I know, NDA and all, but it's worth a shot.
Some of the OpenSolaris insiders have been talking about how they can now
"build OpenSolaris", because they've got the source code now.
When they say "OpenSolaris", are they just talking the kernel? Or more than
that.
I ask this because I look at the OSS Unix landscape and see the differences.
Linux (as everyone screams and shouts), is a kernel, and then there are
indenpendent distributions released on top of it.
FreeBSD is "an operating system" where the kernel and the userland are
maintained and released as a whole. While you can get a "FreeBSD" kernel,
you typically don't. There are really multiple FreeBSD distributions, when
FreeBSD forks, the kernel is changing, not the userland.
Now there's mumblings about "Gentoo OpenSolaris", but that may just be a
port of their package system (to compete with something like Blastwave I
guess).
So, I guess my question, if anyone knows and can share, is whether the plan
will be for "OpenSolaris" to akin to Linux and its distros or more like
FreeBSD as a overarching, "monolithic" entity.
I'm hoping for a FreeBSD model, as the chaos of the Linuxen is one of the
things the leaves me cold, but in truth since Solaris 10 is a free RTU
anyway, there is probably room for a OpenSolaris "kernel" and a bunch of
distros to appease the those that enjoy the distro of the week solutions.
Regards,
Will Hartung
(willh@msoft.com)
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
 Will
|
1/28/2005 7:15:19 PM |
|
In article <35vha9F4ohqi8U1@individual.net>,
"Will Hartung" <willh@msoft.com> writes:
> I know, NDA and all, but it's worth a shot.
>
> Some of the OpenSolaris insiders have been talking about how they can now
> "build OpenSolaris", because they've got the source code now.
>
> When they say "OpenSolaris", are they just talking the kernel? Or more than
> that.
>
[rest snipped]
I'm certainly not an insider, but I would say that it's going to be
more than ths kernel as the source code for DTrace is available at the
OpenSolaris.org website <http://www.opensolaris.org/> .
--
Edward Lloyd Hillman
Signature?!? I don't need no stinking signature!!
<mailto:ehillman@highstream.net>
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
edwardh
|
1/30/2005 1:24:58 AM
|
|
"Edward Lloyd Hillman" <edwardh@highstream.net> wrote in message
news:10vodrajghtidff@news.supernews.com...
> In article <35vha9F4ohqi8U1@individual.net>,
> "Will Hartung" <willh@msoft.com> writes:
> > I know, NDA and all, but it's worth a shot.
> >
> > Some of the OpenSolaris insiders have been talking about how they can
now
> > "build OpenSolaris", because they've got the source code now.
> >
> > When they say "OpenSolaris", are they just talking the kernel? Or more
than
> > that.
> >
> [rest snipped]
>
> I'm certainly not an insider, but I would say that it's going to be
> more than ths kernel as the source code for DTrace is available at the
> OpenSolaris.org website <http://www.opensolaris.org/> .
>
However, DTrace is probably closer to the kernel than any
other command or utility. It would be interesting to find
out if Sun will open source its compilers and ZFS ;-)
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/30/2005 1:53:04 AM
|
|
On Sat, 29 Jan 2005, Dan Koren wrote:
> However, DTrace is probably closer to the kernel than any
> other command or utility. It would be interesting to find
> out if Sun will open source its compilers and ZFS ;-)
ZFS is part of the kernel; what makes you think Sun won't
open source it?
Sooner or later the nay-sayers are gonna have to admit it:
Sun is serious about open sourcing Solaris. It is going to
happen, soon.
--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, author of "Solaris Systems Programming"
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Rich
|
1/30/2005 2:28:08 AM
|
|
"Rich Teer" <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.58.0501291824470.855@zaphod...
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2005, Dan Koren wrote:
>
> > However, DTrace is probably closer to the kernel than any
> > other command or utility. It would be interesting to find
> > out if Sun will open source its compilers and ZFS ;-)
>
> ZFS is part of the kernel; what makes you think Sun won't
> open source it?
File systems are modular. Sun could very well open source
the kernel and some, but not all, of the file systems. If
I'm not mistaken, this is exactly what SGI did: they open
sourced XFS, but not CXFS.
