Joerg Schilling wrote:
Jim Grisanzio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Artem Kachitchkine wrote:
Darren,
I feel like you covered the floor with little metal balls - one would
slip no matter where he steps. I think that extensive discussions here
and on indiana-discuss have established beyond r
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before I get to the question in the subject, let me spell out
the background for it:
Linux - *the* open source operating system/kernel
FreeBSD - promotes itself as being the BSD to use for desktop/server
NetBSD - promotes itself as being easy port
OpenBSD - promotes itse
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Hahn wrote:
...
I think these are all good points, and think your proposed slogans are
pretty good candidates, too. I believe I've seen similar ideas in
both the Advocacy group and the Indiana project, too--I also remember
that Dennis has pushed out some p
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Kristin Amundsen wrote:
I am really curious now how much is missing from the sources currently
available. I will have to look at this.
One major hole missing is a standards compliant shell (since Solaris ksh
source is not released) though Roland is getting close to f
Kristin Amundsen wrote:
I am really curious now how much is missing from the sources currently
available. I will have to look at this.
One major hole missing is a standards compliant shell (since Solaris ksh
source is not released) though Roland is getting close to fixing that with
the ksh93 i
Heh, yes I have read it before. This is my job for Sun. I have done
all of Sun's brands in the last 7 years. I know exactly what we need to
do and how it has to happen. What I have not ever done is to try to run
the conformance suites on OpenSolaris.
-Kristin
__
> A list could be made of everything that would be needed (though it would
> take a bit of time).
>
> I am really curious now how much is missing from the sources currently
> available. I will have to look at this.
>
> -Kristin
Are you ready for this? :-) Looks at the opening lines on this
> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> Simple question :
>>>
>>> Can a person or person(s) with sufficient craft take the sources
>>> from OpenSolaris.org and build a distro which *may* be certified
>>> as UNIX ?
>>>
>>> Yes or No ?
>>
>>
>> Sources only? I do
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Simple question :
Can a person or person(s) with sufficient craft take the sources
from OpenSolaris.org and build a distro which *may* be certified
as UNIX ?
Yes or No ?
Sources only? I don't think so, at least not until Proj
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Simple question :
Can a person or person(s) with sufficient craft take the sources
from OpenSolaris.org and build a distro which *may* be certified
as UNIX ?
Yes or No ?
Sources only? I don't think so, at least not until Project Emancipation
is complet
> As much as we may want to call OpenSolaris UNIX, we cannot. UNIX is a
> trademark owned by The Open Group.
Sounds like a deep deep jungle full of many many landsharks.
:-(
> The UNIX brand is designed to be applied to specific versions of
> specific products from specific vendors. This
As much as we may want to call OpenSolaris UNIX, we cannot. UNIX is a
trademark owned by The Open Group.
The UNIX brand is designed to be applied to specific versions of
specific products from specific vendors. This is the problem. You
cannot brand "OpenSolaris" any more than you could "Linu
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> This is the most important argument: OpenSolaris is UNIX 03 approved
>
> It's not, and cannot be (as I explained earlier).
>
> Solaris 10 3/05 is UNIX 03 certified. No Solaris Nevada build has yet
> been certified (since it's not worth paying the Open Group for every
Joerg Schilling wrote:
This is the most important argument: OpenSolaris is UNIX 03 approved
It's not, and cannot be (as I explained earlier).
Solaris 10 3/05 is UNIX 03 certified. No Solaris Nevada build has yet
been certified (since it's not worth paying the Open Group for every
build), and
> "Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > What OpenSolaris needs is something like this:
>> >
>> > OpenSolaris: the premier open source server platform
>> >
>> > or...
>> >
>> > "The OpenSolaris project is the only SVR4 based open source
>> > platform that scales evenly from 1 CPU to 12
"Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What OpenSolaris needs is something like this:
> >
> > OpenSolaris: the premier open source server platform
> >
> > or...
> >
> > "The OpenSolaris project is the only SVR4 based open source
> > platform that scales evenly from 1 CPU to 128 CPUs."
>
>
Artem Kachitchkine wrote:
Darren,
I feel like you covered the floor with little metal balls - one would
slip no matter where he steps. I think that extensive discussions here
and on indiana-discuss have established beyond reasonable doubt that
opensolaris.org is indeed in a bit of an identity
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Can we say that it is UNIX ?
Probably not. You can say a specific version of a specific binary
distro is UNIX if it passes the test suites and submits the appropriate
sized check to the Open Group to certify the results, but I don't think
they have any model for brand
> Before I get to the question in the subject, let me spell out
> the background for it:
> While it might be exciting for lots of executive types at Sun,
> for those who are in the open source community,
> it's incredibly "ho hum".
I wouldn't give it that much.
> What OpenSolaris needs is so
Dennis Clarke wrote:
[snip]
"The OpenSolaris project is the only SVR4 based open source
platform that scales evenly from 1 CPU to 128 CPUs."
That is sweet.
Can we say that it is UNIX ? At the very least let's look at the
Single UNIX Spec and determine if we can say it is UNIX ?
GNU
* [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2007-06-21 16:14]:
> And when we get to OpenSolaris:
> "The OpenSolaris project is an open source community and a place
> for collaboration and conversation around OpenSolaris technology."
>
> The problem here is that the first two sentences on www.opensola
Darren,
I feel like you covered the floor with little metal balls - one would
slip no matter where he steps. I think that extensive discussions here
and on indiana-discuss have established beyond reasonable doubt that
opensolaris.org is indeed in a bit of an identity crisis. I would argue,
ho
Stephen Hahn wrote:
...
I think these are all good points, and think your proposed slogans are
pretty good candidates, too. I believe I've seen similar ideas in
both the Advocacy group and the Indiana project, too--I also remember
that Dennis has pushed out some possibilities in the past a
Before I get to the question in the subject, let me spell out
the background for it:
Linux - *the* open source operating system/kernel
FreeBSD - promotes itself as being the BSD to use for desktop/server
NetBSD - promotes itself as being easy port
OpenBSD - promotes itself as being the most secur
24 matches
Mail list logo
