Yes, exactly. Once enough applications make assumptions about pagesize the
platform pagesize might as well have been part of the ABI.. as I recall it
was more than one application that broke, so we can't reasonable change it
now and claim to remain binary compatible.
And even between 4K
On 3/6/06, Jasse Jansson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Mar 6, 2006, at 7:09 PM, Felix Schulte wrote:
On 3/6/06, Michael Lee [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
It's recommended that you use Studio 10; perhaps you should try
that first.
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/tools/sun_studio_tools/
Now, instead of being told to go to a certain web site to download
the necessary NIC driver (doe s anyone see a problem here?) we the
mortals can be instructed to copy the driver from the DVD. As
I reported in my post, all the necessary drivers are there. The issue
is inclusion ( lack ther
Now, that's just rude. I mean, why can't a reference count be maintained
(by hsfs_mount(), hsfs_unmount(), and maybe one or two others) so that
modunload would be permitted whenver thereference count was zero?
Granted it might actually take a bit more than that, but I'd like to think it
still
Hi, recently I have [u]upgraded[/u] to Soalris 10(Release 3/05) from Solaris 8
on my SUN Blade 200
0. Since then I am unable to use DVDROM and USB ports. I received recommended
S-10 Patches also. Bu
t of no use. Can any body help? I suspect S10 does not support the three year
old achitecture
If you can wait a few weeks, and you're taking into account the fact
that BFU is ON only, then I think it just boils down to personal
preference. BFU'ing causes less heartburn than doing a fresh install for
some people, while for other people doing a fresh install causes less
heartburn than
UNIX admin writes:
Solaris 9 ought to work, if it doesn't try 8.
S9 won't work. The machine is just too ancient.
See:
http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/9/sparc/
http://docs.sun.com/source/817-6356-10/eos.html
Why didn't you guys at least do like HP does for their gear?
For
When will R/W UDF support be available for CD-RWs and DVD+-RWs?
Perhaps a better question is, why can't I simply
mkfs -F udfs /dev/rdsk/c1t0d0p0` (DVD+RW drive)
right now as it is? Why won't Solaris let me asequentially write onto those
devices?
Much of the RW media doesn't support random
Because the number of supported write cycles is not sufficient.
Fewer than 1000, except for DVD-RAM.
(And the other limitations make incremental writing through the
OS cumbersome except for DVD-RAM)
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
V890 .. now thats a nice machine but I'd rather have an 8-way T2000
with 16GB of RAM. Rack space and power saved in a big way.
And very nicely engineered, just like its Opteron sibling the X4200
(which needs to be screwed down in the rack or it will take off :-)
These boards and systems look
I have a dual processor SPARCserver 1000 laying arround that I was thinking of
using as a mail and
XMPP server for my house. I was originally just going to run Linux as I'm
more familar with it bu
t as the sun4m arch is rather strange Linux doesn't support it in
multiprocessor mode. Does
On 2/15/06, Roland Mainz [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Cyril Plisko wrote:
Having Solaris on zSeries will be a nice complement to Polaris which
targets IBM pSeries among other platforms, leaving IBM no options
but one - to embrace Solaris across all the product range:)
OpenSolaris WD
--Boundary_(ID_psS4Mz8w2HlD4QtT4suLvQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-disposition: inline
On 2/14/06, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Now we have a drop in communications.
I
Everything. It is official statement that SXCR b32 is a prerequisite
for building current ON consolidation. I saw no mentions of Nexenta,
SchilliX or anything else as a supported platform. They can or can not
be used for that purpose, but as long as opensolaris.org goes it is
SXCR b32, no less.
Alan Coopersmith [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Qt licensing was part of it, avoiding the nightmare of C++ binary
incompatibility between compilers (or even between different g++ versions)
was another. The official FAQ answer is at:
Mmm, how is this related to star?
=20
Sorry J=F6rg, but star is an ordinary word or is astrology the
science devoted to s-tar?
Astrology isn't a science, and it's not related to stars either.
Astronomy, my bad.
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss
Uhm... in theory such a project would be nice but first I'd like to
focus on ksh93 - which is already a quite large beast to handle
(assuming libshell, libc, profile shells, bugfixing and some sort of
backwards-compatibility+migration tools should be handeled, too.).
