On Jan 29, 2010, at 1:15 AM, James C. Cotillier wrote:
> The main opensolaris download page advises two things: that SXCE will no
> longer be available past January 2010, but also that, "To build OpenSolaris
> from the source, you first need to install a suitable OpenSolaris
> distribution, whi
The main opensolaris download page advises two things: that SXCE will no longer
be available past January 2010, but also that, "To build OpenSolaris from the
source, you first need to install a suitable OpenSolaris distribution, which at
this time is limited to the Solaris Express Community Rele
> > To make a desktop OS work as a data center OS is
> not
> > remotely the best engineering practice. Could you
> > run Solaris 8 on a desktop? Sure. But why? It
> > wasn't practical. Could you use Windows 95 as a
> > server? Probably many did. But why? That wasn't
> > its intended use.
>
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 9:18 PM, Shawn Walker wrote:
> On 01/28/10 09:07 PM, Jason King wrote:
>>
>> I seem to recall the whole point of the project Indiana (now
>> OpenSolaris the distribution) versus SXCE was to have a desktop
>> oriented distribution (with the idea of trying to entice developer
> It appears that this site was left behind on sun's
> servers and was not added to oracle.com like the rest
> of sun's products. I hope it's not a bad sign.
Just think a second why it has always been opensolaris.org and not
sun.com/opensolaris ...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
Anon Y Mous wrote:
SMF is already filled up with so much stuff that at a certain point, it starts
to become overwhelming from a sysadmin persective just to parse through the
output of svcs -a and now the goal is to add even more stuff to it by getting
rid of scripting during package installati
Shawn Walker wrote:
>> - Refactor package names
>
> Coming in the next build or so I believe. Some of this has already been
> done.
Package renaming missed 132 and is trying for 133, but refactoring package
contents won't be until after 2010.03. (Fortunately, it will be easier to
do that once
Shawn Walker wrote:
On 01/28/10 10:50 PM, Anon Y Mous wrote:
With the OpenSolaris distribution, you install a relatively small core
(that is supported), and then you add pieces to that.
U, OpenSolaris might be an improvement over Solaris 10 in some
ways (i.e. pkg image-update being better
SMF is already filled up with so much stuff that at a certain point, it starts
to become overwhelming from a sysadmin persective just to parse through the
output of svcs -a and now the goal is to add even more stuff to it by getting
rid of scripting during package installation and offloading all
I just had to play some more whack-a-mole and kill yet another one of these
unnecessary services:
# svcadm disable avahi-bridge-dsd:default
and what does:
svc:/application/desktop-cache/mime-types-cache:default
do? And why is it running right now on my minimalized headless server that has
X-w
Mike knows all of this I believe, so this is mainly for others:
On 01/28/10 11:11 PM, Mike Gerdts wrote:
In my mind the key things that seem to be missing for it to be able to
take the baton from Solaris 10 are:
...
- The ability to host all of the media required on my own install servers
Pl
Gary Bainbridge wrote:
If I wanted to run a GNU/Linux distribution I would, but apparently the
decision is being made for those who like Solaris, to be made to run another
Linux-type server.
As it has been said /repeatedly/ here, OpenSolaris is NOT a GNU OS clone
- go over to Nexenta and ta
> To make a desktop OS work as a data center OS is not
> remotely the best engineering practice. Could you
> run Solaris 8 on a desktop? Sure. But why? It
> wasn't practical. Could you use Windows 95 as a
> server? Probably many did. But why? That wasn't
> its intended use.
And where is tha
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 10:20 PM, Gary Bainbridge wrote:
> If I wanted to run a GNU/Linux distribution I would, but apparently the
> decision is being made for those who like Solaris, to be made to run another
> Linux-type server.
>
> Seriously, how long (how many years) and how much money is it
> (3) After the installation process is done, only SSH and mail should be
> running.
alanc:
> Done since the Secure by Default project integrated a few years ago.
Yes, but I just had to do the following two commands on an OpenSolaris Indiana
snv_129 server that a client was evaluating:
#svcadm
On 01/28/10 10:50 PM, Anon Y Mous wrote:
With the OpenSolaris distribution, you install a relatively small core
(that is supported), and then you add pieces to that.
