. This likely means that you have your hard drives connected via a SATA (Serial ATA) interface or some other hardware that is not yet supported. Please provide as much specific information as you can about your system, and file a bug at http://defect.opensolaris.org/ 4. Finally I clicked on system icon on top of the screen and then clicked on Shutdown. I got this error message: User does not have permission to use gnome-sys-suspend command. Also I finally noticed it said that it would shutdown in 60 seconds, so I waited and got the above error message again. Next I brought up a terminal and su root and typed shutdown, but that did not work either. I hate shutting down a system without permission. This issue has been resolved in developer preview 2. You can get it here, if you are able: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/indiana/resources/getit/ I'm sure that some of these issues have been fixed, but if not, I have contributed. I know the members of the Indiana project always appreciate this feedback! -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview
On Feb 18, 2008 8:45 AM, Mario Goebbels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Try to be more visible then, posting what's up with Indiana and what changes to the project are being discussed. Instead it appears that you only show up when shit hits the fan on one of the mailing lists. Read the indiana-discuss list or the various other discussion lists for projects related to it. Ian's able to make rather big decisions, since it's his project after all. The branding decision didn't hit the lists until it had been decided (and caused quite a fuzz), same happened right now with SX*E MkII. I'm referring to announcing things like this, when they're still in the consideration phase. At least that's how I think it should be with all the emphasis on community. The community doesn't want to be left out of the loop. Both the naming decision and the SX*E MkII were first dicussed last year, at the very least, in October 2007. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] No sound with OSS on Solaris 10
On Feb 18, 2008 12:05 PM, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I have experienced problems with OSS which appear to be related to the /dev/audio device which is linked to /devices/pseudo/[EMAIL PROTECTED]:sound,audio. So that applications which /dev/audio do not produce any sound. I used Ogle, Mplayer and XMMS which can be downloaded from blastwave.org. XMMS needs to be configured to use the Sun Audio device and not the OSS device, it will generate an error but play okay. Realplayer and Flash also work without problem. Haven't tried on x86 recently (not having a working x86 box right now), but I've never gotten the OSS SADA (Sun Audio Device Architecture - the pre-existing audio interface on Solaris) compatibility support to work, even with OSS releases as of a few weeks ago. Until that works, and works well, there's not much point for me, esp. as I've also never gotten the Mute light on my Audigy NX USB(under OSS) to go out, so that although with newer OSS osstest seems to work, you still don't hear anything. (it did work when I plugged it into a Windows box once...) The SADA support has worked for me on my Audigy 2 for quite some time now. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] What's in a name? Re: [ogb-discuss] Should the OGB respond to Sun's OpenSolaris name-use decision?
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 12:04 PM, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:00 AM, Joerg Schilling This is why the OpenSolaris cummunity proposed Sun to use a new trademark for an OpenSolaris based distro. *watches point fly by responder* Let's try this again. Canonical controls the Ubuntu trademark *and the community* that surrounds their distribution. RedHat controls the Fedora trademark *and the community* that surrounds their distribution. If you did really understand the problem, why do you still tell people that you disagree? Ubuntu et al are all creating distros from a project called Linux, we and Sun are all creating distros from a project called OpenSolaris. If Sun follows the example of Ubuntu and other Linux distros, we had no problem. Let Sun just create their trademark from their OpenSolaris distro, but don't let them call it OpenSolaris as no Linux distro is called Linux. Sun can't follow their example for two reasons: * Sun produces Solaris and that becomes OpenSolaris * Sun owns the trademark to Solaris and OpenSolaris, Ubuntu does not own the trademark to Linux That makes the situation *very* different. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Definition of project/community success Re: [ogb-discuss] Should the OGB respond to Sun's OpenSolaris name-use decision?
On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 11:56 AM, Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 21, 2008 at 06:50:53PM +0100, Michal Bielicki wrote: If I would be religious I'd pray that we will have as much susccess as those two [Ubuntu and Fedora] :) How do you define success? * A thriving community with sustained growth? * Nearly instant name recognition among anyone that knows there are other operating systems than Windows? -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] MultiBoot Anyone Any time Sometime?
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 9:21 AM, Uwe Dippel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: After my positive (overwhelming) experience with SXDE 09/07 I tried Indiana Preview 1. Since it was not useable, I filed the bugs I found and wiped it. Now I receive detail requests about those bugs, months later. In a nutshell: with the current size of hard drives, why is Solaris still not multiboot-compliant? Any second install will have to be on another drive, or you fiddle with (v)fstab. What I mean: grub supports multiboot, and one can easily point into another partition with it, and get the (other) version of *Solaris started. But then, sooner or later, it will crash due to another version on the same cxdytz, that it confounds. Just curiosity: is it really not possible to write a backward-compatible slice handler that remains within the defines into which one has catapulted it at boot? Partition StatusType Start End Length% = == = === == === 1 Linux native 036 37 0 2 Solaris2 37 97639727 32 3 Solaris2 9764 121962433 8 4 Solaris2 12197 3040018204 60 As one can find out and as mentioned, grub is fine with this, and will boot off properly. Before it crashes, at least when I boot that Solaris on partition 3 and higher. In 2008, with a lot of OSs around, including plenty based on the Solaris-slice-concept, it would only be helpful if we could store multiple on the same drive. It consumes much too much electricity to have 3, 4 drives in a casing just because Solaris doesn't support multiboot. Also, the acceptance could improve considerably, if a(ny) large enough partition could simply become 'home' for an install. I do understand, that seeing a slice on another partition on the same drive is difficult, because Solaris is not partition-aware, only drive aware. Therefore my question is only on some means to confine an install within the partition into which it is 'dropped' at boot time; something that - since it is not aware of partitions - could in principle be achieved transparently. With the correct setup, you can actually boot multiple instances of Solaris. See LiveUpgrade for details. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] MultiBoot Anyone Any time Sometime?
On Sat, Feb 23, 2008 at 7:07 PM, Uwe Dippel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: jabrewer, thanks. In my original post I talked about installing another Solaris, not an upgrade. Like Indiana, Sol10, you name it. A current default layout offers one free slice, second_root. That might not be enough for all. I might not want to share /export/home. One could say: Back to the original question 'Multiboot ...?' If you actually read about LiveUpgrade, you would see that it was designed to support multiple instances of Solaris. It isn't just for upgrading, it's just that is the primary use. While I don't believe you can currently multiboot Indiana with it, you could, for example, boot: * Solaris 10 * Solaris Express Developer Edition (01/08 and prior) * Solaris Express Community Edition ...etc. LiveUpgrade has tools that allow you to switch between alternate boot environments. As for the type of multiboot support you might be used to, that is being worked on, but it is not a priority at this stage from what I've read. It will eventually be done though. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Long usernames greater than 8 chars
On Sun, Feb 24, 2008 at 11:25 AM, Edwin Goei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to create accounts that have usernames longer than 8 characters like 32. I believe linux supports longer usernames. How does one configure opensolaris? getconf LOGIN_NAME_MAX seems to say the limit is 8 characters. Also, opensolaris.org keeps user login names to 8 characters. You can't do this currently. See this page: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/security/library/long_usernames/ A related question is what is the limit for the max UIDs? 2147483647 docs.sun.com is your friend: http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/819-2379/6n4m1vlb0?l=ena=viewq=UID+numbers Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Long usernames greater than 8 chars
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 4:14 AM, Mario Goebbels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I would like to create accounts that have usernames longer than 8 characters like 32. I believe linux supports longer usernames. How does one configure opensolaris? getconf LOGIN_NAME_MAX seems to say the limit is 8 characters. Also, opensolaris.org keeps user login names to 8 characters. You can't do this currently. Just wondering what this is about: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~ getconf LOGIN_NAME_MAX 9 Not exactly dazzling, but still more than eight. How can that be? 8 characters + terminating null charcter. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [advocacy-discuss] OpenSolaris Developer Preview 2 Available
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Dr. Robert Pasken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: And Indiana is pushing me away from Solaris. If I wanted the poorly thought out and unstable crap that comes the linux mindset I would just go with linux. I am looking for something that is well thought out and stable Indiana is a prototype at this stage. Solaris is the same it always has been, and the current release will be supported for a very long time. If you want to influence the direction of the project; constructive criticism is appreciated. In other woods, if you have specific issues, please bring them up. Otherwise, I'm not certain how your problems can be resolved. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Informal (and unsanctioned) poll
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Mark Martin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 12:23 AM, Ché Kristo [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I too would like to see the results shared publicly. When do you plan on doing this? Given that it's ~44 hours since I started it, I suspect we're at the point of diminishing returns. Let me see how I can package the report for sharing (I'm thinking genunix). I can tell you what the response was so far: 69 respondents with 55 complete responses. Considering we have several thousand registered members on opensolaris.org; I think that makes any result a passing fancy at best. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Informal (and unsanctioned) poll
