On the other side, GNU tar is unreliable.
It is really unhelpful to Solaris when its advocates make inflammatory
and incorrect statements like this. We agree that you have reported a
bug. There is no bug-free software in the world. The immensely huge
numbers of people who, like me, have
On Jan 17, 2009, at 6:04 PM, Octave Orgeron wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I totally agree. The BSD userland is not bad at all and I haven't
> heard any developers on the Mac OS X platform complain
Well, as a long-time Linuxoid, when I started using a Mac I
was fairly astounded how invisible the d
On Jan 17, 2009, at 4:29 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> A serious problem with GNU tar is that it is unreliable and in a
> signficant
> number of cases is unable to read back it's own archives.
I've been using tar on linux since about 1996 and I've never had such
a failure, nor have I ever hear
On Jun 21, 2007, at 1:53 PM, Donal McMullan wrote:
> I'm not really digging the 'innocent until proven guilty' approach
> either. I don't think Ian's personal integrity is in question.
>
> I can tell you what's *not* going to attract Linux users to the
> community; trolling, petty negativity,
On Feb 18, 2008, at 8:51 AM, Bob Netherton wrote:
>
> On Mon, 2008-02-18 at 08:32 -0800, Euan Thoms wrote:
>> I ask this because it sucks in Solaris 10 and even Nevada /
>> OpenSolaris builds that i have trialled to date.
>
> This is simply not true. OK, perhaps if you are looking for
> ever
On Feb 15, 2008, at 6:27 PM, Bart Smaalders wrote:
> I've had problems getting the ae driver to work reliably under Virtual
> Box; does it work well for you?
>
> - Bart
Nope. It works for a little browsing and ssh-ing, but first time you
do a big wget or the like, it locks up. For me anyhow.
On Feb 13, 2008, at 3:14 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> $ mkdir ae-tmp
> $ mv ae-2.6.0a.tar.gz ae-tmp
> $ hdiutil makehybrid -o ae-tmp ae-tmp/
>
> and then tell VirtualBox to export that ISO file, ae-tmp.iso, into the
> VM.
Or get VBox to mount it as a CD. -T
_
On Jan 15, 2008, at 6:30 AM, Bryan Boone wrote:
> ...But if Indiana wants to lure Linux folks to Solaris, it needs to
> offer tools that are familiar. I cut my teeth as a Windows 3.0
> developer, but I came to Linux via Mac OS X. What was true in OS X
> (BSD) was true, for the most part, in Linu
On Jan 9, 2008, at 5:57 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
>> I know I am a Java addict, but when I see we use 80Mb for gimp
>> (SUNWgnome-img-editor The Gimp image editor 80M) that I used once and
>> then decided to forget about it, I would prefer a jdk environment
>> (30Mb)
>> (many developers/apps are r
On Nov 22, 2007, at 9:01 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> I expect to seem them because that is the standard Sun has set forth
> for package naming.
>
> Whether you think they "obtrusive, ugly, or whatever" is a subjective,
> personal opinion.
>
> The perceived benefit they currently provide is:
Well,
On Nov 22, 2007, at 8:53 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> As a user, I would expect to see the SUNW, FSW, and SFE before package
> names.
I think it's ugly and obtrusive and I haven't seen yet how it helps
me as a user. Other package-management systems seem to get by by
calling things by simple unp
On Nov 6, 2007, at 4:05 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
> Putting /usr/gnu at the head of PATH causes incompatibilities to
> apply.
Failure to put /usr/gnu at the head of PATH will cause a huge class
of potential Solaris users to be confused and irritated and many of
them will walk away.
The ch
On Nov 5, 2007, at 12:19 PM, Josh Hurst wrote:
>> I don't know - from what I've seen so far, many people are happy with
>> the fact that the initial user's shell is bash (something that
>> they're
>> familiar with)
>
> Didn't see anyone cheering about that except Mike and some die hard
> Linux p
On Nov 2, 2007, at 11:14 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 03/11/2007, Richard Nekus <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> oh, and
>> 1./ "System -> Shutdown" -does not shutdown,
>
> Known issue. In the meantime you can pull up a shell then run "pfexec
> bash" and do a shutodown, init 5 (to shutdown), init 6
On Nov 2, 2007, at 10:27 AM, Dave Miner wrote:
>> I used format/fdisk to make a new solaris partition and installed
>> on it, no problem. But Grub doesn't see the other two bootable
>> partitions, one XP and one Ubuntu. I don't see anything under
>> the admin menus to address this. Is
On Nov 2, 2007, at 2:43 AM, Martin Damboldt wrote:
> Hi,
>
> I noticed the Indiana installer does not teach Grub to create an
> entry for the existing Windows XP partition on my machine.
>
> I tried to file a bug for this but I was not able to find a
> category in the listing fitting into Gru
On Nov 1, 2007, at 7:52 PM, MC wrote:
>> The fonts are all spidery, there's no anti-aliasing.
