It really depends on how many BEs & snapshots you have, if you don't have many,
just remove the content of that dir in BEs & snapshots. Otherwise I have no
idea what the clean solution is.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-dis
> BTW, it timed out exporting those variables, so
> essentially, even though SUN says OpenSolaris is fit
> for the datacenter you would be *&$#ed if you needed
> to build zones.
As far as I know, this will be fixed by providing the repository as a
downloadable image. But, if you really are runnin
Try switching to /dev, it works.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
See for example this:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=106836&tstart=0
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Why not give up on the imitations, and go for the
> real thing - ksh93?
ksh93 might be good as a scripting language, but NOT a good desktop shell in my
opinion, while zsh is ideal :)
> You want over-the top character-based hand-holding,
> use Midnight Commander.
already using it for many year
In my projects, it was the other way around, the compilation times in
OpenSolaris were lower than in Linux.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> As someone else already mentioned a new build should
> be available today or tomorrow.
>
Apparently not :( Oh well, maybe next week.. :)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris
I also use zsh on OpenSolaris, and it's awesome ;)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> And you're waiting for the ARC review to do that? I
> haven't looked too closely but I'm not generally aware
> of any security problems introduced by pfexec in OpenSolaris.
By default OpenSolaris gives the default user adminstrator privileges, allowing
any program run by that user to execute
"R" is not in the repositories. You have to download the sources and compile
them on your own (I tried, it all works without patching).
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Thanks for the info - but - I always do "entire
> distribution" but I don't
> see it anywhere. On solaris 10u6 (aka solaris 10
> 10/08) "pkginfo | egrep -i
> 'svn|subv'" has no result. And I didn't find any "svn" in any "bin" dir
> that I know about ...
Please note that nobody said anything ab
> Had just come across eclipse.org and to find out
> that
> eclipse-SDK-3.5M7-solaris-gtk-x86.zip is available
> for download.
>
> It's been years the long awaited goodies be
> downloadable!
Wow, that was unexpected :) I wonder if they are really going to support
Solaris GTK2/x86 in the future,
IPS & snv_112 ? The latest there is 111a. If you mean 111a, then try running:
% pfexec pkg verify SUNWpowertop
As for me powertop shows 2009...
% ls -l /usr/bin/amd64/powertop
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 62968 2009-04-24 09:46 /usr/bin/amd64/powertop
% ls -l /usr/bin/i86/powertop
-r-xr-xr-x 1 root bin 5
murrina engine compiles just fine for me.. I've compiled the svn version... :
% svn checkout http://svn.gnome.org/svn/murrine/trunk/ murrine
% cd murrine && ./autogen.sh --prefix=/usr
% gmake
...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolar
Hmm, as I understand the problem is that *compiz* is not running, if you
disable compiz, then metacity would run by default. See
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6822628 , it shows as fixed in
OpenSolaris 2009.06 b111a, I don't know what's the SXCE build this fix went in
to...
--
Log out, then select Options->Safe terminal session
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
$ svccfg -s application/opengl/ogl-select \
setprop options/vendor = nvidia
$ svcadm restart application/opengl/ogl-select
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Installed OpenSolaris 2009.06 build 111a on a 64 bit
> system. Found that
> file /kernel/genunix doesn't exist. While on build
> 111, that file is
> still there.
>
> Is this a problem or a new feature?
>
Is it a new install or upgrade ? It definitely should be there as it's a part
of SUNWck
> Problem 1 :
> It's normal on my computer opensolaris lunching about
> 1.5 minute , and shutting downo about 4 minutes .
> It shouldn't suprise most services in opensolaris are
> responsible for network or security :)
>
> It's price that we pay for stability and security :)
In latest dev builds
> as I have mentioned before, The pidgin in the IPS
> does not support QQ, which is very famous among
> Chinese, because the QQ is not an open source
> protocol. So I have to compile the pidgin from source
> to get QQ support. The version is not important.
Ah, right, I wonder why OpenSolaris doesn
Did you export them ?
i.e.
export CC=suncc
export CXX=CC
./configure
P.S. You might want to update to b111, it already has Pidgin 2.5.5 installed...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discus
That's a really good advertisement!