> Sooner or later the nay-sayers are gonna have to admit it:
Don't count me among the nay-sayers. I was only asking.
> Sun is serious about open sourcing Solaris. It is going to
> happen, soon.
Of course. Not only Solaris, but also AIX and HP-UX.
VMS and MPE too ;-)
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/30/2005 2:56:09 AM
|
|
"Rich Teer" <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote in message
news:Pine.SOL.4.58.0501291824470.855@zaphod...
> On Sat, 29 Jan 2005, Dan Koren wrote:
>
> > However, DTrace is probably closer to the kernel than any
> > other command or utility. It would be interesting to find
> > out if Sun will open source its compilers and ZFS ;-)
>
> ZFS is part of the kernel; what makes you think Sun won't
> open source it?
>
> Sooner or later the nay-sayers are gonna have to admit it:
> Sun is serious about open sourcing Solaris. It is going to
> happen, soon.
>
However, the Sun compilers and the IDE are not currently
considered part of the kernel package. They are sold as a
separate product (Sun Studio) and they are expensive: $3k
for a single seat license last time I checked, which is
more than I'm willing to pay for a single seat compiler
license.
Sun Studio generates a fair amount of revenue for Sun,
and it is unlikely (IMHO) that it will be open sourced.
I would however be very happy to be proven wrong ;-)
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/30/2005 5:14:58 AM
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 00:14:58 -0500, Dan Koren wrote:
> Sun Studio generates a fair amount of revenue for Sun,
> and it is unlikely (IMHO) that it will be open sourced.
That was never announced.
> I would however be very happy to be proven wrong ;-)
No, you would be happy to change the subject to suit your own agenda.
___________________
/| /| | |
||__|| | Please do |
/ O O\__ NOT |
/ \ feed the |
/ \ \ trolls |
/ _ \ \ ______________|
/ |\____\ \ ||
/ | | | |\____/ ||
/ \|_|_|/ \ __||
/ / \ |____| ||
/ | | /| | --|
| | |// |____ --|
* _ | |_|_|_| | \-/
*-- _--\ _ \ // |
/ _ \\ _ // | /
* / \_ /- | - | |
* ___ c_c_c_C/ \C_c_c_c____________
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dave
|
1/30/2005 5:40:01 AM
|
|
"Dave Uhring" <daveuhring@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.01.30.05.40.00.648570@yahoo.com...
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 00:14:58 -0500, Dan Koren wrote:
>
> > Sun Studio generates a fair amount of revenue for Sun,
> > and it is unlikely (IMHO) that it will be open sourced.
>
> That was never announced.
>
> > I would however be very happy to be proven wrong ;-)
>
> No, you would be happy to change the subject to suit your own agenda.
No, I did not change the subject.
Having kernel source without development tools has value,
but not nearly as much value to most developers as having
a complete development environment.
I also have no agenda whatsoever. I am just a developer
who wants to have reasonable access to good development
tools for a reasonable price. That is all.
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/30/2005 7:36:07 AM
|
|
On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 02:36:07 -0500, Dan Koren wrote:
> "Dave Uhring" <daveuhring@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> news:pan.2005.01.30.05.40.00.648570@yahoo.com...
>> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 00:14:58 -0500, Dan Koren wrote:
>>
>> > Sun Studio generates a fair amount of revenue for Sun,
>> > and it is unlikely (IMHO) that it will be open sourced.
>>
>> That was never announced.
>>
>> > I would however be very happy to be proven wrong ;-)
>>
>> No, you would be happy to change the subject to suit your own agenda.
>
>
> No, I did not change the subject.
The Sun compiler system has never been a part of Solaris. It is a
separate product.
> Having kernel source without development tools has value,
> but not nearly as much value to most developers as having
> a complete development environment.
Solaris has always included a complete set of header files and all
necessary tools for a C compiler system save for the compilers themselves.
> I also have no agenda whatsoever. I am just a developer
> who wants to have reasonable access to good development
> tools for a reasonable price. That is all.
