Re: [osol-discuss] SXCR 51 delayed slightly

2006-10-30 Thread Michael Pogue
Along those lines, here's a more direct link that discusses what Zulu is: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?messageID=44918 And, the PSARC case: Zones Features For Zulu http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/caselog/2006/387/ Mike Alan Hargreaves wrote: It does make

Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: integrate GCCfss into SFW

2006-07-24 Thread Michael Pogue
Regarding current support for gcc 3.4.3 in Solaris, see below: Rainer Orth wrote: I think here's an important misunderstanding: this is not how free software works. If Sun as a vendor or the OpenSolaris community as a whole rely on GCC in some way (as Sun has done for the initial amd64 port),

Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: support GCCfss and gcc 4 in ON

2006-07-21 Thread Michael Pogue
Rainer Orth wrote: I don't see CodeSourcery being very active with GCC for Solaris work these days (maybe their contract has ended?) No, their contract has not ended. (I am the initiator/manager of the contact for the 3.4.3 compiler). We just don't have a whole lot of bugs that need fixing

Re: [osol-discuss] Project proposal: support GCCfss and gcc 4 in ON

2006-07-21 Thread Michael Pogue
Alexey Starovoytov wrote: 'diff csl-sol210-3_4-branch gcc_343' should go into mainline, otherwise we'll end up with 'sol' branches for every major gcc release ON care to support. ...snip/... The prerequisite for that is to have 'diff csl-sol210-3_4-branch gcc_343' integrated into gcc trunk

Re: [osol-discuss] Google Summer of Code: Call for OpenSolaris Participation

2006-04-17 Thread Michael Pogue
. Instead, maybe that student could be participant in a thread in the OpenSolaris Tools community, or perhaps the Performance community (or both). Mike Jim Grisanzio wrote: Michael Pogue wrote: I have a suggestion: in another current thread, Build times for Open Solaris, there's discussion about

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Build times for Open Solaris....

2006-04-14 Thread Michael Pogue
Do you think it's possible to change the build, such that more can go on in parallel? Or, are there some limiting steps that are hard to eliminate (if so, where do you think they are?)? Thanks, Mike Danek Duvall wrote: On Fri, Apr 14, 2006 at 01:06:21AM -0700, Menno Lageman wrote: This

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Bug fix process overly burdonsome ?

2005-08-30 Thread Michael Pogue
The interesting question for me is this: if we're doing all this stuff, then how come people (like Steven) still think we're not penetrating into the community? There is a perception out there that we're not doing enough developer evangelism and spreading of the technical knowledge, and

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Bug fix process overly burdonsome ?

2005-08-30 Thread Michael Pogue
A couple other questions that Steven's post brought up for me: Have we done a device driver fest in the past (or do we have plans for one)? Do we have plans for online tutorials? (If so, on what topics?) And, on the developer education front, how can we get people up-to-speed on the source