[osol-discuss] Re: RE: PlatinGUI for SAP on Solaris x86

2006-04-03 Thread Edmund Macaso
hey, thanks for the quick reply. was surprised to run into that error because i thought it was 100% java and it's supposed to be portable and OS independent. I am going to shift to using SAP ITS (web). just talked to our Sys Admin/BASIS guy here and he will set it up. thanks again, edmund

RE: [osol-discuss] Re: RE: PlatinGUI for SAP on Solaris x86

2006-04-03 Thread Döhr, Markus ICC-H
> hehe... this reminds me of HP Openview ICM Tool which is 100% > Java but requires Windows, Tivoli Client and Desktop which > both are 100% Java but don't run unless your OS is supported... Yes... It's a BadThing(TM)... But there are also good news: snnadm> file `which disp+work` /usr/sap/SNN

[osol-discuss] OpenSolaris Community Newsletter ---- March 2006

2006-04-03 Thread Linda Bernal
Here is an update on OpenSolaris for the month of March, and thanks to the following contributors: Bonnie Corwin, Nenad Cimerman, Detlef Drewanz, Patrick Finch, Jim Grisanzio, Katarina Machalkova, Sridhar Muppalla, Laura Ramsey, Michelle Olson, Sue Weber. http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project

[osol-discuss] Re: RE: PlatinGUI for SAP on Solaris x86

2006-04-03 Thread Stefan Parvu
hehe... this reminds me of HP Openview ICM Tool which is 100% Java but requires Windows, Tivoli Client and Desktop which both are 100% Java but don't run unless your OS is supported... stefan This message posted from opensolaris.org ___ opensolaris

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Why LSB filesystem layout is bad,part 1 ...

2006-04-03 Thread Erast Benson
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 10:47 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 16:32 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > > Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > > > There is more than disliking it. > > > > > > > > > > If e.g. 'rsh' is

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Slowaris vs. Solaris

2006-04-03 Thread Alan Coopersmith
Mika Borner wrote: I'm not using X that much anymore in the sense of opening remote applications. But if you're displaying anything locally you're still using X. Remote display is free - don't use it if you don't want to, but it doesn't hurt to have the option. -- -Alan Coopersmith-

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: uncluttering df output

2006-04-03 Thread Richard L. Hamilton
How are you going to confuse them by having a configurable defaults file supress certain output (unless command line options effectively override it), yet not confuse them by sprinkling "ignore" onto mnttab entries? I'm not talking about changing the format, so much as the selection of entries.

Re: [osol-discuss] uncluttering df output

2006-04-03 Thread Peter Tribble
On Mon, 2006-04-03 at 03:52, Roland Mainz wrote: > Peter Tribble wrote: > > One way I would imagine approaching this would be to allow multiple > > fstypes to be > > specified with -F. This way, I could easily specify what I wanted to > > monitor, > > rather than trying to filter out the stuff I do

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: uncluttering df output

2006-04-03 Thread Peter Tribble
> One additional capability that would help minimize further configuration > changes would be if one could request that entries with a capacity of 0 > be suppressed by default - that takes care of most of the uninteresting > stuff other than lofs entries all at once, probably new ones as well as >

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Slowaris vs. Solaris

2006-04-03 Thread Mika Borner
>>> gheet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/03/06 4:04 pm >>> > Let hope I am not taking you out of context on this quote, go talk to >any Linux desktop guys and asked them to dump the X Window System, you >will get some funny looks :). The whole of Linux desktop such as GNOME >or KDE are built on top of

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Slowaris vs. Solaris

2006-04-03 Thread gheet
Mika Borner wrote: Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/31/06 2:31 pm >>> To make Solaris more attractive compared to Linux (et al.) we should dump the whole X-Window System. Let hope I am not taking you out of context on this quote, go talk to any Linux desktop guys and asked them to

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Slowaris vs. Solaris

2006-04-03 Thread Bill Rushmore
On Mon, 3 Apr 2006, David Powell wrote: > Anything in particular? There's probably not a lot we can do if > they're the SMC technology itself, but if they're related to the > underlying Solaris configuration someone might be able to at least > give you some starting points. Most of things

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Why LSB filesystem layout is bad,part 1 ...

2006-04-03 Thread Joerg Schilling
Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Sun, 2006-04-02 at 16:32 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote: > > Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > > > > > There is more than disliking it. > > > > > > > > If e.g. 'rsh' is linked to 'ssh', people do not get what they expect. > > > > > > this is d

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Slowaris vs. Solaris

2006-04-03 Thread David Powell
On Thu, Mar 30, 2006 at 04:24:39PM -0500, Bill Rushmore wrote: > On Thu, 30 Mar 2006, David Powell wrote: > > > Though not SMC, the Visual Panels project is attempting to do just > > that. (Actually, if services are all you're interested in, it > > already does do that and is attempting to