waynel - I think you should lay off the man you are talking to. He is not the
original post creator, I am so if you have a beef then bring it to me and if
you have a problem with the word ass then you need to get some help from
someplace other than here.
--
This message posted from
waynel - I think you should lay off the man you are talking to. He is not the
original post creator, I am so if you have a beef then bring it to me and if
you have a problem with the word *** then you need to get some help from
someplace other than here.
@bsdnix
Since we have your
Shawn Walker schrieb:
Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess truth does = rude to people who are blind
to it and can or
will not see the light of it. Most people here
will agree that
opensloaris has headed down the wrong path, many
will not say in
public but there are those that have and that
Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess this is not enough information? Chad Welsh
wrote:
I guess there is a limit to how much you can
update at one time when using Opensloaris 1002 b127
or any other Opensloaris version?
While reading this thread, I downloaded and installed some 267MB packages from
Anon Y Mous wrote:
Is anybody interested in tacking a crack at re-writing IPS in the C programming language if that would make it run faster?
I'm amused that you think that re-writing IPS in the C language would
make it run that much faster.
You're aware that core parts of IPS are already
I'm amused that you think that re-writing IPS in the
C language would
make it run that much faster.
snip
Cheers,
--
Shawn Walker
Hi Shawn,
You are, of course, a very respectable member of this forum (an
understatement), but please refrain from using languages that may cause
Is expressing amusement language that causes resentment?
Or is the bad language you are talking about the reference to A$$ in
the subject line?
Has our forum come to this?
Brian
W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
I'm amused that you think that re-writing IPS in the
C language would
make it run that
Is expressing amusement language that causes
resentment?
Or is the bad language you are talking about the
reference to A$$ in
the subject line?
Has our forum come to this?
Brian
I believe you have answered your own question. (thus then why bothered to
ask?)
--
This message
I am all for calling out bad language when its used but I am failing to see
your point here.
As for the C question, it has been discussed already in the IPS mailing
list, as already mentioned performance critical portions are written in C at
this stage.
On Wed, Dec 2, 2009 at 05:22, W. Wayne
Is anybody interested in tacking a crack at re-writing IPS in the C programming
language if that would make it run faster?
Maybe it might be useful add an optional choice where local OpenSolaris user's
groups could use an algorithm similar to bit-torrent to accelerate the
downloading of
I guess this is not enough information? Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess there is a limit to how much you can update at one time when using
Opensloaris 1002 b127 or any other Opensloaris version?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess this is not enough information? Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess there is a limit to how much you can update at one time when using
Opensloaris 1002 b127 or any other Opensloaris version?
No.
--
Shawn Walker
___
And why not? it asks specifically Opensloaris 1002 b127 I don't think you can
get any clearer than that.!
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
I was getting at the fact that *you* are more than welcome to raise these
issues *yourself*, by becoming constructively involved in the community you
will find that you can have your concerns and opinions heard. Being abrupt
and rude is almost a guarantee that no one will listen to you. And yes,
Stephen, hope that you are very well.
[OT]
We have seen some ISPs that blacklist occasional specific packets.
Can we either kick these ISP's up the ass for being crap, or identify
what packets they are refusing (eg. JPEG signatures?) and obfuscate the
offensive packets?
Whatever,
I think you have a problem with your install. IPS works good. I have no
complaints, and neither other people on other Solaris forums I hang around.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
Hi,
On Thu, Nov 26, 2009 at 1:41 AM, Orvar Korvar
knatte_fnatte_tja...@yahoo.com wrote:
I think you have a problem with your install. IPS works good. I have no
complaints, and neither other people on other Solaris forums I hang around.
IPS surely works, but performance-wise, it is very poor
Che Kristo schrieb:
Just out of curiosity are there defects raised against the issues you've
raised here? I have searche3d and can not find them in
http://defect.opensolaris.org/
I don't think it would make sense to add them. gnome-vfs is broken by
design and is already replaced by something
At present, I believe Solaris 10 or SXCE is more suitable to large-scale
deployment than OpenSolaris (i.e. the distro formerly known as Indiana).
