Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [solarisx86] For those nostalgic fellas
On Tue, 2011-01-04 at 12:21 +, Peter Tribble wrote: > On Tue, Jan 4, 2011 at 12:08 PM, Gary Gendel wrote: > > Jonathan, > > > > There are lightweight alternatives to Gnome available with a bit of work. > > KDE is pretty close to Gnome in terms of weight. I had used XFCE happily > > for awhile. It is lightweight and snappy and didn't bring my laptop to it's > > knees. It also has a CDE-like look and feel. > > http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+xfce/ > > > > Unfortunately, as far as I can tell, it's not being actively supported or > > developed anymore. > > Xfce is really here: > > http://www.xfce.org/ > > and is very much under active development, with 4.8 just around the corner > and pre-release versions of 4.8 currently available. > > I run the current 4.6.2 as my primary home desktop and have done for some > considerable time - it works extremely well. I also try and make sure that the > Xfce releases work on Solaris, and have added Solaris support to some of the > applications and panel plugins. > > Of course, the number of Xfce developers is relatively small compared to > the big boys of GNOME and KDE, so I'm sure that more help (and more > users) would be welcomed. > Another up and coming lightweight desktop environment is LXDE: <http://lxde.org/> I've used Xfce off and on since pre Xfce4 days and would subjectively rate LXDE as significantly lighter - lightweight enough that my kids have a couple 700 MHz PII boxes running it. LXDE also uses my favorite window manager, OpenBox. I don't think I've ever heard mention of an OpenSolaris/Indiana or Solaris port though. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Proposal: OpenIndiana Stable Branch
On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 20:36 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > Hi All, > > I believe now would be a really good time for us to create our first stable > branch of OpenIndiana, given the timing of some developments within the > project. Was a consensus ever reached on this? Opinions are easier to come by than developer time and talent so I kept mine to myself, waiting to see what shook out in the wash. Since it appears that nothing actually did, I'll offer the following. I see advantages to both waiting on IllumOS integration and getting something out now. It has been stated that "it could be many months until we have an Illumos dev build suitable for respinning as a stable branch". Could it also be significantly less time? If we're really talking "many" months here (and I assume that means more than 6, else terms like a "couple" or "few" would have been more appropriate), then I'd vote for a minimally supported release sooner rather than later. If, otoh, integration would be more on the order of 2-3 months, then I'd postpone and concentrate all available resources on making that a reality. As for the MTA discussion, Postfix is pretty much a drop in replacement for Sendmail, and my vote would be to replace Sendmail entirely. Of course Exim and others should be available (at some point in time) via the package system and it's not my intent to debate relative merits of various MTA offerings. Replacing Sendmail with Postfix is more of a pragmatic call - doing so is very low hanging fruit and nobody I know has rolled out a new Sendmail set up in many, many years now, and supporting an essentially fringe MTA as part of the core would be one less thing to worry about. Despite all it's goodness, one, if not the, primary detractor to Open Solaris's uptake was a paucity of 3rd party packages. Postponing until IllumOS integraton would allow more time for the repository to be updated and fleshed out, thereby creating a better initial impression of "fresh and up to date" Open Solaris based system. If the minimal supported server now path is chosen, then I think there really needs to be some POP3/IMAP package on the list, because it's not all just about web servers. Cyrus or Dovecot would be good choices. Regarding timing from a marketing perspective, FreeBSD is on the cusp of 8.2 release and Debian is close to 6.0 going stable. I'm not sure if it's relevant, but I think we can expect various publications to be doing reviews. Having OI included in the discussion could be a blessing, or a curse. My $0.02, for whatever it may be worth. Thanks for your indulgence. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Proposal: OpenIndiana Stable Branch
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 21:52 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > Hi Ken, > > On 25 Jan 2011, at 18:50, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > > > > On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 20:36 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > >> Hi All, > >> > >> I believe now would be a really good time for us to create our first > >> stable branch of OpenIndiana, given the timing of some developments within > >> the project. > > > > Was a consensus ever reached on this? > > Yes, we're going ahead! :-) I'm hoping to target 2010.02 but it might slip to > 2010.03, depending on how much work needs to be done to secure all the > packages and commit resources to monitoring security lists. We need more > volunteers willing to help "adopt" packages they'll look after. > > But I think there has been mass misunderstanding on what we are intending to > do, so I'll put it in the simplest possible terms. > > The stable branch will consist of us copying oi_148 from /dev into /release, > in its entirety, along with a few bug fixes and a bunch of security fixes. > We'll only make available the Text Installer ISO. We will then provide > security updates for a limited, defined set of software, for a limited period > (6 months, or until the next stable release is put out). > > No minimisation, no replacement of MTAs, no changes. > > Minimising the OS, or yanking out the core MTA, would require a huge amount > of work and break compatibility in a big way with the upstream Oracle source > we're still building. It's not something we're looking to do right now - > there are much more important bits of work needing to be done. > > Down the road in the future, replacing Sendmail with Postfix is something we > could do. But minimising the OS doesn't make sense. What's the difference > between Ubuntu Server and Ubuntu Desktop? As far as I'm aware, just the > package list. It's the same story with OpenIndiana - if you want to run a > server, do your install from the Text Installer ISO or the Automated > Installer ISO. You get a stripped down package set suitable for servers. > > We would like the Text Installer to be leaner and lighter, and we can > potentially achieve this at a later date by refactoring some of the packages, > and this is something we'd like to do. > > But for now, things like internationalisation (g11n), Illumos integration, > and providing security patches to a stable oi_148 branch are more important. > > You are right though about needing more software in our repos, and this is > something we do intend to do via the OIAC project, please see: > > http://wiki.openindiana.org/display/~guido/OI+Extra+Consolidation > > If you'd like to help out with this, we'd love the support. We can provide > permanent build zones, help mentor you (or anybody else looking to help) and > explain how to do it. It's great to volunteer, you help others and it looks > good on the CV, and you get to meet people and make new friends, learn stuff > and gain skills. > > Cheers, > > Alasdair Thank you for the clarification. I'd followed the discussion, but was unsure as to the final result. As for packages, yes, this is something I would be willing to help out on, but I am committed heavily to other projects at present and have minimal spare time. Given that, and operating on the premise that some help is better than no help, I'm willing to do what I can. The consolidation link above is prompting me for a username/pass to access. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Proposal: OpenIndiana Stable Branch
On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 10:58 -0800, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 01/25/11 10:50 AM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > As for the MTA discussion, Postfix is pretty much a drop in replacement > > for Sendmail, and my vote would be to replace Sendmail entirely. > > I still don't understand this subthread - if someone wants to start working > on postfix as a development project for a future release, that makes sense, > but doing it as a bug fix in a stable branch that's just supposed to be > providing fixes for the b148 already shipped? That just seems to violate > the definition of a stable branch. At the very least it should go into > the development branch first to get some testing before you even consider > backporting it to stable. > > (Not that I get a vote - that's up to the developers who actually do the > work, not those of us just here to provide color commentary.) Few are going to use Sendmail for anything other than sending notices to root. It would create a better first impression if OI shipped with a modern MTA such as Postfix or Exim. Postfix, being a drop in replacement for Sendmail, would be relatively painless. There's a saying that you never get a 2nd chance to make a 1st impression. Also that perception is 9/10ths of reality. Sure, the *BSD ship with Sendmail, but that is mostly for historical reasons and that nobody wants to get into a holy war as to what a more modern default should be. At the time Debian opted for Exim, Sendmail was one security exploit after another waiting to happen, Postfix was not yet in existence and Qmail, the other potential contender, had an unacceptable license. Several Linux distributions ship with Postfix. Just because Oracle makes a poor decision and ships Sendmail doesn't mean OI necessarily has to follow, no? It's not a big deal to me. I was expressing agreement with others who've lobbied for Postfix. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] BSD Magazine mentions OpenIndiana
On Wed, 2011-01-26 at 10:09 +, Jonathan Adams wrote: > True, but then Sun did mess up by abandoning Solaris x86 (last release > Solaris 8) just at the time that it (x86) really took off, and in > realising their mistake started producing Solaris x86 (First release > late Solaris 9) ... > > It caused us problems and headaches because we ran Oracle on one of > our servers (although we had some Sparc in house at the time) and > Oracle said that they were going to stop supporting x86. > > We now have only 1 Sparc box left, about 30 x86 Solaris 10 boxes ... > and currently 1 OpenIndiana laptop ... Only 1 *Solaris box left here as well - and that's my workstation daily driver. Been meaning to getting around to switching it over to FreeBSD but time has slipped by. I took 148-dev for a short test drive shortly after "release" and man, OI is so sluggish as to be pretty much unusable as a desktop and I just wrote it off as a dev release, still not ready for prime time. Subsequently Alasdair posted his stable release proposal, which made me think I needed to revisit OI and take a closer look. Then this BSD mag article comes out. Interestingly, the article author acknowledges that it takes forever and a day to boot, but then comments on it performing well. I installed in on an exact clone of my workstation (presently OS-2009.06) and the difference was like night and day. I didn't have time to look into it at all but mayhaps some major x server changes? Graphics card is Radeon RV370, wh/uses radeon driver on the os box, but Gnome being so slow makes me wonder if maybe OI was defaulting to vga? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] GPU HCL - nVidia Questions & Advice
