I believe a while back last year I had asked if it were theoretically possible
to build a distro, and how much source must be with it, for which, I'm happy to
state, I got a clear answer. However, can one provide source only for
modified/built binaries, link to the Source Browser for unmodified
Once again, thank you. :) I remember receiving an original answer to the
source question last year.
Does an equivalent to sudo apt-get source package_name that exists on Linux,
exist for Solaris? For those unfamiliar, this downloads a .tar.gz format source
code package of the package requested
Ah. Thanks, again. Sounds like on the source end, now that I'm okay with GPL
software, I might stick with Linux.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
OK--I think I understand source + software requirements. Once again, as stated
earlier, thank you OpenSolaris team for answering!
-- Andrew
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Thank you, everyone, for the time and effort put forth into answering this
question. I apologize for replying back 5 days later.
I think I fully understand any distro's requirements under open source law.
Basically, in summary of what I've read, one can build software from
pre-compiled source
A big thank you to everyone who replied. It's appreciated. :)
Basically, assessing everything said so far, to make a distro, one has to:
1. Build it from source
2. Include the binaries
3. Follow the guide for remastering
--
Or, could it be include all
Hello. I had a question, after reading through the CDDL. If I wanted to make a
distro/respin, (and this is only out of sheer curiousity), would all the
OpenSolaris source have to be downloaded with it, or would it only have to be
anything built or modified upon? I've read what it says on
There's a lot of mystery here surrounding my reasoning around not supporting
the GNU General Public License. I don't blame anyone for that. Firstly, what is
the definition of open source?
- It is a common belief that source and software should be open and shared
amongst people without
Cool. Thanks for the advice, everyone! I'll see what works out in this case.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I appreciate all the help and feedback, but I think I'll stop my part in
discussing the whole GPL and GNOME thing further. It is really opening up a can
of worms I did not originally intend to open at all. I simply had a question
that sparked out of 100% curiosity. Thank you everyone for your
Thanks. This is what I envisioned would have been the answer to this question
before even asked. I have used both GNOME and KDE--aware a community fuels it's
popularity and license, and considering the fact GNOME is made not only for
OpenSolaris, but for Linux and Unix-like systems as well,
New threads popped up while replying to another thread...
However, compiling and putting Fluxbox on OpenSolaris then would be the viable
option, since the licensing for GNOME cannot be changed. (I don't think I'd
want to convince anyone to change GNOME either.) :)
--
This message posted from
I was thinking of getting feedback on window managers and licensing, but I
wasn't thinking so many threads would accumulate! :-) This is getting
interesting
Getting back to an original comment--apparently, yes, OpenSolaris does indeed
use the GRUB bootloader--I noted that upon first using
OK I'd better wrap this discussion up before taking up anyone else's time
on the forum. I understand there are questions pertaining to hardware or just
plainly more important questions than these.
Apparently, as much as I like using OpenSolaris, without the ability to
completely change the
Before **completely** quitting discussing OpenSolaris GNOME here, I might add
someone could install a shell to go on top of GNOME once logged in (though it'd
take more startup time), then run OpenSolaris. Installing an alternative
bootloader might do the trick for not using GRUB at startup.
Sorry about so many posts--this is really the last question I've got for
OpenSolaris! After this, I'm gonna quit putting up threads for a while! :) And,
hopefully, this is a quick, short question--not opening a can of worms like the
GNOME licensing thing.
OK. With Mac, you've got VMWare
I'm aware of the 'GPL situation'. As stated in my previous post yesterday,
Apparently, as much as I like using OpenSolaris, without the ability to
completely change the GPL components to where they're dwindled to simply
coreutils and a LILO bootloader or something miniature in respect to the
Out of curiousity, is it possible to convert the GPL-licensed GNOME on
OpenSolaris to the CDDL or MIT licenses? We are NOT talking of LGPL here.
I'm well aware that any code or really 'software' deemed compatible with the
GPL underneath another license compatible becomes GPL or at least, GPL in
Sorry I've replied to the post late! Thank you for the help so far!
I'll work with the terminal using the commands you've supplied and get back to
you shortly.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Thanks for the commands and support so far. The only issue is that when I type
the commands you had specified,
and...@netbook:~# rmformat
Looking for devices...
No removables found.
and...@netbook:~# format
Searching for disks...done
AVAILABLE DISK SELECTIONS:
0. c8d0 DEFAULT cyl 9844
Thanks, everyone! I have a *small* understanding now of OpenSolaris disks! The
disk is now mounted and I used ls -l to list it by mount point when I finished
mapping it out.
(In case anyone was wondering, I originally wrote premoron/pre in one
sentence. The blog five-starred it when I reviewed
Hello, I've got an issue with a partition I cannot seem to access. I'm familiar
how drives are mounted in Linux and mapped in Windows. For instance, /dev/sda5
underneath the Linux platform would describe my partition, D:\ under Windows
would've described it.
Here's the issue:
When I ls /dev
22 matches
Mail list logo
