My network works okay under b95 but it doesn't work after update to B97
On B95:
# ifconfig -a
lo0: flags=2001000849 mtu
8232 index 1
inet 127.0.0.1 netmask ff00
e1000g0: flags=201004843
mtu 1500 index 2
inet 10.239.12.36 netmask ff00 broadcast 10.239.12.255
ether 0:
Thanks for ethan's help. Clearing out /opt fixed my problem.
Does this mean image-update need /opt is empty? Is this intended?
Or did I do something wrong?
Thanks,
-Aubrey
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 11:44 PM, Aubrey Li <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Filed a bug as 3452:
> http://defect.opensolaris.org
Peter Tribble wrote:
> On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 10:36 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Yes, I saw that and I also believe I've seen Luca's posting on the
>> SunSpot forum asking about this. That still raises the question though
>> what is the actual dependency that project has on Java 5 and w
Author: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Repository: /hg/indiana/docs1
Latest revision: c05685d3ecb8e68f9c54c18be6ffc7ca0fbc369e
Total changesets: 1
Log message:
Add files for Distribution Constructor article
Files:
create: DistroConst.book
create: DistroConst.xml
create: html/css/BL_b8b8
On Mon, Sep 8, 2008 at 10:36 PM, <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Yes, I saw that and I also believe I've seen Luca's posting on the
> SunSpot forum asking about this. That still raises the question though
> what is the actual dependency that project has on Java 5 and why is
> Java 6 incompatible?
Filed a bug as 3452:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=3452&action=View
Please let me know if I can offer more information about this issue.
Thanks,
-Aubrey
On Tue, Sep 16, 2008 at 12:46 AM, Ethan Quach <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>
>> Aubrey,
>>
>>
On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 14:19 -0400, Dave Miner wrote:
> Mark Phalan wrote:
> > On Thu, 2008-08-07 at 14:53 -0400, Dave Miner wrote:
> >> As we all know, the live CD has grown quite a bit since the 2008.05
> >> release. I've spent some time analyzing how we're using the space and
> >> where the grow
Laszlo (Laca) Peter wrote:
> On Mon, 2008-09-15 at 11:52 -0400, Dave Miner wrote:
>> We'd already had some discussion about breaking out non-essential
>> themes, and I thought you'd already done some of the re-packaging; is
>> that accounted for here? That's the other main contributor.
>
> Yes,