There will likely some
I am able to see /dev/ip in my solaris box. But i'm having problem with the
following command,
$ ndd -get /dev/ip \?
open of /dev/ip failed: Permission denied
The fact that you are not allowed to do this is not a bug.
The /dev/ip device cannot be opened by just any user.
When I was searching
On Thu, 26 Jan 2006, Rich Teer wrote:
OK, S10 U1 has got a lot further than build 28 or build 30 of Nevada
(it's currently installing as I type).
Hurrah! The problem was definately with builds 28 and 30 of Nevada;
S10 U1 has finished installing, with no problems. Whew--I was starting
to
Is Jonathan Schwartz going to repeat the License mistake (made
with OpenOffice) with OpenSolaris?
http://blogs.sun.com/jonathan
Thinking about GPLv3
While this may sound nice, it would open the new problem that
contributors may license new stuff for OpenSolaris under the
GPLv3 only
I have:
4a5d672dd34f8257f5262ed453402391
/export/home/iso/sol-10-u1-ga-x86-dvd-iso-a
6b3be40d35dd01d13555aba9cdcc9f92
/export/home/iso/sol-10-u1-ga-x86-dvd-iso-b
e747678cebee5bab330e844c073185f0
/export/home/iso/sol-10-u1-ga-x86-dvd-iso-c
854d314830dc81f76adf1121335a8408
The OGB shall be comprised of natural persons of number and nature
to be defined by the Constitution, but in no event shall they be fewer
than three in number at any time.
What does it mean natural persons, the only thing I can come up with
is that it is trying to keep androids off of the OGB.
Bruce Riddle wrote:
I'm having no luck installing Solaris express on my HP nx9600.
http://h18000.www1.hp.com/products/quickspecs/12114_na/12114_na.HTML
It is currently running Express Build 16 from ~06/05.
I have subsequently tried to install 24,27,28 and now 30 with no luck.
I've tried
Hi,
I am wondering if I can run port fssnap into old solaris system, does it need
modify ufs source co
de, too?
Yes, the ufs code was changed to support fssnap.
(Note that there are many interface changes in the file system layer over
the years so backporting ufs isn't hassle free)
Casper
One of the most important pieces of information a hacker can have is
the OS flavor and version of a remote host. Armed with this knowledge,
a hacker can narrow his search for possible vulnerabiliti es to that
specific operating system and version. An SSH ID string with OpenSSH
does not give away
On the particular issue, I would consider a flag, such as Disable OS
Identification to client to be an acceptable option for all parties
to consider.
Do you understand that the ramifications of this flag are:
SSH will frequently fail to interoperate with different
Finally, I am not beefing about SSH or other tech implementation.
Ya'll do whatever you like. I am, however, concerned about the We
work at Sun and we know what's best attitude. Solaris 10 _may_ be
the best operating system in the world, but if people don't use it
(for whatever reason, however
Can someone please update
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=4113420 ?
1. The bug should be closed as WONTFIX as Sun seems to have lost
interest in upgrading /usr/bin/ksh to ksh93
We cannot upgrade /bin/ksh because ksh93 is *not* compatible with
ksh88.
2. If no one
My general preference for disk-based appliances would be the same (i.e.
install it all, use SMF to determine what happens, make robust booting a
reality).
However, now that flash memory is so cheap, I do think we should also
look at solid state boot configs built around a lightweight,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Why not integrate the current Korn shell as /usr/sbin/ksh93?
Replacing /usr/bin/ksh is just not an option; the list of known
incompatibilities stretches over many pages.
Looks like you did forget that there is no ksh88 compliant /usr/bin/ksh.
No; that's not what I
/usr/bin/ksh being a bastard version of ksh88 adds a *SIGNIFICANT*
**BURDEN* for people who develop and ship software. Every shell script
needs to be back ported to ksh88 to support Solaris. And I personally
think this cannot be tolerated anymore. It costs immense manpower just
to support Sun's
On 1/9/06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
There are many ways format, but from Sun's perspective none include
replacing ksh with ksh93.
Is this the OFFICIAL position of Sun Microsystems?
Why do you think I have an official position of any kind?
There are always exceptions and
Various people, though, may have positions. I agree with Casper that
the best way forward is to develop a transition that breaks nothing
that anyone would ever notice. At least with my ARC hat on, I'd be
more than willing to listen to arguments that one or another bit of
breakage is not
I think the appliance concept is a great idea!