U, OpenSolaris might be an improvement over Solaris 10 in some ways (i.e. pkg image-update
being better than live upgrade) b
Anon Y Mous wrote:
> (2) There needs to be an option to install it as a "headless" server on x86
> or on a SPARC Netra with no GNOME, no X-windows, no GUI installed. All that
> should be installed is a command line with SSH and virtual terminals and the
> "screen" utility to switch between diffe
> With the OpenSolaris distribution, you install a relatively small core
> (that is supported), and then you add pieces to that.
U, OpenSolaris might be an improvement over Solaris 10 in some ways (i.e.
pkg image-update being better than live upgrade) but any OS that forces you to
install a
> Why do you think we're designing OpenSolaris as a desktop first?
OpenSolaris is designed as a destkop first because the GUI installer doesn't
even let you assign a static IP address the way that Red Hat Enterprise Linux /
Oracle Unbreakable Linux / CentOS installer does and it forces you to h
+--
| On 2010-01-28 20:20:08, Gary Bainbridge wrote:
|
| I'm probably old school, however, the barrier to adoption is probably right,
but with those installers like RHEL and SuSE have, everything is going
web-based and y
On 01/28/10 10:20 PM, Gary Bainbridge wrote:
Now the OS is going to be retrofitted to make it an enterprise server? With
Solaris you can choose what you want to install. Not so with OpenSolaris. You
get what you're told.
That's actually less true with Solaris 10. If you'll remember, with
If I wanted to run a GNU/Linux distribution I would, but apparently the
decision is being made for those who like Solaris, to be made to run another
Linux-type server.
Seriously, how long (how many years) and how much money is it going to take to
make OpenSolaris a replacement for Solaris 10?
On 29/01/2010, at 4:07 PM, Jason King wrote:
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Glynn Foster
wrote:
On 29/01/2010, at 1:41 PM, Roger Savard wrote:
As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD
(RockSolid)
infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS-SSO,
OpenLdap, Bin
>
> In retrospect, yesterday's webcast reinforced a new
> fully and integrated stack (from disks to apps) for
> Sparc (Solaris)
> and Linux!
>
> I wish Oracle sees OpenSolaris as a server and not
> only a desktop where you develop apps for Solaris!
> Oracle is a big fan of Linux ... mentionned 2
W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris
look and feel, which tends to be blue/silver to
something bright red. It would be just too annoying.
Bright red will do very well in the greater China market. Very very well,
indeed.
Yah, things are a bit red
> I've no luck with that (which I of course tried first)...
don't just look at the name of the boot environment, it's simply counted
upwards and after 129 comes 130 ;)
boot the new BE and run "uname -a" to see which build you're actually running -
I bet it will show snv_131.
--
This message po
On 01/28/10 09:07 PM, Jason King wrote:
I seem to recall the whole point of the project Indiana (now
OpenSolaris the distribution) versus SXCE was to have a desktop
oriented distribution (with the idea of trying to entice developers
from other *nix variants). Hence the prioritization of the grap
> Sun has already been doing that. If you pay for
> support and use the
> support repository, you are using a closed fork.
> Since
> penSolaris-dev and OpenSolaris-support are pretty
> close together
> temporally, this isn't a big deal. You can look at a
> snapshot of the
> snv_111 code and the
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 6:51 PM, Glynn Foster wrote:
>
> On 29/01/2010, at 1:41 PM, Roger Savard wrote:
>
>> As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD (RockSolid)
>> infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS-SSO, OpenLdap, Bind,
>> apache2, CIFS, Postgresql ... I think i
> I realize that OpenSolaris isn't *entirely* separate
> from Solaris, but if Sun intended to have the next
> release of Solaris based on OpenSolaris, then
> millions will have to be spent to get it to that
> point, and many years.
>
> The better option would have been to have the next
> release b
> I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris
> look and feel, which tends to be blue/silver to
> something bright red. It would be just too annoying.
Bright red will do very well in the greater China market. Very very well,
indeed.
Thus, quite contrary to what probably everyone else i
Surely a fundamental part of the premise here is that there has to be
some incentives to get people to join the OpenSolaris community to
build some of the user base necessary to bed in a new release, and
part of that is that the OpenSolaris builds be easy to deploy and have
an initial focus
Well then, if it's the case, OpenSolaris is on the right track. I downloaded
the text-based installer yesterday but did not have the time to work with it
yet, but I will. The closer opensolaris is to the enterprise, the more exposure
and push it' ll have.
Keep up the good work.
