On 07 Nov 2005 08:47:12 -0500, Paul Smith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > For desktops, and even smaller servers, I really prefer Linux. Sure, > 99% of the tools on Linux can also be compiled for Solaris. But it's > WORK to do that! Trust me, I maintained a repository of GNU and other > F/OSS tools for our company for years: it's a big pain in the rear to > manage it all yourself: software dependencies, upgrade issues, etc. etc. > > And all this even AFTER I simply told people that I'd be updating > software in that repository as I felt like it, without official > announcements, querying everyone as to good/bad times, etc. Also, I > only kept older versions around if the package was designed to make that > easy to do. Even so it was a huge time-sink. And yes, I do know about > things like sunfreeware.com which are better, but still a far cry from > what you get on Linux. > > This is not to mention hardware support, where Linux is much better than > Solaris. > > > However, Solaris still has Linux beat in a few critical enterprise > areas: for example, Linux's NFS and automount support still needs work > to match Solaris. Sure, Linux supports NFSv4 and Solaris doesn't (I > don't think), but we don't have any NFSv4 yet. What we do have are lots > of problems with our Linux desktops because of things like the > automounter mounts every partition exported by a server whenever you > access any partition via /net/host, not just one partition. Also, no > partitions will be unmounted until every partition on the server is > ready to be unmounted. Combined with the fact that Linux gets pretty > unstable/unhappy with >1280 or so NFS mounts and you've got problems in > large enterprise spaces: we have big EMC NFS fileservers that export > LOTS of partitions and we run into this all the time at some of our > sites. Also, we've had issues with NIS and NSCD getting confused with > long entries (using the trick of breaking up long lists into multiple > entries with the same GID for groups for example). There are also some > annoying "holes" in Linux: for example we use ClearCase for source code > control, and that system does a funky kind of loopback filesystem > mount. However, the Linux /proc is not completely implemented for > loopback mounts, so some kinds of accesses to /proc fail inside one of > these mounts (Expect spawn() fails, for example, as does df, and a few > other things). > > > I use Linux all day every day, and Solaris less and less... but if Linux > could just focus on a few "enterprise-level" areas like the above (NFS, > automount, NIS for _big_ environments) and clean up some things it would > be sooooo much better.
Wow!!! So Solaris kernel is generally technically superior... and what a post.