On Thu, Feb 28, 2008 at 11:54 AM, Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: Considering we have several thousand registered members on opensolaris.org; I think that makes any result a passing fancy at best. I always treat the total registration count on opensolaris.org as irrelevant, given the campaigns to get free t-shirts or dvds for registering, with no intent needed to participate or ever come back after the shipping form is filled out. I'm going based off advocacy numbers. There's more than several thousand register *accounts*; I guess I was too subtle with members :) Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE build 84 *only* seems to be out
On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 2:18 PM, Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Sun, Mar 9, 2008 at 1:29 PM, Mario Goebbels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Don't know about anyone else but that link does not work from here. I actually downloaded it. zizz:/home/imp ls -l /data/images/sxce/sol-nv-b84-x86-dvd.iso -rw-r--r-- 1 imp imp 3953131520 Mar 9 01:27 /data/images/sxce/sol-nv-b84-x86-dvd.iso zizz:/home/imp Is it actually b84, or is it b83 with a different filename? Looks pretty much b84 to me. It comes with CIFS client, so it has to be b84... I was getting errors over and over and then finally I was able to download the ISO image. Looks like snv_84 to me. The new installer, while simple, is a little too simple. I am installing a server and it never asks me for ip address nor can I specify the uid and gid of the first new user. I can not layout the disk as I see fit either. Remember that the new installer isn't finished yet, and some of this functionality will be added back eventually. I don't know if the ip address prompt will be added back because of nwam. I also don't know if the uid/gid is coming back. I do know that the disk layout (to a certain extent) will return. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Directory /usr/local present in default Solaris
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:19 AM, Roman Morokutti [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi, I just compiled and installed the wget program. After installation I tried to type wget, but nothing happened. So I saw that it has been installed into /usr/local. Further investigation has shown that wget was the only tool which has been installed into /usr/local (yet). So my question is if I should copy all under /usr/local into /usr. Or would it be better to modify my path variable? What is the standard way under Solaris with such GNU tools? wget should already be on a Solaris 10 system: /usr/sfw/bin/wget /usr/local or /opt/local is where programs you compile and install yourself should go. Just add /usr/local/bin to your PATH. and /usr/local/man to your MANPATH -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Directory /usr/local present in default Solaris
On Tue, Mar 11, 2008 at 10:33 AM, Harry Lu [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Roman Morokutti : Hi, I just compiled and installed the wget program. After installation I tried to type wget, but nothing happened. So I saw that it has been installed into /usr/local. when configuring, you should be able to set the prefix to /usr instead of the default /usr/local. You can try ./configure --prefix=/usr Installing unpackaged software under /usr is asking for trouble if you later try to install other packages. I would highly discourage doing that. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [solarisx86] Picking a Laptop for S10/x86
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 4:47 AM, a b [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Glen Lagasse Wrote: Sure there is. :-) So, here comes a history lesson as all of this has been talked about before to death. But I think the biggest issue is that there's no application packaging developer's guide (that I know of) for the new IPS system. So even if I wanted to get a head start, which I would like to do, I'm stuck. And I probably don't need to tell you that reverse engineering takes huge amounts of time. Not that I would mind, it's just that I'm limited by having to sleep sometime, too. IPS is just a prototype at this point, so expecting extensive documentation for something that is in rapid development isn't reasonable. However, there is a lot of material already available on the project page. I encourage you to read it. It all comes down to 'requirements'. The traditional Solaris installer (as seen in Solaris 10 and prior) is not terribly user friendly. We've Perhaps not terribly user friendly, but I'll tell you - other than Flash(TM) archives and JumpStart(TM), it's still the fastest and most efficient way to install Solaris interactively! That's funny, one of the most common complaints about Solaris installs is how slow they are. had complaints from people for a very long time about that. The problems are exacerbated even further when you are trying to attract new developers to your platform who have never used Solaris and are used to other Unix-like platforms such as Mac OS X, Ubuntu and Redhat (to name a few) that have very simple 'stream-lined' installers. No problem with streamlined, it's just that the lack of ability to pick the shell and slice up the disks the way I *need* them to be sliced is really a big showstopper for Indiana. #1, the shell thing is a personal issue. You can easily change your own shell once you startup the system since you are an experienced user. That's hardly a showstopper. #2 Sun is going to ZFS; so no, you don't get the ability to slice your disk anymore; that's for UFS only. The documents linked above should help dissuade you from the opinion that we're ignoring our enterprise customers. That isn't our intention and never has been. You're trying to make Solaris more attractive for people that really *need* to learn System V, and are both shooting yourself, the existing Solaris base, and the newcomers in the foot. You're basing your judgment on early prototypes and your own beliefs. Sun has being doing this for decades, I'm sure they know what their customers want. Since they are a business, they have a very large motivation (monetary, etc.) to keep their customers happy. Somehow I doubt they will do what you suggest. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun Download Center and wget
On Wed, Mar 12, 2008 at 11:18 PM, Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Since we are talking about the Solaris Express Community Edition here why not just stick the ISO onto OpenSolaris.org somewhere ? Because the community edition still has components that are under legal agreements that require otherwise? -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Sun Download Center and wget
On Thu, Mar 13, 2008 at 8:35 AM, Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Then that license needs to be fixed or we need to figure out if OpenSolaris is inside Sun or not. It can't be fixed as it is right now. The legal requirements are dictated by third parties. Why do you think Sun is working so hard on creating Indiana and moving towards that model? Because something that is freely redistributable is for the best long term. Remember that Solaris Express releases include BitStream, Real Networks, etc. technology as well as other encryption components that must be tracked. While people can choose to redistribute on other download websites, etc. that does not excuse Sun from their legal responsibilities as a public company. While I agree with your views, they do not reflect the responsibilities Sun has to their licensors, shareholders, or the government. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] disk usage
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 4:55 AM, Andrii [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi everyone, Could somebody please help me Several days ago I've installed Opensolaris: [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ uname -a SunOS ulya 5.11 snv_78 i86pc i386 i86pc I used default settings for disk size and patritions. The root patrition is 1.2GB but after installation of soft I saw that free disk space was been ended. I removed all directories which had big size to /export/home/ and created symlinksBut now the free space still is not enouth for normal work:( [EMAIL PROTECTED]:~]$ df -h Filesystem size used avail capacity Mounted on /dev/dsk/c1d0s01.2G 1.1G83M94%/ /devices 0K 0K 0K 0%/devices /dev 0K 0K 0K 0%/dev ctfs 0K 0K 0K 0%/system/contract proc 0K 0K 0K 0%/proc mnttab 0K 0K 0K 0%/etc/mnttab swap 1.9G 640K 1.9G 1%/etc/svc/volatile objfs0K 0K 0K 0%/system/object sharefs 0K 0K 0K 0%/etc/dfs/sharetab /usr/lib/libc/libc_hwcap1.so.1 1.2G 1.1G83M94%/lib/libc.so.1 fd 0K 0K 0K 0%/dev/fd swap 1.9G 224K 1.9G 1%/tmp swap 1.9G24K 1.9G 1%/var/run /dev/dsk/c1d0s7145G 496M 143G 1%/export/home /dev/cdrom 3.4G 3.4G 0K 100%/mnt/cdrom Did you install Solaris Express Community Edition? Did you make your root partition that small, or did you let the installer choose for you? You will likely have to reinstall choose better sizes. I would like to ask do anybody know what means this string: /usr/lib/libc/libc_hwcap1.so.1 1.2G 1.1G83M94% /lib/libc.so.1 OpenSolaris mounts a libc for your hardware on what is called a loopback mount. You can ignore this as it is not actually taking the amount of space listed. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXDE install into single root partition
On Sat, Mar 15, 2008 at 11:24 AM, Edwin Goei [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I'm trying to install SXDE 1/08 into a VMware Fusion virtual machine on my mac. When I run the new installer, it appears that I can Use the whole disk but after the install, the disk has multiple partitions anyway. Instead, I'd like to have a single partition for root and other required partitions like swap and boot. The reason is because I need to install software in /opt and /export which will all go into the root partition which isn't big enough. Any ideas? Did you use the new installer in SXDE? If so, shouldn't you have just one main partition with several zfs filesystems? -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXDE install into single root partition