--
This messag
On 29/01/2010, at 1:41 PM, Roger Savard wrote:
As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD
(RockSolid) infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS-
SSO, OpenLdap, Bind, apache2, CIFS, Postgresql ... I think it is a
mistake to design OpenSolaris as a desktop first, Sun
As much as I like OpenSolaris, I just migrated my FreeBSD (RockSolid)
infrastructure to opensolaris with ease: Tomcat, CAS-SSO, OpenLdap, Bind,
apache2, CIFS, Postgresql ... I think it is a mistake to design OpenSolaris as
a desktop first, Sun always shine on the server side.
I earned my living
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 03:59:45PM -0800, Anon Y Mous wrote:
> This is actually a good sign:
>
> Oracle puts the spark back in SPARC!!!
>
> h, maybe I should give up on this whole sysadmin gig and become a
> marketing droid?
No :-)
--
Dan.
pgpNaPdJXObUb.pgp
Description: PGP signature
___
This is actually a good sign:
Oracle puts the spark back in SPARC!!!
h, maybe I should give up on this whole sysadmin gig and become a marketing
droid?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-di
> I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris look and feel, which
> tends to be > blue/silver to something bright red. It would be just too
> annoying.
I always thought we should just stick with the gorgeous and elegant 2008.05
branding for all of the OpenSolaris releases. The dark bl
I hope Oracle will not rebrand OpenSolaris / Solaris look and feel, which tends
to be blue/silver to something bright red. It would be just too annoying.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discus
> Links to another server. Not a good sign that they plan on keeping it.
> They will retire the Sun server infrastructure and cut over to their own
> eventually.
> Integration would be a better sign!
If Oracle retires Sun's infrastructure but still keeps the Solaris /
OpenSolaris projects going
>Well, it's a good thing that for marketing purposes, Sun starting calling
>SunOS "Solaris", startin
g with SunOS 5. If they hadn't done that, we'd have to to call Solaris
"OracleOS" now!
No, really, there was a Solaris 1.0.1 (SunOS 4.1.4)
Casper
Gary,
I cannot quite grasp the name "Oracle Solaris" which they called it in the webcasts, when
I've been saying "Sun Solaris" for many, many years.
Statements of ownership in two differing forms. I too cannot accept the
former. personally; having been (and remain) a staunch Sun supporte
I realize that OpenSolaris isn't *entirely* separate from Solaris, but if Sun
intended to have the next release of Solaris based on OpenSolaris, then
millions will have to be spent to get it to that point, and many years.
The better option would have been to have the next release built on SXCE.
As a reminder, *all* Solaris Express Community Edition images will be
removed from the DLC tommorow afternoon. There will be no more
subsequent releases.
Derek
--
Derek Cicero
Program Manager
Solaris Kernel Group, Software Division
___
opensolaris-di
I should have clarified. I was speaking about the way zones are implemented
presently in OpenSolaris. They need to function like Solaris 10. I like zones
and use them frequently.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss ma
> I may be incorrect, but when I watched the webcast
> and they had the graphics displayed showing the
> hardware line and Oracle VM working with Logical
> Domains, etc., they had the x86 hardware. I'll have
> to look again, but they had three blocks for
> operating systems on top which were Solar
Well, it's a good thing that for marketing purposes, Sun starting calling SunOS
"Solaris", starting with SunOS 5. If they hadn't done that, we'd have to to
call Solaris "OracleOS" now!
I haven't called Solaris "Sun Solaris", not even once. That even made less
sense after OpenSolaris was launche
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 20:35:41 +0100, Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/wVw wrote:
>
>>Cyril Plisko wrote:
>>> http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html
>>>
>>> Oh well...
>>>
>>>
>>I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already?
>
>
> It looked at it again, saw "SPARK"; refr
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 21:16:53 +, Andrew Watkins wrote:
>
> Well, I am sure over the next few weeks we will get lots of version
> upgrades:
>
> Oracle Studio 12.2
> Oracle Solaris 10 02/10
> and
> OracleOS 5.10.1
br...@ytclaptop:~$ uname -a
OracleOS YTCLaptop 5.11 onx_133 i86pc i386 i86pc Sol
Well, I am sure over the next few weeks we will get lots of version
upgrades:
Oracle Studio 12.2
Oracle Solaris 10 02/10
and
OracleOS 5.10.1
Andrew
On 28/01/2010 21:02, Sergio Schvezov wrote:
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 22:24 +0800, Norbert P. Copones wrote:
but a link to opensolaris is here
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 22:24 +0800, Norbert P. Copones wrote:
> but a link to opensolaris is here.
