On Tue, 19 Jul 2005, Glenn Lagasse wrote:
The big difference though is that the cost of entry
for customization /
maintaining current status is a lot lower on Linux,
just because you get
the source packages. There's a lot less effort in,
say, changing your
distro's mysql-4.0.src.rpm to
1. you patch the source code if necessary
Is there a 'recommended' format for patches in the
Solaris environment?
Is this the correct commands to create a patch:
diff -u old_file new_file
and to apply the patch:
patch -i patch_file file_to_be_patched
or is there some
I'm a tech writer at Sun. I'm going to review this
information and get
back to you about adding this procedure to the
docs.sun.com documentation.
I'd be interested in any feedback and suggestions you could provide on
improving the article.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
and your sanity as well because it will duplicate
many of packages already part of /usr or /usr/sfw,
under /opt/csw.
I might add that this is after the fact that it uses
the same backend as pkgadd.
Well, here's the deal: usually you either go with what Sun ships, i.e. the Sun
Freeware
John Plocher wrote:
I'm not sure I would have phrased it in those words (after all, part
of a being in a community means being tactful and polite), but
debian encompasses a lot of architectural policy that sfw/csw don't.
To be fair, one of the reasons that they don't is that they are
Hey,
After experiencing all this mess, I had to make a judgement call.
Either I stick with the Sun Companion CD, which guarantees stability
and good integration, but is too old for compiling most code, or I
simply install a controlled set of Blastwave packages and link with
those.
Wouldn't
UNIX admin wrote:
Yesterday I spent a few hours at night thinking and
talking with
friends about OpenSolaris and more specifically
trying to answer the
question of Why I don't use OpenSolaris on my
personal laptop?.
I don't know. Why don't you?
I know I can't wait for my laptop to come
when I want to install libbonobo as a dependency for
another package, I want just that and one copy on my
system, and let every package that needs it find it.
company ticker appended to package names is one
ridiculous idea, when a simple package name would do
just fine. All, pkg-get would
Joerg Schilling wrote:
This looks like the generel Solaris volmgt problem that
will disapear with build 19 or 20.
Did you try to do the scanbus with a medium in the CD-ROM drive?
Jörg
No, I believe I had it working before I knew exactly why it would or
wouldn't work. But, that won't
As I said, Blastwave isn't even similar to this approach. It has
lot of problems: libraries duplication, zero system integration,
etc.
The duplications annoys me too, as does perhaps the fact that it the
Solaris 8 it uses as a lowest common denominator is a bit long in the
teeth.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Debian is a well integrated systems, without duplication of
software, with a great packaging system, 100% free, with loads of
ready to use software, hundreds and hundreds of active developers,
dozens of derived distributions, government implantation, etc.. It
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 7/20/05, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
How may I set verbosemode to a value != 0 and when will
we have full sources for multiboot?
I'm pretty sure verbosemode is activated by doing -v to the kernel...
Just like one does -kdv...
-v
Hello!
I'm a little confused about a few things hopefully i can get some answers :-)
a) is the (base opensolaris community sun employees ?
b) where did all the code come from... is it from the solaris tree or is this
all new ?
c) is OpenSolaris just a kernel or a full OS, will it be freebsd
I'm a little confused about a few things hopefully i can get some answers :-)
a) is the (base opensolaris community sun employees ?
Well, I suppose that technically a large number of them are Sun employees;
but there are many more people who joined.