Hello People: I need a new graphics card for an older system (PCIE-1.0). I don't game, do graphics, rendering, etc. so don't need high end - just a good workstation unit that supports OpenGL, good color accuracy, and draws square squares :) Occasional DVD's are probably about the most GPU intensive use the system sees. Noisy fans and failed fan bearings are a drag, so passive cooling is a plus, but not always a must as long as the card doesn't make the box sound like a hovercraft. So I thought I'd consult that newly created HCL wiki and was pleased to note the Quadro 600 is "officially supported". The Quadro 600's price point is attractive but otherwise I don't know much about it, as it's relatively new unit. So I've a question for Mr. Mays; is the 600 your daily driver, and if so, how do you like it?. Also, the nVidia 256.44 driver's support many, many cards, yet only 4 models are listed. I'm curios why this might be? Shouldn't pretty much any of the cards supported by those drivers work? Or is this list just a sample of stuff that's actually been tested by the OI community? I'm not very familiar with nVidia's line and welcome suggestions. Thanks bunches. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] GPU HCL - nVidia Questions & Advice
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 05:55 -0800, ken mays wrote: > To Ken Gunderson, > > The Quadro 600 works fine. Thanks, Ken. How's the noise on that unit in a quiet room/office environment? In my experience larger diameter fans running at lower rpm's are preferable to smaller units spinning fast. nVidia specs as under 23 db but you can never believe marketing :( I give much higher credence to actual end users :) > If you want a basic low-cost graphics card, you can use the GeForce GT 430 or > NVIDIA 9600 GT which is available in most stores today for about $50-$80 USD. > I suggest the Nvidia 9600 GT if you're a casual 3D user (i.e. gaming or > otherwise), or the GT 430 if you need something more 'low profile'... I'm personally okay with the under $200 price point > I'll update the HCL to reflect 'cheaper' cards. But it's good to have some under $100 cards on the list :) Thanks to all who replied. I think I'm going to grab a quadro 600, unless Ken comes back with unfavorable db reports. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] GPU HCL - nVidia Questions & Advice
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 09:00 -0800, Bill Sommerfeld wrote: > On 02/09/11 21:52, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > I need a new graphics card for an older system (PCIE-1.0). I don't game, > > do graphics, rendering, etc. so don't need high end - just a good > > workstation unit that supports OpenGL, good color accuracy, and draws > > square squares :) Occasional DVD's are probably about the most GPU > > intensive use the system sees. Noisy fans and failed fan bearings are a > > drag, so passive cooling is a plus, but not always a must as long as the > > card doesn't make the box sound like a hovercraft. > > I've been happy with: > > http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/B0024NL1E0 > > in a system built around a Tyan S2865-family motherboard(which may well > qualify as an "older system" now). Passive cooling. Drives two 24" > LCD's quite happily. > > That model fits in a pcie x16 slot. i believe there's also a pcie x1 > slot version if you really don't need performance... Thanks for the pointer. The 295 also made my short list and the passive cooling is a plus. The Quadro 600 seems like a lot more card for not very much more money, however, and since Ken reports first hand that the 600 is nice and quiet, seemed like the way to go. Now that I have first hand report of the 295, I'll give it a bit more thought and consideration, as even though the 600 is quiet, the box runs pretty much 24x7 and no moving parts to wear out is a plus. PCIE2 cards downgrade to PCIE1 (and vice versa), you just loose the extra bandwidth. At least that's the theory w.r.t. the spec. I've yet to actually try it. Oh yeah, and an S2865 based system is exactly what it will be calling home. Only single 24" LCD at present. Thanks again to all-- Ken -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] GPU HCL - nVidia Questions & Advice
On Thu, 2011-02-10 at 05:55 -0800, ken mays wrote: > To Ken Gunderson, > > The Quadro 600 works fine. > > If you want a basic low-cost graphics card, you can use the GeForce GT 430 or > NVIDIA 9600 GT which is available in most stores today for about $50-$80 USD. > I suggest the Nvidia 9600 GT if you're a casual 3D user (i.e. gaming or > otherwise), or the GT 430 if you need something more 'low profile'... > > I'll update the HCL to reflect 'cheaper' cards. Lol, latest update now includes the Quadro 6000 and some other not so inexpensive models. Hope you're not paying for this stuff out of your own pocket ;-P > To Guy, > > Colin Ellis is reviewing the issues with DRI/DMA support for the Illumos > team. A patch fix is available through Oracle's X team for the reported > bug/CR 7001754 (not officially committed yet to resolve bug so I'll say 'no' > for the record). > > Sidenote: I've tested the Nvidia drivers up to v260.19.36 with OI 148. > With the default drivers included, you can go as high-end as the Quadro 6000. Does anyone else think it might be nice to have an additional, separate list for cards supported by the default drivers? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] Second Look at OI "Stable" Proposal (was Re: Proposal: OpenIndiana Stable Branch)
I was just taking a second (well, actually third) look at this and the more important baby (IMAP) was thrown out with the bath water (MTA debate). On Tue, 2011-01-25 at 11:50 -0700, Ken Gunderson wrote: > On Fri, 2011-01-14 at 20:36 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > > Hi All, > > [snip] > Despite all it's goodness, one, if not the, primary detractor to Open > Solaris's uptake was a paucity of 3rd party packages. Postponing until > IllumOS integraton would allow more time for the repository to be > updated and fleshed out, thereby creating a better initial impression of > "fresh and up to date" Open Solaris based system. If the minimal > supported server now path is chosen, then I think there really needs to > be some POP3/IMAP package on the list, because it's not all just about > web servers. Cyrus or Dovecot would be good choices. The proposed minimal set of packages to be supported is very web server centric. Email is still a BIG component of the Internet and I believe that at least one IMAP package should be included in the supported list. And that package should be either Dovecot (simpler) or Cyrus (bigger enterprise ready and more RFC conformant). There are many people running large Cyrus ZFS installations on Solaris based systems (although many OpenSolaris may have migrated by now) so I think it might not bee too difficult if we approached the appropriate Cyrus mailing list with a request to package for OI. Probably similarly for Dovecot, as last I communicated with Timo (admittedly in early Dovecot development) he was very helpful guy. My personal preference would be for Cyrus because of the RFC feature/conformance aspect. Also, I think SSH needs to be added to the supported list. I'm sure this one was merely an oversight. Thank you and have a nice day. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Second Look at OI "Stable" Proposal (was Re: Proposal: OpenIndiana Stable Branch)
On Sun, 2011-02-13 at 19:58 +, Deano wrote: > Hi Ken, > > Most of us agree that the more packages and more of a cross section the > stable build has, the better. > However the main issue is supporting it, it's not simply packaging, its > maintaining it to a high enough standard to be considered "stable", if > someone can come forward and not only offer a package but be willing to look > after it, follow the security alerts, package and patch it, then great. > For now we have some great people supporting many packages and > consolidation, but getting more into the stable list requires more people > interested in helping. I understand that. Be that as it may, however, consider the perception of a potential end user who hears about OI's "stable" server release and takes if for a test spin, only to learn that there's not even one single, solitary supported IMAP package. Last I looked, email was #1 use of the Internet, followed by WWW. Granted it's been a couple years since I last checked, but if email is not #1 I'll wager it's close behind as #2. Hence, in m view, that seems like a huge sector to be blowing off. Especially in light of comparatively rich support on the web framework front; apache, php, java, tomcat, python, ruby, & perl. As well as having other major Internet service bases covered between Bind & Sendmail, and not one, but two RDBMS systems. An IMAP option is, ohmo, is an essential component server side and the lack thereof not only leaves a huge gaping hole, but also potentially paints a target for negative evaluations and reviews. I don't really speak for the OI dev community so did not feel like it was my place to solicit help from e.g. Cyrus dev community. But I suspect that if someone of a bit higher profile approached them they'd be receptive. Problem solved, no? I say Cyrus becuase I've used pretty much all of these at one time or another and in modern times the choice pretty much boils down to Cyrus or Dovecot. Dovecot is less feature complete and under more active development. Cyrus would therefore likely involve less effort on the pkg maintenance side. My $0.02. I'm just trying to help. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] GPU HCL - nVidia Questions & Advice
On Mon, 2011-02-14 at 16:48 -0800, Edward Martinez wrote: > > > > Date: Mon, 14 Feb 2011 11:41:29 + > > From: guy.wool...@btinternet.com > > To: openindiana-discuss@openindiana.org > > Subject: Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] GPU HCL - nVidia Questions & Advice > > > > You just need to look at /etc/X11/xorg.conf and change "vesa" to "nv" > > - that should do it. My Xorg.conf file reads simply. [snip] > Section "ServerLayout" > Identifier "X.org Configured" > Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0 Perhaps you may have something amiss with the Screen line in your ServerLayout section. Don't you need quotes, e.g. shouldn't it read something more like: Screen "Screen 1" Or in your case "Screen0"?? What happens when you grep /var/log/Xorg.0.log for WW and EE? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Multifunction colour laser printer for OSOL, OI ?
