Moinak Ghosh wrote: > On Sat, Jul 5, 2008 at 2:09 AM, Giacomo Tufano <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> Il giorno 04/lug/08, alle ore 20:22, Moinak Ghosh ha scritto: >> >>> On Fri, Jul 4, 2008 at 9:40 PM, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >>> >>>> Is the target market the developer? The programer in a university >>>> somewhere? That can NOT be the case because OpenSolaris ships with no >>>> compiler and no system headers even if the compiler was included. If >>>> the target market is supposed to be the programmer then someone forget >>>> to give them GCC 4.x at the very *minimum*. >>>> >>>> >>> The repository contains GCC, headers and other sundry development related >>> packages. So I do not quite get what is the problem with pulling >>> down all those >>> other than bandwidth of course in certain regions. >>> In addition the bandwidth issue is diminishing day by day. >>> >> True. But just today, when looking for KDE for solaris I found on >> http://techbase.kde.org/index.php?title=Projects/KDE_on_Solaris this text >> about the prerequisites for compiling KDE 4.x on Solaris. >> >> "You can use either Solaris 10 update 5 (S10U5) or Solaris Express (Nevada >> build 70b or 83 -- these two versions run on our build machine and on at >> least one developer's desktop). Other versions of the operating system might >> work, but there are no guarantees and probably not much sympathy either; >> OpenSolaris 2008.5 is downright broken as a development platform". >> >> I found some other (similar, while not so "hard") comments somewhere else on >> the Internet (too lazy to find them)... It seems that developers don't think >> that OpenSolaris is a suitable developer platform... some countermeasure >> should be adopted. If the target market are developers, it is probably >> better not include openoffice in the CD and include compilers, headers and >> some dev tool... >> > > Maybe a web poll on this can help. I do not think OpenOffice is > included in the > ISO image. It is one big monolithic package hundreds of MB in size. > A lot of the > space is taken up by all the localization packages and obviously > the 32/64 bit > multi-architecture support in the base system, X11 and Gnome. > A CD ISO can only hold so much. It cannot satisfy everyone's requirements. > > Regards, > Moinak. > > >> My 2 cents, >> gt >> >> >> > _______________________________________________ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > Apples to oranges here. Ubuntu is the only mainstream system that fits all "users" need on a single CD. For development you must use apt to get anything.
FreeBSD is another that fits on a single CD. It manages to have X11 and full sources plus the system itself on the CD. The primary consumer is GNOME i18n and X.org. There is no system this age that fits any development tools on a CD, it's all internet or DVD based. I'm sure you'll try and prove me wrong, finding a niche developer-oriented system using a basic window manager but that's not the point. OO.o is indeed installed only through ips or Solaris package, it's not bundled. Sun must include localization support for a wide variety of languages in addition to support for multiple architectures. Given the fact most developers even in countries where bandwidth is metered can stand to have some patience and a little understanding, where users are in no mood to fiddle, waste time, etc. Developers are generally more easy going about situations requiring slightly more work, because they are used to problems of engineering in their daily work as it is, and this is generally a non-issue. The main reason a respin is needed is due to the fact that Indiana as I've pointed out is initially aimed toward users, and I find that it does that well when one can get past the show-stoppers. The reason for respin is simply to make it more widely installable, which is only accomplishable if the bits which fix numerous common critical bugs are integrated in a timely fashion into media which is available worldwide. Sun as a company, making sure legally Solaris is sustainable must double check just about any action regarding "release" versions. With systems that are distributed over the internet only, from non-US countries, they can deliver fixes because they do not have such strict legal needs. Then there's the quality aspect, yes this is a problem at times, but when is it not a problem elsewhere. It shouldn't have happened so badly that so many users encountered the bugs, and this is why a respin must be done regardless of schedules. I'd do it myself but I lack the knowledge or backing that Sun has. For Sun even if it's an interactive process to regenerate, there is no excuse. They market the hell out of it, it falls through, more people laugh at Solaris and walk away. I find there's a commication problem there, maybe it's just me. Next time both groups should be aware of what they are doing. James _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
