Hey Sun,
Did you send us the free t-shirts yet? :-)
Do you ship world-wide?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
hi there,
I would like to get known some things for the future of Solaris:
1.
http://blogs.sun.com/roller/page/samf?anchor=acls_everywhere
Things are getting much better with the arrival of ZFS. The goal of ZFS's ACL
implementation is to implement NFSv4 ACLs in a way that is compatible with
Hi,
Scenario:
1) log in by telnet
2) run some demon (but not by svcadm)
3)do: svcs -p telnet
Why svcs shows that demon is releated to telnet ?
It's a demon so it parent process is init NOT telnet !.
In this situation when you disable telnet demon will be killed!!
It's a big problem for legacy
Daniel Johnsen wrote:
...
1b. Btw, why doesnt sun share the development process of zfs with the
community ? Like integrating it into the opensolaris release, but not
as the default root filesystem. It would be very clever to get a lot
of beta-testing for the filesystem, from a lot of users. Ok
Please honor the reply-to and send followups to
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michal Rotkiewicz writes:
Hi,
Scenario:
1) log in by telnet
2) run some demon (but not by svcadm)
3)do: svcs -p telnet
Why svcs shows that demon is releated to telnet ?
It's a demon so it parent process is init NOT telnet
John:
However, I see a lot of problems with the approaches that seem to be
evolving out of this discussion. For one thing, it seems that we
are suggesting that OpenSolaris should be bound to interface
stability issues for non-free interfaces found in Solaris. The ksh
example is a good one.
On Sat, 2005-07-30 at 19:11, John Plocher wrote:
In as much as we can follow Path 1 or 2A, the relationship between
Solaris and OpenSolaris is easy. Obviously, this includes
the forwards compatibility with Solaris.Future as well as that
of Solaris.Historical and other OpenSolaris derivatives.
Brian Cameron wrote:
I think it is just a matter of time before we find a necessary
component that isn't in OpenSolaris that we can't include for
licensing reasons, and something nobody is interested in rewriting.
When that time comes, it will be necessary to more look at SunOS6
as a solution.
On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 11:40:51PM +1000, James C. McPherson wrote:
It is my expectation (and note that I'm not on the zfs team just an
interested bystander) that shortly after zfs is integrated, it should
appear under CDDL on opensolaris.org. I have no say in the matter,
Correct.
and the
Keith On Mon, Aug 01, 2005 at 05:13:55PM +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
The reason why nothing with enough significance happened so far, is
that Sun people did stop any attempt to start with significant work.
Keith How, mind control? Please send me privately any messages you've
Keith received
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
For ksh, we could under the current rules do a variety of things:
- Add ksh93 as /usr/bin/ksh93 - simple, easy, no problems, and leave
both ksh88 and ksh93 in Solaris, with only ksh93 in OpenSolaris.
- Announce at least a year before the next minor release that we
11 matches
Mail list logo
