On Sun, May 23, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
[snip]
> My impression is that a number of the AST tools have picked up the
> major options previously unique to the GNU tools, while trying to retain
> better standards compliance. Assuming that to be true, I think they'd
> be the way
> IPS repositories are simply death because of speed
> and crazy lack of applications because of stupid IP
> and patent issues which doesn't help anything. They
> just cause slow or no development at all. And
> Oracle/Sun must be in line with them.
If you want Ubuntu with a Solaris kernel, use Nex
someone sent me to genunix to download the developers version.
All the other Solaris versions would not run on my laptop, or required may too
much manual input to get drivers working for hardware.
Which I did NOT have enough experience to do.
My big problem now is to get two partitions recognized
thanks and you're right did not answer the question.
Currently have 3 partitions. during install OSOL partition had to be named
solaris 2.
It installed itself there. With Mathias help, corrected boot loop problem
permanently.
My problem now is, OSOL will NOT recognize or mount the other two parti
IPS repositories are simply death because of speed and crazy lack of
applications because of stupid IP and patent issues which doesn't help
anything. They just cause slow or no development at all. And Oracle/Sun must be
in line with them.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
You mean something like this?
Provide the best development platform possible. Provide full source access to
developers and users, including the ability to look at CVS tree changes
directly. Users can even look at our source tree and changes directly on the
web!
Integrate good code from any sou
Josh
WTF, we can't even use the (Open)Solaris name.
Why don't we rename the organisation then? OGB should hold a contest
and community vote and then move all servers to the new name.
Well my vote is for (O pen S olars 1 edition) or OS1 for short.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
Alan DuBoff wrote:
> > A test with _short_ path names does not prove
> > anything - sorry.
>
> Jörg,
>
> WTF do I need to do then? I was told that you couldn't unarchive any long
> filenames with another tar, that it wouldn't work.
You did run a test with less than 100 chars (which is supportd
> A test with _short_ path names does not prove
> anything - sorry.
Jörg,
WTF do I need to do then? I was told that you couldn't unarchive any long
filenames with another tar, that it wouldn't work.
Do I need to rub my tummy, while hopping around on one leg in a full moon?
Or do I need to do s
Alan DuBoff wrote:
> > You picked a bad example. GNU tar has its own share
> > of problems. By
> > default no other achiever than GNU tar can unpack
> > long path names in
> > archives created by GNU tar.
>
> Maybe I just got lucky...
>
> [al...@eagle Documents]$ gtar zcvf ./test.tgz tmp
> tmp/
>
can NOT read / write data to NTFS
This probably does not answer any of your questions but the only way I found to
keep OS at NTFS is to reinstall it first to that partition. Then install the
open Solaris OS; its grub will pick back up that now nonactive boot layer. This
is a start over situatio
[...]
> You picked a bad example. GNU tar has its own share
> of problems. By
> default no other achiever than GNU tar can unpack
> long path names in
> archives created by GNU tar. That's a big problem. It
> becomes worse
> because tar archives with long path names created
> with GNU tar from
> 20
> You picked a bad example. GNU tar has its own share
> of problems. By
> default no other achiever than GNU tar can unpack
> long path names in
> archives created by GNU tar.
Maybe I just got lucky...
[al...@eagle Documents]$ gtar zcvf ./test.tgz tmp
tmp/
tmp/split log cut.jpg
tmp/Trailer Photo
13 matches
Mail list logo