On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 09:24 +, Guy Woolley wrote: > Hello all, > Does anyone have positive experience of a currently > available (not legacy) Multifunction colour laser printer (duplex > printing,copy, scan, fax) running under recent OpenSolaris or OpenIndiana ? > > I have located 2 possible models: > > Samsung CLX-6220FX No experience here. > Manufacturer mentions a "Unified driver for Linux" > > Brother DCP-9055CDN Experience with a few Brother models. Presently an MFC-8860DN and HL-1650N. A few others at various client sites that I forget the model numbers off the top of my head. In my experience the key, at least w.r.t. the printing side is to get a Postscript printer. HP invented their competing printer control language because they didn't want to have to pay Adobe royalties where more of the processing is done client side and requires client side drivers. With Postscript printers most (all?) processing is done by the printer engine. Hence, as long as you have a postscript printer definition file (ppd) you're good to go. Otherwise you end up with reverse engineered foomatic and may end up with a lag between release and CUPS support. > manufacturer mentions CUPS driver download. Now that CUPS is become defacto *nix standard, it's good to see some manufacturers supporting it out of the gate. But I'd still opt for a Postscript, or Brother's functionally equivalent "BR Script" printer - they'll run forever w/o any need for driver updates. AFAIK, CUPS is not going to get your scanner or fax working though. For scanner you need SANE and I've minimal experience there. I think HPLIP gives SANE an interface to HP scanners but haven't a clue as to which models are currently supported. > > Any other suggestions v. welcome - or even report that the above do NOT > work, or that there is no such thing would be very useful. Were I you, I'd also be looking at Lexmark. > I've tried openprinting.org but didn't get anywhere. > > Thanks > > Guy > > ___ > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OpenIndiana mailing list
On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 18:28 +0500, Dmitry G. Kozhinov wrote: > Hi, > > To whom it may concern. The link to OpenIndiana mailing list > (http://openindiana.org/mailman) should be added somewhere at the main page. > > Currently the only way to find the mailing list (at least which I could > find) is way too long and hidden: > "Documentation" -> "FAQ" -> "Where can I get more info or keep up to > date with the project?" -> "Please join our mailing lists – > http://openindiana.org/mailman";. > > Could it be e.g. "Support" -> "Mailing lists" ? > > Dmitry. > > ___ > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss It would be nice if you would start a new message rather than replying to existing and merely changing subject, as the latter practice messes up threading. Thank you. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Multifunction colour laser printer, for OSOL, OI ?
On Thu, 2011-02-17 at 13:13 -0800, ken mays wrote: > Guy, > > Check out the Brother MFC-9560CDW. Not familiar with this particular model but can attest that Brother in general provides excellent bang for the buck. Just stay away from refurbished. Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] RFC: OI website brain storm page
On Fri, 2011-02-18 at 13:45 +, Matt Wilby wrote: > On 18/02/2011 13:34, Dmitry G. Kozhinov wrote: > > I have already said that the OpenIndiana project definitely needs a > > forum (not just mailing list), because many people do not want to > > subscribe to a mailing list, and want to keep their mailboxes free > > from regular mailing. They would be happy though to look into a forum > > when they want to. > > > > I have contacted Alasdair directly about this some time ago, but did > > not get any reply. > > > > I vote for forum. > > > > Dmitry. > > > > > > On 18.02.2011 17:43, Gerald Davies wrote: > >> On Tue, Feb 15, 2011 at 23:54, jay undernet wrote: > >>>> http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/Website-Ideas > >>>> > >> Can anyone actually sign up? Had a permissions problem just a moment > >> ago. > >> > >> Idea: have an OI Forums page, like ubuntuforums.org, if one doesn't > >> already exist. > >> > >> That will massively aid people making the switch, not just a 'from > >> Linux to OI' page. > >> > >> Cheers, > >> > >> Gerald > >> > >> ___ > >> OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > >> OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org > >> http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > >> > > > > ___ > > OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list > > OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org > > http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss > > > > Hi Dmitry, > > A web based forum is being considered as part of the website re-design. > > It was discussed in the last oi-meeting, and was on the agenda for > several weeks. I have also added it to the suggestion list. > > Alasdair is a busy guy. He will get round to replying to you when he can. > > Thanks, > > Matt Phorum is a lean, mean, yet still featured forum package. Relatively good security track record as well, at least for a php based app. I have used several over the years and Phorum would be on my short list for something like this, i.e. don't more knowledge and info based than recreational. I suggest you include it in your evaluations. Also, there are many excellent CMS's out there which would ease the burden of keeping things up to date greatly. I would recommend taking a good look at Drupal. That way web dev's can focus on backend development and documentation oriented folks can focus on creating documents. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Multifunction colour laser printer for OSOL, OI ?
On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 07:06 -0700, Ken Gunderson wrote: > On Tue, 2011-02-15 at 09:24 +, Guy Woolley wrote: > > Hello all, > > Does anyone have positive experience of a currently > > available (not legacy) Multifunction colour laser printer (duplex > > printing,copy, scan, fax) running under recent OpenSolaris or OpenIndiana ? [snip] > AFAIK, CUPS is not going to get your scanner or fax working though. For > scanner you need SANE and I've minimal experience there. I think HPLIP > gives SANE an interface to HP scanners but haven't a clue as to which > models are currently supported. Here's a link to the hplip stuff I mentioned: <http://hplipopensource.com/hplip-web/index.html> Might be worth a gander if youŕe still shopping. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] why is OI- illumos based 148a 805mb
On Thu, 2011-02-24 at 20:32 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > On 24 Feb 2011, at 00:10, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > > > On 02/23/11 04:02 PM, Sean wrote: > >>> i'm just wondering why is illumos based OI dev build 148a larger then > >>> solaris 11 express? > >> > >> Because it has more bits? o_O > > > > And probably because Solaris 11 Express removed packages from the LiveCD > > until it fit onto a CD, and that iteration hasn't happened yet for a first > > development build. The tradeoff between what comes on the CD vs. needing > > to be installed from the repo later is flexible, and was adjusted many times > > during OpenSolaris development, especially as we neared milestone releases > > and needed to shrink the image to fit the media again. > > We should probably slim the LiveCD down a bit. Presumably if we built 151a > consolidations, and used distro-const from 151a, we'd end up with a CD rather > than a DVD. > > I guess we'll find out soon enough :-) Care to elaborate? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] OI_148a >= 2/23/2011
I note there was some discussion on oi-dev about pressing this to DVD for SCALE. There was also a plan for text installer "stable" release for server target sometime in Feb. Given that integration of illumos kernel seems to be getting favorable reports, is this still the plan or will the release now be illumos based? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] quadro 600 on oi-dev-148a - no joy :(
Hello All You Happy People:) Well, I finally tracked down a #00 Phillips screw driver so I could swap out the factory low profile mount for a standard height on my new Quadro 600. Unfortunately, oi loads only with vesa driver. Boo Hiss!! Booting to console and forcing nvidia drivers in xorg.conf pukes up glx initialization failures. I uninstalled and reinstalled the nvidia drivers, glx extensions, etc., but results were the same with both simple xorg.conf specifying nvidia driver and Xorg -configure generated xorg.conf. See attached log and xorg.conf's. nvidia's website and marketing stuff conveniently omits anything about supported cpu's, but the actual packaging stipulates processor requirements: *Intel Core i5, i7 or Xeon processor or later * AMD Phenom or Opteron class processor or later The system is Tyan S2865 based, sporting any Opteron 180, & 4GB ECC, fwiw. Ideas? Thanks in advance. -- Ken Gunderson Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "nvidia" EndSection Section "ServerLayout" Identifier "X.org Configured" Screen 0 "Screen0" 0 0 InputDevice"Mouse0" "CorePointer" InputDevice"Keyboard0" "CoreKeyboard" EndSection Section "Files" ModulePath "/usr/lib/xorg/modules/amd64" ModulePath "/usr/X11/lib/modules/" FontPath "catalogue:/etc/X11/fontpath.d" EndSection Section "Module" Load "dri2" Load "dri" Load "ia" Load "dbe" Load "extmod" Load "glx" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Keyboard0" Driver "kbd" EndSection Section "InputDevice" Identifier "Mouse0" Driver "mouse" Option "Protocol" "auto" Option "Device" "/dev/mouse" Option "ZAxisMapping" "4 5 6 7" EndSection Section "Monitor" Identifier "Monitor0" EndSection Section "Device" Identifier "Card0" Driver "nvidia" VendorName "ATI Technologies Inc" BoardName "Rage XL" BusID "PCI:5:0:0" EndSection Section "Screen" Identifier "Screen0" Device "Card0" Monitor"Monitor0" SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 1 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 4 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 8 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 15 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 16 EndSubSection SubSection "Display" Viewport 0 0 Depth 24 EndSubSection EndSection ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] quadro 600 on oi-dev-148a - no joy :(