>
> http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/solaris/index.htm
You also have Oracle Solaris Studio there :-P
Will the former Sun Studio only work on Solaris in the near future? Or
is this a
Gary Bainbridge wrote:
> Oracle isn't going to put tens or hundreds of millions into OpenSolaris when
> they announed they are going to spend more on Solaris development than Sun.
OpenSolaris isn't a separate OS from Solaris - it's the development branch of
the next release of Solaris. Sun's p
I may be incorrect, but when I watched the webcast and they had the graphics
displayed showing the hardware line and Oracle VM working with Logical Domains,
etc., they had the x86 hardware. I'll have to look again, but they had three
blocks for operating systems on top which were Solaris, Linux
I cannot quite grasp the name "Oracle Solaris" which they called it in the
webcasts, when I've been saying "Sun Solaris" for many, many years.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolar
> On 01/28/10 01:08 PM, Scott Rotondo wrote:
>> Cyril Plisko wrote:
>>> http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh well...
>>>
>>
>> I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already?
>
> Yep, it's been fixed since this morning :)
Could have been worse.
>Cyril Plisko wrote:
>> http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html
>>
>> Oh well...
>>
>
>I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already?
It looked at it again, saw "SPARK"; refreshed it and now it says SPARC.
Casper
___
On 01/28/10 01:08 PM, Scott Rotondo wrote:
Cyril Plisko wrote:
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html
Oh well...
I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already?
Yep, it's been fixed since this morning :)
--
Shawn Walker
Cyril Plisko wrote:
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html
Oh well...
I don't see it. Maybe it's been fixed already?
Scott
--
Scott Rotondo
Principal Engineer, Solaris Security Technologies
President, Trusted Computing Group
Phone/FAX: +1 408 850
On 01/28/10 10:11 AM, Cyril Plisko wrote:
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html
As another engineer said:
"Ah, the good, old stories. Noah and his Sparsely Populated Ark."
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-discus
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a
>> wholly-owned subsidiary
>> > of Oracle.
>> >
>> > An initial change resulting from that acquisition
>> involves updating the
>> > opensolaris.org website to reflect the new
>> ownership.
>> >
>> > Copyright text has been updated,
On 01/28/10 03:32 AM, Thommy M. Malmström wrote:
When I do a pkg image-update today (2010-01-28) I still get b130... :(
Do you have any packages from '/contrib' installed?
What does:
pkg list -af entire
...say?
--
Shawn Walker
___
opensolaris-dis
FYI, this diagnostic still shows in snv_131
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I have also noticed that all of the license agreements still say Sun!
Given 6 moths to plan you would think that the license agreements would have
been changed to oracle!
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
o
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a
> wholly-owned subsidiary
> > of Oracle.
> >
> > An initial change resulting from that acquisition
> involves updating the
> > opensolaris.org website to reflect the new
> ownership.
> >
> > Copyright text has been updated, and toda
All,
Apols - new laptop keyboard causing trubs with my typing. "avopen" and
"Solaris 8a" being gross examples.
Regards... Sean.
Ed,
Well, I'm glad SUN decided to open source solaris years ago. Does
anybody know if opensolaris will remain under the CDDL?
I was part of when Sun made avop
Ed,
Well, I'm glad SUN decided to open source solaris years ago. Does anybody
know if opensolaris will remain under the CDDL?
I was part of when Sun made avopen bits of Solaris 8a decade ago (the
only Solaris source availability thus far - outside OpenSolaris). I hope
and trust that O
> Hi,
>
> As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a wholly-owned subsidiary
> of Oracle.
>
> An initial change resulting from that acquisition involves updating the
> opensolaris.org website to reflect the new ownership.
>
> Copyright text has been updated, and today the Oracle logo will be
I listened to the entire webcast yesterday and it leaves wondering about what
is the OpenSolaris roadmap! I propose solutions for a living and Solaris has
been/is a tough sell. I only wished Oracle would clarify more about
OpenSolaris. Time will tell.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
Bruce wrote:
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:05:41 +, Brian Ruthven - Sun UK wrote:
Bruce Porter wrote:
Hi,
While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something around 129, but I run
into:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380
I can actually get as far as 12
On Thu, 28 Jan 2010 14:05:41 +, Brian Ruthven - Sun UK wrote:
>
>
> Bruce Porter wrote:
>>> Hi,
>>>
>>> While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something around 129, but I run
>>> into:
>>> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380
>>>
>>>
>>>
>> I can actually get as far as
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/servers/blades/index.html
Oh well...
