On Friday 02 February 2007 10:42 am, John Plocher wrote:
Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 09:34 am, Stephen Harpster wrote:
We're wondering if this would increase participation.
However, I wanted to offer a suggestion on how you could help
I would like to see a virtual
On Friday 02 February 2007 01:27 pm, James Dickens wrote:
On 2/2/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would like to see a virtual user group, where all the participants
might connect with RealPlayer10 to get a live video of the meeting, which
could be
anything from a presentation,
On Sun, 2007-02-18 at 21:04 +, Peter Tribble wrote:
On 2/5/07, Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another library from the GNOME community is libxml2, which is
now used all over Solaris. I'm currently working on updating
it in Solaris 10 to a version that is 2 years newer.
On 2/5/07, Laszlo (Laca) Peter [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Another library from the GNOME community is libxml2, which is
now used all over Solaris. I'm currently working on updating
it in Solaris 10 to a version that is 2 years newer. The diff
is 10+ lines (not counting the Makefile changes)
No, that's reasonably priced. Now the issue will be
finding somewhere to put it. I may not have a
datacenter for my system, but space is still an issue
:P
Indeed, in today's computing environment, two most precious resources are space
and energy consumption. A close running third is noise
More of us getting stuck into the gaps that hinder
the spread of
OpenSolaris, working either as independent
OpenSolaris developers or as
an integral part of a Sun project team. I'd like to
think that one day
I can make a living as an OpenSolaris developer.
...or a(n) (Open)Solaris
Just FYI, there is a list of the bite-sized bugs:
http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports/oss_bite_size
I have added link to this page to http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports
and we'll get a link on http://bugs.opensolaris.org as soon as we can.
Bonnie
Ben Rockwood wrote:
While that would be
Thank you Bonnie. :)
benr.
Bonnie Corwin wrote:
Just FYI, there is a list of the bite-sized bugs:
http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports/oss_bite_size
I have added link to this page to
http://opensolaris.org/os/bug_reports and we'll get a link on
http://bugs.opensolaris.org as soon as we
On 31-Jan-07, at 9:37 PM, Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Some have been considering a bug bounty program,
so yes, I think
we ought to consider specific programs to engage
more people in
more ways and then call attention to their
contributions.
Fantastic!
:) I honestly think that'd be
IBM is also embracing it on their blade centers, and
are a reseller of
Solaris.
Maybe so -- I can't comment on that, but I can say that IBM is badmouthing
Solaris every chance they get. They even have a magazine that features IBM
solutions on Linux, and lots of articles are specifically
The testing process is also difficult at best at the
moment since you need to test for x86 and SPARC, and
let's face it, most folks have an x86 box, not a
SPARC box.
Used SPARC hardware is dirt cheap nowdays. I just got me 2 x SunFire V100 for
$200 USD apiece, and they're both practically
The testing process is also difficult at best at
the
moment since you need to test for x86 and SPARC,
and
let's face it, most folks have an x86 box, not a
SPARC box.
Used SPARC hardware is dirt cheap nowdays. I just got
me 2 x SunFire V100 for $200 USD apiece, and they're
both
-ok there you are, i was lookin' for this post,
Hi All,
I have a few (3) Questions at the bottom, for you opensolaris developers, et
all.
But, first of all, thanks for OpenSolaris ! it works great (now, to get
Mplayer, and DVD:Rip goin' :) yup, its now workin'... betiful. mmm, The
On 2/5/07, James C. McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 2/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And how far have the star or ksh projects progressed? The last one
appears to be in serious trouble now because Sun has to complain about
every little detail and
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 2/5/07, James C. McPherson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
Ok Josh, how about you provide detail on which of those rules
Sun is suddenly pushing forward, and why they are mindless. If
they truly are mindless then it would be really good for other
people to find out why.
Few
Josh Hurst writes:
Few examples:
Why is it required to remove .so and lint libraries?
We're currently discussing it. The issue is that the libraries in
question are _NOT_ documented, and are not guaranteed any sort of
stability to those building separate applications.
