On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 8:09 PM, Moinak Ghosh<moinakg at belenix.org> wrote:
> On Tue, Jul 21, 2009 at 4:11 PM, Manish
> Chakravarty<manishchaks at gmail.com> wrote:
>> http://www.osnews.com/story/21859/OpenSolaris_a_Bad_Linux_Distribution_
>>
>
> ? Interesting. His config has enough RAM. However there are considerations.
> ? Number of SMF services have been growing (including contributions due to
> ? IPS). Newer Gnome has more stuff starting out of the box. The Nvidia card
> ? that person is using is ancient and the Osol bundled Nvidia driver is very
> ? new with not that good support for older cards. Even my GeForce 7300 does
> ? not perform well with the latest driver. I am not sure what he means by slow
> ? installation. No timing is given, but given that Osol uses LZMA compression
> ? by default on the CDROM, decompression tends to squeeze the juice out of
> ? Pentiums in my experience. Athlons and Core2s are able to sustain the
> ? demand placed by LZMA.

I see an opportunity here (given enough developers) - figure out a
mechanism where by the user is able to download and install the right
drivers for his system. The Device Detection Tool already does some
work. Of course, there'd be interesting issues to deal with - such as
whether the older driver would cause problems with newer software or
not.

>
> ? Unfortunately the comment on the package manager matches other comments
> ? on the package manager I have seen elsewhere and tends to be true.
>

Indeed. The goals are good - let's hope that they have success with
the package manager too, since the a package manager should not get in
the way of the user's access to underlying technologies.

> Regards,
> Moinak.
> --
> ================================
> http://www.belenix.org/
> http://moinakg.wordpress.com/
> _______________________________________________
> ug-bosug mailing list
> List-Unsubscribe: mailto:ug-bosug-unsubscribe at opensolaris.org
> List-Owner: mailto:ug-bosug-owner at opensolaris.org
> List-Archives: http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=54
>

Reply via email to