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Have you filed bugs on the dtrace toolkit issues (if in fact they
> actually exist)? I'd be pretty surprised if they didn't work. The
> networking stack in OpenSolaris is identical to the one in SXCE as is
> dtracetoolkit.
I filed it two months ago...
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.
> Not having temperatures defined in the "ac" array
> could be ok, when the BIOS is able to control the
> fans without help from the operating system.
> Is your T61 overheating, too?
Nope, the average temp. of the two cores is 46C.
>> http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=6964
>> http:
> > Both ac[] and al[] don't look this interesting to
> me...
>
> Yep, there are no threshold temperatures defined,
> so that tzp->current_level will never change and
> always remains at -1 (so the code will never call
> tzmon_set_power() to enable / disable any fans).
>
On Lenovo T61:
ac = [ 0
> Maybe with the new PAD support (cpupm enabled in
> "event-mode") the kernel is able to switch back to
> the highest cpu frequency *much* faster (=> event
> driven), so that "kstat cpu_info:::current_clock_Hz" now
> always reports the highest cpu frequency?
>
> (That is, monitoring the kstat cpu_
I suggest you to try KeePass (on Windows) and KeePassX on OpenSolaris (you'll
have to compile gcc4.3/4, q4.5 and KeePassX though, but they're usually needed
anyway...)
I recently compiled the latest version of keepassx with success (had to tweak
the compile flags to have "-include keepassx.h" a
Recently moved to zsh, here's a part of my a current configuration (PATH,
PKG_CONFIG_PATH, etc.. missing), maybe someone will find it useful.
What about you, OpenSolaris users, shows us some nice tips for your favourite
shell :)
.zshrc
===
> Took a bit of your advice and having a go with
> binutils. However I cannot compile ffmepg svn 18335
> with the new ld from bintutils. Can you please have
> alook and tell if you can where this is oging wrong.
> I'm using /tmp/gcc/bin/ld but cannot figure out where
> or why it calls /usr/ccs/bin/
> I also keep getting wildly sporadic results with
> blogbench on Opensolaris compared to Linux/Freebsd.
> Like I mentioned, my first run produced a 14k read
> result after fresh install. Then I disabled prefetch
> and got the 499 reads. Reboot got it to 2k reads.
> Enable prefetch then results sam
> >> (%i1) exp (log(1.001) * (2^27) );
> >> (%o1) 674530.4760270637
>
> And maxima would be wrong by at least .0052.
>
> The point I was trying to make, and judging by the audience here
> lately I was entirely too subtle, is that it is very easy to get the
> wrong res
>>> (%i1) exp (log(1.001) * (2^27) );
>>> (%o1) 674530.4760270637
> And maxima would be wrong by at least .0052.
Here you go, had to login to a linux machine running mathematica...
In[5]:= SetPrecision[SetPrecision[1.001,10]^(2^27),100]
Out[5]= 674530.4760270640702779319720642184526
>
> >> > exp ( ln(1.001) * (2^27) )[1]
> >> (%i1) exp (log(1.001) * (2^27) );
> >> (%o1) 674530.4760270637
>
> And maxima would be wrong by at least .0052.
What ? Can you show me the command you run in Mathematica to get the "correct"
result ?
> Lastly, th
> Right. Googling a bit also found "Octave", and maybe
> others. I couldn't begin to comment on how the various free
> vs commercial products compare, or for what purposes.
Yeah. although Octave (which I have installed as well) is an alternative
to MATLAB which deals mostly with numerical calcula
> I can do this with bc -l, too. Even pasting it into
> google gives an answer of sorts.
yeah, it's a trivial calculation, the point of my post was that MAXIMA is an
opensource alternative to Wolfram's Mathematica (i.e. focus on symbolic
computations, but is just as good handling numeric calcul
> exp ( ln(1.001) * (2^27) )[1]
> Which *should* be the same as 1.001 squared 27
> times.
