[...]
far.. My list: packaging, installation, GNU userland
alongside
Solaris classic userland, and laptop support (see
what
I mean that there are already people working on these
things?).
At least you didn't use the pejorative marketing term legacy.
Hopefully, if different userlands were
Good. He sounded like some ksh zealot.
Oh, I am. The _creators_ of all other shells are heretics that should have
been burned at the stake (metaphorically speaking). But the poor misguided
fools who prefer other shells...if it doesn't get in my way any to have them
on the system, under names
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 10:46:30AM +0200, Frank van
der Linden wrote:
To quote the news.com article:
Basic operations, such as the ls command to see
a listing of files in
a directory, behave differently in Solaris
colorls here we come!
You may continue to be snarky if ls -h
On Fri, 11 May 2007, Ian Murdock wrote:
As promised:
Maybe that's a part of being in marketing, you've only posted a few
messages to this list, and already you're making promises!g
First of all, as Marc said, Project Indiana is more of a concept than
anything else.
So far, I haven't
Wakes the Charlie Kaufmann in me. (Artem takes out
the dusty Underwood, replaces
the ribbon...)
White background. Two men enter the view:
a young, stylish man with a smile on his face,
an older man with orange crumbs in his beard.
YOUNG MAN
Hi, I'm a Mac.
It never stops to amaze me to hear things like this,
i've been a unix
admin for a long time too, but at least I wouldn't
have said something as
ridiculous as that.
For the record, i've written enture programs in bash,
and wouldn't look back.
Then I really have to question your UNIX
Firstly, let me state that upfront that I'm not sure
that I have much
sympathy for the familiarity problem; one problem
for the non-Linux
world is that a large proportion of free software
developers have been
ignorant of the fact that there are systems that
aren't Linux and work
in
colorls is one of the most ugly thjings I know from
Linux...
You mean hijinks? (:-)
Of course it is. The thing is useless for any serious / productive work since
it's very hard to read and the color choice is very poor.
In other words, colorls is *extremely* annoying. Hence my joke about that
http://solaris.reys.net/english/2006/09/root_shell_in_
solaris_10
Yes Sir, thank you for the link, but I've known about this ever since it's been
implemented.
However, what I don't know, and that's the dangerous part, is what else I could
break if I change the root's SHELL.
Which is why
I think that the best way to do that is just run
the
commands and make
sure they fail appropriately when they can't be
run
and have that
error reported back.,
If not, you will have two implementations of
essentially the same access
mechanism and they are bound to drift out of
It might be a pipe dream, but can people on this list
reach a consensus
on a quoting style?
I find the mixture of correct (spot my bias!) and
top-posting very hard
to follow.
The general consensus on technical Usenet groups is
not to top post and
the reasons have been well debated,
To my mind, the question would be does anything non-interactive use
root's shell from the passwd database? If not, I don't see that it would
matter, unless someone is depending on /.profile entries or the like, which
is their problem.
But offhand, I don't know the answer to that question; it
Then add an option to pfexec that only checks if something should be
permitted, returns zero/non-zero, and writes not a message, but
a stable code that could be expanded to a message (so as to leave
localization up to whatever reads that code) to its stdout. That would
take care of things by
Dude
Can we please drop the dude part? Thank you kindly in advance.
Oh, you mean I shouldn't compile any of my own code
on my own
system cause I might have to rm -rf it instead of
builiding a package
every time. I'm really sure the new users we are
catering too
are just *gonna* love
However, what I don't know, and that's the dangerous part, is what
else I could break if I change the root's SHELL.
Nothing; I have run with different root shells on many systems
and nothing ever broke (tcsh which is so different from /sbin/sh that
breakage would certainly have happened)
Which
To my mind, the question would be does anything non-interactive use
root's shell from the passwd database? If not, I don't see that it would
matter, unless someone is depending on /.profile entries or the like, which
is their problem.
Nothing that I ever came across.
But remote shells will
On 5/12/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First of all, as Marc said, Project Indiana is more of a concept than
anything else.