What is first needed is to determine the base install is.
Min packages=min vulerabilities.
I don't think this is necessarily true; removing packages may
make a system harder to maintain and that in the end may cause
more vulnerabilities, not fewer.
Darren wrote:
Why not ? Why can't OpenSolaris just be as quick as OpenBSD ?
When there is a problem with OpenSSH, does the Sun team investigate
whether it affects their forke d code base? If so, don't they have to
port the fix and then do regression testing? Doesn't this ta ke time?
Yes, and
Totally agree! It's not worth trying to maintain OpenSSH,Kerberos,PAM.
It's smarter to let Sun maintain SunSSH. If there is something that
really needs to be fixed or added to SunSSH, then file a bug or RFE.
As for the banner issue, all SSH implentations I've used have a
banner:)
Or fix it
Take a look at
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/cab/governance_proposal/#Communities -
basi
cally, if there's enough interest, the CAB pays attention and blesses us :-)
I'll happily +1 a Sysadmin Community.
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss
Not even in the man pages that come with SX B27
What man pages to you refer to?
The -d option is mentioned twice; see below at OPERANDS where it
specifies the URL.
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
BTW: I see a http proxy option but no hint on how to use pkgadd via the
network.
pkgadd -d http://
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Sat, 2005-12-24 at 01:56, Gary Gendel wrote:
I just installed snv_28 Sparc and am now seeing these strange errors in my
log:
[ID 336459 user.info] libpkcs11: /usr/lib/security/pkcs11_softtoken.so
CRYPTOKI minor version, 2
0, may not be compatible with minor version 11.
Things seem
It's one of those historical things. For almost all of the Companion
CD's lifetime (going on 6 years now) the Sun Studio compilers were not
freely available. So in the interest of transparency, Companion CD
packages (as much as possible) were built with gcc. The philosophy being
that
(Removed Sun-managers because that's not a discussion list)
In fact, their tools i.e. lspv etc etc showed clearly the PP layout on
the physical disk.
Solaris never really liked more than 8 physical partitions on a disk;
this AIX mechanism looks like something you'd do when disks are huge
and
I'm not sure I completely agree with that. AIX's PP facility is not
really like Solaris' use of physical partitions at all.
Instead, PPs on AIX are a way to segment storage on a single disk so
that you can grow LVs when you need to and without dedicating storage
to them ahead of time.
I
Hello!
I've upgraded my Thinkpad R50 from SX-b23 to SXCE-b28 and it seems
somewhat slower. X server is particularly slowed down. Xorg never
worked properly for me in SX-b23 and now that it is further slowed down,
I can almost see the windows while being drawn.
What graphics does it have?
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What graphics does it have? I think b28 has a lot more Xorg changes.
I have ATI Radeon Mobility 9000.
Never had any issues with those.
b28 should have new settings like:
Option AccelMethod EXA
which you could try,
Oh yeah, one other thing (and this used to happen
I don't know if I'm in the right place to post this but I need to vent! Every
time I look for Sola
ris Enterprise, Nevada, SunOS 5.11, whatever, the list of downloadable stuff
only lists Solaris 10
(x86 of course although I do have a Sparc Ultra 5). I eventually stumbled upon
it and
Steven Christensen wrote:
With regard to KDE. I am currently putting Stefan's KDE work on
sunfreeware.com http://sunfreeware.com and its
mirrors for use, testing, comments, etc. I hope to put an
announcement up this weekend
when I am sure it is all there and Stefan says it is OK. The
I see that Solaris 10 1/06 has just been released and looking at the
documnetation it looks like i
t is based on Solaris Express 11/05 (no ZFS). Is this correct, or is it based
in an early version.
Incorrect; Solaris 10 1/06 is based on Solaris 10 and has no
direct relationship with any of
Felix Schulte wrote:
Having two desktops does not make sense for the customers - and KDE is
the primary government desktop here. Support for KDE will be a
requirement for further contracts as far as I can see from my POV. The
European governments are looking into further ways to save costs
It seems to be forbidden to log into a rule directly, but how is this
impleted? Does the 'login' program check /etc/user_attr and forbids
a login into a role directly?
It's implemented through a pam module (pam_roles.so.1) which
checks when authenticating a role whether this is a login or
Solaris also definitely does not support file sizes 4GB and I would guess
that there are even problems with a file size 2 GB.
