Alfred Monticello wrote:
The one in /opt/sfw can produce 64bit code but is a 32bit binary.
What's wrong with that?
I can't see any reason for wanting a 64 bit compiler binary, unless you
have a file which takes more the 4GB or RAM to compile..
Ian
john kroll [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Did sun have a release which belenix, martux mbe, nexentaos,and schillix
built from or were they partners before project nevada??
No, it was SchilliX that introduced the needed infrastructure to allow
to create a fullly redistributable _and_ working
Hi,
I am a new to dtrace and have a little question I am hoping you could clear up.
When I run the following I command I get the ouput of the file which is being
stat by ftsat64, when I quantize this what reference is the Value field using
dtrace -n syscall::fstat64:entry'[EMAIL
I'm still trying to figure out how to ask questions in this forum. Have you
switched to opensolaris?? One of the things which turned me off to evaluating
the build was the loss of control over root filesystem. How much room is in
root for /opt or /var to grow. Its seems now the option to run
Hello Allan,
Thursday, August 21, 2008, 11:15:02 AM, you wrote:
A Hi,
A I am a new to dtrace and have a little question I am hoping you could clear
up.
A When I run the following I command I get the ouput of the file
A which is being stat by ftsat64, when I quantize this what reference is the
Alfred Monticello writes:
The one in /opt/sfw can produce 64bit code but is a 32bit binary. I couldn't
get a later version to compile, or if I did, it complained about not being
able to produce 64bit code even though the binary was 64bit.
The old /opt/sfw path is the Companion CD. If you're
john kroll writes:
I'm still trying to figure out how to ask questions in this forum. Have you
switched to opensolaris?? One of the things which turned me off to evaluating
the build was the loss of control over root filesystem. How much room is in
root for /opt or /var to grow. Its seems
Matt Harrison wrote:
I probably should have mentioned, I'm running SXCE (snv_95).
Regarding the question in the Subject line, my snv_95 has
/usr/include/math.h from the package SUNWlibm
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
I'm still trying to figure out how to ask questions in this forum.
There is a whole gaggle of people that share your feelings.
I'm one of them and I have been doing this since the Open Solaris
idea was tossed around and I still don't know what is going on with
the maillists.
I'm being quite
Folks,
I have the answer of what I was looking for thanks to Clive King, It was a wood
for the tree's moment so thanks for all the replies.
Allan
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Eddy Diaz wrote:
I need to know to the code or password of maintenance administrator since the
install program asks for me and not it encounter by no side. Thanks
Try with Ni55eH0lt
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
If you are installing opensolaris from a cd onto an x86 system the default user
login is set to jack and the password opensolaris will allow you to use the
su command as root from the live-cd. Alternatively, you can set your own
password for root (ie superuser) for use later on the
On Wed, 20 Aug 2008 14:58:32 -0400
Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
John wrote:
Ken,
That is pretty much my impression as well, that even SXCE is a walking
dead man.
I am okay with the SXDE/SXCE branches getting pruned as long as Sun
provides a method to live
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:59:24 +1200
Ian Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alfred Monticello wrote:
The one in /opt/sfw can produce 64bit code but is a 32bit binary.
What's wrong with that?
I can't see any reason for wanting a 64 bit compiler binary, unless you
have a file which takes more
Hi,
I'm looking for the legal process address in sun4v for both 32 bit and 64 bit
modes.
The 2nd edition of the solaris internals book (section 9.2.2, figure 9.4) has
the figures for sun4u and before.
These are listed as 0x0001 - 0xFFBEC000 for 32 bit mode, and
0x1. -
On Sun, 3 Aug 2008, Dennis Clarke wrote:
so .. pull the power ?
That's one option.
Another would be to post in the zfs-discuss list where it is more likely
to get a response from somone working on zfs.
--
Alan DuBoff - Solaris x86 IHV/OEM Group
Mike Meyer wrote:
On Thu, 21 Aug 2008 18:59:24 +1200
Ian Collins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alfred Monticello wrote:
The one in /opt/sfw can produce 64bit code but is a 32bit binary.
What's wrong with that?
I can't see any reason for wanting a 64 bit compiler binary,
3 quick questions, 1, does solaris 10 still support software raid-5 (not
raid-z). 2, can you still do this:
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/816-4520/6manpiell?a=view . 3, can you stick a
zfs pool on a software raid-5 array?
Thanks,
Micah
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Micah Leier wrote:
3 quick questions, 1, does solaris 10 still support software raid-5 (not
raid-z). 2, can you still do this:
http://docs.sun.com/app/docs/doc/816-4520/6manpiell?a=view . 3, can you stick
a zfs pool on a software raid-5 array?
Wrong place to ask, but seeing as the
19 matches
Mail list logo
