Apparently Ed you have been gone since the beginning of the Opensolaris
movement, because Murdock and Company were doing just what you saying is not
true, they wanted an OS that ran on laptops and could still be a top running
server OS. If they did not want only a server OS why go to all the tro
On 07/ 6/10 04:48 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
Opensolaris and solaris are for servers. Not desktops. Yes you can use it
for a desktop if you want, but it's not designed for that purpose, and not
good compared to other products in that arena.
So what do you suggest I use for my Solaris de
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Gary
>
> "little things like FreeBSD"
>
> You continue to make exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims such as
> "it's free open source so you can't expect it to be supported or
> From: Joerg Schilling [mailto:joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de]
>
> Are you sure that MS solved the problem of finding the most recent
> superblock
> in a COW filesystem and are you sure that MS solved how to make "cheap"
> snapshots?
I didn't say anything about MS finding the most recent s
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Graham McArdle
>
> One of the selling points of Solaris
> was that the same kernel runs on everything from a laptop to a
> mainframe
Not sure I get you there. (a) how is that
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Ken Gunderson
>
> As I mentioned earlies, Solaris commercial is irrelevant.
You can't just make a statement like that, as if it were a fact of some
kind, and expect to retain
On Mon, Jul 5, 2010 at 2:51 AM, Svein Skogen wrote:
> On 05.07.2010 06:12, Fredrich Maney wrote:
>> On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 12:03 PM, Edward Ned Harvey
>> wrote:
>>> It is free. So people should not be expecting supportability or perfection.
>>> It's very agile to development and change.
>>
>> I
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de wrote:
> "W. Wayne Liauh" wrote:
>> Actually in the US, you can file a re-examination request with the Patent
>> Office to invalidate an issued patent. NetApp's COW patent, USP 5,818,292,
>> was subsequently rejected as invalid in light of "newly discovered p
I'm increasingly getting the feeling that the delay is because Oracle is
working to re-brand OpenSolaris the binary distro as Solaris 11. They are
committed to "Solaris" and they are apparently committed to contributing to the
OpenSolaris code base (and indeed you can see business as usual in th
> "W. Wayne Liauh" wrote:
>
> > > BTW: The problem with the US law system is that
> you
> > > cannot cancel a patent
> > > separately. This needs to be done during the main
> > > hearing of the trial.
> > >
> > > Jörg
> > >
> >
> >
> > Actually in the US, you can file a re-examination
> reques
"W. Wayne Liauh" wrote:
> > BTW: The problem with the US law system is that you
> > cannot cancel a patent
> > separately. This needs to be done during the main
> > hearing of the trial.
> >
> > Jörg
> >
>
>
> Actually in the US, you can file a re-examination request with the Patent
> Office
> BTW: The problem with the US law system is that you
> cannot cancel a patent
> separately. This needs to be done during the main
> hearing of the trial.
>
> Jörg
>
Actually in the US, you can file a re-examination request with the Patent
Office to invalidate an issued patent. NetApp's COW
As I mentioned earlies, Solaris commercial is irrelevant. And my read is that
OpenSolaris the binary distribution is well on the way to becoming irrelevant,
if not already so. I think this may well be precisely what Oracle desires as
it provides an exit from the sticky wicket Sun left them in
I'll just weigh in here with my $0.02 as well and point out that per recent
Netcraft survey 3 out of 4 of the top most reliable web hosts are running
FreeBSD. As is apache.org. Not S10 or OpenSolaris. Wonder why that might be?
It's not availability of paid support model that enterprises shel
i have created an additional loopback interface for denying ARP reply for a
certain ip, here are the commands i have run:
ifconfig lo0:1 plumb
ifconfig lo0:1 x.x.x.x -arp netmask 255.255.255.255 up
secondly i need to make it permanent , so i tried the following to insert into
the /etc/hostname.
"little things like FreeBSD"
You continue to make exaggerated and unsubstantiated claims such as "it's free
open source so you can't expect it to be supported or perfect." All the while,
Apache, Sendmail, Postfix, Squid, Nagios, Procmail, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, NetBSD,
Cactus, Dovecot, Roundcube, P
>
> Hello,On Jul 5, 2010, at 5:00 PM,
> Edward Ned Harvey wrote: type="cite"> color="#00">Possibility #3 and #4
> are the ones I think are the most
> likely.Oracle is shifting effort from osol,
> to sol10. They're incorporating bugfixes,
> security patches, and feature enhancements into
> sol
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> > From: Joerg Schilling [mailto:joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de]
> >
> > If netapp has a chance to win this case, then this can only happen in a
> > non-cilized country. The "patents" netapp is claiming are just
> > duplicates of
> > prior art in my Dimploma thesis
Hello,
On Jul 5, 2010, at 5:00 PM, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
>
>
> Possibility #3 and #4 are the ones I think are the most likely.
>
> Oracle is shifting effort from osol, to sol10. They're incorporating bug
> fixes, security patches, and feature enhancements into sol10, at the expense
> of del
> From: Joerg Schilling [mailto:joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de]
>
> If netapp has a chance to win this case, then this can only happen in a
> non-cilized country. The "patents" netapp is claiming are just
> duplicates of
> prior art in my Dimploma thesis on a COW filesystem that I published i
On Mon, 2010-07-05 at 11:03 -0400, Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> I will suggest using "osol" to refer to opensolaris, and "sol10" to
> refer to solaris 10, and "OS" to refer to an Operating System.
This also lends us the advantage of being able to use phrases like:
"Osol no longer needs the weirdin
Edward Ned Harvey wrote:
> And I think radio silence while preparing Sol11 or whatever is totally
> appropriate. Especially given the fact that netapp's copy-on-write lawsuit
> still is not closed. And BTRFS still doesn't exist. And ZFS for Linux is
> still unusable for production.
If netapp
"Richard L. Hamilton" wrote:
> Some Solaris/OpenSolaris drivers were ported from *BSD originals.
> And not only ZFS, but DTrace have been ported to one or more *BSDs
> and derivatives.
>
> The license compatibility (in both directions) certainly helps. But lest
> folks that prefer GPL view that
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Ken Gunderson
>
> Like you, however, I'd considered possibility of using OS for some of
I'm going to suggest dropping the term "OS" to refer to opensolaris.
Because "OS" is alr
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Thomas Maier-Komor
>
> On 05.07.2010 14:49, me wrote:
> > Oh and I hope Oracle does not get too crazy painting Solaris in
> Oracle red, it just does not feel the same. My refere
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
>
> Would be possible, just using your imagination, to see why someone
> might
> be _VERY_ reluctant to connect a system they cannot access
> security-patches for to the internet at all?
Obviously, if you expose anything to
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> If the community had ever taken a bigger role in the production of the distro
> you might have a stronger argument that it's an open source communtiy project,
> but the bulk of the work on it was always done by Sun employees.
This is not a result of the missing will in
On 05.07.2010 14:49, me wrote:
> Oh and I hope Oracle does not get too crazy painting Solaris in Oracle red,
> it just does not feel the same. My reference being Oracle OpenOffice 3, it
> just lacks the pizazz of Sun branding.
concerning use of colors, I was really surprised seeing the new Oracl
I would just like to have an up to date (in security terms not necessarily in
features)
OpenSolaris release in the next few months. We are already using b134 which is
6 months old now as the latest release available except the roll your own
flavor, and I have been holding off with b130 of SXCE f
This is a little off thread but. One update it seems to me they could provide
automatically is the java update. Presently I'm running Version 6 update 17 and
I think it should be at 20. How can I link this system to do that update
automatically ?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
30 matches
Mail list logo