On Sun, Mar 16, 2008 at 6:48 AM, Mario Goebbels [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Did you use the new installer in SXDE? If so, shouldn't you have just one main partition with several zfs filesystems? Using the SXDE installer, you get ZFS root and boot? I thought this wasn't in yet, would come with snv_87? Sorry, I guess I was thinking of Indiana :) -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] How to get an old build?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've used both Gnome and KDE off and on since 0.x days but ditched both in favor of Xfce in more recent years. In my opinion Sun (along with other US corps) bet on the wrong horse with Gnome. I'm looking forward to the ongoing KDE4 work (although KDE has become a bit too glitzy for me) but that's going to be a while yet. What would be really appreciated is if Sun/OS would invest some energies in porting Xfce - lightweight, fast, and sports a nice window manager that actually does useful things like shade on mouse title bar scroll, right click anywhere for full menu, page desktops on mouse scroll, etc. It's gtk based and attracts a lot of Gnome refugees to it's ranks, so should not be too hard to port, eh? xfce has a long way to go before getting to Section 508 compliance, etc. It also is relatively immature compared to KDE or GNOME for now. GNOME is far more mature as a platform than KDE or XFCE, right now, when it comes to accessibility, etc. For many business purposes, GNOME still has friendlier licensing than KDE or components KDE relies on as well. Sun spent millions on GNOME in years past before xfce was really known at all, so it makes sense for them to stick with their investment. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [desktop-discuss] How to get an old build?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:46:38 -0500 Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've used both Gnome and KDE off and on since 0.x days but ditched both in favor of Xfce in more recent years. In my opinion Sun (along with other US corps) bet on the wrong horse with Gnome. I'm looking forward to the ongoing KDE4 work (although KDE has become a bit too glitzy for me) but that's going to be a while yet. What would be really appreciated is if Sun/OS would invest some energies in porting Xfce - lightweight, fast, and sports a nice window manager that actually does useful things like shade on mouse title bar scroll, right click anywhere for full menu, page desktops on mouse scroll, etc. It's gtk based and attracts a lot of Gnome refugees to it's ranks, so should not be too hard to port, eh? xfce has a long way to go before getting to Section 508 compliance, etc. Not sure about this one, but who cares? Why should majority suffer additional bloat and bugs for a small minority so long as _other_ options exist that _do_ accommodate that minority? Sun as a public company is *required* by law to seek Section 508 compliance. People who don't have friends or family members, or who themselves are not physically disadvantaged in some way, often don't understand the need for Section 508 compliance. These folks are disadvantaged, through no fault of their own usually, and deserve the same opportunities we have to use software and live life. It also is relatively immature compared to KDE or GNOME for now. -1 -1 means nothing in this context. GNOME has a hig, has had numerous accessibility and other studies performed, and especially on Solaris, is far better supported. GNOME is far more mature as a platform than KDE or XFCE, right now, when it comes to accessibility, etc. -1 -1 what? For many business purposes, GNOME still has friendlier licensing than KDE or components KDE relies on as well. Care to back this up with specific references? It's quite simple. GNOME is primarily LGPL. KDE relies on many GPL components, especially its core window toolkit. Sun came to the same conclusion when they chose GNOME, so I'm told. Sun spent millions on GNOME in years past before xfce was really known at all, so it makes sense for them to stick with their investment. No it doesn't. When you've made a mistake, smart leaders correct rather than pouring good money after bad. I haven't seen anything to prove it was a mistake yet. Quite the opposite. -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Pointless KDE vs. GNOME discussion was Re: [desktop-discuss] How to get an old build?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:10:24 -0500 Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:46:38 -0500 Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've used both Gnome and KDE off and on since 0.x days but ditched both in favor of Xfce in more recent years. In my opinion Sun (along with other US corps) bet on the wrong horse with Gnome. I'm looking forward to the ongoing KDE4 work (although KDE has become a bit too glitzy for me) but that's going to be a while yet. What would be really appreciated is if Sun/OS would invest some energies in porting Xfce - lightweight, fast, and sports a nice window manager that actually does useful things like shade on mouse title bar scroll, right click anywhere for full menu, page desktops on mouse scroll, etc. It's gtk based and attracts a lot of Gnome refugees to it's ranks, so should not be too hard to port, eh? xfce has a long way to go before getting to Section 508 compliance, etc. Not sure about this one, but who cares? Why should majority suffer additional bloat and bugs for a small minority so long as _other_ options exist that _do_ accommodate that minority? Sun as a public company is *required* by law to seek Section 508 compliance. People who don't have friends or family members, or who themselves are not physically disadvantaged in some way, often don't understand the need for Section 508 compliance. These folks are disadvantaged, through no fault of their own usually, and deserve the same opportunities we have to use software and live life. Right. But enabling such features should be an option, not default requirement. The law makes it a requirement. GNOME is far more mature as a platform than KDE or XFCE, right now, when it comes to accessibility, etc. -1 -1 what? For many business purposes, GNOME still has friendlier licensing than KDE or components KDE relies on as well. Well now you're citing licensing issue to support claim that Gnome is more mature and accessible. Moreover, seeing how KDE has been in No, I am not. I never stated that. existence longer than Gnome, how can you assert it's less mature. Same for Xfce if you take into account that it's based/ported from CDE. More mature because GNOME has had more structured, corporate involvement and more usability studies done than KDE. Care to back this up with specific references? It's quite simple. GNOME is primarily LGPL. KDE relies on many GPL components, especially its core window toolkit. Sun came to the same conclusion when they chose GNOME, so I'm told. And I've had it whispered in my ear that a lot of the decision by various US corps to back Gnome was based more on nationalism concerns than technical merit. The difference is that a Sun person is the one that stated that. It wasn't rumours or whispered in my ear. Sun spent millions on GNOME in years past before xfce was really known at all, so it makes sense for them to stick with their investment. No it doesn't. When you've made a mistake, smart leaders correct rather than pouring good money after bad. I haven't seen anything to prove it was a mistake yet. Quite the opposite. Then why, despite all this backing by various US corp entities, does Gnome still take back seat to KDE by something like 3:1 ratio in terms Where are you getting those statistics from? It doesn't make much sense given that: * RedHat uses GNOME by default and is the most well GNU/Linux distribution * Novell used GNOME by default in their enterprise distribution * Novell purchased Ximian years ago, which is a GNOME company * Sun chose GNOME years ago ..etc. I suppose it depends on whether you are looking at the US or European markets. of user base? I'll venture a hypothesis: any *nix based DE is not going to be able to seriously compete w/MS for corp workstation in the foreseeable future. Hence the lack of uptake in this market despite That I can agree with. the various periodic marketing pushes from Novell, IBM, etc. So who's left as user base? People smart enough to not want a crippled DE that's designed to be usable by lowest common demominator (e.g. does the print dialog still omit duplex option in name of usability?), and this sector seems to exhibit strong preference for KDE. Crippled is a matter of perspective. I consider almost all of the current *NIX desktops to be crippled in one way or another. As for the rest; that's just opinion -- so no facts or figures are going to make any
Re: [osol-discuss] Pointless KDE vs. GNOME discussion was Re: [desktop-discuss] How to get an old build?
On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 4:40 PM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 15:32:18 -0500 Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:48 PM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 13:10:24 -0500 Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 12:49 PM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, 20 Mar 2008 07:46:38 -0500 Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, Mar 20, 2008 at 2:02 AM, Ken Gunderson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I've used both Gnome and KDE off and on since 0.x days but ditched both [snip] Right. But enabling such features should be an option, not default requirement. The law makes it a requirement. No it doesn't. It needs to be available as an option for those who require such in certain environments, but not all. It does if you want to sell to government entities, etc. which Sun obviously does and wants to. That's my point. And I've had it whispered in my ear that a lot of the decision by various US corps to back Gnome was based more on nationalism concerns than technical merit. The difference is that a Sun person is the one that stated that. It wasn't rumours or whispered in my ear. Call it what you like. Doesn't change reality... Indeed, it does not. Which reality it doesn't change is up for debate though :-) Sun spent millions on GNOME in years past before xfce was really known at all, so it makes sense for them to stick with their investment. No it doesn't. When you've made a mistake, smart leaders correct rather than pouring good money after bad. I haven't seen anything to prove it was a mistake yet. Can you cite instance where has Gnome replaced MS in corp/govt.? I can cite cases where KDE has. Seems to indicate to me that betting the farm on Gnome _might_ have been a mistake... Sure. Go look on Novell's website :-) Quite the opposite. Then why, despite all this backing by various US corp entities, does Gnome still take back seat to KDE by something like 3:1 ratio in terms Where are you getting those statistics from? Google is your friend. You're an analyst. Don't make me do your legwork. They're your stats, not mine :-) It doesn't make much sense given that: * RedHat uses GNOME by default and is the most well GNU/Linux distribution RedHat is a lame distro whose only feature is a psuedo offerings of indemnification and support that fail to actually pan out in the real world. Nobody I know uses it in production environment unless forced to do so by phb's lacking in technical competence, i.e. decisions based on politics rather that technical merit. A lame distro that makes millions for RedHat every year in subscriptions :-) * Novell used GNOME by default in their enterprise distribution * Novell purchased Ximian years ago, which is a GNOME company * Sun chose GNOME years ago ..etc. Debain, (K)Ubuntu, and Slackware of the most popular. But why are we talking about Linux? Because you don't hear about mass desktop deployments of *NIX-like platforms with anything else? Which desktop I'm using makes little difference in the end. I don't appreciate that you've inappropriately and erroneously changed the subject heading in what appears to be an effort at belittling my input by relegating to status of a religious war. Especially since I I'm the one responding, aren't I? :) The point is, that in the end, everyone has their particular view of a project. Most of us are never going to change our view of KDE, GNOME, etc. We encountered them and stuck with it for whatever reason. I doubt I will ever change my view of KDE's licensing or library choices, and I doubt you will ever change your view of GNOME or XFCE. So, there's little point to the discussion, hence the subject :-) Gnome. In this context I have pointed to some things I do not like about Gnome related to lack of stability, sluggish performance, and purposeful crippling of capabilities that were formerly present under the guise of usability. And also I would welcome a modern Xfce-4.4.x, as Blastwave's repo is still on 4.2, and quite out of date. File bugs. However, I can just about guarantee that Xfce someday will be accused of being bloated too, (actually I've already seen that from those that used it from early, early versions). One man's bloat, is another man's must have feature. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Longest uptime?