If OpenSolaris will indeed become the basis of Solaris next (give or take
additional licensed, i.e. proprietary components and support for Solaris
Well I guess if the service is supposed to work it would have had that setting
already enabled. Hell I hate the living crap out of windows but its update
service is significantly more reliable out of the box than this, hell even
solaris 10 update manager is more reliable and efficient. But I
set the variable and I still cannot finish an update. I cannot believe that you
plan to replace solaris with this crap! You should
have stuck with JDS R2 instead of a linux-solaris bastardization. At least I
could get updates with JDS R2 before the repositories were
I guess when people don't like the truth they stop helping no matter, huh? Well
you all have a fun time with Sol-nux and stay in your yummy gummy dream world
while us true believers stomp the turf with the tried and true heavy metal
hitter solaris 10 and its Step brother that is beaten to death
Nexenta.org
2009/11/24 Chad Welsh unixphr...@mac.com
I guess when people don't like the truth they stop helping no matter, huh?
Well you all have a fun time with Sol-nux and stay in your yummy gummy dream
world while us true believers stomp the turf with the tried and true heavy
metal hitter
Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess there is a limit to how much you can update at one time when using
Opensloaris 1002 b127 or any other Opensloaris version? If I try to install
large packages like Openoffice, Java 7 runtime or I figure anything over 10MB
or so the Package Manager fails to download
I've never used the older package system, OpenSolaris 2009.06 was my first try
on Solaris as an admin. I've had no problems with the package system though. It
works well for me. I've done image-updates when I needed to download close to a
gig and it gets them all and installs them all without
It works, but it doesn't mean that it works well. Don't know why Sun decided to
reinvent wheel (the most stupid idea in Unix world opposite to K.I.S.S.). There
is pkgsrc available for Solaris or there are packaging systems from OpenBSD,
FreeBSD, ... with good licence.
--
This message posted
* Chad Welsh unixphr...@mac.com [2009-11-24 04:58]:
I guess there is a limit to how much you can update at one time when
using Opensloaris 1002 b127 or any other Opensloaris version?
There is no limit imposed, either by the client or the server.
If I try to install large packages like
Tomas Bodzar wrote:
It works, but it doesn't mean that it works well. Don't know why Sun decided to
reinvent wheel (the most stupid idea in Unix world opposite to K.I.S.S.). There
is pkgsrc available for Solaris or there are packaging systems from OpenBSD,
FreeBSD, ... with good licence.
On Tue, Nov 24, 2009 at 6:27 AM, Chad Welsh unixphr...@mac.com wrote:
I guess when people don't like the truth they stop helping no matter, huh?
Well you all have a fun time with Sol-nux and stay in your yummy gummy dream
world while us true believers stomp the turf with the tried and true
Unlike some, I find IPS to be usable, but that doesn't change the fact that it
was lunacy to implement a packaging system in an interpreted language.
[url=http://www.haskell.org/haskellwiki/Haskell]Haskell[/url] would have been a
much better choice. The [url=http://xmonad.org/]Xmonad window
Greetings Erik,
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:55:56 +0100, Erik Trimble wrote:
Aside from the sporadic download issues, exactly what else seems wrong
with ips?
First sorry for my English.
I miss some options when (un)install packege(s) like these:
-f
--force Force
Viktor Cemasko wrote:
Greetings Erik,
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 19:55:56 +0100, Erik Trimble wrote:
Aside from the sporadic download issues, exactly what else seems wrong
with ips?
First sorry for my English.
I miss some options when (un)install packege(s) like these:
-f
--force
Greetings Erik,
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:08:05 +0100, Shawn Walker wrote:
Viktor Cemasko wrote:
...
--forceForce the (un)install of a package.
This was purposefully omitted. Your system couldn't be properly
upgraded if this was supported.
With snapshot possibility I
Viktor Cemasko wrote:
Greetings Erik,
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:08:05 +0100, Shawn Walker wrote:
Viktor Cemasko wrote:
...
