UNIX admin wrote:
> I guess I failed to make my point - you can't engineer an enterprise piece of
> software, for example for a bank or an insurance agency, or the any Fortune
> 100 company, then come to the sales presentation and tell them that they must
> use OpenSolaris.
>
> Banks for instan
UNIX admin wrote:
>> There are few compatibility breaks that affect ISV's
>> - what is breaking your
>> software?
>
> What happens on OpenSolaris when one tries to install a System V package that
> runs a CREATE DATABASE inside of "postinstall" and SQL*Plus?
The same thing as on SXCE, since it's
UNIX admin wrote:
There are few compatibility breaks that affect ISV's
- what is breaking your
software?
What happens on OpenSolaris when one tries to install a System V package that runs a
CREATE DATABASE inside of "postinstall" and SQL*Plus?
The better question is why someone is doing some
This thread is getting a little vitriolic but I agree with UNIX admin's
argument.
I am a very firm supporter of Solaris, even in situations which are
strongly anti Solaris.
I also find that although the Sun OS staff and Opensolaris contributors
are absolutely brilliant technically, they are a
> There are few compatibility breaks that affect ISV's
> - what is breaking your
> software?
What happens on OpenSolaris when one tries to install a System V package that
runs a CREATE DATABASE inside of "postinstall" and SQL*Plus?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
> How are they worthless? They all install fine,
> since compatibility was kept
> with the System V packaging system.
I guess I failed to make my point - you can't engineer an enterprise piece of
software, for example for a bank or an insurance agency, or the any Fortune 100
company, then come
> Sorry - just realized my mistake in replying to this
> mail too soon after
> having a different discussion and not shifting my
> brain fast enough - root's
> shell is bash, /bin/sh is ksh93.
Errare humanum est - to err is human.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
> How are they worthless? They all install fine,
> since compatibility was kept
> with the System V packaging system.
I was told in no uncertain terms, by a Sun engineer I respect and trust, that
IPS will be "the way forward", come hell or high water, and that unless I
migrate to IPS, all of o
> Or you could just continue to be a troll on the
> OpenSolaris lists
And by the way, do bear in mind that today's "trolls on OpenSolaris lists" are
tomorrow's purchase decision makers and technology adopters and consultants, or
software company owners Just a thought.
--
This message po
> Just for the record, you don't need to be a kernel
> engineer to
> contribute to OpenSolaris.
Nobody ever said anything to the contrary; I certainly didn't, not even implied
it.
But what are you going to do without kernel engineers? They don't grow on trees.
And it's not like there is an abu
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> UNIX admin wrote:
>> I dislike the fact that root's shell is /bin/bash.
>
> Then don't change it to bash - OpenSolaris doesn't ship that way.
Sorry - just realized my mistake in replying to this mail too soon after
having a different discussion and not shifting my brain
UNIX admin wrote:
> OpenSolaris will never make it to the top of the food chain because it has
> severe architectural issues, starting with the software management subsystem,
> continuing with breaking compatibility with Solaris, and causing tremendous
> engineering and software development effo
On 11/12/2009, at 1:26 PM, UNIX admin wrote:
There is indeed a failure here, and it's one of
communication: Sun
certainly needs to be clearer about exactly what
OpenSolaris is
targeting, and how it is going to get there. _I_
certainly could use
better information. And, yes, I do wish it were
> I suspect he's a holdover from the switch from SunOS
> to Solaris, way
> back in the early 90s. SunOS was a BSD-based system,
> and many
> old-timers really disliked the switch to the
> SVR4-based Solaris.
My first Solaris was 2.5.1. So I started off on a System V Release 4.0 UNIX,
and I fee
> Like I said above, my local understanding about
> David's comment is that
> he meant OpenSolaris is a Linux replacement /for the
> LAMPS niche/ .
> Once again, OpenSolaris is about creating a superior
> OS for targeted
> niches, of which LAMPS is one. To win in such
> niches, you do need to
OpenSolaris, at least according to David Comay & Co., is going for
Linux / GNU crowd directly, hence the forced-at-all-and-any-cost
replacement of System V utilities to GNU userland
Actually, that's never been stated as a goal in any form. What has
been said is there is a large community of bot
dmpk2k wrote:
I also have a graybeard sysadmin colleague who froths against Solaris. I have
noticed, however, that all his rants have to do the command-line. Remove those,
and I suspect he'd suddenly be a bit more mellow. I'm trying to convince him to
give Solaris another spin, and given his c
> And in that OpenSolaris fails miserably
Perhaps it fails miserably for your needs, but not for mine. I'm one of the
much-reviled Linux nubs who decided to take a closer look at OpenSolaris. Hi.
I don't particularly care about the different behaviour of utilities in Solaris
-- glancing at a ma
UNIX admin wrote:
The problem is one of target audience. OpenSolaris
isn't a wholesale
Linux replacement - that is, it's not intended to do
everything that
Linux does, nor be used everywhere that Linux is.
People get confused
n that. In many ways, OpenSolaris is more like the
various *BSD OS
> The problem is one of target audience. OpenSolaris
> isn't a wholesale
> Linux replacement - that is, it's not intended to do
> everything that
> Linux does, nor be used everywhere that Linux is.
