BTW, SDM worked OK on my SuSE 10.2; it appeared that
it is the nv_70 version of SDM that's having
problems.
However, I am able to use SDM in nv_70 to download nv_71 iso's. Have no idea
what is/was going, just to make a note.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Sun refusing to make noise doesn't help either. Considering that almost
every SPARC machine ships with ATI gpus inside, if they really meant it,
they would have removed it - and launch a campaign of pulling AMD's name
through the mud for poor co-operation with a partner.
I'm not sure that is
So it would seem:
http://lwn.net/Articles/248227/
If they actually follow through on this, I'd buy a
new ATi card in a heartbeat.
Why? Nvidia has great support for Solaris. They've done everything *just
right*, including packaging. I checked their stuff and they really *paid
attention to
cdrw is a strange program on Solaris. It has been
started as CD only
program around 2002 - 4 years after cdrecord did
introduce DVD writing support.
At the time cdrw was added to Solaris, they also
added mkisofs but not cdrecord
although cdecord and mkisofs are in the same source
As a by-product of this thread, I would like to say
that I miss a howto repository (as there is in Linux)
or a knowledge base (as Microsoft offers for their
products) for such common knowledge that one must
become aware of before one can fully appreciate the
beauty of OpenSolaris. Sometimes
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's like Adobe (née MacroMedia) flashplayer vs Acroread for x86[1].
Casper
[1] Perhaps the mention of Acroread for x86 should be an amendment to
Godwin's law.
Please toss GPL (at least on the OpenSolaris list;-) in that amendment
also.g
--
I was getting 1.8meg from Hilo on it today...
Tim
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
It's reasonable to expect problems in one release that aren't there in the next
one, I've been using unstable builds as my primary desktop for a very long time
without much trouble. Usually what I do is use another local machine as a
stable platform use 'screen' to that, or restrict certain
Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So this is sketched out roughly, but no coding has started on this yet
(and, given my commitments changed, isn't going to start by myself any
time soon either).
Cool but in regards to how the FAT is read, that is, dumping the whole
thing in
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So this is sketched out roughly, but no coding has started on this yet
(and, given my commitments changed, isn't going to start by myself any
time soon either).
Cool but in regards to how the FAT is read,
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 12:08 +0200, Joerg Schilling wrote:
Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So this is sketched out roughly, but no coding has started on this
yet
(and, given my commitments changed, isn't going to start by myself
any
time soon either).
Cool but in
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 01:02 -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
So it would seem:
http://lwn.net/Articles/248227/
If they actually follow through on this, I'd buy a
new ATi card in a heartbeat.
Why? Nvidia has great support for Solaris. They've done everything
*just right*, including
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 09:20 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sun refusing to make noise doesn't help either. Considering that
almost
every SPARC machine ships with ATI gpus inside, if they really meant
it,
they would have removed it - and launch a campaign of pulling AMD's
name
through the
AMD still owns ATI; if AMD management is so incompetant to be unable to
put their foot down and actually establish who is boss, who own's who,
then I think they need to give up, go home and take up an interest in
knitting.
I don't think management chains actually have that much control over
I've gone 1 step further; boycott all AMD products -
AMD now owns ATI;
if management at AMD don't have the melons to lay
down the law then
maybe a job working for the womens spinners and
weavers association is
more up their alley.
I've got nothing against AMD. The Opterons in my servers
i am new to opensolaris discussions/community. I am working on the 652094 bug
and do not know which is the relevant community. Please help.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
On 9/6/07, Neerhaj N Joshi [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
i am new to opensolaris discussions/community. I am working on the 652094 bug
and do not know which is the relevant community. Please help.
6452094?
For any bug in ONNV, I believe osol-code is the appropriate forum.
-Shiv
Neerhaj N Joshi stated:
i am new to opensolaris discussions/community. I am working on the 652094 bug
and do not know which is the relevant community. Please help.
Which bug ? 652094 doesn't exist. Seems you've left out a digit there.
Regards,
--
Sean.
.
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 13:51 +0200, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
AMD still owns ATI; if AMD management is so incompetant to be unable
to
put their foot down and actually establish who is boss, who own's
who,
then I think they need to give up, go home and take up an interest in
knitting.
I
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 05:02 -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
I've gone 1 step further; boycott all AMD products -
AMD now owns ATI;
if management at AMD don't have the melons to lay
down the law then
maybe a job working for the womens spinners and
weavers association is
more up their alley.
Actually (Open)Solaris has documentation, including
HOWTOs, which is among the best and finest in the
industry:
http://docs.sun.com/
Yes, of course, Sun documentation is very good and I use it very often. But I
mean maybe some kind of Wiki, where people who get to know something
Why don't you just use a recent cdrecord version?