b) where did all the code come from... is it
John Plocher [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure I would have phrased it in those words (after all, part of a
being in a community means being tactful and polite), but debian encompasses
a lot of architectural policy that sfw/csw don't. To be fair, one of the
reasons that they don't is
Dragan Cvetkovic [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
That was a problem discussed a few days ago. Basically, as I understand
it, Blastwave packages are supposed to work the same way on any Solaris
version (from 8 to 11) and you can't guarantee that some required library
would be in the base OS or in
On Solaris you could solve this kind of problems using lofs, on Linux you
can't
and it seems that Debian is Linux centric
http://www.debian.org/ports/#nonlinux
And for the building on a minimal configuration; well, there's always the
option to take a base debian and use apt to install the
Alvaro Lopez Ortega wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Debian is a well integrated systems, without duplication of
software, with a great packaging system, 100% free, with loads of
ready to use software, hundreds and hundreds of active developers,
dozens of derived distributions,
Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 2005-07-20 at 14:04, Chris Ricker wrote:
creating a mysql-4.1 pkg from scratch. Or what if you want the same
version that Sun shipped, but just need it compiled with different
options? That's trivial on Linux distros, not so trivial on
Dan Mick [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dan Mick wrote:
and for the record, /dev/xsvc is coming. I'm working on it personally now.
BTW, examining the source for aperture, it looks very much like programs
designed to use /dev/xsvc (like the afore-argued-about iasl) would work
fine if /dev/xsvc
Alvaro Lopez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, it is the systems level thought and integration that makes
Debian more than simply a collection of pre-built packages.
Obviously, I have been quite impressed by the thought and effort
that has gone into the Debian system, and agree
Ferdinand O. Tempel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I thought about this as well, and as a matter of fact, I want to go through
with it. The Debian project itself isn't all that enthousiastic due to the
GPL not being compatible with the CDDL and all that crap, but that doesn't
mean noone else can
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Wouldn't it be even better to not have to make that judgment call? Now
don't get me wrong, the stuff done by the likes of Blastwave and
Sunfreeware were *hugely* important - I'd just like to see us acting as
a combined community, working on porting the software,
On Jul 21, 2005, at 7:13 AM, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Alvaro Lopez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
IMHO, it is the systems level thought and integration that makes
Debian more than simply a collection of pre-built packages.
Obviously, I have been quite impressed by the thought and effort
that
Don't expect things to work if you adopt to the entire Debian way of
thinking.
Actually, I do. I don't care much about what the debian project thinks or
expects, and I doubt it's what you claim as:
As long as Debian compiles software on Linux-2.4 and
expects the resulting binaries to work on
Did you ever consider that one possible reason is
that Solaris X86
simply doesn't have all the drivers - I have a
laptop, and it's less
than 2 years old, which Solaris will install on, but
there simply are no
network drivers for it. So it would take much more of
my time to get to
a
Joerg Schilling wrote:
From my understanding Debian people like to run GNU application on
top of a given kernel which will create problems with a kernel like
Solaris that has different features than Linux.
Replacing vital parts of Solaris with GNU counterparts will not
work.
Nobody
Wouldn't it be even better to not have to make that
judgment call? Now
don't get me wrong, the stuff done by the likes of
Blastwave and
Sunfreeware were *hugely* important - I'd just like
to see us acting as
a combined community, working on porting the
software, integrating the
software
On 7/20/05, Bart Smaalders [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Is that still considered the proper practice? Would
I be considered
evil if I released packages without the prefixes?
That question is better left for Sun employed engineers, but I write for
myself: I wouldn't do it.
As a general rule of thumb:
I don't see anything in rpm that could not be handled
via the pre and
postinstall scripts that are part of a SVR4 package.
Or a Makefile processed by `make` in a pre/postinstall phase of package
installation. Which is what you're basically saying, correct?
This message posted from
Theo Schlossnagle [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, that exactly what I mean. Debian will bring a huge set of
quality software greatly integrated to OpenSolaris.
Why do you expect that packages that only have been tested on Linux
will even compile on Solaris?
Because the vast
Ferdinand O. Tempel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Don't expect things to work if you adopt to the entire Debian way of
thinking.
Actually, I do. I don't care much about what the debian project thinks or
expects, and I doubt it's what you claim as:
As long as Debian compiles software on
Yeah, that exactly what I mean. Debian will bring
ing a huge set of
quality software greatly integrated to
to OpenSolaris.