On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 12:33 PM, James Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Cyril Plisko writes: On Fri, Mar 21, 2008 at 6:53 PM, Orvar Korvar [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: How long uptime for Solaris and which version, have you heard of? Please be quite sure when you post, not something like i heard a tale about a strangers cat whose neighbour had a solaris box in poland that had 5 years uptime. Sun Microsystems Inc. SunOS 5.10 Generic January 2005 X:/export/home/imp uptime 9:15am up 1011 day(s), 8:26, 1 user, load average: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00 X:/export/home/imp date Fri Mar 21 09:16:50 PST 2008 X:/export/home/imp That's the highest I have, personally. There are more records here: http://www.brendangregg.com/sunrecords.html#time1 But I'm a bit confused by the request. Is long uptime always a good thing? It also means that you haven't taken the system down for patching or regular maintenance and upgrade in years. That seems to me like a dubious accomplishment ... sort of like longest time between baths. Not only that, is uptime really an indicator of operating system reliability, or hardware reliability and system administration policies? -- Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[osol-discuss] Shutleworth on PulseAudio
Shuttleworth admits having four separate audio systems is a messy situation: http://www.theregister.co.uk/2008/04/22/shuttleworth_hardy_heron/page3.html -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Samsung Sata Drives Not Detected
On Thu, Apr 24, 2008 at 6:50 AM, heather valentine [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi Well i do have NTFS files system on all my drives now. i do have a question though is there any other possible way i can convert my drives to ZFS or UFS with software similar to partition magic in Windows right now. This way i can get all my data where i want it before hand. Not at this time Also does that mean once i do any of the above i will no longer be able to access those drives when i do boot into Vista. If you could do such a thing, yes. You can use the tools found here to mount NTFS partitions (readonly!) on Solaris/OpenSolaris: http://sourceforge.net/projects/mount-ntfs/ -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris Compatibility - Developing Products for Solaris
On Mon, Apr 28, 2008 at 12:54 PM, Michael B Allen [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Mon, 28 Apr 2008 10:13:55 -0700 Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Michael B Allen wrote: But is there any way for a civillian to download Solaris 8 and Sun Studio for free? Solaris 10 is the oldest version available for free download and use. I assume Solaris 8 runs on both x86_64 and i386? Or do I have to use 10 to get x86_64 (for example)? Solaris 8 is circa-2000, long long before x86_64 - it may run on such a machine in 32-bit mode, but Solaris 10 (early 2005) was the first release to have 64-bit support on amd64/em64t. Hi Alan, So realistically / ultimately it sounds like I want the Solaris 10 5/08 free download? I am very much a shell + vi type of person so I assume I should be able to install the OS and Sun Studio without X? Or is one expected to have one of those fan-dangled desktops? You should always do a full install when installing Solaris 10. As such, you'll get X, etc. However, vi is there (the original). You don't have to use the graphical login if you don't want to, and you can always use CDE if you prefer instead of GNOME. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] will there be an sxce build 88 ?
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 9:52 PM, Peter Lees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: or is it all opensolaris 2008.05 ? i'm looking for something i can use as a jumpstart image The SXCE builds will continue for the forseeaable future. At this time, I know of no plans to discontinue them. Only the SXDE builds are being discontinued, as far as I know. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] will there be an sxce build 88 ?
On Wed, May 7, 2008 at 10:30 PM, Peter Lees [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: thanks shawn. based on the previous release pattern, sxce 88 is imminent - is anything delaying it beyond the next couple of weeks? (trying to work out timings vs downloads) I don't have any direct lines of information, but I see nothing here: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/on/flag-days/86-90/ ...that indicates something amiss. In addition, there is a source release and release notes already up here: http://dlc.sun.com/osol/on/downloads/b88/ Cheers, -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE versus 2008.05 etc
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Simon Breden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: What's the situation regarding SXCE and the new 2008.05 and future releases? My understanding from what I've seen is that SXCE is a release made approximately every 2 weeks, and is based on the Nevada project. Again, my understanding of the 2008.05 release is that: 1. this will be released only every 6 months 2. it is based on the Indiana project 3. to get updates for fixes, new code etc, you will use IPS -- i.e. the pkg command (like the old Debian apt-get update... command) Does that sound correct, or not? Yes. However, if I moved over to using 2008.05 (Indiana), I wonder if this would be a much better way to keep my system up to date with fixes etc. However, am I right in saying this is the first real release of Indian (non-Live CD)? If so, again, perhaps it will still be more bleeding edge than staying with Nevada. The difference is that real support will be available starting May 13th: http://www.sun.com/service/opensolaris/index.jsp Also, from a code / features point of view, what are the main differences between Nevada and Inidiana (2008.05)? I know about IPS, and that sounds good, but what other things are there in Indiana that would make me want to switch to using it? The main thing is support being available. SXCE never had security fixes, etc. so you always had to BFU or reinstall each time. The disadvantage is that you won't see new functionality as quickly (every six months instead of every two weeks). The advantage is that the system will have more features (i.e. modernization) than Solaris 10, but be more stable than SXCE. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE versus 2008.05 etc
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:02 AM, Guido Berhoerster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 5:51 AM, Simon Breden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: My understanding from what I've seen is that SXCE is a release made approximately every 2 weeks, and is based on the Nevada project. Again, my understanding of the 2008.05 release is that: 1. this will be released only every 6 months 2. it is based on the Indiana project 3. to get updates for fixes, new code etc, you will use IPS -- i.e. the pkg command (like the old Debian apt-get update... command) Does that sound correct, or not? Yes. However, if I moved over to using 2008.05 (Indiana), I wonder if this would be a much better way to keep my system up to date with fixes etc. However, am I right in saying this is the first real release of Indian (non-Live CD)? If so, again, perhaps it will still be more bleeding edge than staying with Nevada. The difference is that real support will be available starting May 13th: http://www.sun.com/service/opensolaris/index.jsp Also, from a code / features point of view, what are the main differences between Nevada and Inidiana (2008.05)? I know about IPS, and that sounds good, but what other things are there in Indiana that would make me want to switch to using it? The main thing is support being available. SXCE never had security fixes, etc. so you always had to BFU or reinstall each time. The disadvantage is that you won't see new functionality as quickly (every six months instead of every two weeks). The advantage is that the system will have more features (i.e. modernization) than Solaris 10, but be more stable than SXCE. Your statement seems contradictory to what I have gathered, according to David Comay[1] the Indiana repository will be updated every two weeks as new SXCE builds become available. So stability- wise it will be like SXCE and not SXDE. My interpretation of [2] and [3] is that access to a more stable repository receiving backported bugfixes only will be tied to a support contract. That's why I pointed at that link above for the support page, and said support being available. Sorry, I should have been clearer. So to me this implies that one either pays for a support contract and gets a stable system with bug-/security-fixes and bi-annual releases or has to live with a constantly updated, bleeding-edge SXCE (at least if one makes use of IPS) :( Or am I getting something wrong here? I know as much as you do about that, at this time, and your impression matches mine. *If* that is what Sun chooses to do, it would essentially be the same thing RedHat does with Fedora, and I think it would be quite fair. I suspect we'll find out more on May 13th. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE versus 2008.05 etc
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:17 AM, Guido Berhoerster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: *If* that is what Sun chooses to do, it would essentially be the same thing RedHat does with Fedora, and I think it would be quite fair. I suspect we'll find out more on May 13th. That would be a major disappointment to me, as I had hoped more from a community effort. Then there would be a need for an OpenSolaris-CentOS... No, CentOS only exists because RedHat was extremely restrictive about any usage of their trademark. The CentOS folks weren't even allowed to reference the fact that their packages came from RedHat Enterprise Linux. The other difference is that, thanks to ips, it is fairly easy to setup a repository. As such, should there be no security fixes only repository provided by Sun, community members can certainly provide one and users can simply add that to their configuration. Debian and Fedora both rely upon community members to supply most of their packages and maintenance. I don't see why our expectations should be any different for OpenSolaris. I think it would be unreasonable to expect Sun to provide *everything* free (how would they stay in business?) -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE versus 2008.05 etc
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 10:51 AM, Guido Berhoerster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: No, CentOS only exists because RedHat was extremely restrictive about any usage of their trademark. The CentOS folks weren't even allowed to reference the fact that their packages came from RedHat Enterprise Linux. The other difference is that, thanks to ips, it is fairly easy to setup a repository. As such, should there be no security fixes only repository provided by Sun, community members can certainly provide one and users can simply add that to their configuration. That was all I meant. Debian and Fedora both rely upon community members to supply most of their packages and maintenance. I don't see why our expectations should be any different for OpenSolaris. I think it would be unreasonable to expect Sun to provide *everything* I did not mean everything, but rather bi-annual releases of OpenSolaris and the availability of security fixes. This is what I also get from Linux As I said before, many GNU/Linux distributions depend upon community members to supply and maintain packages. Why does Sun have to provide it? distributions and IMO nothing unreasonable to expect. I'm a student and consider myself a Unix hobbyist, I don't need and want a support contract but I like a certain amount of stability and do not like a system with security vulnerabilities. But you are wanting a stable system with specific fixes only, that sounds like you want support. free (how would they stay in business?) By selling support contracts (to commercial customers) and hardware? Isn't maintaining software a form of support? RedHat requires you to subscribe to receive updates to RHEL, even after you've bought it. I don't see why Sun can't... -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE versus 2008.05 etc
On Fri, May 9, 2008 at 12:53 PM, Guido Berhoerster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I never said Sun has to provide it, but that Sun will apparently provide it only to paying customers is disappointing for me and seems inconsequent given the fact that they are trying to attract Linux developers (who are not the same as OpenSolaris developers who might actually have an interest in a bleeding-edge SXCE-like distribution). I think a comparison OpenSolaris with RHEL is also inappropriate, rather Solaris 10 would be in the same league. I wouldn't consider the combination of security and a certain degree of stability as an optional feature to pay for, especially because I can get that for free by using Ubuntu, OpenSuse, Debian etc. What does Sun have to loose here, enterprise users will want their support contract for Solaris 10/OpenSolaris anyway? IMO this only makes OpenSolaris less attractive for the (at least initially) targeted Linux developers, students etc. I'm just going to have to disagree in general. Maintaining software is expensive, especially lots of software. Your belief seems to be that Sun should support the cost of the distribution by themselves, that if the community doesn't provide it, Sun has to, and that you should get all support short of a help-line for free. You also seem to believe that the burden of this cost should be placed on enterprise users and that individual users should not have to share in any of it. That doesn't seem very fair or reasonable. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] SXCE versus 2008.05 etc