--
Regards,
Cyril
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 28/01/2010 14:05, Brian Ruthven - Sun UK wrote:
Bruce Porter wrote:
Hi,
While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something
around 129, but I run into:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380
I can actually get as far as 129 (but slow boot and login puts me off), my re
Hi,
As most of you are probably aware, Sun is now a wholly-owned subsidiary
of Oracle.
An initial change resulting from that acquisition involves updating the
opensolaris.org website to reflect the new ownership.
Copyright text has been updated, and today the Oracle logo will be added
to t
> On 01/28/10 06:53 AM, Thommy M. Malmström wrote:
> >> I think I ran into this, had to remove and
> recreate
> >> publisher to get the update.
> >
> >
> > Nope, still b130 after that...
>
> Had the same problem...
> pkg refresh --full
> fixed it for me.
I've no luck with that (which I of c
On 01/28/10 06:53 AM, Thommy M. Malmström wrote:
I think I ran into this, had to remove and recreate
publisher to get the update.
Nope, still b130 after that...
Had the same problem...
pkg refresh --full
fixed it for me.
--
Robert W Hartzell
bear at rwhartzell.net
RwHartzell.Net
> but a link to opensolaris is here.
>
> http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/sola
> ris/index.htm
>
Links to another server. Not a good sign that they plan on keeping it.
They will retire the Sun server infrastructure and cut over to their own
eventually.
Integration would be a be
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 4:13 PM, Mike DeMarco wrote:
> Yea but www.opensolaris.org has not been re-directed. I don't know if that is
> good or bad?
> If it was not integrated is it going to be kept?
The copyright footnote, however, has been changed promptly.
--
Regards,
Cyril
_
but a link to opensolaris is here.
http://www.oracle.com/us/products/servers-storage/solaris/index.htm
> Yea but www.opensolaris.org has not been re-directed. I don't know if that
> is good or bad?
> If it was not integrated is it going to be kept?
> --
> This message posted from opensolaris.org
Yea but www.opensolaris.org has not been re-directed. I don't know if that is
good or bad?
If it was not integrated is it going to be kept?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.
Bruce Porter wrote:
Hi,
While ago I tried to jump from 111b to something
around 129, but I run into:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=12380
I can actually get as far as 129 (but slow boot and login puts me off), my real
big problems start at 130 (the blank screen actua
On Thu, Jan 28, 2010 at 1:37 PM, Paul Griffith wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 11:21 +, Andrew Watkins wrote:
>> Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today?
>>
>> You get http://www.oracle.com
>>
>> Very quick change
>
> Not really, they had 9 months to plan and to get everything in order
> I think I ran into this, had to remove and recreate
> publisher to get the update.
Nope, still b130 after that...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, 2010-01-28 at 11:21 +, Andrew Watkins wrote:
> Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today?
>
> You get http://www.oracle.com
>
> Very quick change
Not really, they had 9 months to plan and to get everything in order.
Regards,
Paul
__
On Jan 28, 2010, at 10:12 AM, W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
>> It is not a technical issue, but a legal one.
>>
>> I don't know if it is legal to ship a QQ client
>> created by using "reverse engineering".
>> But I know, in 2006, Tencent filed a copyright
>> lawsuit against Chen Shoufu (aka Soff), the a
Andrew,
Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today?
You get http://www.oracle.com
Very quick change
Rest In Pieces :-(
Sadly won't see you at LOSUG tonite... Sean.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Has any one gone to http://www.sun.com today?
You get http://www.oracle.com
Very quick change
--
Andrew Watkins * Birkbeck College
http://notallmicrosoft.blogspot.com/
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I think I ran into this, had to remove and recreate publisher to get the update.
Bruno
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
When I do a pkg image-update today (2010-01-28) I still get b130... :(
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Hi
On 01/28/10 16:45, Bruno Damour wrote:
Well, I copied the file back from live-cd so I'm back online.
Investigating, I found in the console output (when it happend) :
[output of kstat|grep misc]
amber ~ # libkstat.so.1 => /usr/lib/libkstat.so.1
bash: libkstat.so.1: command not foun
89 matches
Mail list logo
