"Richard L. Hamilton" <rlha...@smart.net> wrote:
> Well...there are probably people that prefer for example
> * traditional Solaris command set default vs GNU command set default
This is why few Solaris users did accept Indiana.
> * SVR4 packages vs IPS vs whatever packaging scheme Nexenta uses
> (there too there's a problem, inasmuch as other tools like beadm and zonecfg
> are also involved, although I gather it ought to be possible to come up with
> different versions of them for each packaging scheme that some distro or
> another uses)
SVR4 packages support sparse zones, IPS does not.
> If one wants to keep maximum compatibility with OpenSolaris/Solaris 11
> (Express),
> then I suppose one had better grit one's teeth and accept IPS. But the rest
> might well be handled mostly with additional packages for alternative
> command set(s) or GUIs.
SVR4 packages are widely in use (e.g. from ISVs) and accepted by customers.
IPS is halfway ready and it's future OSS strategy is unknown.
> But don't forget that the most commercial (i.e. developers that do it as
> their day job) distro outside of Oracle is probably Nexenta, and they
> do Debian-based packaging and command set.
Commercial developers still use SVR4 packages
Jörg
--
EMail:jo...@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
j...@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni)
joerg.schill...@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) Blog:
http://schily.blogspot.com/
URL: http://cdrecord.berlios.de/private/ ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily
_______________________________________________
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