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 7:54 AM, Guido Berhoerster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker wrote: I'm just going to have to disagree in general. Maintaining software is expensive, especially lots of software. Your belief seems to be that Sun should support the cost of the distribution by themselves, that if the community doesn't provide it, Sun has to, and that you should get all support short of a help-line for free. You also seem to believe that the burden of this cost should be placed on enterprise users and that individual users should not have to share in any of it. That doesn't seem very fair or reasonable. I don't say what Sun *should* do, I am merely pointing out some contradiction between the initially stated goal to create a distribution of OpenSolaris attractive to Linux developers and the later implementation. I think it is fair to measure Sun by this goal and to compare it to the alternatives or competition, that is a multitude of Linux distros providing stable and supported releases (if through community or corporate developers doesn't really matter) for free. I don't believe its a contradiction. Mac OS X attracts many GNU/Linux developers, for example, but without providing anything for free. While I realise that Apple hasn't targeted them directly, I think it is fair to say that they have targeted users of UNIX-like platforms in general -- otherwise they wouldn't have sought UNIX certification. Not only that, when someone says they want to attract GNU/Linux developers, that doesn't mean they're going to copy exactly what GNU/Linux distributions do. I also disagree that OpenSolaris should be compared to Fedora. I believe that, in general, the stability and quality of OpenSolaris will be greater than that of the free GNU/Linux distributions, and directly comparable to the non-free (cost) en enterprise distributions. So I don't see why the current model would lure Linux developers into using OpenSolaris, there is a multitude of Linux distributions (run by communities or corporations) that provide a supported and stable branch of their product for free. It may have it's usefulness for OpenSolaris developers just as development versions of Linux distributions have their usefulness to their developers. It might also one day serve as a basis for community supported derivatives, I'm just sceptical that this will happen any time soon (and I'd be happy if I was proven wrong). This where you and I diverge. You seem to believe that attracting GNU/Linux developers will require giving everything away for free and being just another GNU/Linux distribution. Attracting GNU/Linux developers does not mean copying the business model of those companies. In fact, I would like to point out that only RedHat and Novell is turning a noticeable profit out of the companies that produce GNU/Linux distributions. These are the same companies that *do not* release free updates for their enterprise level distributions. Meanwhile, the community run, and corporate-sponsored projects do produce distributions, but do not provide the same level of production stability, etc. I don't think that is the goal here. The goal is have a rich, compelling environment for development that is familiar enough to GNU/Linux users that they feel comfortable while using the platform. OpenSolaris has technologies that you will not find in any of the GNU/Linux distributions, such as ZFS, Containers, DTrace, and dlight. It has a stable ABI, APIs, and a wealth of language support and documentation. My initial hopes raised by the stated objectives of Project Indiana have not been fulfilled, no big deal. I'll just continue to use my community and corporate sponsored linux distro that provides a released and supported version for free. And if I have more time I'll play around with OpenSolaris in a VM as I have before with SXDE. You should use what best fits your needs, but OpenSolaris will and does offer some superior technologies. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] will opensolaris ever be released under the GPL?
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:10 PM, GNU Watch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I have heard nothing but broken promises from Ian Murdock and other big whigs at sun saying that opensolaris will be released under the GPLv3. Many developers dont want to invest time to opensolaris until it is under the GPLv3 because the CDDL doesnt protect users and developers freedoms as well. Will this ever happen? and when? I started contributing to Opensolaris because i thought it was going to be gpl'd in the near future like what was promised from sun. I honestly feel let down by sun because empty promises and murdock who abandoned debian. Sun has never promised that it would be released under the GPLv3 to my knowledge. As far as I know, it has always been a *consideration*, not a *promise*. In addition, it has been the choice of our community members so far to not adopt that license. If you can provide a link to a quote where Sun has promised this, I would be interested to see it. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] will opensolaris ever be released under the GPL?
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 10:41 PM, GNU Watch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hey ian take it easy no one wants to start a licence war with you. I am just trying to get feedback from the opensolaris community. The general consensus among the community has been that we don't want that license. We like the one we have already. Maybe that will change someday, but today is not that day. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] will opensolaris ever be released under the GPL?
On Sat, May 10, 2008 at 9:43 PM, GNU Watch [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: hey Shawn this promise was made over a year ago by Jonathan Schwartz and Rich Green. The statement soon retracted by them which I understand bro but they clearly said they are strongly considering it and there has been no progress in that direction. Hey I appreciate your reply and dont mean any disrespect to you but not everyone in the opensolaris community feels the way you do (CDDL is a better licence for opensolaris). Here are some of the few remaining links I could scavenge for you please give me some more feed back if you can. http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS8979755794.html http://www.osnews.com/story/16973 In both cases, there were rumours, nothing more. unnamed sources claimed it was going to happen. If you want to know what Sun will do, I suggest emailing them. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Are there plans to make more official packages available for 2008.05?
On Sun, May 11, 2008 at 7:44 AM, Helge G. [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does Sun plan to extend the pkg.opensolaris.org repository over the lifetime of 2008.05, so that it will become more and more comparable to the official Debian or Ubuntu repositories, or will that not happen before the next OpenSolaris release, or maybe not at all? From what Sun announced at Community One, it is my understanding that they intend to significantly extend the repository at pkg.opensolaris.org as time passes. However, no specific timeline was given. I suspect we'll see more real soon now -- especially from the SFE and SFW projects. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] IPS on SXCE?
On Mon, May 12, 2008 at 9:27 AM, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: As long as ON does not compile on any opensolaris based distro (and Indiana is such a distro), shuting down SXCE would shut down the possibility to compile ON. Actually, ON does compile on OpenSolaris 2008.05. There were outside reports of that a week or so ago. You just have to do two things: * Install a tarball of the correct compiler * Set your PATH / environment properly It may compile if you do some manual changes, it will not create signed binaries. Manual changes? If you mean code changes. No. None are required. wbem is still not redistributable. If it it's on the repository at pkg.opensolaris.org, or in OpenSolaris 2008.05, it is redistributable. I'll soon check to be able to update the list of missing bits. Please do! With the advent of OpenSolaris 2008.05, there shouldn't be any missing bits. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ethernet driver for Broadcom netlink Gigabit Ethernet
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:31 AM, prabit mishra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you please suggest where I would be able to find a Ethernet driver for Broadcom netlink Gigabit Ethernet Card?? On this page: http://www.skd.de/e_en/support/driver_searchresults.html?navanchor=10013produkt=produkt.SK-9843V2.0system=term=typ.treiber+produkt.SK-9843V2.0typ=typ.treiber -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ethernet driver for Broadcom netlink Gigabit Ethernet
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:33 AM, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:31 AM, prabit mishra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Can you please suggest where I would be able to find a Ethernet driver for Broadcom netlink Gigabit Ethernet Card?? On this page: http://www.skd.de/e_en/support/driver_searchresults.html?navanchor=10013produkt=produkt.SK-9843V2.0system=term=typ.treiber+produkt.SK-9843V2.0typ=typ.treiber Sorry I had *Marvell* on my brain instead Broadcom, what you want is here: www.broadcom.com/support/ethernet_nic/netlink.php -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] ethernet driver for Broadcom netlink Gigabit Ethernet
On Thu, May 15, 2008 at 9:40 AM, prabit mishra [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: sorry but the link says they dont offer links for sun solaris Which is weird, because they do: http://www.broadcom.com/support/ethernet_nic/driver-sla.php?driver=570x-Solaris -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] solaris cluster opensolaris2008.05 libDtTerm issu
2008/5/17 George [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi all, I have just installed opensolaris20008.05. I also installed suncluster 3.2 console (SUNWccon). When I try to run the ccsonsole binary I get: ld.so.1: cconsole: fatal: libDtTerm.so.2: open failed: No such file or directory This is an issue with libDtTerm which is not included in opensolaris20008.05. I also tried installing the cluster console from clusterexpress (2/08) with no luck. This one too searches for the same library. Any ideas? Unfortunately, libdt* is from CDE which is not open source or freely redistributable as I understand it. As a result, you will not be able to run software that relies on these libraries. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] How a (wrong) accent can lock you out of your server
2008/5/23 Nico Sabbi [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, I'd like to point out this stupidity in the localization of scp/ssh, that can have *VERY* dangerous consequences (like being locked out of your server). It doesn't really lock you out though right? Can't you always just delete your ~/.known_hosts file? Or are you talking about the fact that it wouldn't allow you to type yes/no? -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Poor disk performance (nForce4 board)
2008/5/23 Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Thomas Backman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: I grabbed OpenSolaris 2008.05 to see if disk performance had gotten any better since my last try, which was Solaris 10 (8/07 IIRC). It had, but still not good enough. I have four disks, three IDE and one SATA. My highly scientific benchmark was: dd if=/dev/... of=/dev/null bs=128k count=4000 Under OpenSolaris, this took: 19.808, 18.65, 14.274 and 7.6 seconds, respectively. On Linux: 16.58, 11.27, 9.4 and 7.63 seconds. On average, the transfer rate under Linux works out to be about 35% faster (avg. 35MB/s vs 47.4MB/s). Did you use buffered or raw devices on Solaris? Note that Linux does not have raw devices and thus comparing is hard in special if you use small transfer sizes Joerg, Linux does have raw device support. In fact, it's often used by Oracle and DB2 setups: http://publib.boulder.ibm.com/infocenter/db2luw/v8/index.jsp?topic=/com.ibm.db2.udb.doc/admin/t0004971.htm Perhaps you mean a different kind of raw device? -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Some confusion/comments
2008/5/27 Jesse Lehman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: * Does Network-Auto-Magic actually work for anyone? Yes, and it works beautifully. First time I installed 2008.05, I booted, and got prompted to connect to a wireless network. I typed my password and then I was connected. My home desktop is the same. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Network Installation of OpenSolaris 2008.05?