Apparently Mailman trimmed xorg.log. Sending again, sans the xorg.conf's. Hello All You Happy People:) Well, I finally tracked down a #00 Phillips screw driver so I could swap out the factory low profile mount for a standard height on my new Quadro 600. Unfortunately, oi loads only with vesa driver. Boo Hiss!! Booting to console and forcing nvidia drivers in xorg.conf pukes up glx initialization failures. I uninstalled and reinstalled the nvidia drivers, glx extensions, etc., but results were the same with both simple xorg.conf specifying nvidia driver and Xorg -configure generated xorg.conf. See attached log and xorg.conf's. nvidia's website and marketing stuff conveniently omits anything about supported cpu's, but the actual packaging stipulates processor requirements: *Intel Core i5, i7 or Xeon processor or later * AMD Phenom or Opteron class processor or later The system is Tyan S2865 based, sporting any Opteron 180, & 4GB ECC, fwiw. Ideas? Thanks in advance. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] quadro 600 on oi-dev-148a - no joy - Xoeg.log output
2010 (II) NVIDIA Unified Driver for all Supported NVIDIA GPUs (II) Primary Device is: PCI 05@00:00:0 (II) Loading sub module "fb" (II) LoadModule: "fb" (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/amd64/libfb.so (II) Module fb: vendor="X.Org Foundation" compiled for 1.7.7, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4 (II) Loading sub module "wfb" (II) LoadModule: "wfb" (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/amd64/libwfb.so (II) Module wfb: vendor="X.Org Foundation" compiled for 1.7.7, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4 (II) Loading sub module "ramdac" (II) LoadModule: "ramdac" (II) Module "ramdac" already built-in (WW) VGA arbiter: cannot open kernel arbiter, no multi-card support (II) NVIDIA(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 24/32 (==) NVIDIA(0): Depth 24, (==) framebuffer bpp 32 (==) NVIDIA(0): RGB weight 888 (==) NVIDIA(0): Default visual is TrueColor (==) NVIDIA(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0) (**) Feb 26 18:02:42 NVIDIA(0): Enabling RENDER acceleration (EE) Feb 26 18:02:42 NVIDIA(0): Failed to initialize the GLX module; please check in your X (EE) Feb 26 18:02:42 NVIDIA(0): log file that the GLX module has been loaded in your X (EE) Feb 26 18:02:42 NVIDIA(0): server, and that the module is the NVIDIA GLX module. If (EE) Feb 26 18:02:42 NVIDIA(0): you continue to encounter problems, Please try (EE) Feb 26 18:02:42 NVIDIA(0): reinstalling the NVIDIA driver. (EE) Feb 26 18:02:45 NVIDIA(0): Failed to initialize the NVIDIA graphics device! (II) UnloadModule: "nvidia" (II) UnloadModule: "wfb" (II) UnloadModule: "fb" (EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration. Fatal server error: no screens found Please consult the OpenIndiana, based on X.Org Foundation & OpenSolaris sources support at http://openindiana.org/consolidation/xnv for help. Please also check the log file at "/var/log/Xorg.0.log" for additional information. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Explain the Goal of oi
On Sat, 2011-02-26 at 19:35 -0600, Harry Putnam wrote: > I'm getting a little confused about what OI is trying to do exactly. > > I changed to oi with Opensolaris looked untenable due to oracle > maneuvers, expecting to see a basic continuation of what was happing > from b 101 up to 134. > > I've been seeing little snippets of subjects and the like that seem to > indicate that oi is merging with Illumini (no sure what that is called > by full name). > > If that is the case what, in general, will that mean? I noticed my > subscription to illuminos-discuss has produced 6 msgs since the end of Jan. > > So can someone fill me in, just in general, what the plan is over > the next yr or so? OpenSolaris, despite it's name, to the contrary still contained non free bits that Sun _still_ hadn't gotten around to replacing when Oracle took over and nuked OpenSolaris. Illumos is more akin to the Linux kernel - an open core around which "distributions" may be constructed. OI aims to be one such distribution but hasn't quite gotten there yet because Illumos hasn't quite gotten there yet... But they're getting closer. Hence the discussion. Recently a developer spun an IllumsOS based OpenIndiana Live Cd, dubbed oi-dev-148a. Sans the "as" it's still Sun ON based . Clear as mud? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] Quadro 600 No Joy - Updated
on XFree86-DRI (II) LoadModule: "dri2" (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/extensions/amd64/libdri2.so (II) Module dri2: vendor="X.Org Foundation" compiled for 1.7.7, module version = 1.1.0 ABI class: X.Org Server Extension, version 2.0 (II) Loading extension DRI2 (II) LoadModule: "ia" (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/extensions/amd64/libia.so (II) Module IANAME: vendor="X.Org Foundation" compiled for 1.7.7, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: X.Org Server Extension, version 2.0 (II) Loading extension SolarisIA (II) LoadModule: "xtsol" (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/extensions/amd64/libxtsol.so (II) Module xtsol: vendor="X.Org Foundation" compiled for 1.7.7, module version = 1.0.0 Module class: X.Org Server Extension ABI class: X.Org Server Extension, version 2.0 (II) Loading extension SUN_TSOL (II) LoadModule: "nvidia" (II) Loading /usr/X11/lib/modules/drivers/amd64/nvidia_drv.so (II) Module nvidia: vendor="NVIDIA Corporation" compiled for 4.0.2, module version = 1.0.0 Module class: X.Org Video Driver (II) NVIDIA dlloader X Driver 256.44 Thu Jul 29 02:06:07 PDT 2010 (II) NVIDIA Unified Driver for all Supported NVIDIA GPUs (II) Primary Device is: PCI 05@00:00:0 (II) Loading sub module "fb" (II) LoadModule: "fb" (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/amd64/libfb.so (II) Module fb: vendor="X.Org Foundation" compiled for 1.7.7, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4 (II) Loading sub module "wfb" (II) LoadModule: "wfb" (II) Loading /usr/lib/xorg/modules/amd64/libwfb.so (II) Module wfb: vendor="X.Org Foundation" compiled for 1.7.7, module version = 1.0.0 ABI class: X.Org ANSI C Emulation, version 0.4 (II) Loading sub module "ramdac" (II) LoadModule: "ramdac" (II) Module "ramdac" already built-in (WW) VGA arbiter: cannot open kernel arbiter, no multi-card support (II) NVIDIA(0): Creating default Display subsection in Screen section "Default Screen Section" for depth/fbbpp 24/32 (==) NVIDIA(0): Depth 24, (==) framebuffer bpp 32 (==) NVIDIA(0): RGB weight 888 (==) NVIDIA(0): Default visual is TrueColor (==) NVIDIA(0): Using gamma correction (1.0, 1.0, 1.0) (**) Feb 27 06:31:57 NVIDIA(0): Enabling RENDER acceleration (II) Feb 27 06:31:57 NVIDIA(0): Support for GLX with the Damage and Composite X extensions is (II) Feb 27 06:31:57 NVIDIA(0): enabled. (EE) Feb 27 06:32:01 NVIDIA(0): Failed to initialize the NVIDIA graphics device! (II) UnloadModule: "nvidia" (II) UnloadModule: "wfb" (II) UnloadModule: "fb" (EE) Screen(s) found, but none have a usable configuration. Fatal server error: no screens found Please consult the OpenIndiana, based on X.Org Foundation & OpenSolaris sources support at http://openindiana.org/consolidation/xnv for help. Please also check the log file at "/var/log/Xorg.0.log" for additional information. TIA-- Ken -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Quadro 600 No Joy - Solved
Well, I guess I have this solved. Sort of?? I can now startx with the nvidia drivers loaded but one of my cores stays pegged at 80%. At least on oi-dev148. Still need to test this fix on 148a. I did some searching on the gfx_private error. Got lots of hits. One of which was this OpenSolaris bug report: <https://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=9525> This clued me into running scanpci, whereupon I noted, similarly to the bug reports "i915 device driver is bound twice" problem, my Quadro is also bound twice: pci bus 0x0005 cardnum 0x00 function 0x00: vendor 0x10de device 0x0df8 nVidia Corporation Device unknown CardVendor 0x10de card 0x0835 (nVidia Corporation, Card unknown) STATUS0x0010 COMMAND 0x0047 CLASS 0x03 0x00 0x00 REVISION 0xa1 BIST 0x00 HEADER 0x80 LATENCY 0x00 CACHE 0x08 BASE0 0xfa00 SIZE 16777216 MEM BASE1 0xc800 SIZE 134217728 MEM PREFETCHABLE BASE3 0xd600 SIZE 33554432 MEM PREFETCHABLE BASE5 0x6c00 SIZE 128 I/O BASEROM 0x addr 0x MAX_LAT 0x00 MIN_GNT 0x00 INT_PIN 0x01 INT_LINE 0x0b pci bus 0x0005 cardnum 0x00 function 0x01: vendor 0x10de device 0x0bea nVidia Corporation Device unknown CardVendor 0x10de card 0x0835 (nVidia Corporation, Card unknown) STATUS0x0010 COMMAND 0x0046 CLASS 0x04 0x03 0x00 REVISION 0xa1 BIST 0x00 HEADER 0x80 LATENCY 0x00 CACHE 0x08 BASE0 0xfbffc000 SIZE 16384 MEM BASEROM 0x addr 0x MAX_LAT 0x00 MIN_GNT 0x00 INT_PIN 0x02 INT_LINE 0x05 I tired running update_drv, but didn't have the correct incantation. It was suggested that my Quadro was not being