Since Solaris 9 04/03 the supported max. file size is 16 TB. If an app
on solaris has problems wit h files bigger than 2GB or 4GB then because
either the app code
Well, my aim is to understand how to unload module without modunload, for
example,via kmdb and /de
v/kmem.If I know the address of _fini() somewhere in kernel memory,can i do jmp
addr to it?
No, calling _fini() does *not* unload the module.
You'll need to call the modctl system call.
Even if the code was pulled early, there's no real reason to drop out
a workable release of code(t hat is, something that would build cleanly
for sun4m, not just raw code known not to work without u nobtainable
tools) for perfectly runnable machines. It'd not be much, but something
based off of
On Wed, 7 Dec 2005, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
of interest in maintaining them, even Ultra-1 support for those who
feel that they are happy to run the risk of 64 bit on UltraSPARC-I.
This, to me, would be a far more worthwhile project. Yes, the US-I
is long in the tooth, but I've never
joey.guo wrote:
The second question:
Can I use the sunstudio11 to compiler the opensolaris source
code.
not yet. people have reported warnings/errours trying to compile ON
with studio 11.
And that's why you can download a version of Studio 10 exactly patched
as used
I have a V20z and am using a serial console. So naturally enough I
used 'eeprom' to set console=ttya and things worked fine until during
some driver testing I killed the box. I then needed to boot 'failsafe'
only to find my console going to screen/keyboard.
This makes sense since the
I make a kernel module. In the module, I redirect write system call. Before
the data write to the
file, I need to handle the data.
In my write system call's function, what I do like this:
1. allocate the memory
Note that this can be an near infinite amount; write can be
called with more
1. seems the root disk still , so still have to use svm for mirroring root disk
Correct.
2. I can't find option to use hotspare in raid1 or raidz
3. is it possible for zfs to do the same thing as concate pro in vxvm
When asking questions like does ZFS have feature Y from fooFS is
helps to
On Thursday 01 December 2005 03:30 am, Joerg Schilling wrote:
In former times, it was usual to (by intention) have a limited PATH
for root in order to reduce provlems by miss-typed commands and similar.
Let's try to forget about the past, and let's try to look towards the future.
We also had
Yep. I looked into the problem again and found that not much API/ABI
changes happened betwen so.4 and so.6. This should simplify the thing
actually since symbolic link (in some cases) will be sufficient.
But not for building; the soname (-h option passed to ld when building
library) should match
Gary Gendel [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is there a Solaris equivalent to the lchmod library function found on Linux?
The chmod changes
the protection of the file the symbolic link is pointing to whereas lchmod
changes the protection o
f the link itself. I couldn't find a direct replacement.
OpenBSD also supports numerous crypto cards and the crypto
instructions on VIA CPUs. And OpenBSD i sn't locked into 10 year old
technology. New security features are being developed and integrated a
ll the time.
In Solaris 10 we've added the kernel crypto framework which allows
us to plug in
1. What are the resource requirements for all this wonderful
Solaris 10 software to work and perform reasonably well?
Is it all available for x86 systems? Does it require a
64-bit dual or quad processor system, 4 GB of RAM and a 200
GB HDD? Or would it all work on a 1.8 GHz Intel Celeron
The GNU utilities carry both a stability and compatibility
risk. Nothing in Solaris proper can fix that.
This statement true for any software in general, unless development is
pretty much dead. :-)
Perhaps I should have quantified that: when used as default
in a Solaris environment..
Yes. It's all fully available on low powered systems.
(Even a VIA C3 CPU with 512 MB of ram works just fine,
even as Sun RAY server; boot Solaris from flash too,
if that's your thing)
Neat. Does it work on the PLE133 chipset?
I think I actually have an old ASUS PC with a similar
chipset
I may have underestimated SMF.
Probably, but it does work better on SPARC systems
Well SMF itself is no differnet from one architecture to the next;
but it you're talking about fault managemet, the focus for hardware
fault handling has traditionally been on hardware we developed and
sold. And
I'll take a look, thanks. I was affraid that it means you have to use nfs via
loopback on standalo
ne machine to be unixlike :)
The Solaris automounter actually works correctly in that respect;
it determines if a mountpoint is remote or local and will use an
NFS or loopback depending on the
* Paul Durrant [EMAIL PROTECTED] [2005-11-23 09:51]:
Apologies if this has been asked before...