As they're not
Josh Hurst wrote:
Few examples:
Why is it required to remove .so and lint libraries? You don't do that
for X11 even when the API is not public.
What private API's does X11 provide .so lint libraries for? I can't
think of any.
Why is is necessary to demand the removal of diff files from the
Josh Hurst wrote:
Why is it required to remove .so and lint libraries? You don't do that
for X11 even when the API is not public.
Please see the architectural policy on libraries at
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/arc/policies/libraries/
In particular, note W2 and W3 in that document.
On Mon, 5 Feb 2007, John Plocher wrote:
JDS doesn't grok Gnome session files from Linux.
Blame this directly on GNOME - their config file formats have
been wildly unstable between versions, making it difficult to
reuse them across versions. IMHO, GNOME was not designed to work
in an
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 09:24 -0800, John Plocher wrote:
Josh Hurst wrote:
JDS doesn't grok Gnome session files from Linux.
Blame this directly on GNOME - their config file formats have
been wildly unstable between versions, making it difficult to
reuse them across versions.
That's right.
On Mon, 2007-02-05 at 10:04 -0800, Rich Teer wrote:
In fact, one might argue that had the GNOME project adopted some
of Sun's mindless rules (aka, sound engineering practices),
issues like this probably wouldn't have arisen in the first place.
Broad-ranging breakages and everything needing
On 2/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And how far have the star or ksh projects progressed? The last one
appears to be in serious trouble now because Sun has to complain about
every little detail and the star project makes either zero progress or
no progress announcements.
The
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 2/2/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And how far have the star or ksh projects progressed? The last one
appears to be in serious trouble now because Sun has to complain about
every little detail and the star project makes either zero progress or
no progress
Well duh..! As a community project one of the
measures of success is definitely community
participation and how big it is.
Not exactly. Success of a platform is measured by the availability of software
for that platform. Even the most advanced platform in the world is useless if
there is no
1) Community participation has remained very low. To
date greater than 90% (very unscientific and
conservative estimate) of OpenSolaris changes are
driven by Sun's business interests and they come from
Sun employees. (Look at commits, look at general
development direction - nothing there for
[i]In closing, if we want to attract programming talent and expertise, we
should more closely work with, and even help the BSD community, even if we have
to put on hold what we're doing on Solaris. Eventually the two communities
might jump in for each other, and both communities would benefit.
UNIX admin wrote:
We do need more people, but not the Linux hacker kind. All those would want to
do is muck with Solaris so that it looks, works and behaves like Linux.
Unfortunately, Linux suffers from serious lack of engineering and quality
control because everything is implemented ad-hoc
What I am about to say is fairly brutal, so if you're already upset,
don't read further.
--- UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please understand that one of the reasons Solaris is superior to
just about any other operating system out there is because Sun
engineering has implemented
Christopher Mahan wrote:
What I am about to say is fairly brutal, so if you're already upset,
don't read further.
You make some dramatic statements. However, I think some of them are off
somewhat. I wholeheartedly agree that open source needs to be embraced,
and quickly and aggressively. I
Added bonus:
http://www.iowaconsumercase.org/010807/PLEX_7264.pdf
via /. (http://slashdot.org/articles/07/02/03/1524250.shtml)
read the last line.
--- Christopher Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I am about to say is fairly brutal, so if you're already
upset,
don't read further.
If you'd like to do driver development for Solaris,
what's stopping you from going to docs.sun.com and
looking up the driver development guide?
I am frustrated to say that people repeatedly miss the point. To remind -
Those drivers were written long back ago (before OpenSolaris) by single
I am frustrated to say that people repeatedly miss
the point. To remind - Those drivers were written
long back ago (before OpenSolaris) by single person
for his own cause and he was kind enough to make them
available.
Incorrect. Those drivers (by Murayama-san) are still in development, and
That's what has
happened with Linux - it is good enough and does what
people want it to do and it is free. Why do I need to
wait for years just to make it run on my hardware
when Linux runs on it today and if it doesn't run the
way I like it - I can just fix it up and propagate
those
Also, Linux fails miserably in large enterprise
deployments, because the thing is simply not designed
for server farms with thousands of systems on them.