>> Is this a bug?
>> Tim
>> ___
>> indiana-discuss mailing list
>> indiana-discuss@opensolaris.org
>> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-d
>
On Nov 1, 2007, at 6:19 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 01/11/2007, Tim Bray <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> The fonts are all spidery, there's no anti-aliasing. Is this a bug?
>
> Must be a bug relatively specific to your configuration. Anti-aliasing
> was acti
Glynn Foster wrote:
> Tim Bray wrote:
>
>> The fonts are all spidery, there's no anti-aliasing. Is this a bug?
> If you open up the System > Preferences > Appearance menu entry, select the
> 'Fonts' tab, and select 'Subpixel smoothing' does it
The fonts are all spidery, there's no anti-aliasing. Is this a bug?
-Tim
___
indiana-discuss mailing list
indiana-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
I used format/fdisk to make a new solaris partition and installed on
it, no problem. But Grub doesn't see the other two bootable
partitions, one XP and one Ubuntu. I don't see anything under the
admin menus to address this. Is this a bug?
-Tim
___
On Nov 1, 2007, at 2:19 PM, Sarah Jelinek wrote:
>> Indiana can install on to the whole disk or an existing Solaris
>> partition. Since you are running on the live media, you can bring
>> up a terminal window, fire up format, create a Solaris partition
>> and restart the installer. This shou
Indiana boots off the CD no prob, which has partitions for Ubuntu and
Windows, sees that there's 85G of free space, can't make a Solaris
partition. Grmph. Bet this is a common problem. OK, off to get
that SXDE DVD, maybe it'll be able to make one. -Tim
___
On Nov 1, 2007, at 5:05 AM, Jennifer Pioch wrote:
> The choice for /bin/bash as user shell for 'Jack' and 'root' is a
> SHAME.
This the same argument as the one over /usr/gnu. The huge number of
people who've grown up outside of Solaris, the ones we want to
attract, will find this setup sm
On Oct 31, 2007, at 10:07 AM, Bruno Jargot wrote:
> WTF?
> I think this should be removed from Indiana until the community made a
> decision whether /usr/gnu/bin should be present in the default PATH or
> not. I think this is a serious issue and should not be taken lightly.
For the record, here's
On Oct 24, 2007, at 11:14 AM, Mario Goebbels wrote:
> Gnome or KDE in themselves aren't the issue. The themes are. Window
> borders, control themes, icons, fonts (including hinting and
> antialiasing), size of paddings/spacings and margins, colors,
> dimensions of controls, and so on. In my
On Oct 16, 2007, at 4:43 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> Perhaps it would be better worded:
> "The Slim installer prototype cannot upgrade an existing operating
> system. The installer can perform an initial installation into a
> selected primary partition (preserving existing partitions) or use an
> en
On Oct 16, 2007, at 1:25 PM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Tim,
> The current OpenSolaris installation will overwrite the existing
> Solaris installation. It's not an upgrade, in that it won't save
> any parts of the
> existing OS, it's a fresh installation.
On Oct 16, 2007, at 1:28 PM, Shawn Wal
On Oct 16, 2007, at 8:44 AM, Barbara Lundquist wrote:
> Gang,
> Apologies for my posting confusion! For those of us outside swan, a
> copy
> of the same document is posted at:
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/caiman/Slim_Install/
> project_documents/
> This copy has all the new content t
On Sep 16, 2007, at 10:42 AM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> Not any more than it does now. The people that created this problem
> are the idiots that put #!/bin/sh at the top of their script and
> assume that means bash, when it obviously isn't.
Well, "obviously" it is on a few distros whose adoption dwa
On Sep 13, 2007, at 12:13 PM, Mario Goebbels wrote:
> The most important thing required to start off the branding process
> itself is a name. Graphics (and other things) of a brand are
> usually orientated around the name. I doubt it'll be "Project
> Indiana" forever, nor does it sound good.
On Aug 9, 2007, at 2:52 PM, Keith Bierman wrote:
> Make the default user (viz. the entity created during the Developer
> install) have primary administrator profile rather than ordinary
> user. Have the skeleton profile (eliding the discussion of what the
> default shell is, or hack it for any of
On Aug 8, 2007, at 12:11 PM, Bruno Jargot wrote:
> I thought we're talking about making /bin/sh being ksh93, NOT bash
> Using bash would be the wrong direction. Indiana should make thinks
> BETTER than Linux.
>
> A few numbers:
This all feels a little surreal. Remember, we're targeting developer
On Aug 8, 2007, at 10:56 AM, Richard Elling wrote:
> pushd/popd and dirs came from csh. They are invaluable when you only
> had a terminal. They are so invaluable that ksh code to implement
> them
> is on pp 244-247 of "The Kornshell Command and Programming
> Language" by
> Bolsky and Korn,
On Aug 8, 2007, at 8:06 AM, Josh Hurst wrote:
>> 1. !!
