On 7/6/07, Shawn Walker <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> Those aren't there yet as the new installer has not been adopted yet.
> It's safe to say those are a future release.
>
> Plus, since I know SPARC support isn't ready, I know Sun wouldn't do that :)
Does anyone know if Live Update will support
On 5/25/07, Anne <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
The sad thing about this is that I still cannot get the backspace working on
the Java environment. UGH what a major pain. And the DEL key acts the same
way. The ONLY thing that works for backspace is continually hitting "CTRL+H"
The Java interface is s
On 5/21/07, Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
You are missing something very significant. There are times when doing
so, might give you a significant competitive advantage. Whether that
is time to market, efficiency gains, or some other advantage, there
are many cases that make strong busine
On 5/18/07, Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Why don't we first focus on those applications that don't exist in
Solaris currently? Also, in parallel, we should work on an updated
packaging format.
Whoa... slow down Tiger.
SVR4 is by far a more complete and cohesive packaging format than
Chenboro and Supermicro are both good vendors for cases (rackmountable
and low profile)
Sorry for the typo, that should have read: Chenbro
http://www.chenbro.com/
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On 5/18/07, Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> http://www.tyan.com/product_board_detail.aspx?pid=181
Questions:
Is this unit 64 bit?
Assuming you put in a 64bit processor, yes. This is a socket 479
motherboard, so you will need to look at mobile cpu's. I would suggest
a lowend core 2 du
f) leave Solaris precisely how it is, and add additional personalities
(ie: /usr/gnu) to support disparate runtimes with sensible aliases for
new users.
On 5/17/07, Doug Scott <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> I agree with much of your post. Though rather than using the
>>
On 5/16/07, Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Personally, I am not terribly worried about GNU/Linux users who have a
> hard time moving over to Solaris. I find the goal to be laughable and
> I would far more upset if my OS of choice was diluted to support a
> marketing initiative.
How exa
I have perhaps a more general question.
Why not fully flesh out the /usr/gnu personality and just provide
users with either a default .profile/.cshrc (or *gasp* new user
documentation) rather than wreaking havoc on 10+ years of
compatibility?
Why not provide default aliases for these new users a
I have a network attached tape device I built using this board from
Tyan. It is a FlexATX so its quite small (only marginally larger than
a mini-itx) and is dead silent (under 17db) in full operation and
makes use of the newer core 2 chipset (vt-x instruction support) so
vmware would run at near n
Have you tried issuing 'svcadm enable -r nfs/server' ?
There may be a dependency lurking somewhere you could have missed.
On 5/15/07, jason jin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
solaris 10 11/06 on SUN V240
# cat /etc/dfs/dfstab
share -F nfs -o ro,anon=0 /jumpstart
#svcadm enable svc:/network/nfs/se
Serves me right for not actually reading the original email...
What flags are you passing to modload... -p ?
On 5/14/07, Steve Stallion <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
It sounds like you are having runtime lookup issues. If you are
compiling something by hand, make sure that you are passin
It sounds like you are having runtime lookup issues. If you are
compiling something by hand, make sure that you are passing a -R flag
with the library paths you wish to link to at runtime.
Do *not*, I repeat, do *not* use LD_LIBRARY_PATH. Hint: This should
look a lot like your -L paths.
On 5/14
Well it didnt take long for this to escalate to into an all out flame.
Remember Gentlemen, pinkies up!
On 5/11/07, Brian Gupta <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/11/07, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Not at all, but Sun execs have a long history of
> > telling the press long
> > before
Sorry about that, Im a bit guilty of using /usr/sfw as shorthand for the consolodation - i'll qualify next time :)On 10/11/06, Darren J Moffat <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:David Kleiner wrote:> Steve,>> What's your take on the metadata (versions, pkg dependencies, stable vs. -devel, that sort of stuf
All of this certainly up for discussion. Ive registered a channel on irc.freenode.net named #opensolaris-ports so we can discuss this outside of the discuss list for now. Over the next couple of days, I'll get a ports list setup on
opensolaris.org.This goes for anyone else who is interested, hop o
Danek,Thats great to hear. What else needs to happen make this project official?SteveOn 10/10/06, Danek Duvall <
[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:On Tue, Oct 10, 2006 at 07:28:19AM -0500, Steve Stallion wrote:
> I most definitely agree - however, I would like to see the project get an> actual
Erast,I am more than willing to develop and support this project, however it will depend on the rest of the community to make use of it. I think that would be a good goal to have ultimately. I have had a couple of ideas to support specific dist revisions of the ports repository, which would make of
Frank,I most definitely agree - however, I would like to see the project get an actual start before these discussions commence. To be perfectly honest, Im feeling a little guilty for all the traffic I have caused on the -discuss list the last few days ;)
As a side note: I have already done much of
), vs. unstable
(unsupported).
Cheers!
SteveOn 10/9/06, Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Steve Stallion wrote:> I completely agree. It does make the dependency list much bigger but> there are a couple of options (at least as I see it):>> 1) /usr/sfw is moved into the ports
Agreed. Build recipies are cheap to host, Sun or genunix or wherever would have the master repository, but it would be very easy to build a mirror system with so little space requirements.Admittedly, I would be thrilled to see the Companion folks make use of this once we are ready. Just as Dennis m
I completely agree. It does make the dependency list much bigger but there are a couple of options (at least as I see it):1) /usr/sfw is moved into the ports collection (eventually of course), and we all live in a big happy world.
2) We build in alternate dependencies on /usr/sfw package in the ev
Dave,This may be ignorance on my part, but AFAIK, there are no
TCL bindings to sun api's. In my experience, more developers (including
myself) are more proficient in C than TCL. While TCL is in /usr/sfw, I
would like to see the ports system available to any solaris user
whether or not they have the
23 matches
Mail list logo