> People get confused
> n that. In many ways, OpenSolaris is more like the
> various *BSD OSes -
> The problem is one of target audience. OpenSolaris isn't a wholesale
> Linux replacement - that is, it's not intended to do everything that
> Linux does, nor be used everywhere that Linux is. People get confused
> on that. In many ways, OpenSolaris is more like the various *BSD OSes -
> w
Erik,
Erik Trimble píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 06:22 -0800:
> Milan Jurik wrote:
[...]
> > Call those people insane who paid for it. But I met such situations. If
> > you have hundreds of gigabytes stored on such system, you are evaluating
> > all possible ways. And yes, we did such migration for muc
Milan Jurik wrote:
Erik,
Erik Trimble píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 05:11 -0800:
Milan Jurik wrote:
Hi Erik,
Erik Trimble píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 01:35 -0800:
Milan Jurik wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Maier-Komor píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 09:32 +0100:
There
Erik,
Erik Trimble píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 05:11 -0800:
> Milan Jurik wrote:
> > Hi Erik,
> >
> > Erik Trimble píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 01:35 -0800:
> >
> >> Milan Jurik wrote:
> >>
> >>> Hi Thomas,
> >>>
> >>> Thomas Maier-Komor píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 09:32 +0100:
> >>>
> >>>
Milan Jurik wrote:
Hi Erik,
Erik Trimble píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 01:35 -0800:
Milan Jurik wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Maier-Komor píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 09:32 +0100:
There is no technical reason, only limited manpower, why OSol cannot
support ext2/ext3. On-disk format is st
Hi Erik,
Erik Trimble píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 01:35 -0800:
> Milan Jurik wrote:
> > Hi Thomas,
> >
> > Thomas Maier-Komor píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 09:32 +0100:
> >
> >> On 08.12.2009 23:08, Francois Laagel wrote:
> >>
> Jörg Stephan schrieb:
> [...]
> Why doesn't Linux supp
Milan Jurik wrote:
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Maier-Komor píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 09:32 +0100:
On 08.12.2009 23:08, Francois Laagel wrote:
Jörg Stephan schrieb:
[...]
Why doesn't Linux support ZFS?
If does! In user mode through FUSE. Just the same way as, I've heard,
if you're reall
Hi Thomas,
Thomas Maier-Komor píše v st 09. 12. 2009 v 09:32 +0100:
> On 08.12.2009 23:08, Francois Laagel wrote:
> >> Jörg Stephan schrieb:
> >> [...]
> >> Why doesn't Linux support ZFS?
> >>
> >
> > If does! In user mode through FUSE. Just the same way as, I've heard,
> > if you're really deter
On 08.12.2009 23:08, Francois Laagel wrote:
>> Jörg Stephan schrieb:
>> [...]
>> Why doesn't Linux support ZFS?
>>
>
> If does! In user mode through FUSE. Just the same way as, I've heard,
> if you're really determined you can implement NTFS under OpenSolaris.
>
> Francois
I know ;-)
My
> Jörg Stephan schrieb:
> [...]
> Why doesn't Linux support ZFS?
>
If does! In user mode through FUSE. Just the same way as, I've heard,
if you're really determined you can implement NTFS under OpenSolaris.
Francois
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
Wow! Didnt expect this much reply,
so thanks to all.
I think i understood most of the "problems" if they are a problem.
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Thomas Maier-Komor wrote:
Jörg Stephan schrieb:
Hi there,
at the weekend i installed OpenSolaris 2009.06 on an AMD Athlon64 X2 5200+ with
1GB DDR Ram. I wanted to try virtualization with VirtualBox. But i there where
some things i really dont like, maybe you can help me to understand why i
Jörg Stephan wrote:
Hi there,
at the weekend i installed OpenSolaris 2009.06 on an AMD Athlon64 X2 5200+ with
1GB DDR Ram. I wanted to try virtualization with VirtualBox. But i there where
some things i really dont like, maybe you can help me to understand why it is
and when it will work
1.
On Tue, Dec 08, 2009 at 06:10:40AM -0800, J??rg Stephan wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> at the weekend i installed OpenSolaris 2009.06 on an AMD Athlon64 X2 5200+
> with 1GB DDR Ram. I wanted to try virtualization with VirtualBox. But i there
> where some things i really dont like, maybe you can help me
On Tue, Dec 8, 2009 at 7:40 PM, Jörg Stephan
wrote:
> Hi there,
>
> at the weekend i installed OpenSolaris 2009.06 on an AMD Athlon64 X2 5200+
> with 1GB DDR Ram. I wanted to try virtualization with VirtualBox. But i there
> where some things i really dont like, maybe you can help me to understa
1) Buy more memory. Update OpenSolaris trough dev repository and post outputs
of 'vmstat 1 10' and 'top' commands
2) It's OpenSolaris. Read about ZFS first, try it and you will hate ext* very
quickly.
3) Memory and maybe some problem with your HW thanks to info that your
installation take 95%
Jörg Stephan schrieb:
> Hi there,
>
> at the weekend i installed OpenSolaris 2009.06 on an AMD Athlon64 X2 5200+
> with 1GB DDR Ram. I wanted to try virtualization with VirtualBox. But i there
> where some things i really dont like, maybe you can help me to understand why
> it is and when it wi
Jörg Stephan wrote:
> 4. Why doenst + switch to an console? Or better question... Where is
> the console?
Because you're using 2009.06 and the implementation of virtual consoles wasn't
finished until after that. To get to the text console in 2009.06, stop gdm & X
by running 'svcadm disable -t g
101 - 138 of 138 matches
Mail list logo