That's why your local ATM, or your bank or even your
insurance will never be powered by Linux and why they
will always either be run on
On 2/3/07, UNIX admin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I am frustrated to say that people repeatedly miss
the point. To remind - Those drivers were written
long back ago (before OpenSolaris) by single person
for his own cause and he was kind enough to make them
available.
Incorrect. Those drivers
Yeah I can do that if I feel like doing it but that is not the point. Point is
to make OpenSolaris a place where people can easily contribute their changes.
Why would I need to discuss that sort of thing (making and propagating my own
changes) on this list?
What happens when number of
On 2/3/07, S Destika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah I can do that if I feel like doing it but that is not the point. Point is
to make OpenSolaris a place where people can easily contribute their changes.
Why would I need to discuss that sort of thing (making and propagating my own
changes) on
Wow thats a bunch of crazy statements right there -
you have insurmountable amount of ignorance here. ATM
machines run Linux
(http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Banrisul - they
replaced MS-DOS here so your statement couldn't be
more funnier!) . Plenty of banks running Linux
successfully - do a
[...]
That's true too and Alan I _really_ appreciate that
you are the only Sun employee to admit that. But I
think the reality is that OpenSolaris has made no
progress whatsoever and when I say that I will not
ignore defining and quantifying it -
So let us see what was the prime objective
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 09:34 am, Stephen Harpster wrote:
We're wondering if this would increase participation.
You mentioned this previously and several folks made comments about the
participation of the community, probably more than we'll need for a long
time(even mine;-)
That's true too and Alan I _really_ appreciate that you are the only Sun
employee to admit that. But I think the reality is that OpenSolaris has made no
progress whatsoever and when I say that I will not ignore defining and
quantifying it -
So let us see what was the prime objective of
On 2/2/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Hurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/2/07, Stephen Harpster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want it to go faster, then participate.
Many of us are waiting that the first community project integrates.
We'd like to see that
On 2/2/07, Stephen Harpster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want it to go faster, then participate.
Many of us are waiting that the first community project integrates.
We'd like to see that Opensolaris.org is really an Open organisation
where community projects can succeed. So far you lack a
And how far have the star or ksh projects progressed? The last one
appears to be in serious trouble now because Sun has to complain about
every little detail and the star project makes either zero progress or
no progress announcements.
The only problem in the ksh93 project is people who are not
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I see no problem; it's progressing as we expected. As they
say, you may like sausages, but you may not want to see them made.
Maybe we want to know what's in the sausage.
Chris Mahan
818.943.1850 cell
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Yeah, everyone wants organic sausages. Dump the E-number stuff. But then,
for some of these we don't know yet how ... when talking about the Solaris
sausage.
I guess you fell hook, line and sinker for the E-numbers are
(dangerous) chemicals ploy.
Most of them are ordinary checmicals you'll
Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 09:34 am, Stephen Harpster wrote:
We're wondering if this would increase participation.
However, I wanted to offer a suggestion on how you could help
I would like to see a virtual user group, where all the participants might
connect with
U.. we already have that. GNOME Meeting went in build 53, and
the USB webcam support just went in last week -- or the week before.
Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 09:34 am, Stephen Harpster wrote:
We're wondering if this would increase participation.
You
William James writes:
Really? Most in the community don't share this opinion. Ben, David,
Jesup, Tobias, Bruno, Markus and I are betting right now whether the
ksh93 integration will succeed or not.
Bets are 6:1 that it'll fail (I try to be optimistic but I am alone
with this opinion).
At
On Fri, 2 Feb 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Yeah, everyone wants organic sausages. Dump the E-number stuff. But then,
for some of these we don't know yet how ... when talking about the Solaris
sausage.
I guess you fell hook, line and sinker for the E-numbers are
(dangerous) chemicals ploy.
On Friday 02 February 2007 10:46 am, Stephen Harpster wrote:
U.. we already have that. GNOME Meeting went in build 53, and
the USB webcam support just went in last week -- or the week before.