So far, I haven't heard anything from either of you that has much
substance to it. I mean, no disrespect, but it seemed more like mumbling
in your hand...
Solaris with more of a GNU userland, as either a separate distro
or as a branded zone, might, as long as all libs, devs, and config files
remained the same as on plain Solaris (so that anything developed
in the Linux-friendly environment would Just Work in a plain Solaris
environment) ease
On 5/12/07, Ian Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/12/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First of all, as Marc said, Project Indiana is more of a concept than
anything else.
So far, I haven't heard anything from either of you that has much
substance to it. I mean, no disrespect,
On 5/10/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
All that needs to happen is for those developers to start using Solaris as the
main development platform. Again.
Oh, well, that sounds SIMPLE!
-ian
--
Ian Murdock
650-331-9324
http://ianmurdock.com/
Don't look back--something might be gaining
On 5/10/07, Frank Van Der Linden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter C. Norton wrote:
You may continue to be snarky if ls -h became a common solaris
invocation, but I doubt your users would be upset at no longer having
to multiply by 2 to get K, and to get the size rounded to MB, GB,
etc.
I'm
snip
that we're arguing that we must preserve non-human-readability because
that's just the way we do things kinda highlights a larger point...)
Thanks be to God for noting that.
Dennis Clarke
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Ian Murdock wrote:
As I'll say till I'm blue in the face, I'm as obsessed with
compatibility as anyone here. But I have to ask: What exactly
would break if -h *were* the default behavior? Point is: There's a big
difference between breaking the ABI of the C library and changing the
output of a
There was one bit of news from CommunityOne (i.e. the JavaOne pre-show)
that I thought might have interesting consequences for the OpenSolaris
community. That was the proposal to pay open source developers for
their work. That doesn't seem like a bad idea and I am wondering how
such a thing
On 5/10/07, John Martinez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny you should mention this, but I generally feel that way when I
ssh into the few Linux boxes I administer. Solaris is much more
intuitive for me. But maybe I'm becoming that old fogey I swore I'd
never become...
This is ultimately why I
On 5/12/07, ken mays [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
- Sun is not anti-Linux, and Sun is not against the
Linux community. Sun competes in the commercial
operating systems market against multiple companies
that distribute Linux operating systems. The two are
not inconsistent. Some of the first non SunOS
On 5/10/07, James C. McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Now, as to what Ian is proposing - we'll have to wait and see.
I've heard that he had a really really hectic time at JavaOne
so it could be a little while.
You have no idea.. :-) But I'm here now, as you've probably noticed..
-ian
--
Ian
Ian Murdock wrote:
On 5/10/07, James C. McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
frank wang wrote:
Sun will keep two universes, 1 is Linux alike, the other Solaris
alike. User can just pick what they like or are familiar with. But it
can't replace the efforts to scale the train coverage on
It might be a pipe dream, but can people on this list reach a consensus
on a quoting style?
I find the mixture of correct (spot my bias!) and top-posting very hard
to follow.
Agreed.
The general consensus on technical Usenet groups is not to top post and
the reasons have been well
Yeah, some people read into that too much. Being a better Linux than Linux
to me means Beating Linux at its own game, which just means beating Red Hat
and Novell and Ubuntu. I see that some people took the first phrase a certain
way, so maybe beating Linux at its own game is a better way to
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:44:26AM -0400, Bill Rushmore wrote:
There was one bit of news from CommunityOne (i.e. the JavaOne pre-show) that
I thought might have interesting consequences for the OpenSolaris community.
That was the proposal to pay open source developers for their work.
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 03:49:52AM -0700, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
Firstly, let me state that upfront that I'm not sure
that I have much
sympathy for the familiarity problem; one problem
for the non-Linux
world is that a large proportion of free software
developers have been
On 5/12/07, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 03:49:52AM -0700, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
Having said that, of course Sun want to grow their
mindshare and install
base and breaking down some barriers is part of that.