2008/5/28 Karthik S S [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, OpenSolaris 2008.05 media is available as LiveCD or LiveUSB. But is it possible to install this image through Jumpstart or some network install method. I need to install OpenSolaris on about 10 servers and I think network install will be a good idea. Not yet. But this will happen eventually. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] how do I install openoffice.org and other sw
2008/5/28 Cj [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I am new to the opensolaris operating system. I have an AIX background so if someone has a AIX to opensolaris sheet they would like to pass along great. I downloaded opensolaris and installed it ok. I installed virtual box but get an error of [EMAIL PROTECTED]:/usrVirtualBox Qt WARNING: VirtualBox: cannot connect to X server I am running this on a gui terminal so I am not sure what it refering to. Do I need something else to be started? I tried to install openoffice.org and get the following errors: It looks like you can't access pkg.opensolaris.org on port 80 from your system. If you have a proxy that you have to use to obtain outside access, set your http_proxy environment variable appropriately and then try running it again. -- Shawn Walker To err is human -- and to blame it on a computer is even more so. - Robert Orben ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] new opensolaris site
2008/6/1 David M Singer [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Nice start. But you have some presumptions in the startup area, such as (a) there is an existing opsys on the computer, and (b) that one would wish to boot from C: (or one of the hard drives). How do we ask questions? I hover over comments and nothing happens? For instance, my current question goes: I want C: D: E: to be non-bootable hard disk. I want F: to be a bootable USB flash drive. But OpenSolaris only comes on CD. OK, I put in a CD drive, and boot from LiveCD. Now, how do I make my bootable USB flash drive so I can continue from there (and pull out the CD drive). Here's what you need: http://softwareblogs.intel.com/2008/05/15/fun-with-usb-sticks-how-to-make-one-bootable-with-opensolaris-200805/ -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris 2008.05 - feedback of progress
2008/6/4 Euan Thoms [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Sound: have to install OSS driver and even on full volume it's not very loud at all, sometimes only one speaker works. In addition to driver support, we really need a proper and pwerful unified sound server, I suggest adopting pulse audio as the default sound server. We don't need a sound server. OSS provides all of the functionality needed except for network-based audio (as far as I know). As for your sound troubles, did you try running ossxmix and play with the volume controls? Graphics (X): At a 2D level I'm very happy, screen is crisp, more fonts available, it's pretty quick and surprisingly clean (no spurious flashing and colours when switching between X and command line UI or when adjusting screen res). However my ATI still doesn't support desktop effects. No 3D ;-( ATi only relatively recently opened up their specifications for 3D. Look for more progress in this area to come soon. Printing: We need CUPS, either by default or a really easy switch. It works so well for linux desktops, and one thing that I feel is superior to Windows. Printer hardware support still better in linux. CUPS has already been integrated as of build snv_89 I believe. However, OpenSolaris 2008.05 was based on snv_86 (if I remember correctly), so you won't see it until the OpenSolaris distribution gets updated (near future). Multimedia: This is one area I was really hoping Indiana would work on, those application menu entries are just teasers, like dangling candy in front of kid. Disappointed with lack of progress here. As others have mentioned, legal entanglements prevent much from being done here. In the meantime, you can buy a few legal codecs from fluendo. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] I give up.
2008/6/5 Mark Kaiman [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I would be happy to submit bug reports as Calum suggested above. I'm not one of those people who just want to complain - I'd like to help Sun improve the product so I can actually use it. Is there a URL for bug reports? http://defect.opensolaris.org/ ...for OpenSolaris 2008.05, etc. http://bugs.opensolaris.org/ ...for Solaris Express editions. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Media Distributor
2008/6/10 W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Apologize if this issue has already been addressed. But Is there any way to burn IPS repository/repositories into DVDs? Thanks. Yes, but without running a depot server, it doesn't do you much good. Mind you, running a depot server is trivial to do. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Minimal Install of OpenSolaris 2008.05
2008/6/11 Stephen More [EMAIL PROTECTED]: When I used to install Solaris 8 I could create a minimal install of about 300MB. How can I do the same with OpenSolaris 2008.05 ? When I boot the live cd then click to install, it tells me the minimum is 3GB. A minimal installation profile is not yet available. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Congratulations. We're 3.
2008/6/17 Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED]: man ... we have to get a website somewhere where all the OpenSolaris based distro's are on the home page and up to date. Wasn't that the dream back in 2005? This should be up to date: http://opensolaris.org/os/community/distribution/links/ http://opensolaris.org/os/community/distribution/ Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Solaris 200805 pkg install SUNWgcc failed behind the firewall
2008/6/17 Shao Xuan [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hello baolu, Installing pkg through the default pkg utility is a pain, you have to try many many times before you download some pkgs. Large pkg such as SUNWgcc (171.53MB), you should think of other ways to install it instead of the default pkg utility way. I'm experiencing the same problem now, and I don't know where can I download SUNWgcc manually, Anyone have ideas? Unfortunately, there are no manual installation methods currently available. However, I can tell you that many improvements are being made to both the depot server and the client. Supporting a on-disk method of installation is coming in the near future. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] How to replicate http://pkg.opensolaris.org to a local repositary server?
2008/6/18 Karthik S S [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Is there a way to replicate all the packages available under http://pkg.opensolaris.org/ to a local repository server? I could not find much information on this site except for adding custom packages: Greetings, Mirroring supporting is not currently available and no mechanisms are currently in place to directly support copying pkg.opensolaris.org. However, if you look at the pkg-discuss mailing list archives, you may find scripts others have provided that are of use. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] cdrw command burning CD
2008/6/18 Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Emmanuel De Paepe [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: No I haven't tried cdrecord yet. To clearify with GUI I mean the CD-writer which is available in OpenSolaris, created the error. Please tell me the exact name of the binary, I don't know this program. How do you call it? He's probably talking about the nautilus CD burner. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Used IPS, now system won't boot.
2008/6/19 Brian Utterback [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Okay, knowing what I do about Solaris, I can accept that getting the updated packages wrong can brickify your system, but either the package manager needs to handle this for you, or put up a dialog in blinking red that says Danger: Warm brick imminent. I thought the enticing Shall we play a game? gambit went out years ago. At least they called the game Global Thermonuclear Warfare as a clue. The main issue is that the packagemanager GUI is currently divergent in code from the cli. As such, you don't have the safety net of the boot environments that the cli provides you. If you use the cli, you'll get a boot environment created so you could have safely recovered from this scenario. It is unfortunate that you ran into this issue, but please note that this will be addressed in the gui soon. Thanks, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OS2008.05, OpenOffice: Fonts, License?
2008/6/24 Kristian Rink [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Folks; two questions regarding the OOo 2.4 packages installable via IPS in OS 2008.05: (a) No matter how often I start any of the OOo components, I am each and every time promted to go through the whole accept-license / provide username / already registered? process again. Why? Is there a way to turn this off? Sounds like a bug. I haven't seen that one myself. (b) Comparing to Firefox, Thunderbird and other applications running atop the OS / GNOME desktop, the UI fonts in OOo look somewhat strange, fuzzy, smoothened, different to the rest of the applications. Is there a reason for that? How to get along with it? Check the Font tab in the Appearance control panel. You'll want to enable the subpixel setting more than likely. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about adopting rpm to package OpenSolaris?
2008/6/24 Mauro Mozzarelli [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I have read about Solaris packaging projects that extend pkg, however I am not convinced of the effectiveness of building on a packaging system that demonstrates several limitations. To mention only two, are: - the lack of a standard package building method - the lack of dependencies resolution Current packaging systems do not meet the unique needs of OpenSolaris. The lack of package building method is intentional at the moment. However, there are projects working towards providing one such as pkgbuild (http://pkgbuild.sf.net/). pkg does have dependency resolution, though there are currently restrictions on what it supports. Remember that pkg is still a work in progress. I would encourage you to provide any constructive feedback to the pkg-discuss mailing list. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OS2008.05, OpenOffice: Fonts, License?
2008/6/24 Kristian Rink [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Shawn; first off, thanks for your help / hints on that. Shawn Walker schrieb: (a) No matter how often I start any of the OOo components, I am each and every time promted to go through the whole accept-license / provide username / already registered? process again. Why? Is there a way to turn this off? Sounds like a bug. I haven't seen that one myself. After dealing with the system a little closer, including uninstalling the IPS provided openoffice and instead manually installing a localized build (de-DE) from openoffice.org it seems this issue is gone. Might be a localisation issue then. I'm using the one from pkg.opensolaris.org (ips) and it worked fine, though I am using the standard English locale. [Fonts] Check the Font tab in the Appearance control panel. You'll want to enable the subpixel setting more than likely. Indeed tweaking around these settings did help, thanks. It seems however that these settings never directly change the appearance of openoffice itself just just help making the fonts in all other applications and the desktop itself look more like those in openoffice. What does make openoffice special here (the same behaviour does appear with both the oo.org and the IPS packages)? That I can't answer. Did you try restarting OO after changing the settings? I'm not certain what OO uses for its font settings... -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about adopting rpm to package OpenSolaris?