$ uname -v
snv_110
$ maxima
Maxima 5.16.3 http://maxima.sourceforge.net
Using Lisp SBCL 1.0.23
Distributed under the GNU Public License. See the file COPYING.
Dedicated to the memory of William S
Uhm ?
Mathematica has been available for Solaris 10 x64 for quite a while now (I know
I've been trying 5.x on OpenSolaris)
http://www.wolfram.com/products/mathematica/platforms/
Nowadays I just use MAXIMA, which is opensource...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
Hey, I compiled a working 4.4 version just fine with the following flags:
$ gcc -v
Using built-in specs.
Target: i386-pc-solaris2.11
Configured with: ./configure --prefix=/opt/gcc/gcc-4.4
--with-as=/opt/gcc/binutils-2.19/bin/as --with-gnu-as --with-ld=/usr/ccs/bin/ld
--without-gnu-ld --enable-lan
> > Can you try the release OpenSolaris 2008.11 ?
>
> being masochistic, I d/l'ed Realease and wiped the
> Sidux install I painstakingly had all ready to go
> with RAID5.
But you had RAID disabled for OpenSolaris, right ?
> Fresh run Blogbench on default 2008.11 install:
>
> Final score for w
> The user side experience of IPS is no doubt very good but is no different
> from a good Linux package manager like Smart/Yum (with the exception
> of ZFS features).
I trust you on that one, and Conary, which was pointed out by Martin seems to
be nice as well.
> From a developer point of vie
> 5. Usually the design is not cross-platformant, IPS can even run on Windows.
>
>
> Weak argument.
> conary is also implemented in python with C backend.
> Also runs under everything including Windows.
> Also most other pkg systems run on every UNIX.
Note the use of "usually", and by cross-plat
> *** before you argue with moinak, be sure that you
> have taken the time to read his blog. ***
As you have probably noticed from my messages, I never try to argue with
anyone, I'm merely carrying a discussion in which I express my opinion and I
don't make anyone "clueless", "you must be jo
> So modern Linux package managers do not have any of these qualities ?
Some of them ? Of course. All of them ? No. Just a few points:
1. They usually upgrade a live system (and while it's possible for some to do a
non-live upgrade, the live upgrade is exactly how pretty much all of them
operat
> Yes.. writing an entire package manager from the
> ground up is *less* work than maintaining the patches.
This is called "moving forward", IPS is based on new novel ideas, a secure
package manager without any arbitrary post/pre-install scripts, which is fast,
doesn't hog the system upon instal
> Do you have any clue how many patches Sun maintains
> for packages in onnv-gate that never go upstream? Anyway.. they say
> love is blind so it all seems fitting..
I am quite well aware of the patches in the on-nv gate, and they aren't as many
as you make them sound. Plus you are being rude a
> > $ ./blogbench -d ./test
> ...
> > Final score for writes: 693
> > Final score for reads : 45610
>
> Is that on an uncompressed or compressed zfs
> filesystem?
Uncompressed
>
> (Compressed zfs seems to get *much* better results;
> but blogbench writes 0-filled test files,
> and in the end, we have yet-another-package-manager.
while I agree with you on some of the points, I have to say that I love IPS and
how it uses ZFS, if the code would have been based off some Linux package
manager then the changes would never go upstream due to the lack of bootable
clones/sn
> Both of these are most likely the major culprits.
> Since this is basically only a NAS box it only has
> 1gb DDR2 ram in it. It also is a newish nvidia
> chipset based motherboard so Solaris is probably
> reverting to an older default/"generic" type driver.
If you've got sata working there, then
"IBM Near Deal to Buy Sun for Lower Price"
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123869375752683145.html
Sun Microsystems shares again on the rise..
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensola
> When I try to install DB2 Express-C for Linux x86,
For Linux x86 ? On OpenSolaris ? You can't run Linux programs under
OpenSolaris, they are different operating systems.
> installation program quits with an error "There has
> been an attempt to use db2setup on an image for a
> platform that do
> PS - Why did you only run 10 iterations of blogbench?