What worries me is that if Indiana is
The correct way to fix this whole situation is for
Linux developers to migrate to Solaris, and forget
about Linux. That would fix all these compilation
issues.
OOh, I like this one. Forget gcc compatibility. Kill
Sun Studio gcc extension support now! Just make that
hoard of gcc extension
Did you set up those 500 DB servers?
Yeah, I finally finished them this morning!
You mean, you hacked them all up together,
installing one by one from DVD and modifying each
and every system manually? And the fact that the
work you did is basically crap and you should be
fired for it,
People get paid every day to develop free software. Google and Mozilla pay
Firefox developers, Red Hat and Novell pay Linux app developers. Many of these
developers worked for free previously and were pulled into the corporate fold
to continue or expand upon their work.
So I don't think
As a long-time Linux user (since RedHat 4.2) and
former Sun fan (with a
newly piqued interest in all the things Sun is
currently doing), I think
you have to lose the fear. I highly doubt anyone at
Sun would be so
stupid as to enforce a change in the userland
experience for Solaris
Point is: there isn't going to be One Answer,
because we as a community
are not doing just One Thing with our operating
system of choice. This
is a Good Thing: it reflects the growth -- and
growing diversity -- of
our community. This diversity is our vitality as a
community, and we
On 12/05/07, Ian Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 5/11/07, Chung Hang Christopher Chan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Anyway. What bothers me is not that there will
apparently be an effort
to make the transition from Linux easier, providing
the features that a
Linux user is used to,
That is an interesting opinion to have considering that almost every product
you've ever used was built to make someone money :)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Sat, 12 May 2007, Ian Murdock wrote:
On 5/12/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
First of all, as Marc said, Project Indiana is more of a concept than
anything else.
So far, I haven't heard anything from either of you that has much
substance to it. I mean, no disrespect, but it
It's painfully obvious that OpenSolaris and Solaris on x86 platforms lack
drivers of all sorts. It also lacks an easy way to install software reliably.
If making OpenSolaris/Solaris more like Linux can resolve both these problems
then I'm all for it. If the Linux-like statement is just a
On 12/05/07, Michael Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's painfully obvious that OpenSolaris and Solaris on x86 platforms lack
drivers of all sorts.
I don't think that is an accurate statement. It all depends on the
context in which you make it.
For example, I have at least three systems that I
Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan, thank you for staring this kind of discussion!
Yes, Project Indiana refers to a binary distro of OpenSolaris
that Sun plans to build in the OpenSolaris community in full
community view, and with full community participation.. I.e.,
this is not
UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh crappity, Solaris users aren't all old beards. At least I'm not THAT
old! (:-)
In fact, I'm probably no older than a contemporary Linux user. I've just used
Solaris since I was a kid! It was the first UNIX I ever used, and I grew up
with it. Did a
Bill Rushmore wrote:
There was one bit of news from CommunityOne (i.e. the JavaOne
pre-show) that I thought might have interesting consequences for the
OpenSolaris community. That was the proposal to pay open source
developers for their work. That doesn't seem like a bad idea and I am
Oh crappity, Solaris users aren't all old beards.
My bad, I guess I'm just looking at the world through too small a hole.
Here in Menlo Park 17 we all wear beards, so I just assumed... But don't
tell me not all Mac users are young and hip, and not all Windows users
look like Steve Ballmer.
Ian Murdock wrote:
On 5/10/07, John Martinez [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Funny you should mention this, but I generally feel that way when I
ssh into the few Linux boxes I administer. Solaris is much more
intuitive for me. But maybe I'm becoming that old fogey I swore I'd
never become...
This
Martin Bochnig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I strictly oppose that idea, because nobody can (or at least will) afford to
pay all the spare time developer enthusiasts.
If that cost was to be paid by SUNW (that is, in addition, to what they
already do finance), where should Sun take it from,
People get paid every day to develop free software. Google and
Mozilla pay Firefox developers, Re d Hat and Novell pay Linux app
developers. Many of these developers worked for free previously and
were pulled into the corporate fold to continue or expand upon their
work.