I'm fine with using any software that will allow us to collaborate, but
RealPlayer works
Josh Hurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/2/07, Joerg Schilling [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Josh Hurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 2/2/07, Stephen Harpster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
If you want it to go faster, then participate.
Many of us are waiting that the first community project
On Friday 02 February 2007 11:34 am, Stephen Harpster wrote:
What help do you need? Just ask on the desktop community.
I'm not exactly sure, but we need some type of software to multiplex the
clients so we can have xxx number, for one thing. Some software might handle
that by default, and
NOTE: send an email to Derek Cicero to have your email changed.
On Thursday 01 February 2007 06:36 pm, S Destika wrote:
It depends on how you define progress. I agree that most Sun folks feel
they have made good progress but like marketing folks they conveniently
ignore defining and
On 2/2/07, Alan DuBoff [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wednesday 31 January 2007 09:34 am, Stephen Harpster wrote:
We're wondering if this would increase participation.
You mentioned this previously and several folks made comments about the
participation of the community, probably more than we'll
--- [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
What I mean was
--Works in x86 32bit but not in 64bit, and not in Sparc
--Works with Bash but not ksh
--Works with single core but not dual or even 8 cores
--Works with cli but crashes X Window
etc.
None of these are considered acceptable at Sun.
Christopher Mahan wrote:
What I mean was
--Works in x86 32bit but not in 64bit, and not in Sparc
You broke my laptop it runs 64 bit and you broke my NFS server it is
SPARC.
In specific cases this one might actually be okay if it is functionality
that only applies to x86 in 32bit and there
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 09:09:20PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, and when did kprobes and ReiserFS integrate?
In Opensolaris? Not at all. In Linux which is probably offtopic
here it's 2004 (kprobes) and 2001 (reiserfs).
___
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Christoph Hellwig wrote:
On Wed, Jan 31, 2007 at 09:09:20PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Oh, and when did kprobes and ReiserFS integrate?
In Opensolaris? Not at all. In Linux which is probably offtopic
here it's 2004 (kprobes) and 2001 (reiserfs).
How about lkcd
Christopher Mahan writes:
Could performance regression be acceptable if there is, let's say,
tangible development potential? For example: a tool is reimplemented
in Python to allow very competent python devs to take it to the next
level?
Sure. You just need to be explicit about what you're
--- Darren J Moffat [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Christopher Mahan wrote:
What I mean was
--Works in x86 32bit but not in 64bit, and not in Sparc
You broke my laptop it runs 64 bit and you broke my NFS server it
is
SPARC.
In specific cases this one might actually be okay if it is
While that would be handy, we already have a good program in place, its just
buried. I refer to Bite Sized Bugs.
I've pointed to this problem before: how do you find them? Bugs are (were)
flagged in the database but finding a list of these is difficult or impossible.
I've suggested in the
Ben Rockwood wrote:
While that would be handy, we already have a good program in place, its just
buried. I refer to Bite Sized Bugs.
I've pointed to this problem before: how do you find them? Bugs are (were)
flagged in the database but finding a list of these is difficult or
impossible.
On Thu, 1 Feb 2007, Ben Rockwood wrote:
The idea here is that if someone sits down on a Saturday afternoon
and wants a challenge they pull up the list, pull one that looks tasty
and start working on a solution. Its got to be super easy for people
to get started this way.
FWIW, I think
On 2/1/07, Ben Rockwood [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While that would be handy, we already have a good program in place, its
just buried. I refer to Bite Sized Bugs.
...
The idea here is that if someone sits down on a Saturday afternoon and
wants a challenge they pull up the list, pull one
Peter Tribble writes:
I think we need to advertise what projects or communities need help at any
point in time, and for each community or project to identify key issues
where extra hands would make a difference. At the moment it's very difficult
even for those of us who've been involved with
[b]Do not reply to me - I read this forum. My email ID is INVALID. Thank
you.[/b]
James C. McPherson wrote:
Hi Erast,
I *really* do not understand why you appear to be
so concerned
about how large or extensive the OpenSolaris
community actually
is.
Yes, the number of those who
[b]Do not reply to me - I read this forum. My email ID is INVALID. Thank
you.[/b]
How nice of you.