detected by Xorg. Yeah, that much I'd groked. But why not? nVidia has subsequently released newer drivers than those shipped with OI, so I was getting ready to give them a try, when I spied following in the README: The X server does not start and shows the error "Cannot open /dev/fb (No such file or directory)" Your graphics card may be newer than the NVIDIA Accelerated Solaris Graphics Driver Set, meaning that its PCI device ID may not have been included in the installation scripts and therefore not added to the file /etc/driver_aliases. To manually register the graphics card, proceed as follows: * Determine the PCI device ID of your graphics card with the command # /usr/X11/bin/scanpci For example a Quadro FX500 appears as: pci bus 0x0009 cardnum 0x00 function 0x00: vendor 0x10de device 0x032b nVidia Corporation NV34GL [Quadro FX 500/600 PCI] The PCI vendor ID is '10de', the PCI device ID is '32b'. * Become root and register the PCI device ID with the command # update_drv -a -i '"pci10de,"' nvidia is the PCI device ID returned by the scanpci command. Drop any leading zeroes. Note that pci10de, is nested between a set of single-quote/double-quote double-quote/single-quote. For example: # update_drv -a -i '"pci10de,32b"' nvidia * Reboot with the command # reboot -- -r Full text here: <http://us.download.nvidia.com/solaris/260.19.36/README/commonproblems.html> This was just too familiar to the OpenSolaris bug report not to catch my eye, so this time around I dropped the -v flag from scanpci. Relevant output here: pci bus 0x0005 cardnum 0x00 function 0x00: vendor 0x10de device 0x0df8 nVidia Corporation Device unknown pci bus 0x0005 cardnum 0x00 function 0x01: vendor 0x10de device 0x0bea nVidia Corporation Device unknown Followed by; #update_drv -a -i '"pci10de,df8"' I'd previously been unfamiliar with the -- -r flag, and after reading man reboot and man boot am still unclear as to just what this does, but whatever, it seems to have done the trick, as I was presented with gdm login welcome screen and Xorg.0.log reports that my Quadro is now being deteched: (II) Feb 28 04:18:59 NVIDIA(0): NVIDIA GPU Quadro 600 (GF108GL) at PCI:5:0:0 (GPU-0) (--) Feb 28 04:18:59 NVIDIA(0): Memory: 1048576 kBytes (--) Feb 28 04:18:59 NVIDIA(0): VideoBIOS: 70.08.27.00.02 (II) Feb 28 04:18:59 NVIDIA(0): Detected PCI Express Link width: 16X (--) Feb 28 04:18:59 NVIDIA(0): Interlaced video modes are supported on this GPU Yeah! :) But one of my cores is pegged whilst just idling. Boo Hiss!! :( Hmmm... just booted with the vesa drivers and core is still pegged. Maybe not an nVidia driver issue. I'll follow up once I get a chance to test this with 148a. Perhaps this was obvious to Solaris guru's but I'm not and offer the above in the hope it saves someone else some time running down similar issue in the future. Regards-- Ken On Sat, 2011-02-26
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Quadro 600 No Joy - Solved
On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 07:33 +, Chris Ridd wrote: > On 28 Feb 2011, at 04:20, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > > But one of my cores is pegged whilst just idling. Boo Hiss!! :( > > > > Hmmm... just booted with the vesa drivers and core is still pegged. > > Maybe not an nVidia driver issue. I'll follow up once I get a chance to > > test this with 148a. > > What's the core doing? What does intrstat show? It shows that bge0 is macking down 52% of one of my cores: device | cpu0 %tim cpu1 %tim -+-- ata#0 | 0 0.0 0 0.0 bge#0 |105062 51.7 0 0.0 ehci#0 | 1 0.0 0 0.0 hci1394#0 | 0 0.046 0.0 nv_sata#0 |81 2.0 0 0.0 nv_sata#1 |81 0.1 0 0.0 nvidia#0 | 0 0.046 3.1 ohci#0 | 0 0.0 0 0.0 I tested the update_drv fix on 148a and gdm login/welcome came up upon reboot using the nvidia drivers. 148a idles along at a respectably low load, so I assume some work was done on bge driver that's not in 148? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Quadro 600 No Joy - Solved
On Mon, 2011-02-28 at 10:59 -0500, Gary Gendel wrote: > Jon, > > This particular v20z refuses to update to the latest firmware, but bge > works properly for OpenSolaris up to and including 134b so it looks to > be a change to the bge driver found in Oi 147 or 148. There is another > issue where apcupsd wouldn't run because of some change in libusb as > well. Recompling from source wouldn't fix that problem either. > > Unfortunately, this is my home router, file, web, mail, et. al. server > so I can't do extended experimentation and debugging. > > That a second person saw a CPU issue with the bge driver makes me (want) > to believe something changed in the driver source to cause this. Just to add to the data point, this exact same system (sans the Qudaro) worked for many months with bge as primary NIC under various iterations of Nevada and OpenSolaris. So I would concur with Gary that the fault is something introduced post 134b, but remedied in Illumos based 148a. The 2865 also has onboard nge, and that works fine, wh/I makes ruling out something else in the stack a pretty safe bet. I've been up to my ears with other things, but am curious if anyone has checked Illumos bug tracker? Best regards-- Ken -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Solaris Express server name broadcast
On Sat, 2011-03-05 at 22:39 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > On 5 Mar 2011, at 22:25, Dmitry G. Kozhinov wrote: > > > We all (OpenIndiana and Solaris users) are using technology created by Sun. > > Why not be just helpful? There are Oracle employees here at the list > > providing very helpful information - you call the names. There are Linux > > and FreeBSD users here. Why kick them off? Why setting a hostile attitude > > here? > I do not think that a FOSS project community has any moral imperative to act as a support channel for a commercial product. Nor another competing FOSS project, for that matter. To illustrate, I think most would agree that it would be impolite at the minimum, if not downright ludicrous, for me to expect support for FreeBSD from an OpenBSD list just because they both derive from a common heritage. > There hasn't been a hostile attitude so far and we shouldn't start now! > > So lets agree to all be friendly to each other. Bayard put it well. I think politely pointing S11 users to appropriate support channels would fall under the umbrella of friendliness. If for whatever reason, those channels don't meet their needs, then they should take that under consideration when choosing an OS platform. To reiterate, lest some misinterpret, this does not equate to, nor advocate, hostility. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Solaris Express server name broadcast
On Sun, 2011-03-06 at 09:58 -0500, weknox wrote: > Two points I believe are germane: > > 1. This is a tempest in a teapot. Get outside and plant some flowers. > It's Spring, or at least nearly so. > > 2. WTF? There is no "moral obligation" to help? There is *always* a > moral obligation to help someone in distress - or one who simply needs > help - in a caring community. If someone is reading and writing on this > list then they obviously belong to us, at least at this point in time. > Give them a hand. Granted, there may be some point in time when the > users are too numerous here that posts may need to be edited but I don't > think that's today - otherwise we wouldn't all be stirring this little > teapot so vigorously. Don't allow your irritation at Oracle (or Sun) > from interfering with our new community. Talk about a tempest in a teapot - and then go on to extend my comment about moral imperative to act as a support channel for commercial product to turning a blind eye to someone in distress. Get some perspective here. The OP asked a question, to which they did not receive an adequate answer. Two posters made a couple gruff remarks about this not being the most appropriate forum for the query at hand, for which they apologized. Later posters then edited my post to omit my actual text and also took what I did say out of context in an apparently thinly guised effort to rebuke my supposed villany and make mountains out of mole hills. So I'll set the record straight and then be done with this drama. I did not say anything about not being helpful. Pointing someone to the most appropriate forum/repository of requisite expertise is being helpful, even if worded a bit caustically or grumpily. Politely pointing - my actual verbiage - people thusly is being both helpful and friendly. And, it may well be argued, more effective, especially when the quick answer was not to be had here. Peace-- ken -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] oi0148 illumos integration status??
Hello: I'm confused about whether what's being served up at: <http://openindiana.org/download/> is now Illumos based or still on ON?? I caught that the 148a build was rekindled as 148 so as not to fubar up pkg-repo version numbers, and then subsequently at pkg repo <http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/en/index.shtml> But if I want to point someone to dl Illumos based 148 what is the correct URL? Basically the post here: <http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/2011-March/000273.html> and the terse "I'll move it" response has left me confused and some clarification would be appreciated. Thank you. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Next build of OI
On Mon, 2011-03-14 at 15:26 +0100, Hans J. Albertsson wrote: > Will there be a next build of OI, or must we wait for Illumos? See this thread from oi-dev: <http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/2011-March/000257.html> -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] oi0148 illumos integration status??