It's strange that you
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 12:35:19PM -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
And usually with Linux. However, Even though I prefer
tcsh, I don't think it's light-years ahead of bash.
I've seen arguments on both sides.
Did you read `tcsh`s man page?
Last time I used tcsh there was no way to do redirection
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 12:35:19PM -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
And usually with Linux. However, Even though I prefer
tcsh, I don't think it's light-years ahead of bash.
I've seen arguments on both sides.
=20
Did you read `tcsh`s man page?
Last time I used tcsh there was no way to do
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:05:38AM -0400, Ian Murdock wrote:
On 5/10/07, Frank Van Der Linden [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter C. Norton wrote:
You may continue to be snarky if ls -h became a common solaris
invocation, but I doubt your users would be upset at no longer having
to
On Sat, May 12, 2007 at 09:50:21AM -0400, Ian Murdock wrote:
On 5/10/07, Christopher Frost [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it too much to ask for the community 'behind' the future operating
system to be informed of such decisions? Even proposals??
And that's exactly what you're
Two things:
Improvement can only take place with change or supplementation. If something
does not improve, it will be replaced by superior alternatives. Sun wants
Solaris to be successful, so change (or supplementation) must occur. If POSIX
told you to hang yourself, you wouldn't do it,
MC wrote:
Two things:
Can you retain some context please, you message make less sense in
isolation.
Ian
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Thommy M. Malmström wrote:
The general consensus on technical Usenet groups is not to top post and
the reasons have been well debated,
Yeah, but this is a mailing list/web forum and not a Usenet news group. There
is no nntp feed available to my knowledge. We who prefer things
On 5/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 10, 2007 at 12:35:19PM -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
And usually with Linux. However, Even though I prefer
tcsh, I don't think it's light-years ahead of bash.
I've seen arguments on both sides.
=20
Did you read `tcsh`s man
On 5/12/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
People get paid every day to develop free software. Google and
Mozilla pay Firefox developers, Re d Hat and Novell pay Linux app
developers. Many of these developers worked for free previously and
were pulled into the corporate fold to
On 5/10/07, Dick Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 10/05/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And what's the default? Oh yeah that shell
that's still stuck in
the first century?
I don't see anything wrong with `exec tcsh -l`. That's only in root's case
anyway, and hopefully not
Ian == Ian Murdock [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
fvdl I'm not sure what you mean here. Are you talking about making -h the
fvdl default? I doubt that would be standards compliant..
[...]
Ian What exactly would break if -h *were* the default behavior?
[...]
Ian (unless there's a whole collection of
I top because that's my only option for gmail mobile web edition.
On 5/12/07, Ian Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Thommy M. Malmström wrote:
The general consensus on technical Usenet groups is not to top post and
the reasons have been well debated,
Yeah, but this is a mailing list/web
no, the non-topposting side has invariably yelled the topposters down
without listening, this is not the same as consensus. in fact, one
quotation style fits all does more harm than good. I've got a novel
idea, make it such that the person doing the replying can choose their
own format.
On
My list: packaging, installation, GNU userland alongside
Solaris classic userland, and laptop support
Ian, your list sounds a lot like what I would call usability issues. If you
feel
like you have to use the term familiarity to sell the concept to
Sun management, then you have my sympathy and
Shawn Walker wrote:
As long as there is a way for users to get a fully standards-compliant
environment when they need / want it, I'm happy. Solaris' strict
standards compliance is one of the things I liked about it most. I
started using GNU/Linux in 1996, and didn't start using Solaris until
On 5/12/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
As long as there is a way for users to get a fully standards-compliant
environment when they need / want it, I'm happy. Solaris' strict
standards compliance is one of the things I liked about it most. I
started using
On 5/12/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
As long as there is a way for users to get a fully standards-compliant
environment when they need / want it, I'm happy. Solaris' strict
standards compliance is one of the things I liked about it most. I
started using
67 matches
Mail list logo