> Try running it with its default to get a standard to
> which others can compare (blogbench -d {directory})
> which runs 300 iterations I beleive.
It runs 30, not 300, here is the result for the default number of iterations,
on an external
Can you try the release OpenSolaris 2008.11 ? As I said builds 109, 110, 111
come with a zfs bug that reduces performance. Given that even on b110 I get on
a slower hdd much better results than you, I can only assume one of the three
things:
1. Not enough memory (seriously, you should have at l
If you want good ZFS performance you have to be running a 64 bit kernel... On a
32 bit system it'll be slow.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
+1 the packages count is useless in its current form. should just say, e.g.
(not real numbers):
- 15 builds
- 1,500 packages for b109
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> I saw that Sun is providing to Hypervisors :
> - xVM (not released, in beta, a fork from Xen on Solaris 10)
What do you mean by "not released" ? It has been released for quite a long time
now,
and it's an actual release, NOT a beta.
> - Ldom : But I can't find clear informations about it
R
> It's like those cliff-hanger endings they have in TV
> shows. will IBM acquire SUN? will Joerg and
> Jennifer patch things up and go Schuhplattler dancing
> together?
haha! man, that was funny =)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
+1
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Do the math... what brigs them more money? Selling
> Solaris or reselling Linux?
In order to sell Solaris, they have to develop it, which costs a lot of money.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolari
to be honest, I don't think it has ever worked =)
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
It should indeed be flying on that hardware, have you tried updating to a newer
build ?
As a workaround for now, if you don't use compiz you can run:
$ gconf-editor
then go to apps/metacity/general and check "reduced_resources", this won't
repaint the window on resize.
--
This message posted fro
> It's third or fourth rumor of this kind this year.
Links please to rumours of the same magnitude, making Sun's share price jump
74% (and it's still on the rise), reported by CNBC, Bloomberg, WSJ, Reuters,
and pretty much everyone out there..
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
I for one hope that this deal will not go through, otherwise OpenSolaris is
doomed...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Worked fine for me for all builds (now on b109), so you might want to simply
copy it, instead of using a symlink.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
What icons are you talking about ? You can always create a shortcut of your
own...
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
All you have to do:
$ tar xvjf opera-10.00-4205.gcc3-static-qt3.tar.bz2
$ cd opera-9.64-2480.gcc3-static-qt3
$ pfexec ./install.sh --prefix=/usr
Works fine for me..
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensol
Seriously guys,
What on earth is the link to "AMD Shanghai Opteron: Linux vs. OpenSolaris
Benchmarks" doing on main page of opensolaris.com ? That article is seriously
biased towards Linux as has been discussed many times already. Way to put
potential users off... :)
--
This message posted fro
Just tell him to fire up the OpenSolaris LiveDVD
http://genunix.org/distributions/indiana/osol-0811-95.iso and start the Device
Detection Tool
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolar
the short answer is: yes, for newer processors
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6575192
http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/opensolaris-help/2008-April/009089.html
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailin
See:
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=1459
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6715568
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/view_bug.do?bug_id=6711636
The workaround:
"
Comment #8 From Danek Duvall 2008-05-02 17:58:47 (-)
And I don't have this problem on my freshly-installed RC3
try do disable the xscreensaver and use
$ xlock -mode blank
instead, and see if that helps.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
works fine for me...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Try to disable compiz, and use firefox 3.0 instead of firefox 2.0...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Looks like a bug you should report, on b92 psrinfo shows 2 cores on my computer:
$ psrinfo -pv
The physical processor has 2 virtual processors (0 1)
x86 (GenuineIntel 6F6 family 6 model 15 step 6 clock 2400 MHz)
Intel(r) Core(tm)2 CPU 6600 @ 2.40GHz
This message posted from
shows 2 cores just fine for me...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Can't say about mp3s & build 93, but as for the error, try to use "gmake"
instead.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Thats is one of the problems of OpenSolaris in
> comparison to Linux: It have not so much driver.
Yes, it has fewer drivers, at the moment.
> And the driver which works, don't run all perfect.
And would you care to prove an example ? As I tend to disagree with you on this
one.