Is the Sun coding style doc. available to the opensolaris community?
Given that, I presume, code taken from contributors from outside Sun
still has to pass the standard ON cstyle/hdrchk stuff it
Perhaps what he meant to say was that SVr4 comes in part from BSD. As
I recall the order events:
You forgot the first event: which is that Unix escaped from
Bell Labs and is enhanced elsewhere, including Berkeley;
BSD did include ATT materials
-People at Berkeley write BSD, some of these
Clearly? If you discount the inventions done for
SunOS at Sun, I don't
think there's that much to show: sockets, reliable
signal handling,
r* commands.
I thought sockets and reliable signals were originated from Berkley. Sun
invented NFS, and the big
gest take from SunOS were the virtual
That sound like a great idea Rich!!
I actually bought a Ultra 1 just to run Solaris 10 on. I was a bit di=
sappointed when it wasn't supported.=20
That was announced a long time ago.
What is the mainwork that needs to be taken care of i order to get Op=
enSolaris to run on a U1 ?
Not much,
Ethernet adapters are availalbe that plug directly into an external USB port,
just like a camara o
r other consumer product.
Does Solaris 10 or Opensolaris support such cards? The nic on the integrated
chipset (nforce4) of
my system is not suppport by either.
I thought nforce 4 was
But the explanation is fairly simple: you cannot recover from a number
of failures (corrupt vfstab, bad /dev* links for boot device) without
having /usr mounted; you cannot mount /usr when those things happen.
And you cannot recover if the same happens with a big / installation
either.
You
Please explain why you believe this.
the only difference I see in your case is that you would need to find
the /devices entry to mount /usr so it makes sense to have find or
a name completing shell in /
When you boot from a device the node does not need to be present in
/dev* in order for you
-sh: /bin/i386: not found
-sh: /usr/sbin/quota: not found
-sh: /bin/cat: not found
-sh: /bin/mail: not found
#
# df -ak
df: not found
# ls
ls: not found
# pwd
/root
That looks like you have split / and /usr, right ?
And we've long said you shouldn't be doign that :-)
Not sure
It would be simple to add a (maybe hidden) flag to the FILE *
data structures that tell stdio that the calling program is
aware of the new interface because it has been compiled with
the new include files.
There's always an issue with old libraries and such and FILE *'s
being passed around to
Has anyone tried to install Opensolaris on an EPIA Mini-itx mainboard?
I'd be interested to know if Opensolaris supports the following mobo chipset:
- VIA CN400 North Bridge
- VT8237R South Bridge
and the folowing nic chipset:
- VIA VT6122 10/100/1000 Base-T Ethernet Controller (GbE LAN)
- VIA
I have an idea that might help get people started with OpenSolaris. I
would like to create and distribute a VM image of a basic OpenSolaris
system that people can run with the free VMWare player or VM Workstation.
Basically what I would be doing is distributing a VM of Solaris Express
with
For folks interested in the details, the issue here is old binaries
that were compiled with a fileno macro that directly dereferenced
the char that holds the file descriptor. This was changed in 1998
(Solaris 7) to always be a function call with the fix for:
4155198 fileno() macro is evil and
I heard about a 256 fd limit on solaris 32bit boxes due to some stdio limit...
will anything chang
e in opensolaris? is it possible to increase this limit?
There's not 256 fd limit; there's a limitation on using file descriptors
over 255 in FILE *s. I.e., once all fds = 255 are taken you can
Instead of
fclose, use close, etc. Using those routines you'll
have (depending on
the OS and settings) the ability to use thousands of
descriptors. For
vanilla Solaris 10 you'll have 1024 by default with a
hard limit of 65536.
why the hard limit is 65536?
The *default* hardlimit is
Hi guys, just to let you know.
I finally received the t-shirt, good, but the federal tax office, had put a
US$ 21 related to impo
rt tax, unbelieveable. Then I noticed, the pack had a kind of 30 number, where
the tax office emplo
iyee thought, was the price I paid for that t-shirt. Luckly, I
On 11/11/05, Sara Dornsife [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Real Media is our corporate standard for video production (which is a long
thread all on its own I know). I'm sorry if it is a problem for some.
So how do people at Sun watch these videos?
Realplayer on Solaris.
Casper
Any information on when this driver will be available in Solaris.