I did it. Got 2.01.01a35 sources from berlios site and cdrecord burned my 6.8GB
image perfectly to the disk. Thanks for pointing me to it.
cdrecord includes full support for DVD+R/DL
(including automated and manual
layer breask setup -
i apologize for the typing error. Its 6452094.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 06/09/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So it would seem:
http://lwn.net/Articles/248227/
If they actually follow through on this, I'd buy a
new ATi card in a heartbeat.
Why? Nvidia has great support for Solaris. They've done everything *just
right*, including packaging. I
Darn, too bad :( the speed is definitely not fantastic (3.8mb/s read vs
15-20mb/s in Linux for a usb flash stick) + the mem usage...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
W. Wayne Liauh writes:
Ideally a serious Solaris-wannabe should have at least three Solaris
slices: A stable release (Solaris 10, updated), a less unstable
release (SXDE, or an SXCE build that you have felt comfortable
with), and a supposedly unstable release (most recent SXCE build).
All
* If I have a choice between two pieces of hardware that both have
really good performance, and roughly the same price, but one has open
specifications, and one does not, I'm going to go with the one that
has open specifications. That's why.
Do we expect the specs to be both open and complete?
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Lurie wrote:
Darn, too bad :( the speed is definitely not fantastic (3.8mb/s read vs
15-20mb/s in Linux for a usb flash stick) + the mem usage...
The change does nothing for the (non-)speed, unfortunately.
It does:
- enable access to 2kB secsize media (like video
Yes, of course, Sun documentation is very good and I
use it very often. But I mean maybe some kind of
Wiki, where people who get to know something
remarkable about Solaris (e.g. how you burn a DVD+R
DL -- and that is not something that comes with SXCE
out of the box) can write it there so
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Sun refusing to make noise doesn't help either.
I've been staying out of this discussion since I know far too much
for my own health, but since I'm tired of the bashing, I'll just
point out that just because you haven't seen Sun do anything doesn't
mean Sun's done nothing.
Douglas Atique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However I found the following advantages to it, which maybe would be of
interest to you as maintainer of cdrecord:
1. cdrw shows the progress of the recording session with a percent amount
that lets the user know whether it is close to the end or
Lurie [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Darn, too bad :( the speed is definitely not fantastic (3.8mb/s read vs
15-20mb/s in Linux for a usb flash stick) + the mem usage...
Do not expect to see more than 12 MB/s on Solaris.
Unless I missed a software update information, Solaris does not yet support
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Douglas Atique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However I found the following advantages to it, which maybe would be of
interest to you as maintainer of cdrecord:
1. cdrw shows the progress of the recording session with a percent amount
On 06/09/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
* If I have a choice between two pieces of hardware that both have
really good performance, and roughly the same price, but one has open
specifications, and one does not, I'm going to go with the one that
has open specifications. That's
I'd be hesitant to use ad-hoc sources of information
on the Internet unless I knew that information came
from an authoritative source, such as from the
engineer that worked on the product, or from someone
that is a proven expert in the field. That presents a
catch-22, because in order for me
I was getting 1.8meg from Hilo on it today...
Tim
Yes, I was able to get up to 2.8 meg (350 KB/s) last night on both accounts
(Solaris and Solaris Express).
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Douglas Atique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However I found the following advantages to it, which maybe would be of
interest to you as maintainer of cdrecord:
1. cdrw shows the progress of
But it doesn't have to be a sun supported wiki -
ANYBODY can do it.
Completely agreed. My point in fact is that I would like to go to
opensolaris.org and see a link there saying e.g. Resources or How to...
that would link to a page with links to genunix.org/wiki (that I have just
learned,
I try to keep links to external sources of info in the FAQ. Also, I
noticed that if you Google for OpenSolaris FAQ, the FAQ I am working
on comes up third on the list. Also, OpenSolaris HOWTOs search
brings up an email that talks about the genunix howtos page.
We are still figuring it out...
Neerhaj N Joshi wrote:
i apologize for the typing error. Its 6452094.
That's a bash bug (would have helped if you said that instead of
making us look it up) - so either shell-discuss or sfwnv-discuss
would be the places I'd consider to ask about it.
--
-Alan Coopersmith-
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Douglas Atique [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However I found the following advantages to it, which maybe would be of
interest to you as
On 6 Sep 2007, at 09:16, UNIX admin wrote:
The way I see it, Sun employs some really awesome engineers,
certainly among the best and brightest in the industry.
Gee thanks. You say the kindest things.
The downside is that these engineers seem to often suffer from the
not invented here
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Actually, you shipped some rebranded 7500 Radeons under another name as
well.
Whoopee doo...those are issolated cases.
--
Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:
* If I have a choice between two pieces of hardware that both have
really good performance, and roughly the same price, but one has open
specifications, and one does not, I'm going to go with the one that
has open specifications. That's why.
Nvidia has
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you did tell me this in February 1996, you had a chance
I am giving people long term stability. It is too late now.
How does showing the progress of the CD write a matter of stability?