> It seems als
> 1. Sun Studio 11/12
Shouldn't Sun Studio Express[1] be included in the list ?
[1] http://dlc.sun.com/osol/docs/content/IPS/instdevsoft.html#sunstudio
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss
This is harmless and has already been fixed, see
http://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=38
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> When conducting these types of tests, use
> if=/dev/zero instead of /dev/random or /dev/urandom.
Apprently you missed a post where just that has been done, quoting:
"
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/rdsk/c5t1d0s0 bs=1024k count=256
184549376 bytes (185 MB) copied, 104.892 s, 1.8 MB/s
"
This message
Disable the fmd service and see if the performance improves ?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> Why not adopt "rpm"?
No way! IPS is awesome, it just needs more time to mature.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
The difference is that b91 sets the hinting to "Full", and previous versions
had it at "Slight", hence the visual different you're seeing, all you have to
do is go to "System->Appearence->Fonts->Advanced" and select "[*] Slight"
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=64450&tstart=0
"First, mount the clone under the /mnt directory
$ pfexec mount -F zfs rpool/ROOT/opensolaris-3 /mnt
Next, update the GRUB configuration on your ZFS boot device(s) using
$ pfexec /mnt/boot/solaris/bin/update_grub -R /mnt"
T
Try to install from the command line (run gnome-terminal) and execute this:
pfexec pkg install openoffice
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
You are over-complicating things, all you need to do is fire up the Package
Manager and install the OpenOffice package, or from the command line you can do
this:
$ pfexec pkg install openoffice
That's it...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
I believe the plan is to discontinue SXCE as soon as Indiana contains
everything available in SXCE (like Jumpstart, text based installer, etc.)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensola
> Perhaps the OpenSolaris.org forum is badly overwhelmed. Last I heard, we have
> over
> 1,000,000 registered users in the Jiva forum, true?
It's Jive, not Jiva
> Also, the OpenSolaris.com forum has a nice "edit" button, which is missing in
> Jiva.
the one here also has a nice edit button, p
You can always check the ON changes here:
http://dlc.sun.com/osol/on/downloads/
As for the ZFS boot support, it's not in b87, but rather in b88, and the
changes to installer to support zfs boot are coming in b89, see here:
http://opensolaris.org/os/community/on/flag-days/pages/2008041103/
"Furth
That's Attansic L1, it's not supported, see
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6580058
http://bugs.opensolaris.org/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6677682 (I guess a
dup of the previous bug)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
the pcfs driver (fat32 implementation in solaris) is severly limited in its
speed, it gives a maximum speed of ~3mb/s, so don't expect to have higher
speeds...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris
http://dev.mysql.com/tech-resources/articles/mysql-zfs.html
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Same here (MSI P965 + C2D E6600), sometimes it powers off, sometimes not
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=nvidia_16912&num=1
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> I can certainly add links to the changelogs in the
> mail that gets sent out.
That would be great.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> - I still see a great good in a
> changelog. As of now, a new nv_xy is just a black box
> of unknown content. The downloader outside has no
> clue what she gets, not at all.
It's hardly a black-box as you'll see following the links below.
> Even the insiders might be helped; I can't imagine
> t
What was the problem with installation ?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
You could try to compile it, although given that the last release was in 2004
it probably depends on very old libraries. Why would you need that on Solaris ?
It hasn't been developed for 4 years now and IMHO gnome/kde offer way richer
functionality...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
> Right, as a "Solaris replacement" Indiana isn't there yet by a long shot.
true. but I don't think it's because of the reasons you mentioned
> (It misses SPARC support,
should be there within several months
> liveupgrade,
this is superceded by zfs cloning on upgrades
> upgradability from "
Yes, I've corrected my post as soon as I posted it, I meant last Nevada DE.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
It hasn't come up recently or something, early presentations (way before the
first preview) on Indiana were all pointing out that the plan is to replace
SXDE with Indiana and that SXDE 1/08 will possibly be the last Nevada.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
1 - 100 of 124 matches
Mail list logo
