Robert Glueck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 3. So far the discussion has only been about Solaris 10 or
> OpenSolaris. What about new distros such as Nexenta and
> BeleniX that retain only the Solaris kernel and core
> libraries? Pure Solaris is renowned for its stability;
> part of the reason pre
> 1. What are the resource requirements for all this
> wonderful
> Solaris 10 software to work and perform reasonably
> well?
> Is it all available for x86 systems? Does it require
> a
> 64-bit dual or quad processor system, 4 GB of RAM and
> a 200
> GB HDD? Or would it all work on a 1.8 GHz Int
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 11:10 -0800, Rich Teer wrote:
> On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, Erast Benson wrote:
>
> > Solaris 8,9,10,11 are different, and therefore "carry" the same risk for
> > end user's apps.
>
> You're forgetting a rather important detail: Sun places a big emphasis
> on backwards compatibilit
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 12:44 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >> The GNU utilities carry both a stability and compatibility
> >> risk. Nothing in Solaris proper can fix that.
> >
> >This statement true for any software in general, unless development is
> >pretty much dead. :-)
>
> Perhaps I shoul
...and Solaris has had multi-threaded applications running for years.
If it is not fast enough, add more CPUs! Solaris scales and by
respecting APIs (thanks for mentioning that Rich) developers save
time ...as time goes by.
R&B :-)
On Nov 27, 2005, at 1:10 PM, Rich Teer wrote:
On Sun, 2
On Sun, 27 Nov 2005, Erast Benson wrote:
> Solaris 8,9,10,11 are different, and therefore "carry" the same risk for
> end user's apps.
You're forgetting a rather important detail: Sun places a big emphasis
on backwards compatibility, so migrating to newer versions of Solaris
carries much less ris
Eric Enright <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 11/27/05, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Add GNU rm it includes an option that allows you to unlink non-empty
> > directories as root. This is a feature that POSIX did put with care into
> > a separate utility called "unlink". So GNU
On 11/27/05, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Add GNU rm it includes an option that allows you to unlink non-empty
> directories as root. This is a feature that POSIX did put with care into
> a separate utility called "unlink". So GNU rm includes an unneeded security
> risk if you m
>> Yes. It's all fully available on low powered systems.
>> (Even a VIA C3 CPU with 512 MB of ram works just fine,
>> even as Sun RAY server; boot Solaris from flash too,
>> if that's your thing)
>
>Neat. Does it work on the PLE133 chipset?
I think I actually have an old ASUS PC with a similar
c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >And in fact, GNU utilities rock stable and pretty compatible across the
> >versions and platforms. So, I woudn't buy your statement..
>
> Except for GNU find and GNU tar which are buggy and are known to be
> buggy to the point that we can only assume that their maintain
Erast Benson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> And in fact, GNU utilities rock stable and pretty compatible across the
> versions and platforms. So, I woudn't buy your statement..
Internal staibility isn't worh anything as long as programs like
e.g. GNU tar exist that cause major compatibility issues
>> The GNU utilities carry both a stability and compatibility
>> risk. Nothing in Solaris proper can fix that.
>
>This statement true for any software in general, unless development is
>pretty much dead. :-)
Perhaps I should have quantified that: " when used as default
in a Solaris environme
On Nov 27, 2005, at 11:11 AM, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
1. What are the resource requirements for all this wonderful
Solaris 10 software to work and perform reasonably well?
Is it all available for x86 systems? Does it require a
64-bit dual or quad processor system, 4 GB of RAM and a 200
GB H
On Sun, 2005-11-27 at 11:11 +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> >3. So far the discussion has only been about Solaris 10 or
> >OpenSolaris. What about new distros such as Nexenta and
> >BeleniX that retain only the Solaris kernel and core
> >libraries? Pure Solaris is renowned for its stability;
>
>1. What are the resource requirements for all this wonderful
>Solaris 10 software to work and perform reasonably well?
>Is it all available for x86 systems? Does it require a
>64-bit dual or quad processor system, 4 GB of RAM and a 200
>GB HDD? Or would it all work on a 1.8 GHz Intel Celeron
>
oops meant this to go to the full list
-- Forwarded message --
From: James Dickens <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Nov 26, 2005 9:08 PM
Subject: Re: [osol-discuss] Re: OpenSolaris - Why should I care? More questions.
To: Robert Glueck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
On 11/26/05, R
Robert Glueck wrote:
Most of the contributors to this thread, I believe, have
been talking about Solaris 10. How much of the full
functionality of Solaris 10 is presently available in
OpenSolaris? And whatever is available, is it only
available as source? Is there a full-fledged free version
Most of the contributors to this thread, I believe, have
been talking about Solaris 10. How much of the full
functionality of Solaris 10 is presently available in
OpenSolaris? And whatever is available, is it only
available as source? Is there a full-fledged free version
of Solaris for x86 avail
James Dickens wrote:
A full install of Solaris requires about 7GB of disk space. 3rd party
and most freeware software will need more.
About half of that...
df -kl
Filesystemkbytesused avail capacity Mounted on
/dev/dsk/c0d0s3 8258469 3080187 509569838%/
I
On 11/26/05, Robert Glueck <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My thanks to everyone for their replies - this has been an
> instructive discussion.
>
> More questions:
>
> 1. What are the resource requirements for all this wonderful
> Solaris 10 software to work and perform reasonably well?
> Is it all av
My thanks to everyone for their replies - this has been an
instructive discussion.
More questions:
1. What are the resource requirements for all this wonderful
Solaris 10 software to work and perform reasonably well?
Is it all available for x86 systems? Does it require a
64-bit dual or quad pro
21 matches
Mail list logo