--forceForce the (un)install of a package.
This was purposefully omitted. Your system couldn't be properly
upgraded if this was supported.
With
Greetings Erik,
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:56:14 +0100, Shawn Walker
swal...@opensolaris.org wrote:
...
In short, the way the OpenSolaris distribution is currently built pretty
much requires SUNWfirefox if you want to use the included GNOME.
I understand Your position in this question. My
Viktor Cemasko wrote:
Greetings Erik,
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 21:56:14 +0100, Shawn Walker
swal...@opensolaris.org wrote:
...
In short, the way the OpenSolaris distribution is currently built
pretty much requires SUNWfirefox if you want to use the included GNOME.
I understand Your position in
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:41:21 +0100, Shawn Walker
swal...@opensolaris.org wrote:
As I already said, -r does what you said for --upward. Look at the
output of 'uninstall -nrv'.
I am sure You already mistook only because of my bad explanation.
~%= pfexec pkg uninstall -nrv
SUNWfirefox
Viktor Cemasko wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 22:41:21 +0100, Shawn Walker
swal...@opensolaris.org wrote:
As I already said, -r does what you said for --upward. Look at the
output of 'uninstall -nrv'.
I am sure You already mistook only because of my bad explanation.
~%= pfexec pkg uninstall
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:39:22 +0100, Shawn Walker
swal...@opensolaris.org wrote:
It is upward through the dependencies of the package you named.
SUNWfirefox is not a dependency of SUNWgnome-help-viewer and is
therefore not listed.
Bingo. We come closer to what I want(ed) and trying to
Viktor Cemasko wrote:
On Tue, 24 Nov 2009 23:39:22 +0100, Shawn Walker
swal...@opensolaris.org wrote:
It is upward through the dependencies of the package you named.
SUNWfirefox is not a dependency of SUNWgnome-help-viewer and is
therefore not listed.
Bingo. We come closer to what I
Chad Welsh wrote:
Y instead of a linux-solaris bastardization.
Great good name for what Solaris is becoming :)
Thanks for your fantasy
Salut
Alex
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Wed, 25 Nov 2009 00:14:52 +0100, Shawn Walker
swal...@opensolaris.org wrote:
It has been discussed, but I don't know when or if it might be
implemented.
Clear, has taken into consideration.
As for SUNWgnome-help-viewer, I suspect its a dependency of some
package SUNWfirefox depends
I think its more like when people see rudeness like you've displayed they
don't want to help
On Wed, Nov 25, 2009 at 01:27, Chad Welsh unixphr...@mac.com wrote:
I guess when people don't like the truth they stop helping no matter, huh?
Well you all have a fun time with Sol-nux and stay in your
I guess truth does = rude to people who are blind to it and can or will not see
the light of it. Most people here will agree that opensloaris has headed down
the wrong path, many will not say in public but there are those that have and
that still will say that SX:CE is the way of the future and
Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess truth does = rude to people who are blind to it and can or will not see
the light of it. Most people here will agree that opensloaris has headed down
the wrong path, many will not say in public but there are those that have and
that still will say that SX:CE is the
Shawn Walker schrieb:
Chad Welsh wrote:
I guess truth does = rude to people who are blind to it and can or
will not see the light of it. Most people here will agree that
opensloaris has headed down the wrong path, many will not say in
public but there are those that have and that still will
I guess there is a limit to how much you can update at one time when using
Opensloaris 1002 b127 or any other Opensloaris version? If I try to install
large packages like Openoffice, Java 7 runtime or I figure anything over 10MB
or so the Package Manager fails to download the entire queue. Am I
Hi,
I have had no problems image-updating via IPS over my slow and flaky
internet connection at home. Having had a lot of experience with SVR4
packages, I can assure you IPS is far far better.
One problem I did run into was related to timeouts. Have you set the
PKG_CLIENT_TIMEOUT=900 (or
48 matches
Mail list logo