>> 5. pushd/popd
It's gonna be painful explaining the absence of these to all the
people we're trying to evangelize in Linux/OS-X-land. Personally, I
couldn't imagine working without pushd/popd. -T
On Aug 7, 2007, at 10:38 AM, Marc Hamilton wrote:
> Ian says it is my job to pick, at least for Solaris.
> For OpenSolaris, it should be a community decision.
> But if the community wants me to pick, I would probably go with ksh93.
I'm a little out of touch with ksh, never used it much. But here
On Aug 7, 2007, at 9:38 AM, Chris Pickett wrote:
> I think we have a bigger problem than /bin/ksh: Does Indiana or
> Opensolaris want to address the problem that Opensolaris still uses
> the original bourne shell as /bin/sh? Most modern Unices use either
> bash or ksh as /bin/sh
This is well know
Ian may be a little too restrained to post this link himself, so I
will: http://ianmurdock.com/2007/07/21/how-package-management-changed-
everything/
-Tim
___
indiana-discuss mailing list
indiana-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://mail.opensolaris.org/m
On Jul 19, 2007, at 2:22 PM, Stephen Hahn wrote:
>
>Danek and I have been poking around at packaging the last little
>while; I've written down many of the issues we're juggling in a
> blog
>post:
>
>http://blogs.sun.com/sch/entry/observations_on_packaging
Good stuff! We going t
On Jul 14, 2007, at 3:23 AM, John Sonnenschein wrote:
> Why parrot anything at all, let alone the current trendy flavour of
> the month?
Uh, because it's known to work well, to be an improvement on what we
have now, and to make a large number of users happy?
Unless, of course, there's
(a) a
On Jul 12, 2007, at 2:03 AM, Frank van der Linden wrote:
> I agree with you about getting a beachhead, but in my experience the
> main obstacles in getting there are installation and package
> management.
Would anyone disagree with the formulation that the big barriers to
attracting GNU-heads
On Jul 12, 2007, at 1:39 AM, Donal McMullan wrote:
> Providing a GNU-friendly userland isn't a technical challenge, and it
> won't require heaps of space on the CD. The cost is low and the
> potential benefits are huge. There is no non-religious reason to not
> provide it.
+1 -Tim
On Jul 11, 2007, at 4:55 AM, Eric Boutilier wrote:
> Nevertheless, I think I see your point, and probably the following
> wording would have been better for my post:
>
> The Indiana/SX-NG/OpenSolaris/Whatever New Distro Project will
> be a
> certain assemblage of OpenSolaris (Nevada) cod
On Jul 11, 2007, at 1:00 AM, Milan Jurik wrote:
> Did somebody ask why there are two (or three) the most growing user's
> bases (ignoring MS Windows, as there is another reason):
>
> a) (X|K)Ubuntu (or PCLinuxOS)
>
> b) Mac OS X
>
> Eric, I think you can easily find some of your colleagues who are
On Jul 10, 2007, at 10:14 AM, Eric Boutilier wrote:
> what I see resulting (from the
> Indiana/SX-NG/OpenSolaris/Whatever New Distro Project) is a
> distro that is vastly different (and vastly to my liking) from
> Ubuntu, Fedora, SuSE, etc.
Care to expand on your vision a bit? -Tim
___
On Jul 10, 2007, at 6:02 AM, Milan Jurik wrote:
> Why are you prefering Linux users and not MS Windows users? Or
> maybe Mac
> OS X users? I don't really understand why somebody is speaking about
> Linux users only. Is Linux so much better in usability than other
> platforms? Or has wider users
On Jul 10, 2007, at 1:15 AM, John Sonnenschein wrote:
> well, for one, sudo makes every user's password as valuable to an
> attacker as root's. There's also the problem that a slightly
> misconfigured sudo can give full root access to a potentially
> malicious user. for example, allowing acc
On Jul 9, 2007, at 7:28 PM, Richard Elling wrote:
>> Minor point, we don't need to use something as braindead as sudo,
>> we're Solaris, we can use RBAC.
Remember, every time you take something out that people are used to
and seemed to work, you increase the Solaris barrier to entry. I've
be
On Jun 29, 2007, at 3:53 AM, Michael Hunter wrote:
The 'ps aux', 'tar zxvf', '/sbin/ifconfig -a' types of things are
bigger generators of cognative dissonance for me when I move between
platforms then the top vs prstat types of things
That's a subtle distinction. The fact is that developers s
On Jun 21, 2007, at 1:53 PM, Donal McMullan wrote:
I'm not really digging the 'innocent until proven guilty' approach
either. I don't think Ian's personal integrity is in question.
I can tell you what's *not* going to attract Linux users to the
community; trolling, petty negativity, paranoi
50 matches
Mail list logo