S Destika [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I was about to send a repy but now I won't.
Casper
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
S Destika wrote:
[b]Do not reply to me - I read this forum. My email ID is INVALID. Thank
you.[/b]
James C. McPherson wrote:
Hi Erast, I *really* do not understand why you appear to be
so concerned
about how large or extensive the OpenSolaris
community actually
is.
Yes, the number of
S Destika wrote:
[b]Do not reply to me - I read this forum. My email ID is INVALID. Thank
you.[/b]
If you cannot be bothered setting up a valid email
address for the mailing lists then perhaps you're
not really interested in being part of the community.
James C. McPherson
--
Solaris kernel
On Thursday 01 February 2007 02:37 pm, James C. McPherson wrote:
S Destika wrote:
[b]Do not reply to me - I read this forum. My email ID is INVALID. Thank
you.[/b]
If you cannot be bothered setting up a valid email
address for the mailing lists then perhaps you're
not really interested in
[b] To all - Please fix the forum s/w to allow me to change my email ID and I
promise I will do it next moment - please STOP complaining about it. I believe
it should be fixed the right way - which benefits all - by fixing the forum
software.[/b]
It's kind of interesting seeing a substantial
disregard my previous post - I didn't realise that you were having
issues changing it. email me your new email address and i'll update
your account.
cheers,
steve
On Thu, Feb 01, 2007 at 06:36:03PM -0800, S Destika wrote:
[b] To all - Please fix the forum s/w to allow me to change my email ID
I could accept every line of your post,but please don't forget that GPL is not
freedom,its a little great community's extortion to a single developer.The
choice to release modified source code should be a logical step without
impositions because its more *convenient* for me and for open
Peter Tribble wrote On 02/02/07 05:23,:
On 2/1/07, *Ben Rockwood* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
While that would be handy, we already have a good program in place,
its just buried. I refer to Bite Sized Bugs.
...
The idea here is that if someone sits down
James Carlson wrote On 02/02/07 05:34,:
Peter Tribble writes:
I think we need to advertise what projects or communities need help at any
point in time, and for each community or project to identify key issues
where extra hands would make a difference. At the moment it's very difficult
even
S Destika wrote On 02/02/07 07:22,:
[b]Do not reply to me - I read this forum. My email ID is INVALID. Thank
you.[/b]
James C. McPherson wrote:
Hi Erast,
I *really* do not understand why you appear to be
so concerned
about how large or extensive the OpenSolaris
community actually
Alan Coopersmith wrote On 01/31/07 16:45,:
Jim Grisanzio wrote:
Also, I just checked the Jive discussion forums. Since opening 20
months ago, the project's lists/forums have generated 10,114,589 total
views, 7,218,833 unique visitors, 21,033 threads, and 81,874 messages.
and how many
On Wed, 31 Jan 2007, Ian Collins wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
I think the barriers to contribution are currently the biggest discouragement.
Integration of even the smallest changes can take a very long time.
That's put me off as well, it adds cost (from the developer's
perspective). It
Hello Shawn,
Wednesday, January 31, 2007, 4:01:33 AM, you wrote:
SW I think the barriers to contribution are currently the biggest
SW discouragement. Integration of even the smallest changes can take a very
long time.
Not that you get code integration in Linux world instantaneously
especially
Shawn Walker wrote:
I think the barriers to contribution are currently the biggest discouragement.
Integration of even the smallest changes can take a very long time.
and how is this any different to getting fixes into the one true Linux
kernel tar ball ?
How many people actually have
Shawn Walker wrote:
I think the barriers to contribution are currently the biggest
discouragement. Integration of ev
en the smallest changes can take a very long time.
and how is this any different to getting fixes into the one true Linux
kernel tar ball ?
How many people actually have
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Shawn Walker wrote:
I think the barriers to contribution are currently the biggest
discouragement. Integration of even the smallest changes can take a
very long time.
and how is this any different to getting fixes into the one true Linux
kernel tar ball ?
How many
All of those things are being worked on now.
Shawn Walker wrote:
I think the barriers to contribution are currently the biggest discouragement.