Emacs, gcc and gdb are available for *free* in Sun's Software Companion
CD. I doubt that Sun will ship Visio with Solaris, however.
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dave
|
1/30/2005 12:51:52 PM
|
|
In article <10vodrajghtidff@news.supernews.com>,
Edward Lloyd Hillman <edwardh@highstream.net> wrote:
>In article <35vha9F4ohqi8U1@individual.net>,
> "Will Hartung" <willh@msoft.com> writes:
>> I know, NDA and all, but it's worth a shot.
>>
>> Some of the OpenSolaris insiders have been talking about how they can now
>> "build OpenSolaris", because they've got the source code now.
>>
>> When they say "OpenSolaris", are they just talking the kernel? Or more than
>> that.
>>
>[rest snipped]
>
>I'm certainly not an insider, but I would say that it's going to be
>more than ths kernel as the source code for DTrace is available at the
>OpenSolaris.org website <http://www.opensolaris.org/> .
I am under NDA so I cannot tell you, but I can give you a miracle:
What is SunOS compared to Solaris?
What would you include if you call it OpenSunOS and what would you include
if you call it OpenSolaris?
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J�rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
js
|
1/30/2005 12:53:38 PM
|
|
In article <41fc4cca$1@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com> wrote:
>> Sun is serious about open sourcing Solaris. It is going to
>> happen, soon.
>
>
>Of course. Not only Solaris, but also AIX and HP-UX.
>VMS and MPE too ;-)
There is a slight difference between opensourcing a life and healthy system
and opensourcing a system that is at the end of it's life cycle.
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J�rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
js
|
1/30/2005 12:59:58 PM
|
|
In article <41fc8e68$1@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Having kernel source without development tools has value,
>but not nearly as much value to most developers as having
>a complete development environment.
Check my Blog to find out whether it is possible or not to compile OpenSolaris.
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J�rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
js
|
1/30/2005 1:06:03 PM
|
|
In article <pan.2005.01.30.12.51.49.976054@yahoo.com>,
Dave Uhring <daveuhring@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Emacs, gcc and gdb are available for *free* in Sun's Software Companion
>CD. I doubt that Sun will ship Visio with Solaris, however.
Solaris 10 includes gcc in /usr/sfw/bin on the basic OS installation CDs
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J�rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
js
|
1/30/2005 1:10:25 PM
|
|
"Dave Uhring" <daveuhring@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:pan.2005.01.30.12.51.49.976054@yahoo.com...
> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 02:36:07 -0500, Dan Koren wrote:
>
> > "Dave Uhring" <daveuhring@yahoo.com> wrote in message
> > news:pan.2005.01.30.05.40.00.648570@yahoo.com...
> >> On Sun, 30 Jan 2005 00:14:58 -0500, Dan Koren wrote:
> >>
> >> > Sun Studio generates a fair amount of revenue for Sun,
> >> > and it is unlikely (IMHO) that it will be open sourced.
> >>
> >> That was never announced.
> >>
> >> > I would however be very happy to be proven wrong ;-)
> >>
> >> No, you would be happy to change the subject to suit your own agenda.
> >
> > No, I did not change the subject.
>
> The Sun compiler system has never been a part of Solaris.
> It is a separate product.
I know that. No need to restate the obvious.
> > Having kernel source without development tools has value,
> > but not nearly as much value to most developers as having
> > a complete development environment.
>
> Solaris has always included a complete set of header files
> and all necessary tools for a C compiler system save for
> the compilers themselves.
>
> > I also have no agenda whatsoever. I am just a developer
> > who wants to have reasonable access to good development
> > tools for a reasonable price. That is all.
>
> Emacs, gcc and gdb are available for *free* in Sun's Software
> Companion CD.
Did I say "good development tools for a reasonable price"?
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/30/2005 1:38:20 PM
|
|
No No No can't be true ...
My worst nightmare is now true "Open Source Solaris"
i just hope that rumors about Linux style releasing is not true.
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
falsename
|
1/30/2005 2:14:05 PM
|
|
In article <41fc6d54@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com> wrote:
>considered part of the kernel package. They are sold as a
>separate product (Sun Studio) and they are expensive: $3k
>for a single seat license last time I checked, which is
>more than I'm willing to pay for a single seat compiler
>license.