2008/6/24 Christian Ortiz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: why not tgz from slackware? i mean it's a plain and simple tar.gz with some control files, it's easy to build and maintain. I would encourage you to read the articles under the Background Reading section found on this page: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/pkg/ They'll help explain why many choices were made. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about adopting rpm to package OpenSolaris?
2008/6/26 Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]: end-to-end functionality. pkgbuild does for SVR4 package building pretty much what rpmbuild does for rpms, and uses nearly identical spec files. Will there be an equivalent for IPS? The current path appears to be getting pkgbuild working with ips directly, so I surmise that is indeed the path. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about adopting rpm to package OpenSolaris?
2008/6/27 Moinak Ghosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 7:39 PM, James Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kristian Rink writes: Mauro Mozzarelli schrieb: Please, could you expand on your statement? Why would it be a bad idea? To me, it would solve most of the problems we have today with OpenSolaris on having to create redundant sub-installations of most of the operating system dependencies, only to install a package like, for example, mplayer from blastwave. How? It wouldn't have any effect on that problem. The blastwave problem is that the repository (in general; there are exceptions) aims to be self-contained and to run on Solaris 8 and higher. That means that many packages declare a wealth of dependencies, and those dependencies are to other blastwave packages that carry the libraries needed. In order to fix this problem, someone would have to figure out a way to make a blastwave package that depends optionally on either a system-installed copy of the foobar library or, if that's not available, a blastwave variant of foobar. Then you'd have to make sure that it links to the right one at run time, and you'd have to make sure all of the versioning lines up -- meaning that the blastwave copy of foobar would likely be constrained to versions that happen to be compatible with the system-supplied ones. No matter _what_ packaging mechanism is used, that's a tall order. I certainly don't blame anyone for not tackling it. I suspect it might not be fixable in any real sense at all. It appears to be fixable. RPM does have features that make this possible via the Provides clause. A package like say SUNWgnome-base-libs can mention: I provide libpango-version, libgtk-version, libglib-version and so on. Another package needing those libs can say: I require libpango, version = version, libglib, version = version and so on. The package system evaluates these dynamically and figures out appropriate dependencies without having to explicitly bind to package names from specific repositories. I find this feature extremely powerful and generic. This does not mean that I am suggesting RPM for OpenSolaris. However this is something that Pkg should have looked at IMHO. I did mention this time and again in various contexts. It was looked at, and is something still be considered. How dependencies work is very much still being discussed. This has definitely not been ignored. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about adopting rpm to package OpenSolaris?
2008/6/27 Dennis Clarke [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 2:37 PM, James Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kristian Rink writes: Talking about OpenSolaris though, I (honestly) don't see much use in keeping a vast bunch of different builds of the same libraries maintained - who should possibly spend time and effort doing so? Maybe in terms of OpenSolaris, people should leave aside the self-contained blastwave idea and focus on maintaining _one_ large IPS repository with a wider range of applications available rather than a bunch of fragmented ones with wagonloads of redundant binaries... Just my $0.02 on that of course... :) Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I thought that's exactly what the OpenSolaris distribution (and IPS repository) folks were attempting to do. Thank you for saying exactly what I was thinking. However, I think we need to have a more coordinated method that allows the unwashed masses ( people like myself ) to drop packages into a not-quite-enterprise-class repo ( like http://blastwave.network.com:1 ) and also to promote packages upwards to the pkg.opensolaris.org world. The Blastwave stuff is easy to contribute to but the pkg.opensolaris.org repo is shrouded in mystery and magic words like ARC etc. There's a new /contrib repository that is currently being evaluated and a process established to get into. It should be much lighter-weight than the main pkg.opensolaris.org repository. I would encourage you to participate in that discussion on pkg-discuss. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about adopting rpm to package OpenSolaris?
2008/6/27 Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dennis Clarke wrote: On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 2:37 PM, James Carlson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Kristian Rink writes: Talking about OpenSolaris though, I (honestly) don't see much use in keeping a vast bunch of different builds of the same libraries maintained - who should possibly spend time and effort doing so? Maybe in terms of OpenSolaris, people should leave aside the self-contained blastwave idea and focus on maintaining _one_ large IPS repository with a wider range of applications available rather than a bunch of fragmented ones with wagonloads of redundant binaries... Just my $0.02 on that of course... :) Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I thought that's exactly what the OpenSolaris distribution (and IPS repository) folks were attempting to do. Thank you for saying exactly what I was thinking. However, I think we need to have a more coordinated method that allows the unwashed masses ( people like myself ) to drop packages into a not-quite-enterprise-class repo ( like http://blastwave.network.com:1 ) and also to promote packages upwards to the pkg.opensolaris.org world. The Blastwave stuff is easy to contribute to but the pkg.opensolaris.org repo is shrouded in mystery and magic words like ARC etc. The contrib repository is basically what you're talking about; there's been a bunch of discussion about it on pkg-discuss and it will be open soon. I might add that Stephen has already put it up here: http://pkg.opensolaris.org/contrib/ There's nothing to look at yet, but there will be soon. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] USB drive for Linux - OS migration: file system?
2008/6/27 W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Folks; another migration-related question: I do have a fairly well sized USB drive to hold data so far to share between Linux, Windows and OpenSolaris, thus the lowest common denominator (in terms of file systems) being FAT32. Taken into account I do have also to backup a few VirtualBox images (which are larger than FAT32 allows), I will have to reformat this drive anyhow, so my question: What kind of file system would suit best the need of being written to in Linux _and_ read from in OpenSolaris? (This is just for the migration of config and some data indeed, I'll have to go for FAT32 again after for the Windows situations anyhow...). Comments, anyone? TIA and best regards, Kristian -- Kristian Rink * http://zimmer428.net * http://flickr.com/photos/z428/ jab: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * icq: 48874445 * fon: ++49 176 2447 2771 Can't you format your USB stick in ufs2? I believe most Linux distros can read and write ufs partitions. Correct? Not the Solaris ufs at last check -- just ufs as seen in older BSDs. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] USB drive for Linux - OS migration: file system?
2008/6/27 Moinak Ghosh [EMAIL PROTECTED]: On Fri, Jun 27, 2008 at 11:35 PM, Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: 2008/6/27 W. Wayne Liauh [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Folks; another migration-related question: I do have a fairly well sized USB drive to hold data so far to share between Linux, Windows and OpenSolaris, thus the lowest common denominator (in terms of file systems) being FAT32. Taken into account I do have also to backup a few VirtualBox images (which are larger than FAT32 allows), I will have to reformat this drive anyhow, so my question: What kind of file system would suit best the need of being written to in Linux _and_ read from in OpenSolaris? (This is just for the migration of config and some data indeed, I'll have to go for FAT32 again after for the Windows situations anyhow...). Comments, anyone? TIA and best regards, Kristian -- Kristian Rink * http://zimmer428.net * http://flickr.com/photos/z428/ jab: [EMAIL PROTECTED] * icq: 48874445 * fon: ++49 176 2447 2771 Can't you format your USB stick in ufs2? I believe most Linux distros can read and write ufs partitions. Correct? Not the Solaris ufs at last check -- just ufs as seen in older BSDs. Yes the Linux ufs module does support Solaris ufs: mount -o ufstype=sunx86 I used it regularly in Ubuntu to access data from the Nevada partition. However Ubuntu only enables read-only support. Write support is experimental. Maybe it's ufs2 I'm thinking of... Thanks for the note Moinak. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] can you create a Solaris 10 zone in Indiana (open solaris 2008.05) ?
2008/6/30 Hans [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi, experts. Just wonder if it is possible to create a Solaris 10 zone in Indiana (open solaris 2008.05), maybe as a branded zone, not a xVM guest. There are many applications only supported under Solaris 10, but not under Solaris 11. Borrowing the idea from ETude, the capability of Indiana (Solaris 11) to contain Solaris 10 zones would be desirable. Any insights ? Not currently. Zones are currently limited to ips branded zones. I believe this is in progress and should be available in the relatively near future. Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] What about adopting rpm to package OpenSolaris?