On Tue, 2011-03-15 at 11:52 +0100, Guido Berhoerster wrote: > * Ken Gunderson [2011-03-15 01:53]: > > I'm confused about whether what's being served up at: > > > > <http://openindiana.org/download/> > > > > is now Illumos based or still on ON?? > > That is still oi_148 based on the last available Oracle ONNV. > > > I caught that the 148a build was rekindled as 148 so as not to fubar up > > pkg-repo version numbers, and then subsequently at pkg repo > > > > <http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/en/index.shtml> > > > > But if I want to point someone to dl Illumos based 148 what is the > > correct URL? > > The /dev-il repo is basically the above oi_148 with Oracle ONNV > replaced by Illumos. It is an experimental build and not intended > for general use, please keep that in mind when pointing people to > it. > > > Basically the post here: > > > > <http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/2011-March/000273.html> > > > > and the terse "I'll move it" response has left me confused and some > > clarification would be appreciated. > > What is called "oi_148a" was a livecd image constructed from the > packages which are in the above /dev-il repo. It was distributed > as technology preview cd at SCALE and not intended for general > use, thus it should not have been placed on dlc.openindiana.org. > Since a number of fixes which went into the oi_148 image were > accidentally left out of the oi_148a image there are a number of > known bugs. This was spun from what was once labeled oi-dev-148a-x86-20110223-1.iso, or something with further fixes? > Our next steps will likely be another respin of oi_148a for > internal usage where perl-584 is being replaced by perl-510. Plus the fixes that were accidentally left out of "oi-148a"? > After ironing out any potential problems we will deliver a new > public development release based on a snapshot of Illumos ON and > b151a for the other consolidations. When this development build > has proven sufficiently stable and major bugs have been dealt > with we plan to make this our first stable release. That will be a happy day for many :) Are there any general timeline estimates? > We have an open development process so experimental repos and > images might be visible, please only use what has been publically > announced unless you know what you are doing. Thank you, Guido. The clarification is much appreciated. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Linux vs. Solaris
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 07:51 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 04:15 AM, Gabriel de la Cruz wrote: > > The Solaris OS was carefully designed as a product, Linux is a > > combination of technollogies carefully developed to interact with > > eachother but created in independent projects. Both of them a very > > well made, but the way how all the parts within Solaris relate to > > eachother is more consistent. > > > > Solaris and linux are like 2 different languages, both ritch on their > > own way, why shoulnt we write phylosopy in German? > > > > Er...certainly the core is a carefully designed product but I would not > go so far as to claim the whole of Solaris is a carefully designed product. > > Anyway, when will KDE be brought on board instead of that directionless > excuse for a desktop environment called GNOME? Ha! Why anyone would want, or indeed, could even use that bug ridden pos they call kde these days is beyond me fyi- I was a kde1, 2, and to some extent kde3 user before I gave up and switched to Xfce4. Changing platform to OS made Gnome one of the pills I had to swallow. And a jagged little pill it was, as I formerly detested it. After some time using it, however, I began to appreciate Gnome. I test drive the latest and not so greatest KDE4 from time to time on Linux boxes and am amazed at just how badly they missed it The point being, to each their own. Gnome works on Solaris. And pretty much works on OI. Better places to invest limited developer engergies and talent than incorporating KDE, imho. You got a really, really bad itch?? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Linux vs. Solaris
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 09:03 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 08:00 AM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > > > On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 07:51 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > >> On Wednesday, March 30, 2011 04:15 AM, Gabriel de la Cruz wrote: > >>> The Solaris OS was carefully designed as a product, Linux is a > >>> combination of technollogies carefully developed to interact with > >>> eachother but created in independent projects. Both of them a very > >>> well made, but the way how all the parts within Solaris relate to > >>> eachother is more consistent. > >>> > >>> Solaris and linux are like 2 different languages, both ritch on their > >>> own way, why shoulnt we write phylosopy in German? > >>> > >> > >> Er...certainly the core is a carefully designed product but I would not > >> go so far as to claim the whole of Solaris is a carefully designed product. > >> > >> Anyway, when will KDE be brought on board instead of that directionless > >> excuse for a desktop environment called GNOME? > > > > Ha! Why anyone would want, or indeed, could even use that bug ridden > > pos they call kde these days is beyond me > > > > fyi- I was a kde1, 2, and to some extent kde3 user before I gave up and > > switched to Xfce4. Changing platform to OS made Gnome one of the pills > > I had to swallow. And a jagged little pill it was, as I formerly > > detested it. After some time using it, however, I began to appreciate > > Gnome. I test drive the latest and not so greatest KDE4 from time to > > time on Linux boxes and am amazed at just how badly they missed it > > Yes, Kubuntu is a complete disaster. Not the KDE team's fault though I > don't think. The Kubuntu devs botched it real bad. On another note, I > have heard that users of KDE on OpenSolaris are happy with it? Who ever said anything about K/Ubuntu, mon? Imho, Ubuntu is for lamers who're not quite bright enough to use a real operating system > I stopped using OpenSolaris as a desktop after I have had enough of GNOME... My experience is opposite - the more I use Gnome, the greater my appreciation. Every once in a while I go retro and take Xfce or LXDE for a spin, or even more retro and roll by own on top of OpenBOX. While each has it's pros and cons, I keep coming back to Gnome because it just works and I've better things to do with my time than tweak my workstation desktop ad nauseum. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Linux vs. Solaris
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 11:42 +0800, Allan E. Registos wrote: > On Wednesday, 30 March, 2011 10:22 AM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > Who ever said anything about K/Ubuntu, mon? Imho, Ubuntu is for lamers > > who're not quite bright enough to use a real operating system > Let us hope that Unity won't get any OI support anytime soon, and most > Linux users were lame and were unable to use a real operating system, as > per your IMHO, and so ISVs supporting Ubuntu/Red Hat before everything > else. > > Let us learn to live and work with each other and stop *bashing,* and > stop that elitist's mentality. Linux is here to stay, and so BSD, > Windows & Solaris derivatives, for it is so inconvenient to read things > from BSD/Solaris folks often bashing Linux. > > Yeah, you have ZFS now what? Application support please. > > Kind regards, > Allan Ubuntu != Linux. Sadly, as some earlier replies might suggest, for many it seems to. Hence my tongue in cheek comments. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Linux vs. Solaris
On Wed, 2011-03-30 at 13:17 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > >> Yes, Kubuntu is a complete disaster. Not the KDE team's fault though I > >> don't think. The Kubuntu devs botched it real bad. On another note, I > >> have heard that users of KDE on OpenSolaris are happy with it? > > > > Who ever said anything about K/Ubuntu, mon? Imho, Ubuntu is for lamers > > who're not quite bright enough to use a real operating system > > Or those who would rather not have to recompile kernel modules for their > Nvidia card. I'd be using Centos if I did not have to mess about every > time the kernel gets an update/security fix. > > > > > >> I stopped using OpenSolaris as a desktop after I have had enough of > >> GNOME... > > > > My experience is opposite - the more I use Gnome, the greater my > > appreciation. Every once in a while I go retro and take Xfce or LXDE > > for a spin, or even more retro and roll by own on top of OpenBOX. While > > each has it's pros and cons, I keep coming back to Gnome because it just > > works and I've better things to do with my time than tweak my > > workstation desktop ad nauseum. > > > > Just works? Good for you. Broken NetworkManager on Ubuntu, crashing > Thunderbird, uber memory hog. I wonder if XFCE would have been better > off not using GTK but ah well. Well, there you go again. Mayhaps your problems are more Ubuntu than Gnome related? In my experience Ubuntu has more glitches than Inspector Gadget. In fact, just today migrated a coworker from Ubuntu to Debian. That which would not work in Ubuntu worked as advertised on Debian - same hardware. > > The Desktop on UNIX/Linux is just a mess. Period. I hope OSS4 gives > something better than the sun audio interface it is replacing (or did I > read that wrong?) and some strides are made elsewhere for the desktop. Audio interface needs help. Just after a big revamp, still does not support many common sound cards. Oh well, drivers anyone? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] Pancakes vs. Waffles
Hello List: Waffles rule. Pancakes really, really suck. So do people who like pancakes. Pancakes get really soggy, especially after you pour on the syrup. The world would be much better off without pancakes. Unless they're sourdough and grilled just right. Or you're camping. But then they still take too long to cook and use up a lot of stove fuel. So really, the smarter solution is to just drive to town and get waffles for breakfast. Waffles are far superior in that the nook and crannies created by the waffle pattern result in greater surface to volume ratio. Combine this with being cooked in a waffle iron and you get a more crisp exterior that offers a far superior surface for containing maple syrup. Not to mention a much more interesting mouth feel. Speaking of syrup, real maple syrup is the best. Fake syrup really, really sucks. So do people who manufacture, market, and buy it. I mean, it's totally unhealthy with all that high fructose corn syrup. Not to mention all the oil energy required to grow it. If not for all the govt. subsidies, the cost of production would far exceed any economically viable use of corn for things like high fructose corn syrup, ethanol to add to gasoline, etc. Indeed, the US Government has become totally corrupted by BIG Corn. It's all part of the big agriculture, big corn conspiracy to rule the US, if not the entire world. We are therefore socially obligated to boycott corn. People who eat corn are fascists. Unless it's corn you grew in your garden. I like green beans much better anyhow. And sweet peas. Speaking of fructose, 5 carbon sugars suck. People who like 5 carbon sugars also really suck. 6 carbon glucose is much more elegant. The tyranny of symmetry is a good thing. Embrace it. Warm regards-- Ken -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Become an OI Bug-Team Member