If you have access to the World Wide Web you can check again.
<URL:http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/buy.xml>
Studio 10 is $1000 when you upgrade from gcc or other compiler.
John
groenveld@acm.org
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
groenvel
|
1/30/2005 7:37:14 PM
|
|
"John D Groenveld" <groenvel@cse.psu.edu> wrote in message
news:ctjd1a$456$1@neuromancer.cse.psu.edu...
> In article <41fc6d54@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >considered part of the kernel package. They are sold as a
> >separate product (Sun Studio) and they are expensive: $3k
> >for a single seat license last time I checked, which is
> >more than I'm willing to pay for a single seat compiler
> >license.
>
> If you have access to the World Wide Web you can check again.
> <URL:http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/buy.xml>
>
> Studio 10 is $1000 when you upgrade from gcc or other compiler.
Hhmmm.... The link you posted shows a price of $2,995 for
an electronic download license, and $1,000 for an upgrade.
No change since I last checked it.
I see no explanation of what is an "upgrade". I take that
means upgrade from an earlier Studio version. Otherwise,
anyone with a compiler on their systems could claim the
"upgrade", right?
Can you point me to any corner of Sun's webdom where the
exact meaning of the term "upgrade" is stated? I would
appreciate if anyone in the know would be so kind as to
clarify for me (us) the meaning of a Studio 10 upgrade.
Incidentally, at $3k (or even $1k) it is not unreasonable
to expect hard copy media and manuals to be included in
the price.
I also do not see any student discounts mentioned.
For comparison Microsoft's Visual Studio Professional
is only $99 for students, and Metrowerks' CodeWarrior
is $149. Quite a difference. Once upon a time, Sun was
very generous to students and researchers. This does
not seem to be the case anymore.
Thx,
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/30/2005 8:37:39 PM
|
|
In article <41fd4597@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com> wrote:
>Can you point me to any corner of Sun's webdom where the
>exact meaning of the term "upgrade" is stated? I would
<URL:http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/upgrades.xml>
John
groenveld@acm.org
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
groenvel
|
1/31/2005 12:30:07 AM
|
|
John D Groenveld wrote:
> In article <41fd4597@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com>
wrote:
> >Can you point me to any corner of Sun's webdom where the
> >exact meaning of the term "upgrade" is stated? I would
>
> <URL:http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/upgrades.xml>
Has anyone ever tried buying the advertised upgrade from gcc for
$1,000? I asked Sun if they really meant it through the feedback
path on the website, but they didn't deign to answer the question.
I can't imagine why anyone would ever pay more than $1,000 for
Studio if the offer's for real.
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
J
|
1/31/2005 4:03:16 AM
|
|
--
Best regards,
dk
---------
Dan Koren
Principal, inRAID
775-833-1407/voice
775-833-1404/fax
==============================================================
This email and any attachments thereto may contain private,
confidential, and privileged material for the sole use of the
intended recipient. Any review, copying, or distribution of
this email (or any attachments thereto) by others is strictly
prohibited. If you are not the intended recipient, please
contact the sender immediately and permanently delete the
original and any copies of this email and any attachments
thereto.
=============================================================
"J. J. Farrell" <jjf@bcs.org.uk> wrote in message
news:1107143902.474240.148970@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com...
>
> John D Groenveld wrote:
> > In article <41fd4597@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com>
> wrote:
> > >Can you point me to any corner of Sun's webdom where the
> > >exact meaning of the term "upgrade" is stated? I would
> >
> > <URL:http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/upgrades.xml>
>
> Has anyone ever tried buying the advertised upgrade from gcc for
> $1,000? I asked Sun if they really meant it through the feedback
> path on the website, but they didn't deign to answer the question.
> I can't imagine why anyone would ever pay more than $1,000 for
> Studio if the offer's for real.
I noticed that too.
