Mario Goebbels wrote: >> This is my deal killer. I've been sticking with SXCE >> due to these >> reasons mainly, though there are others, mainly >> related to the amount of >> software available, and some of the behavior being >> strange with key >> applications. It's cutting-edge in nature, I just >> trust SXCE a little >> more until they respin another ISO. >> > > Not just that. Any new user downloading 2008.05 and then at some point trying > an image-update gets his installation hosed due to the boot changes. IMO the > ISO should get replaced at soon as possible, if it can't be fixed via IPS. > > -mg > -- > > This message posted from opensolaris.org > > _______________________________________________ > indiana-discuss mailing list > [email protected] > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss > The ips timeouts (Happened for more non-US than US users) was a particularly bad case, which drove away a wave of adopters.
SXCE B90+ has ZFS root, that's all I care about since Solaris 10 is imho the more reliable option, and Nevada (SX*E/Next/11) is still somewhat comparable to 10 in terms of package quality. You trade way too much at this point to be able to use ZFS snapshots as a backup solution. It's probably more than possible to write some Perl scripts to automate legacy SVR4 backups, similar to how Slackware's packages are just gzips with a few key files in a hirearchy, the same can theoretically be done by installing a core abstracting the rest of the package data in another location, merely using Solaris as something to build upon. This was the idea behind Indiana, but for the most part most people are willing to stay with the old tried and true method when they are more safe with it for the most part. The default package selection and dependency choices by Sun engineers, while probably sound in themselves, need some common sense worked in by external contributers who have a clue about usability. Sun has never had a clue about desktop usability, so they hired a few people that did lately, but that's still not enough. Just take the past with their documentation, software, user interfaces, they used to be a lot worse and have improved sure, but the requirements of users have also gone up to match their compensation. James _______________________________________________ indiana-discuss mailing list [email protected] http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