What you want to do is bring software on a system where the only Solaris part
is the kernel. That's BUSTED.
I hope OpenSolaris will work to create this new
new
It really makes sense to me: Linux has been the
the most advanced Free
Software choice. What I'm proposing is to make
ake OpenSolaris join
that huge community.
This is incorrect. Linux has actually always trailed behind in development. And
now that Solaris is free, it is most certainly
Alvaro Lopez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It really makes sense to me: Linux has been the most advanced Free
Software choice. What I'm proposing is to make OpenSolaris join
that huge community.
As long as we continue being apart, Debian will continue being Linux
centric,
Alvaro Lopez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
IMHO, it is the systems level thought and integration that makes
Debian more than simply a collection of pre-built packages.
Obviously, I have been quite impressed by the thought and effort
that has gone into
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Don't expect things to work if you adopt to the entire Debian way
of thinking.
As long as Debian compiles software on Linux-2.4 and expects the
resulting binaries to work on Linux-2.2, the did not yet grok how to
deal with evolvoing interfaces.
We are speaking
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Alvaro Lopez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
IMHO, it is the systems level thought and integration that makes
Debian more than simply a collection of pre-built packages.
Obviously, I have been quite impressed by the thought and effort
1) how do you determine that the package name is
unique in all the world?
names are given by the father of the package, and they are pretty unique. its
his duty to give it a unique name. think about it, if you were writing a new
db, would you name it mysql or oracle? if he fails, then the
--- Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
Yes, of course it would have been better!
We have clearly identified an area where there
things could improve,
but that's not the main problem.
The main problem is that people who converted are
trying to push what
they're used to
On 07/21/05 17:02, roland wrote:
The harddisk run out of storage for /
How can i change the disk config to add more disk space for /
without reinstall
If you have additional usable slices elsewhere then a nice way
of approaching this is via LiveUpgrade. You don't really
upgrade but in copying
Hi roland,
Please post requests for help on the opensolaris-help forum.
This is a common problem on unix-like OSes. Try looking through the following
search results for help.
http://www.google.com/search?q=root+partition+out+of+space
cheers,
brian
This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Alvaro Lopez Ortega wrote:
Joerg Schilling wrote:
It really makes sense to me: Linux has been the most advanced
Free Software choice. What I'm proposing is to make OpenSolaris
join that huge community.
As long as we continue being apart, Debian will
On 7/21/05, Alvaro Lopez Ortega [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm not sure I would have phrased it in those words (after all, part
of a being in a community means being tactful and polite), but
debian encompasses a lot of architectural policy that sfw/csw don't.
To be fair, one of the
On 7/21/05, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is the exact same approach that Linux takes. The only way to patch a
software subsystem through the OS interfaces is to do `rpm -u` which goes and
[I]replaces the entire software subsystem[/I] in order to update it.
This is very much
On 7/21/05, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, that exactly what I mean. Debian will bring
ing a huge set of
quality software greatly integrated to
to OpenSolaris.
What you want to do is bring software on a system where the only Solaris
part is the kernel. That's BUSTED.
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Don't expect things to work if you adopt to the
e entire Debian way
of thinking.
As long as Debian compiles software on Linux-2.4
4 and expects the
resulting binaries to work on Linux-2.2, the did
d not yet grok how to
deal with evolvoing interfaces.
propose to set up a community specifically for users in China especially those
in Chinese universities. As China is a fastest growing market for Sun, there
should be a lot of opportunites for Sun in general and Opensolaris in
particular.
Fedora Core, arguably the most popular Linux distro, was
Hi folks,
Taking the opportunity to cross-post to the edu-discuss list. Might I
suggest that we continue the conversation there? Unless folks feel it
is broader than the edu community
T
W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
propose to set up a community specifically for users in China especially
those
Taking the opportunity to cross-post to the edu-discuss list. Might I
suggest that we continue the conversation there?
