And Indiana is pushing me away from Solaris. If I wanted the poorly thought out
and unstable crap that comes the linux mindset I would just go with linux. I am
looking for something that is well thought out and stable
This message posted from opensolaris.org
On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 5:02 PM, Dr. Robert Pasken [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And Indiana is pushing me away from Solaris. If I wanted the poorly thought
out and unstable crap that comes the linux mindset I would just go with
linux. I am looking for something that is well thought out and stable
Dr. Robert Pasken wrote:
And Indiana is pushing me away from Solaris. If I wanted the poorly thought
out and unstable crap that comes the linux mindset I would just go with
linux. I am looking for something that is well thought out and stable
Simple enough, ignore Indiana. Use Solaris 10
[i]Maybe because it costs Sun too much money to maintain multiple release
preview trains?[/i]
Maybe, maybe, maybe. Probably.
Still, as member of a target audience (so I understand), to me the money seems
- another time - not wisely spent.
Having been on Linux since early RedHat, later on
The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an
experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-)
I see Indiana is an experiment well I think it is more than that!
From: Net Talks Webcast Details: Sorting Out Solaris Releases
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 6:43 AM, Andrew Watkins [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an
experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-)
I see Indiana is an experiment well I think it is more than that!
Marketing and
Andrew Watkins wrote:
The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an
experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-)
I see Indiana is an experiment well I think it is more than that!
Eventually, we expect it will be more, that's what Larry is saying.
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 10:26:15AM -0500, Dave Miner wrote:
Andrew Watkins wrote:
The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an
experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-)
I see Indiana is an experiment well I think it is more than that!
On Wed, Feb 13, 2008 at 11:21 PM, Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an
experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-)
I realize from that answer that my question was ill-formed. It's clear
that there is some
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 2:28 PM, Ceri Davies [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Fri, Feb 15, 2008 at 10:26:15AM -0500, Dave Miner wrote:
Andrew Watkins wrote:
The preview is absolutely an experiment. Indiana itself is an
experiment. OpenSolaris? Well, I don't know what to call it ;-)
Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The old shell is now:
/usr/has/bin/sh
Well, then Sun seems to start an incompatible fork from OpenSolaris.
Sigh. We have made no statements about compatibility with anything,
either past or future, in the preview releases. It's an experiment.
On Thu, Feb 14, 2008 at 3:54 AM, Joerg Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
The old shell is now:
/usr/has/bin/sh
Well, then Sun seems to start an incompatible fork from OpenSolaris.
Sigh. We have made no statements about compatibility
So what are you basically saying is that: Solaris should keep /bin/sh for as
long as it stands even if a more stable/more flexible/better designed/ exists
just because there may be old customers without renewed support (I'm sure
customers with support would have their scripts fixed in no time)
Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o ksh93 is the default *system* shell (bash remains the default
user shell)
What do you understand by *system* shell?
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)
On Feb 13, 2008 11:10 AM, Joerg Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o ksh93 is the default *system* shell (bash remains the default
user shell)
What do you understand by *system* shell?
/sbin/sh, /usr/bin/sh are now really ksh93.
The old shell
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 13, 2008 11:10 AM, Joerg Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o ksh93 is the default *system* shell (bash remains the default
user shell)
What do you understand by *system* shell?
/sbin/sh,
Joerg Schilling wrote:
Shawn Walker [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Feb 13, 2008 11:10 AM, Joerg Schilling
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
o ksh93 is the default *system* shell (bash remains the default
user shell)
What do you understand by *system*
On Feb 13, 2008 8:44 PM, Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sigh. We have made no statements about compatibility with anything,
either past or future, in the preview releases. It's an experiment.
The negativity some of you have towards experiments just amazes me
sometimes.
But what's the
Peter Tribble wrote:
On Feb 13, 2008 8:44 PM, Dave Miner [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sigh. We have made no statements about compatibility with anything,
either past or future, in the preview releases. It's an experiment.
The negativity some of you have towards experiments just amazes me
On Wed, 13 Feb 2008, Shawn Walker wrote:
/usr/has/bin/sh
...since it is a hasbin :)
Groan!
--
Rich Teer, SCSA, SCNA, SCSECA, OGB member
CEO,
My Online Home Inventory
URLs: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
http://www.linkedin.com/in/richteer
http://www.myonlinehomeinventory.com
20 matches
Mail list logo