On Sun, 2011-04-03 at 13:15 +0200, Julian Wiesener wrote: > Hello, > > OI needs people who help the developers with bug organization. Therefore > we'll create a Bug Team, which Job is to keep an eye on the Bugtracker > and do a first review on newly reported bugs. > > A Bug Team member can also be a less technical person. Bug Team > members will not need to understand, fix or analyze any bugs. However, > you are kindly invited to help as much as you can and like. The Bug Team > is subjected to be a path of learning, so if you like to start getting > involved with the OpenIndiana project, this might be a good starting point. > > > If you like to be a member of the Bug Team, please write me an email, > contact me via jabber (same address) or show up in IRC #oi-...@freenode.net. Cool. Perhaps as a first step OI could apply to Atlassian for a free Jira license and then get Jira and Confluence integrated? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OI meeting April 4th 2011 write up
On Wed, 2011-04-06 at 00:35 +0100, Deano wrote: > Hi, > > To make it easier for the wider community to know what the weekly OI > meetings are about, it's been decided to write them up into something more > human friendly. > > > > The result is at > http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/oi-meeting+April+5th+2001+Write+Up > > > > I've gone for a more informal newsletter style, but please let me know what > you think, be honest I don't mind. > > Anybody in the meeting let me know if it doesn't reflect anything correctly > and everybody else please let me know what you think! > Good job Deano. Much appreciated, I'm sure, but others like me who simply cannot make the meetings but very keen on keeping abreast on the current state of affairs. Seems like you hit a good balance between hitting highlights while not getting into too much minute administrivia detail, political correctness, spin doctoring, etc. Many thanks. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Nvidia GT430
On Tue, 2011-04-12 at 22:30 -0400, Jeff Goldrich wrote: > This graphics card is 'verified' to work on OI 148 but exactly how remains a > mystery to me. My GTX 460 installs fine however my Galaxy GT 430 is not > recognized. If I click on Nvidia x server settings and do a nvidia-xconfig > and save the config file, I end up in text mode upon reboot. If I try to > fool the system and do a fresh install with the GTX 460 and then swap it > out... I get a blank white screen after password. > > I have tried to install many times with the same result.. > > What am I missing? Not enough information to draw any conclusions but perhaps related to issues I was having with my Quadro 600. In the end I did get it working. Search archives a couple months back for thread entitled something like "Quadro 600 - No Joy", followed up by a problem solved subject. Sorry, I don't have more time at present to get into the details, but hopefully the thread proves productive. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] rsync & snapshot backups?
On Fri, 2011-04-29 at 14:40 -0400, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: > Here's a question for y'all. I have two linux servers I want to back up > to my OI NAS/SAN. What I've been playing with is a simple script that > runs on the OI box, and does an ssh to each of the linux servers, with > the command being an rsync back to the OI box. rsyncd on OI is setup to > allow connection from each specific IP for the filesystem in question. > Each stanza in the rsyncd.conf file has a post command hook that takes a > snapshot with the date&time on the end. I've been googling for how > others do this, and have found a number of competing solutions, none of > which seem to do all of what I want. Frex: snapadm.pl, which creates > rolling backups on daily/weekly/monthly basis with retention times - so > far so good, but it doesn't actually do any backing up. I also found > rsbackup (based on freebsd?) which does the backing up, including > snapshotting, but doesn't seem to have any kind of snapshot expiration. > etc etc etc... I was even thinking of switching from text-mode OI to > the GUI so I can install time slider - that would work if there was some > kind of script I could tell it to run before doing the snapshot (and > said script would run the rsyncs). At this point, I feel like I'm > standing out in the field trying to figure out which way to go :) Any > thoughts? Thanks! Baccula would perhaps be overkill, but get you what you're after in terms of expirations, pre & post scripts, etc. A bit more complex to set up for small onsie and twosie networks but then again once done it's pretty much autopilot from there on out. Amaanda could do similar but last time I evaluated open source enterprise backup solutions Baccula was the clear winner for my needs. Amanda has since seen some developer love so would be worth taking a fresh look. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] sound juicer doesn't propose mp3 as output?
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 09:32 +0200, solarg wrote: > hello all, > i have oi_148. I want to extract my own personal cds on mp3 player, but > sound juicer doesn't propose this format. However, mp3 exists in > Preferences-Profiles, with this Gstreamer pipeline: > audio/x-raw-int,rate=44100,channels=2 ! lame name=enc mode=0 > vbr-quality=6 ! id3v2mux > > but i'm unable to select it. > > Is there something missing? Yes, the lame encoder package, wh/is not available in openindiana repositories due to license and patent issues. Options include 1) switching to less patent encumbered such as ogg/vobis, 2) hunt down the lame source bits and compile yourself, 3) there used to be a couple unofficial repositories located in countries with less anal patent laws that provided various patent encumbered multimedia related packages, but that was back in OpenSolaris days and I'm not sure if they're presently extant, and 4) switch to different platform, e.g. Slackware/Salix that is less concerned about being sued and bold enough to provides prebuilt packages. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] sound juicer doesn't propose mp3 as output?
On Mon, 2011-05-09 at 11:53 +0100, Chris Ridd wrote: > On 9 May 2011, at 09:43, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > > Yes, the lame encoder package, wh/is not available in openindiana > > repositories due to license and patent issues. Options include 1) > > switching to less patent encumbered such as ogg/vobis, 2) hunt down the > > lame source bits and compile yourself, 3) there used to be a couple > > unofficial repositories located in countries with less anal patent laws > > That would include the master (UK-based!) OpenIndiana repository, wouldn't it? I'm unsure of UK laws in this regard, but would be interested if someone more knowledgeable would provide clarification. I pretty much use Flac and ogg/vorbis myself but it would be nice to have mp3 encoder, video codes, etc. available. I think the free Fluendo mp3 codecs actually sound a bit better than the gstreamer defaults commonly available and they also have for fee video codecs but I think their stuff is limited to decoding. P.S.; Thank you for not top posting :) Seems to be an ever increasing nasty habit these days. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 21:00 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > Hi Dan, > > Work has been underway for quite some time on our next build, and the release > is imminent. > > It is taking longer than anticipated though. Building a brand new community > around a codebase as large as OpenSolaris is no easy task, and we're having > to work with what Sun/Oracle provided, which is geared around their internal > processes. > > Stay tuned! > > Alasdair Imminent meaning hours, days, weeks ... months...?? Could you provide a bit more detail? Also, it would be most excellent if your mua would wrap lines at an appropriate length. Thanks bunches :) -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 21:38 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > Hi Ken, > > This month, unless some major showstopper crops up. > > Regarding my MUA, I'm out and about and sending from my blackberry - no > options available to me re line length. Sorry! > > Cheers, > > Alasdair Ah! Thanks bunches. I was just installing 148b on a test box and if it was matter of couple days I'd just waited. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 21:38 +, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > Hi Ken, > > This month, unless some major showstopper crops up. P.S. - any info w.r.t. repository package updates, e.g. LibreOffice, PostgreSQL, etc. Will such coincide with release or come later? -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 16:40 -0700, ken mays wrote: > Hi Ken, > > Ref: http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/oi_151 > > OI Release Engineering stated that construction of the consolidation images > were underway so expectation is within the upcoming week (or two). Mainly > said, TBA - but it was recently reported that there were no major > showstoppers as of today. Let them spin their magic wands in the meanwhile! > > As of the other packages, there are some packages targeted after release and > some available now. Check with the individual OI maintainers on that. > > Best thing is check oi_148(b)/IPS on any issues and ensure any issues get > reported (and mentioned on oi-dev as well). > > ~ Ken Mays That is great news. Boy, it's been a long time coming and it will be good for the project to have an actual release. Spent a few hours putzing around with 148b today and it seems good. Other than I still have to run update_drv to get it to see my Quadro 600. With all the work necessary to get base OS ready for release post Oracle take over my expectations w.r.t. package updates were none too high. Still, this is one thing that will make or break OI with folks prompted to take OI for a test drive post release announcement so I thought there might have been some efforts going on behind the scenes in this regard. For example, and I know it's out of the realm of reality, it would be a big deal pr wise if the release shipped with Gnome 3, because, sadly, bleeding edge package availability is the yardstick w/wh/many judge. Thanks for the update. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
[OpenIndiana-discuss] 148b Gnome Workplace Switcher Glitch