The official blurb says:
"An upgrade to Sun Studio 10 is available for $1000.00 USD if you
previously purchased one of the following Sun developer products:"
What does it mean to have purchased gcc ?!? ;-)
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/31/2005 5:30:03 AM
|
|
"John D Groenveld" <groenvel@cse.psu.edu> wrote in message
news:ctju6f$lgg$1@neuromancer.cse.psu.edu...
> In article <41fd4597@news.meer.net>, Dan Koren <dankoren@yahoo.com> wrote:
> >Can you point me to any corner of Sun's webdom where the
> >exact meaning of the term "upgrade" is stated? I would
>
> <URL:http://www.sun.com/software/products/studio/upgrades.xml>
>
Thanks for the pointer.
dk
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Dan
|
1/31/2005 5:30:23 AM
|
|
"Joerg Schilling" <js@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote in message
news:ctilci$m0m$1@news.cs.tu-berlin.de...
> I am under NDA so I cannot tell you, but I can give you a miracle:
>
> What is SunOS compared to Solaris?
>
> What would you include if you call it OpenSunOS and what would you include
> if you call it OpenSolaris?
Actually, to be fair, it was your Blog that made me think of the question.
You wrote:
"After 1 hour and 18 minutes of compiling on my
1.7 GHz Pentium M notebook, I am ready with compiling
OpenSolaris myself."
This is what made me consider what was being considered "OpenSolaris". With
1hr 18 minute compile time that seems a little high for a kernel (though not
dramatically -- takes about ~45 minutes on a 2.?? Celeron for Linux 2.6 on a
machine here -- apple, meet orange), but a bit low for "the whole thing" ala
"make world" for BSD.
So, I was just curious what you were considering as "OpenSolaris".
More of a total packaging question than anything else.
Regards,
Will Hartung
(willh@msoft.com)
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Will
|
1/31/2005 10:17:15 PM
|
|
In article <367p3bF4uam43U1@individual.net>,
Will Hartung <willh@msoft.com> wrote:
>You wrote:
>
>"After 1 hour and 18 minutes of compiling on my
>1.7 GHz Pentium M notebook, I am ready with compiling
>OpenSolaris myself."
>
>This is what made me consider what was being considered "OpenSolaris". With
>1hr 18 minute compile time that seems a little high for a kernel (though not
>dramatically -- takes about ~45 minutes on a 2.?? Celeron for Linux 2.6 on a
>machine here -- apple, meet orange), but a bit low for "the whole thing" ala
>"make world" for BSD.
First, compilation speed depends on processor speed and I have been told that
it did compile within 57 minutes on an Opteron.
As this is nothing that has not yet been published, I can tell you that
the currently proved unencumbered code is nearly 10 million lines of code,
more than 38000 files and more than 300 MB.
Compare this to the Linux or FreeBSD source and make your guess.
--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) J�rg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog: http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
js
|
1/31/2005 11:11:42 PM
|
|
"Will Hartung" <willh@msoft.com> writes in comp.unix.solaris:
|This is what made me consider what was being considered "OpenSolaris". With
|1hr 18 minute compile time that seems a little high for a kernel (though not
|dramatically -- takes about ~45 minutes on a 2.?? Celeron for Linux 2.6 on a
|machine here -- apple, meet orange), but a bit low for "the whole thing" ala
|"make world" for BSD.
It's bigger than a breadbox, smaller than an airplane... wait, make that
bigger than a kernel, smaller than all of the OS.
--
________________________________________________________________________
Alan Coopersmith * alanc@alum.calberkeley.org * Alan.Coopersmith@Sun.COM
http://www.csua.berkeley.edu/~alanc/ * http://blogs.sun.com/alanc/
Working for, but definitely not speaking for, Sun Microsystems, Inc.
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Alan
|
2/1/2005 12:17:03 AM
|
|
"Will Hartung" <willh@msoft.com> writes:
>This is what made me consider what was being considered "OpenSolaris". With
>1hr 18 minute compile time that seems a little high for a kernel (though not
>dramatically -- takes about ~45 minutes on a 2.?? Celeron for Linux 2.6 on a
>machine here -- apple, meet orange), but a bit low for "the whole thing" ala
>"make world" for BSD.