Integration of even the smallest changes can take a very long time.
Oh, and before I forget, the bug reporting system being out of sync with
I'm the first to agree that the transition to Mercurial, getting the
source outside Sun's firewall, is going slower than I want. And now
there are problems with the automounter. Sigh.
It's not that we don't want to fix this. There are just a lot of
technical issues. The best thing you can
Stephen Harpster wrote:
I'm the first to agree that the transition to Mercurial, getting the
source outside Sun's firewall, is going slower than I want. And now
there are problems with the automounter. Sigh.
It's not that we don't want to fix this. There are just a lot of
technical
On Tuesday 30 January 2007 08:37 pm, Artem
Kachitchkine wrote:
Do the community contributors feel at home here?
I don't think so. I see Sun's process as being very
intimidating. While many
of the other open source communities are bold,
they're somehow more
welcoming. I see OpenSolaris
On 1/31/07, S Destika [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I agree with some of your post, but the rest is
simply untrue. There are plenty of design and
implementation discussions. There have been plenty of
good and bad words exchanged as well about particular
features, etc. There have been
On 1/31/07, Stephen Harpster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm the first to agree that the transition to Mercurial, getting the
source outside Sun's firewall, is going slower than I want.
How do you want to stimulate the growth of the Opensolaris community?
That may be more important right now.
Please forgive the newbiness.
Can Open Solaris be built entirely from source?
Josh Hurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: On 1/31/07, Stephen Harpster wrote:
I'm the first to agree that the transition to Mercurial, getting the
source outside Sun's firewall, is going slower than I want.
How do
Hey,
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 1/31/07, Stephen Harpster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm the first to agree that the transition to Mercurial, getting the
source outside Sun's firewall, is going slower than I want.
How do you want to stimulate the growth of the Opensolaris community?
That may be
--- Josh Hurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/31/07, Christopher Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please forgive the newbiness.
Can Open Solaris be built entirely from source?
Ask in opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org for details. The answer is
yes
except some closed binary parts which
On 1/31/07, Glynn Foster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Hey,
Josh Hurst wrote:
On 1/31/07, Stephen Harpster [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I'm the first to agree that the transition to Mercurial, getting the
source outside Sun's firewall, is going slower than I want.
How do you want to stimulate the
Hey,
Josh Hurst wrote:
You could make it a community phenomenon quite like Linux if you would
allow people to participate without waiting months to see the
submitted patches integrated. It sucks when a five line patch for a
very dumb bug is queued and no one cares. It sucks when projects like
Josh Hurst wrote:
You could make it a community phenomenon quite like Linux if you would
allow people to participate without waiting months to see the
submitted patches integrated. It sucks when a five line patch for a
very dumb bug is queued and no one cares. It sucks when projects like
the
You could make it a community phenomenon quite like Linux if you would
allow people to participate without waiting months to see the
submitted patches integrated. It sucks when a five line patch for a
very dumb bug is queued and no one cares. It sucks when projects like
the ksh93 integration need
Tom Haynes wrote:
Josh Hurst wrote:
You could make it a community phenomenon quite like Linux if you would
allow people to participate without waiting months to see the
submitted patches integrated. It sucks when a five line patch for a
very dumb bug is queued and no one cares. It sucks when
Josh Hurst wrote:
You could make it a community phenomenon quite like Linux if you would
allow people to participate without waiting months to see the
submitted patches integrated. It sucks when a five line patch for a
very dumb bug is queued and no one cares. It sucks when projects like
the
Christopher Mahan writes:
How hard would it be to reimplement the binary parts? Are there
patent issues?
Those who know the issues usually can't talk about them in any
detail. That's actually a good thing, as it leaves you untainted to
take on one of those helpful tasks. ;-}
In general,
On 31-Jan-07, at 11:31 AM, Christopher Mahan wrote:
--- Josh Hurst [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 1/31/07, Christopher Mahan [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Please forgive the newbiness.
Can Open Solaris be built entirely from source?
Ask in opensolaris-code@opensolaris.org for details. The
1 - 100 of 131 matches
Mail list logo