Are you implying that the output of the program can never
Phil Harman [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
p.s. maybe Joerg would consider making cdrw a link to cdrecord, and
preserve compatibility for the sake of existing scripts? If we froze
the cdrw capabilities, perhaps cdrw could then die with dignity of
natural causes?
cdrecord is free software.
Phil Harman writes:
On 6 Sep 2007, at 09:16, UNIX admin wrote:
It's not just cdrecord versus cdrw. You can clearly see the NIH
syndrome in packaging and Caiman projects too. Dave Miner did some
truly awesome work, but not once did anybody think to stop and
study how other UNIX
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you did tell me this in February 1996, you had a chance
I am giving people long term stability. It is too late now.
How does showing the progress of the CD write a matter of stability?
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Surely a 2.x version of cdrecord could break such stability in favour
of a better user experience?
2.0 has been published 5 years ago.
Okay, a major version release greater than the current release - I
wasn't being literal.
Let's suppose then
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Surely a 2.x version of cdrecord could break such stability in favour
of a better user experience?
2.0 has been published 5 years ago.
Okay, a major version release greater than the
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a lot more stability than you get from Solaris (see recent tar -/
discussion).
If you like to have a cdrw emulation for cdrecord, you are invited to write
it.
Right, I wasn't suggesting that you personally do it. So since 3.0
isn't final
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a lot more stability than you get from Solaris (see recent tar
-/
discussion).
If you like to have a cdrw emulation for cdrecord, you
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a lot more stability than you get from Solaris (see recent tar -/
discussion).
If you like to have a cdrw emulation for cdrecord, you are invited to
write it.
Right, I wasn't
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Yeah, and the current situation has worked so well so far.
dribble snip'd
Look, let's just end this conversation on this list, and get back to
OpenSolaris. It's pretty clear that you don't know WTF you're talking
about when it comes to Sun's
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
More twaddle completely unrelated to OpenSolaris.
Can you take this uninformed nonsense somewhere else, a long way form here?
Ian
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 20:13 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Actually, if Sun played it in such a way, Sun would look like the
victim, AMD would look like the irresponsible partner, and the only
one
who would truly come out worse would be AMD - as AMD
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 20:10 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Hmm, interesting, having seen all the weird and crazy crap which money
is dedicated to, you'll think that scraping a few thousand for pcfs
wouldn't be too much of a big request.
Too bad
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 15:36 +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
More twaddle completely unrelated to OpenSolaris.
Can you take this uninformed nonsense somewhere else, a long way form here?
Ian
Or you could ignore it - would that require some maturity?
Matthew
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
On Fri, 2007-09-07 at 15:36 +1200, Ian Collins wrote:
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
More twaddle completely unrelated to OpenSolaris.
Can you take this uninformed nonsense somewhere else, a long way form here?
Ian
Or you could ignore it - would that require some
On 06/09/07, Kaiwai Gardiner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 20:13 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Actually, if Sun played it in such a way, Sun would look like the
victim, AMD would look like the irresponsible partner, and the only
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 10:31 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Actually, you shipped some rebranded 7500 Radeons under another name
as well.
Whoopee doo...those are issolated cases.
But cases where Sun should
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Hmm, interesting, having seen all the weird and crazy crap which money
is dedicated to, you'll think that scraping a few thousand for pcfs
wouldn't be too much of a big request.
Too bad you're not running Sun. It would be so much easier to get
Is there any follow up to this? Is it confirmed you can build OpenSolaris from
the developer edition?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 07:42 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Sun refusing to make noise doesn't help either.
I've been staying out of this discussion since I know far too much
for my own health, but since I'm tired of the bashing, I'll just
point out that just because
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 15:09 +0100, Frank Hofmann wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
[ ... ]
Cool but in regards to how the FAT is read, that is, dumping the
whole
thing in memory rather than a gradual read - is that going to be a
addressed soon?
I'm not aware of any
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 06/09/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is a lot more stability than you get from Solaris (see recent
tar -/
discussion).
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Evan Christopher Henry wrote:
Is there any follow up to this? Is it confirmed you can build
OpenSolaris from the developer edition?
Yes. You'll need to download it seperatly though.
The SunStudio is included on the DVD.
The first cut of the new installer is there, for
On 05/09/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, 5 Sep 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:
So it would seem:
http://lwn.net/Articles/248227/
If they actually follow through on this, I'd buy a new ATi card in a
heartbeat.
No offense to Intel for the great stuff they've done, but they
On Thu, 2007-09-06 at 10:31 -0700, Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Actually, you shipped some rebranded 7500 Radeons under another name as
well.
Whoopee doo...those are issolated cases.
But cases where Sun should have used Nvidia instead.
Matthew
On Fri, 7 Sep 2007, Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Actually, if Sun played it in such a way, Sun would look like the
victim, AMD would look like the irresponsible partner, and the only one
who would truly come out worse would be AMD - as AMD partners would
question the basis of any relationship with
70 matches
Mail list logo