>So, I was just curious what you were considering as "OpenSolaris".
It's the kernel + base OS.
Casper
--
Expressed in this posting are my opinions. They are in no way related
to opinions held by my employer, Sun Microsystems.
Statements on Sun products included here are not gospel and may
be fiction rather than truth.
|
|
|
0
|
|
|
|
Reply
|
Casper
|
2/1/2005 10:20:28 AM
|
|
|
24 Replies
99 Views
(page loaded in 0.207 seconds)
Similiar Articles: OpenSolaris 2010.05 - comp.unix.solarisI've just finished updating my PC to OpenSolaris 2010.05. It suddenly announced itself in the 2009.06 Update Manager, the update ran without a hitch... vmware and opensolaris sparc - comp.unix.solarisHi All, I would like to install Opensolaris in my vmware workstation 5.5. My question is: Is Opensolaris based on sparc technology too? I will love... Solaris 10 10/09 zpool upgrade - comp.unix.solarisCan someone please provide the output of zpool upgrade on a Solaris 10 10/09 x86 machine. I am thinking of changing my OpenSolaris SXCE b123 machine t... zones and NFS - comp.unix.solarisI haven't seen any postings in the OpenSolaris forums that suggests this will be forthcoming. This feature will certainly appear in the opensolaris code before it ... Booting x86 Solaris to 32 bits? - comp.unix.solarisIn OpenSolaris, I edited out a variable that, if memory serves, inserted "amd64" into a couple of lines that described paths. When I looked at the OpenSolaris ... can't get real path - comp.unix.solarisFor some strange reasons there's no patchadd code on the opensolaris web site. Does anybody have an explanation what the problem is and how could I solve it? solaris 10 network problem for broadcom 5754 - comp.unix.solaris ...I have opensolaris 10 and find SUNWcakr below, there is no *.pkg file. how to install SUNWcakr? E:\SOLARIS_10\PRODUCT\SUNWCAKR.I>dir Volume in drive E is SOL_10_508 ... SE 11 questions - comp.unix.solaris> > You can check with opensolaris-discuss or caiman-discuss on > opensolaris.org to get definitive answers. > > Thanks, > > Cindy Thanks Cindy Equivalent dialog command in Solaris? - comp.unix.solaris ...I've had a look > on OpenSolaris.org to see if one is in development but couldn't find > anything. TIA. dialog builds/works on Solaris. I seem to recall that some ... How to set the default publisher on a repository? - comp.unix ...The OpenSolaris release of the IPS package repository must be the same as the OpenSolaris release that will be installed on the client systems. Measuring file copy speed - comp.unix.solarisBut things will change > >> somewhen in the future, as there seems to be an open source project on > >> opensolaris.org that will address it. > > >> Sun doesn't seem to ... ZFS Version Upgrade ? - comp.unix.solaris... that ships with 10. >> > > Thanks Tim. > > I will apply the latest patch cluster for Solaris 10 and see how we go > from there. > > I had no luck on the opensolaris ... How can I determine if a static library is 32-bit or 64-bit ...I want to solve the problem on both Solaris and OpenSolaris - both SPARC and x64, though I suspect the solution to one system will work on another. memset() bug for 32-bit code with sun4v ? - comp.unix.solaris ...> The implementation on a T2000 (10 update 5) is a little different from > the one at opensolaris.org in the case where n=0: The implementation you are showing looks a ... making a bootable DVD - comp.unix.solarisYou might wanna check the opensolaris forums, there was some discussion on creating a bootable cd/dvd image. You might look into those discussions - sparc and x86/64 ... Oracle Solaris 11: Available Now (Main.WebHome) - XWikiAvailable Solaris Source Code. Available Solaris source can be viewed using the OpenGrok source browser. The majority of the source is distributed under an OSI ... OpenSolaris - Wikipedia, the free encyclopediaOpenSolaris was an open source computer operating system based on Solaris created by Sun Microsystems. It was also the name of the project initiated by Sun to build a ... 7/17/2012 1:44:17 AM
|
Search |
Post Question |
Groups |
Stream |
About |
Register
78 followers. 