2008/7/2 Kristian Rink [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Dennis Clarke schrieb: [...] Perhaps I'm missing the point, but I thought that's exactly what the OpenSolaris distribution (and IPS repository) folks were attempting to do. Thank you for saying exactly what I was thinking. [...] Is it? I am not sure but if keeping redundant binary packages managed in terms of, say, having a full installment of GNOME in /usr/bin along with OpenSolaris and one in /opt/csw/ after installing a single GNOME-based application off blastwave, is the intention of IPS, I'll keep myself from pleading for it. Given that, however, i.e. the .deb While you could certainly use it that way, I don't believe that is the intent. That is more a matter of packaging policy and not of packaging technology. correct me nevertheless. A Provides mechanism, along possibly with virtual packages like in Debian, seems a sane way, however it would need to then also be used by those building the packages, i.o.w. making blastwave less standalone and closer tied to the main distribution in case of OpenSolaris... I believe similar dependency mechanisms are being implemented for ips. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] The need for a separate #opensolaris-help IRC channel
2008/7/2 UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]: You may want to be aware of the fact that sudo is being integrated. PSARC/2008/370 sudo was closed-approved on June 18th, 2008. You may now stop unfairly accusing sun of NIH syndrome. Thank you for the permission, but I will stop accusing Sun of the NIH sindrome when they stop reinventing the wheel. To be concrete, in this particular case, that will be when Sun drops RBAC and pfexec in favor of sudo, which is almost guaranteed to never happen. Why would they drop something that provides a different solution to a different problem? sudo does not provide everything rbac does and likewise rbac does not provide everything sudo does. There is room for both solutions. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Integrating Masayuki-san's drivers
2008/7/2 Akhilesh Mritunjai [EMAIL PROTECTED]: Hi Is there an effort or ARC underway to integrate Masayuki-san's drivers into OpenSolaris ? There are lot of people reporting problems with network that can be easily solved by integrating those drivers into OS core. The drivers are under BSD license so, apparently there shouldn't be any problems. Yes, someone has been working with him to get his drivers integrated. That is happening, but it is a slow process. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] WARNING: No randomness provider enabled...,
2008/7/4 Solomon Homicz [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I installed opensolaris on a virtual hard disk in Virtual Box, but I get this message on boot up - WARNING: No randomness provider enabled for /dev/random. Use cryptoadm(1) to enable a provider. What is this? and how do I deal with it? I am totally new to open source, and am searching for alternatives to microsoft. Any help and info would be appreciated. http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=38 -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] running opensolaris on intel with xp
2008/7/10 Cj [EMAIL PROTECTED]: OK I am sure this probably very basic but what boot manager do you all use? grub, which comes with OpenSolaris/Solaris and is specially modified for it. What I have is : Toshiba LT that is just got a new 250G drive for (ditched the 80G). I loaded XP on it but did not partition it. Now i want opensolaris I want to make ~80G for xp, ~100G for opensolaris or more so I can run XP under opensolaris and the rest is data. My primary partition will be opensolaris running XP in virtual box. I have 1.5g memory Is this going to work or am I just better off with a dual boot system? You are better off with a dual-boot system in my opinion. Should I use partition magic or is there something free that works with opensolaris and xp etc that I can use. I suggest the gparted live CD, which I just used to resize my laptop's partition so I could dual-boot between multiple operating systems: http://gparted.sourceforge.net/ It's free. *Backup your data first!* Any gotchas I should watch out for : networking seems to be my biggest issue with the xp and the solaris running on top of it now. Be certain that you have Windows installed first and that you install Solaris after. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] how to set IPS from web server to my local box?
2008/7/14 likaijun [EMAIL PROTECTED]: I want down the pkg from http://pkg.opensolaris.org to local machine.but how can I implement it ?It is so slow when I use the website pkg . hg clone ssh://[EMAIL PROTECTED]@hg.opensolari.org/gh/pkg/gate and pkgadd it .But it show pkg /export/home/ is not a install image when I use the command pkg refresh and so on . Iwant to how to solve it . is so slow when I use the website pkg . Unfortunately, this is not yet supported. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Any lsof tool for nv ?
Mike Gerdts wrote: On Tue, Jul 15, 2008 at 8:05 AM, Richard L. Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: # List open files with link count 1 (which could account # for du != df). This is just part of it, the whole list is # too long. Also, there aren't any really large ones just # now, so it's not an actual concern at the moment. And of # course, Jive messed up the columns; in reality, they do line up. Without lsof, you can do this with: # find /proc/*/fd -type f -links 0 -ls If you want to look inside the file to get an idea of what it is: # less /proc/$pid/fd/$fd If you want to truncate that 1 GB log file that has been deleted: # cp /dev/null /proc/$pid/fd/$fd This is not meant to lessen the importance of having lsof (really, lsof not some almost work-a-like) in OpenSolaris. It is a very helpful tool and is a common part of the known tool set of third party support organizations. That is, having this tool makes it so that ISV and freeware software is more easily supportable on OpenSolaris. I understand that lsof does bad things to get the data that it gets. It would likely stop doing that just about the time that stable interfaces are provided to make it unnecessary to go prodding around in /dev/kmem. I guess since I am complaining, I should add this to the list of projects for me to look into in the future... The main problem with lsof is that it will break often as kernel structures, etc. change. It might be easiest to find a wrapper script that emulates lsof to put around pfiles. -- Shawn Walker | Solaris Kernel | [EMAIL PROTECTED] | blogs.sun.com/srw ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] why there is no CDE in solaris Express
wan_jm wrote: I have installed the Solaris Express b93, but when I log in, I can only use gnome, there is no CDE in the session menu. what can i do as I want to use CDE as it consumes less cpu than GNOME. As noted many times before, CDE is in the process of being EOLd (end-of-lifed). If you want to use CDE, you'll have to stick with earlier builds, stick with Solaris 10 for now, or manually install the CDE packages from an older build onto the newer one. I believe the CDE files are still there for the moment, so you can probably manually configure your system to login. But be prepared for CDE to disappear completely in future builds. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [osol-code] Public accessible OpenSolaris based build servers
Palle Lyckegaard wrote: Hello OpenSolaris developers, contributors, etc... What about public accessible build servers running OpenSolaris so bug fixes, improvements etc. can be buildt on all currently supported x86 and SPARC architectures (i86pc/sun4u/sun4v) by people not employed by Sun. http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code This is already in the works. See here: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/testing/testfarm/ -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] [osol-code] Public accessible OpenSolaris based build servers
I don't, you should email the testing-discuss list. Palle Lyckegaard wrote: Hi Shawn, thank you for the link - it says that the Test Farm will be officially launched soon... do you (or anyone) known when ? On Sat, 19 Jul 2008, Shawn Walker wrote: Date: Sat, 19 Jul 2008 15:40:09 -0500 From: Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] To: Palle Lyckegaard [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org, [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: [osol-code] Public accessible OpenSolaris based build servers Palle Lyckegaard wrote: Hello OpenSolaris developers, contributors, etc... What about public accessible build servers running OpenSolaris so bug fixes, improvements etc. can be buildt on all currently supported x86 and SPARC architectures (i86pc/sun4u/sun4v) by people not employed by Sun. http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/opensolaris-code This is already in the works. See here: http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/testing/testfarm/ -- Shawn Walker Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Is OpenSolaris FireFox snooping on its users ?
Joga wrote: I looked at that url and I see that it is FireFox fetching a simple png file ( 1p.png ) and passing a parameter for the time as well as reporting the User-Agent. So that seems like pretty obvious user base tracking and data collection going on there. What else are you guys snooping on or reporting back to head quarters about? I'm going to drag down FireFox 3 and then see if it does the same sort of thing on Solaris 10 or on OpenSolaris. I never knew that Sun was collecting user data via the browser. That is sneaky .. you know. Despite your interesting conspiracy theories, this is merely because the default configuration of FireFox on OpenSolaris includes a Live Bookmark to planet.opensolaris.org. I believe that if you remove the live bookmark from FireFox and restart the browser, you won't see this behaviour anymore. It might be better to ask questions first and make accusations later... -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Where can I find a document describing OpenSolaris commands?
Varuna Seneviratna wrote: Where can I find a document describing OpenSolaris commands? You might find some helpful information here: http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/IPS/getst1.html -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] mount solaris2 partitions
Alexander Bubnov wrote: Hello, My MBR is erased by linux install manager. And I would like to see grub settings on solaris partition to add them to linux grub menu, but I cannot mount solaris partitions under opensolaris live cd. If you're talking about OpenSolaris 2008.05, you likely have a ZFS based filesystem. What is wrong? How can I mount an opensolaris's partition under opensolaris? Which FS type is used for opensolaris? Since they are likely ZFS datasets, you need to use ZFS to mount them. Something like: pfexec zpool import -f -R /tmp/rpool rpool -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Gui does not load, stuck on Console
Berkan Gursoy wrote: Just to note, when I say 'Console' I mean it loads to a part where it verify's the ZFS filesystems (6/6) then it pops out the message Username Console:. I can log in but it is a terminal login which enables me to carry out unix commands so its not like a pre-gui login unfortunately. Any help or advice would be greatly appreciated!. Once you've logged in, try this: pfexec svcadm clear gdm pfexec svcadm enable gdm If that fails, try: pfexec svcs -xv ...that should tell if you there were any services that failed to start. -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] Can Solaris be discussed here?
Ming Kin Lai wrote: I have a feeling that Sun has abandoned maintaining Solaris, and shifted its resources to OpenSolaris. Well, that's good news to people here, I guess. So, can I discuss things about Solaris 10 here? How about something about Solaris 10's C library? Can I ask a question why a certain library function does not work properly? Can I report a bug here? Currently there does not appear to be a way to report Solaris' bugs in Sun's website anymore. These lists are for OpenSolaris, not Solaris. I'm not certain what gave you the idea that Sun has abandoned Solaris 10 maintenance. However, I can assure you that is not the case. Read more about the Solaris Life Cycle model here: http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/lifecycle.xml You may want to visit the bigadmin pages for further discussion of Solaris 10 topics: http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/home/index.html Cheers, -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Re: [osol-discuss] HOME and END keys not active in term ?
Bruno Damour wrote: Hello, I have a small annoying problem with gnome-terminal (and others btw) under sxce b94 I want to map HOME, END and DELETE keys to do what I want, ie like ^a, ^e, and delete current char. I managed to get what I wanted with the delete key adding a line in my .bashrc that says : bind '\e[3~:delete-char' But HOME and END key (supposed to work with) : bind '\e[1~:beginning-of-line' bind '\e[4~:end-of-line' Furthermore, trying to catch the keycodes with read fails, it's like the key would not even send anything ? (it gives the expected result with DELETE though) And, no, it's not my keyboard, the keys work correctly in some other apps, let's say firefox for example or gedit ! Any clue would be appreciated, I'm tired of googling for this ! Otherwise I guess I will have to use ^a and ^e agin, but it seems wrong that HOME and END keys should be useless in term... http://tech.groups.yahoo.com/group/solarisx86/message/20027 -- Shawn Walker ___ opensolaris-discuss mailing list opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
