Robert Milkowski [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I myself would prefer open source software based on libraries already
included in Solaris (like OpenSSL) - something I can't get with
Blastwave.
This is something that currently does not fit the ON OSS model from Sun.
Unless we find a way that Sun
Hello Philip,
Tuesday, April 18, 2006, 11:44:11 PM, you wrote:
PB On Tue, Apr 18, 2006 at 09:53:44AM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
PB [really, it should give the patches to openssl.org. but barring that,
PB it would be nice to see a patch set just posted somewhere, like
PB
Hello Chris,
Wednesday, April 19, 2006, 11:28:14 PM, you wrote:
CR On Wed, 19 Apr 2006, Dave Miner wrote:
Not being a Debian user, I won't try to compare. I guess your
experience with Solaris patches is more from the user end, whereas I'm
looking at it from the creator/maintainer end;
On Thu, 20 Apr 2006, Robert Milkowski wrote:
CR It's not so pretty from the user side either, though I suppose that's more
CR a matter of taste. There are things about Solaris I prefer over Linux, but
CR the package / patch duality versus the everything-is-a-package approach of
CR Debian or
Hello Philip,
Monday, April 17, 2006, 7:19:44 PM, you wrote:
PB On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 03:35:52AM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
Saturday, April 15, 2006, 2:27:45 AM, PB writes...
PB Basically, blastwave packages are set up to be binary distributions, not
PB developer distributions.
PB
What many people forget is about the historical trend
of the software development during the last five to
support the latest open source software initiatives
and challenges.
Take for example:
http://www.sun.com/software/star/gnome/
versus
http://dlc.sun.com/osol/jds/downloads/current/
This is
On Sat, 15 Apr 2006, Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello Bill,
Thursday, April 13, 2006, 8:28:32 PM, you wrote:
BR I say this as someone who has no vested interest in Blastwave,
BR Sunfreeware, or the companion CD but I still don't see the point, the
BR community already has a more than one project
Hello James,
Thursday, April 13, 2006, 2:06:40 PM, you wrote:
JC Hugh McIntyre writes:
JC That's also what Debian does. That fixes the dependency problem, but
JC doesn't fix the path problem.
JC The path problem for libraries is that if one installs as
JC /opt/csw/lib/libfoo.so.1
JC and
Hello Darren,
Thursday, April 13, 2006, 4:46:17 PM, you wrote:
DJM Eric Boutilier wrote:
Hmm, Sun service would not like it (to put it mildly), but other than
that it sounds worth considering if you ask me. So James, correct me if
I'm wrong... the following is a sample future scenario
Hello Dennis,
Thursday, April 13, 2006, 9:15:20 PM, you wrote:
I blatantly disagree with the creation of yet another separate
project that completely replaces services and processes that
already exist ...
Where, then, would be the right place to discuss the sorts of issues
that
Hello Dennis,
Thursday, April 13, 2006, 8:59:15 PM, you wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
If Sun Microsystems Inc. would like to begin from scratch with a
complete new project then there is little that can be done right?
Sun has been producing the companion CD for longer than blastwave has
Hello Philip,
Saturday, April 15, 2006, 2:27:45 AM, you wrote:
PB On Sat, Apr 15, 2006 at 02:13:11AM +0200, Robert Milkowski wrote:
Hello James,
Thursday, April 13, 2006, 2:06:40 PM, you wrote:
JC Hugh McIntyre writes:
JC That's also what Debian does. That fixes the dependency
12 matches
Mail list logo