Where is there?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Ginnie,
I've forwarded a few parts of this thread to the writer for the
Application Packaging Developer's Guide. Once you've reviewed this
information, I'd like to see what we could do to get the information
into the relevant docs.
Another option is this information could be written up as a
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 05:25:39AM -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
Is that still considered the proper practice? Would
I be considered
evil if I released packages without the prefixes?
That question is better left for Sun employed engineers, but I write for
myself: I wouldn't do it.
Nor
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 12:33:41PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
This only contains a rough description in prosa but no build system.
For GPL'd software, it violates the GPL as the build scripts are
not available.
We're tossing around some proposals for fixing[0] this as part of
making
On 7/21/05, Keith M Wesolowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 05:25:39AM -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
Is that still considered the proper practice? Would
I be considered
evil if I released packages without the prefixes?
That question is better left for Sun employed
On Thu, Jul 21, 2005 at 02:41:58PM -0500, Shawn Walker wrote:
So is it ok for me to name my packages libfoo, progname, etc or not?
No.
--
Keith M Wesolowski Sir, we're surrounded!
Solaris Kernel Team Excellent; we can attack in any direction!
As for SGI, they have their hands full with IRIX. If
you really want to have a real discussion of porting
packages to IRIX versus Solaris/OpenSolaris when
talking about SGI instead of Linux which is more of
a kernel versus a distribution like Debian.
SGI ditched IRIX in favor of Linux on
On 7/21/05, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Actually, SuSE's RPM update system uses special patch
RPMs that are
not the entire software subsystem over again.
They were working on it.
Possibly because of the Linux community there is a
large set of free
software available for any Operating
I am answering my own question. I have found the edu-discuss forum from the
e-mail header, which, however, is not shown in the forum message:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
I am very interested in this issue not necessarily because I was born a
Chinese, but mainly because I am convinced that the
On Thu, 2005-07-21 at 13:22, UNIX admin wrote:
Look past the sentences and read the fine print. Read the blogs of the Sun
executives. CDDL may not say it, but it is clear why Solaris has been
released to the public. It's a purely political move with the aim to sell
more Sun HW (which is
Hi,
We are looking to start an OpenSolaris User Group in the Colorado Front
Range area. More information will be sent out as the group forms, but
right now we'd like to see who is interested. If you are interested,
join the frosug (stands for Front Range OpenSolaris User Group) Google
Ferdinand O. Tempel wrote:
for Debian packages to work, you need to adopt the entire Debian way of
thinking.
Bells and whistles and all.
But it'll be a fight against both the OpenSolaris community and
What are the core differences WRT the way Sun has traditionally done
sfw and the
On Mon, Jul 18, 2005 at 06:45:20AM -0700, Chao-Feng Guo wrote:
Users are asking for the wishlist like Solaris 10 X86 3ware 9000 series RAID
controller driver. I do know more people are investigating some good
approaches to make the IHVs embrace the OpenSolaris. But it's a better way to
+1.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, 21 Jul 2005, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
This seems like a fine suggestion; I'd just make it a bit more general
to encompass all platform discussions at least on x86, and either
include SPARC as well or create a parallel SPARC platform community.
I'd prefer a platform-neutral device
Dan Mick wrote:
Sunil wrote:
1) how do you determine that the package name is
unique in all the world?
names are given by the father of the package, and they are pretty
unique. its his duty
Sunil, there's an inherent race condition here; both parties wish to
release SolDoom packages;
Yep, I believe the platform neutral device driver is the target of OpenSolaris.
But to this end, we'd better kick off the work on the easily approched
platforms. Please see the draft of the community below. I do know I miss lots
of parts in the scope, please feel free to add your comments.
Well, in that case it would probably end up either
somewhere in BluePrints program on Sun's site, or
somewhere on BigAdmin. But as far as I know, only Sun
employed engineers are allowed to write this kind of
documentation for the Sun BluePrints program.
In the past, we've published Sun
67 matches
Mail list logo