No. I'm trying to get the power people to come out and
be more visible in the community.
I've noticed Caspers Dik's blog and his Ferrari 4000 powernow
driver... but I'm not sure whether t here is an official version in
OS.
My fear in tragetting Linux explicitly for migration like this is the
name is an enduring hostile act just towards Linux. I prefer
immigrants - nothing to stop it focussing just on the Penguinistas
under that banner for now.
Exactly my argument; my +1 is conditional on not including linux
On Wed, 2 Nov 2005, Adam Leventhal wrote:
There seems to be at least a loose concensus that this would be a useful
community. Any +1 votes from the CAB?
+1
+1 Absolutely agree.
I think we should also be open for those in exile such as South
Koreans who may seen be exiled from Windows :-)
In my opinion, a big part of the value of this community will be that it
helps to explain the relevance of OpenSolaris to the wider Linux
community. Extending the scope beyond Linux immigrants could threaten
that.
wider Linux comminity? I think the value of OpenSolaris does not
derive from
Rumor is the developers got somewhere with ZFS integration, and at least
Solaris Express may
see ZFS soon; presumably OpenSolaris some time thereafter? So maybe a forum
specifically
for ZFS might be a good idea sooner rather than later?
Rumor?
I have downloaded the Open Solaris (Solaris Express Build 24, CD 1,
English for x86 platforms). I have trouble installing Open Solaris on
my pentium III, ~ 128 MB system.
Sorry, but the minimum requirement for Solaris with newboot is 256 MB of memory.
(The kernel uses 128MB of scratch memory to
Oh...it is this perl /usr/perl5/bin/perl and my perl that I am using =
is perl
5.8.6 :) which has a different INC path and cannot load the module
Regards.
So it's not the standard perl; in that case you'll need to get CPAN's most
recent kstat module.
Casper
Hello all,
LKR has recently told us about the record performance of
Studio 11. I would very much like to cut down my current
12-hour+ build time for OpenSolaris (OK, I should buy some
new H/W ;-) ); so when is Studio 11 going to be let loose on
the OpenSolaris community? Real soon
Hello friends
Can any one please tell me how can I acess libkstat with perl. I mean
using API ..
Thanks,
Nikhil
using the kstat perl module (see the kstat program for an example of how
to use it)
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Hello
I had earlier installed OpenSolaris 03/05 x86 platform system, but now I am
planning to upgrade it to Solaris 10/05 release without any installation .
Is there anyway where I can upgrade without disturbing the existing system.
much like the way of up2date/yum on Linux systems.
Regards,
Thank you for reporting!
I get bscv: 64-bit driver module not found in amd64 mode, and your
aperture driver fails with
undefined symbol 'hat_getkpfnum' but works in x86 mode.
As there is no source for the bscv driver, we need to addres this
question to the Sun folks..
It's not that
We've been pondering the idea of creating a kernel/user bounce module
to be able to write userspace filesystem providers. Seems that this
exists there.
How I hate these licensing issues. FUSE is GPL, of course ...
should not be a show stopper, imho. Project like this has clear API
between
strings stupid.doc | more
This reminds me of a story: one person used this method to
read .documents; but he didn't understand the email he got from
his manager as it was confidential and not concerning him.
It turned out that this was another one of those: take a document
as template, delete
--Boundary_(ID_cdrTXVNPYFEDnLNon9P0Rg)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-disposition: inline
On 10/14/05, Jim Grisanzio [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I posted my draft slides and notes about OpenSolaris:
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Solaris runs nicely on my laptop.
Same here. It's picky, but when it runs, it runs very well. Also a lot of
thanks to Sun for maki
ng available the Solaris version of StarOffice 8.
I wonder if any of our resident Solaris experts can explain the following to
me:
In
ZFS is a 128 bit filesystem, isn't it?
So I hope it uses 128 bit inode numbers too.
but it should at least use 64 bit for inode numbers.
Now what happens to a 32 bit application that calls stat(2)
on a file that uses an inode number that is outside the
32 bit scope. Whill this cause stat(2)
Eric Schrock wrote:
ZFS inode numbers are 64 bits. The current implemenation restricts this
to a 48-bit usable range, but this is not an architectural restriction.
Future enhancements plan to extend this to the full 64 bits.
32-bit apps that attempt to stat() a file whose inode number is
1001 - 1100 of 1175 matches
Mail list logo
