On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 11:52, UNIX admin wrote:
> > That's not how I understood it. I thought the idea
> > was that the package
> > would be stored as a single file in datastream format
> > rather than unpacked
> > in filesystem format. Which would cut down a lot of
> > the small I/O operations that
Mika Borner wrote:
I'm not using X that much anymore in the sense of opening remote
applications.
But if you're displaying anything locally you're still using X.
Remote display is free - don't use it if you don't want to, but
it doesn't hurt to have the option.
--
-Alan Coopersmith-
>>> gheet <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 04/03/06 4:04 pm >>>
> Let hope I am not taking you out of context on this quote, go talk to
>any Linux desktop guys and asked them to dump the X Window System, you
>will get some funny looks :). The whole of Linux desktop such as GNOME
>or KDE are built on top of
Mika Borner wrote:
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/31/06 2:31 pm >>>
To make Solaris more attractive compared to Linux (et al.) we should
dump the whole X-Window System.
Let hope I am not taking you out of context on this quote, go talk to
any Linux desktop guys and asked them to
Mika Borner wrote:
To make Solaris more attractive compared to Linux (et al.) we should
dump the whole X-Window System.
Sorry, but that's simply not possible. To start with, we simply couldn't
replace all the video drivers on our own.
This message is intended for the addressee only and may
c
On Fri, 2006-03-31 at 14:33, Mika Borner wrote:
>
> To make Solaris more attractive compared to Linux (et al.) we should
> dump the whole X-Window System.
To be replaced with what? And to what purpose?
All this does is force you to rewrite all your graphical
applications, and puts up a barrier d
>IMHO Apple did the right thing with dumping X for Aqua with the
>possibility of runnin X on top of it, for legacy apps. Let's face it, X
>should die. We need something new.
Sorry, what's wrong with X?
"X must die" is a bit of a broad brush.
I'm currently displaying around 10 remote xterms,
> Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> 03/31/06 2:31 pm >>>
>I also think that Apple does provide sufficient control over system
>config these days. No longer is it a "don't touch" but instead they
>have sufficient legacy in doing stuff through the GUI because there
was
>no CLI that they under
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, how do you do this on 1000 Macs?
Remote AppleScript.
And that's a GUI?
Can be or it can just be scripting to interact with the GUI elements
remotely.
If one is running, presumably?
I don't know how it works; b
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>>> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, how do you do this on 1000 Macs?
>>> Remote AppleScript.
>>
>> And that's a GUI?
>
>Can be or it can just be scripting to interact with the GUI elements
>remotely.
If one is running, presumably?
Casper
___
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, how do you do this on 1000 Macs?
Remote AppleScript.
And that's a GUI?
Can be or it can just be scripting to interact with the GUI elements
remotely.
--
Darren J Moffat
___
opensolaris-discu
>[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> So, how do you do this on 1000 Macs?
>
>Remote AppleScript.
And that's a GUI?
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, how do you do this on 1000 Macs?
Remote AppleScript.
--
Darren J Moffat
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
>Indeed and there are GUI's out there that attempt to bridge the
>gap by showing you what CLI would be run. Thats now what I'm
>after here since I don't see the GUI as a "teaching tool" I want
>to have it been seen as the one true way for people that want to
>do it that way.
A GUI should run a c
UNIX admin wrote:
That is an excellent question, and you're to be commended for it.
How do you marry two opposite approaches to getting a task done?
Indeed and there are GUI's out there that attempt to bridge the
gap by showing you what CLI would be run. Thats now what I'm
after here since I
> /usr/sadm/bin/sm* is the CLI interface to SMC.
I did not know that. I just use the individual commands.
When I think of SMC, the first thing I think about is the Java GUI and the
server listening on port 898.
To be quite honest, not my idea of fun.
And it doesn't help that Java's widget tool
> That's not how I understood it. I thought the idea
> was that the package
> would be stored as a single file in datastream format
> rather than
> unpacked
> in filesystem format. Which would cut down a lot of
> the small I/O
> operations
> that are currently necessary.
Aha! OK, that would work.
17 matches
Mail list logo