I'm not subscribed to oi-dev and short on time so will post here. Testing 148b I note that mouse wheeling over gnome switcher does not change desktops. Until, I right click and go to preferences. At which time it crashes and prompts for reload. After which switcher now responds to mouse wheel scrolling. This is repeatable. Thanks. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Fri, 2011-05-13 at 16:40 -0700, ken mays wrote: > Hi Ken, > > Ref: http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/oi_151 > > OI Release Engineering stated that construction of the consolidation images > were underway so expectation is within the upcoming week (or two). Mainly > said, TBA - but it was recently reported that there were no major > showstoppers as of today. Let them spin their magic wands in the meanwhile! > > As of the other packages, there are some packages targeted after release and > some available now. Check with the individual OI maintainers on that. > > Best thing is check oi_148(b)/IPS on any issues and ensure any issues get > reported (and mentioned on oi-dev as well). > > ~ Ken Mays How do I "check oi_148(b)/IPS"? When I try adding package repo dev-il it seems to rather instead modify standard dev repo to whatever I used for new dev-il name and still point to standard dev repo regardless of me having specified dev-il, as per the 148b wiki page here: http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/oi_148b ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 13:08 +0100, Jonathan Adams wrote: > > How do I "check oi_148(b)/IPS"? When I try adding package repo dev-il > > it seems to rather instead modify standard dev repo to whatever I used > > for new dev-il name and still point to standard dev repo regardless of > > me having specified dev-il, as per the 148b wiki page here: > > > > http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/oi_148b > > > the "dev-il" repository does replace the standard "dev" repository ... > you then do an image-update on it and you should have IllumOS as your > kernel > > Attached is the output from when I "upgraded" This was a fresh install of 148b. The default repository pointed to http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev/ Per the wiki page noted above, I read that it should be pulling from http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/ I tried changing via Package Manager gui and got the results I reported. When I try from the command line, I get errors about insufficient privileges: > kvg@athena:~$ pfexec pkg set-publisher -O http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il > oi-dev-il > pkg set-publisher: > Could not operate on /var/pkg/lock > because of insufficient permissions. Please try the command again using pfexec > or otherwise increase your privileges. If I try to check my privileges via System>Administration>Users and Groups, my root password is denied. When I go straight to su, results are consistent with gui, only more verbose explanation: > kvg@athena:~$ su > Password: > kvg@athena:~# pkg set-publisher -O http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il oi-dev-il > pkg set-publisher: > One or more of the repository origin(s) listed below contains package data > for openindiana.org; not oi-dev-il: > > http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/ > > This is either because one of the repository origins is not valid for this > publisher, or because the list of known publishers retrieved from the > repository origin does not match the client. Myabe I'm being brain dead here but unfortunately it appears I'm finding quite a few glitches on a fresh install of 148b. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 17:05 +0100, Jonathan Adams wrote: > pkg set-publisher -P -O > http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/ openindiana.org > Well I'll be damned. I missed the -P flag, wh/is apparently essential, as that command worked. I don't quite understand why setting as preferred would make a difference though since this was a fresh oi 148b install rather than OpenSolaris upgrade. In any event, thanks for your assistance. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] 148b Gnome Workplace Switcher Glitch
On Wed, 2011-05-18 at 12:56 +0200, Guido Berhoerster wrote: > * Ken Gunderson [2011-05-17 21:30]: > > I'm not subscribed to oi-dev and short on time so will post here. > > Testing 148b I note that mouse wheeling over gnome switcher does not > > change desktops. Until, I right click and go to preferences. At which > > time it crashes and prompts for reload. After which switcher now > > responds to mouse wheel scrolling. This is repeatable. > > Does this only happen with 148b? There should be no difference > between gnome-applets in 148 and 148b. Anyway, please file a bug > at https://www.illumos.org/projects/openindiana/issues. It would > also be helpful if you included a backtrace from the crash there. I don't have a Redmine account at present and posted here and oi-dev per Ken Mays advice in recent "Update info" thread. Busy boy here and wanted to get a head's up out sooner rather than in event someone was spinning a release. I did a fresh install of 148b and have been testing it as replacement for my seriously outdated, but jfw OS-2009.06. I've not had time to delve into it much yet, but I seem to be running across quite a few minor glitches. Hopefully I'll get some time to do so later today. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Gnome to become a Linux only project
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 13:25 +, Ben Taylor wrote: > On Thu, May 19, 2011 at 11:23 AM, Apostolos Syropoulos > wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > I have read the following > > > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTQ1Nw > > > > > > Are they serious? I think we should seriously consider abandoning GNOME > > and replace it with KDE. > > > > A.S. > > Think a Redhat guy might have an axe to grind with Oracle, given the most > recent > attempts by the RH kernel to stiffle by ofuscation the changes they > made to RH kernel > to prevent Oracle from bundling up the changes in their unbreakable product. Yeah, RH sucks. Following the demise of OpenSolaris and a free to use Solaris 10 as potential contenders, however, RHEL is rapidly becoming the defacto standard in the Enterprise. So much so that they've been able to at least double, if not triple, their support contract fees in the past two years. Still, this is about 1/4 of Oracle support fee so where are enterprises heading, especially in a tough economy where shareholders are looking closely at corporate budgets? Been a big boon for RH. > > It really is the antithesis of open source. hope he chokes on his > triple expresso. Unfortunately all too many have an axe to grind with Oracle. Hence, present audience excepted, many Penguinistas will likely be open to his arguments, if not outright supportive. Especially sycophants hoping to be hired by RH. Moreover, don't forget RH's deep roots with Gnome, as in addition to paid developers, they also sponsor the website, major bandwidth, and other infrastructure. Bottom line is that I wouldn't blow this off as non trivial threat to the future portability of Gnome. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Gnome to become a Linux only project
On Thu, 2011-05-19 at 10:26 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 05/19/11 04:23 AM, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote: > > > > > > Hello, > > > > I have read the following > > > > http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=news_item&px=OTQ1Nw > > > > > > Are they serious? I think we should seriously consider abandoning GNOME > > and replace it with KDE. > > Will it seriously happen? To soon to say. > > Are there some GNOME developers seriously annoyed that they have to do > a lot more work to support other platforms than the amount of contributions > they get from developers of those platforms? Absolutely. > > If you care, you can contribute to lessening that pain by reducing platform > differences or contributing more to the overall GNOME development. > > For instance, a very similar set of developers work on X.Org, and most of them > are Linux based, but they're not as upset about carrying support for Mac OS X, > Solaris or BSD, because the developers from those platforms help with the > overall project development load. I did release management for X11R6.9, 7.5, > and 7.6; the MacOS X port maintainer from Apple is also the maintainer of the > Xorg 1.9.x & 1.10.x stable release series, the OpenBSD port maintainer is also > the security alert coordinator, etc.HP-UX, SCO, AIX? Long since purged. Yep. Unfortunately the modern corporate position of many in these tough economic times seems to be that there IS such thing as a free lunch - they're putting minimal, if any, effort into their further development of their proprietary *nices and counting on a free Linux lunch to fill the void. Then they whine and complain when Linux lets them down on enterprise grade features necessary for the task at hand. For example, back in Yahoo's hayday, they employed several developers tasked with working on FreeBSD full time. Now? I haven't kept up, but I don't think there are many, if any. ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 15:39 -0400, Alex Smith (K4RNT) wrote: > Another related question - why have we stopped using pfexec and > started using sudo? I preferred RBAC... Have we? I've been testing 148b and just assumed it was a defect. If not, I concur with you that RBAC is preferrable to sudo. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 23:29 +0200, Jeppe Toustrup wrote:
> 2011/5/23 Ken Gunderson :
> > On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 15:39 -0400, Alex Smith (K4RNT) wrote:
> >> Another related question - why have we stopped using pfexec and
> >> started using sudo? I preferred RBAC...
> >
> > Have we? I've been testing 148b and just assumed it was a defect. If
> > not, I concur with you that RBAC is preferrable to sudo.
>
> The change was made upstream. See this bug report which discusses the change:
> https://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=4885
And here I used to think Dave was a smart guy let's bork Solaris's
superior RBAC model so we can make it more like one of the lamest (at
least w.r.t. seasoned users) Linux distros out there. Damn fine
analysis there;-{
--
Ken Gunderson
___
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 17:03 -0700, Bill Sommerfeld wrote:
> On 05/23/11 16:54, Ken Gunderson wrote:
> > On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 23:29 +0200, Jeppe Toustrup wrote:
> >> The change was made upstream. See this bug report which discusses the
> >> change:
> >> https://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=4885
> >
> > And here I used to think Dave was a smart guy let's bork Solaris's
> > superior RBAC model so we can make it more like one of the lamest (at
> > least w.r.t. seasoned users) Linux distros out there. Damn fine
> > analysis there;-{
>
> The way RBAC was configured by the opensolaris installer was flagrantly
> insecure (automatically granting any process running with the uid of the
> initial user account the ability to exec arbitrary commands as uid 0
> with all privileges)
>
> The upstream change closes a serious security hole.
>
> - Bill
Yeah, I read the thread, and that aspect I do agree with. The part that
irked me was the this makes things more familiar for Ubuntu Linux users
(ir)rationale.
--
Ken Gunderson
___
OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list
OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org
http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 09:10 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 08:51 AM, Gary wrote: > > On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > > >> Yeah, I read the thread, and that aspect I do agree with. The part that > >> irked me was the this makes things more familiar for Ubuntu Linux users > >> (ir)rationale. > > > > I must have missed that part of the thread but sudo predates Linux by at > > least ten years; http://www.gratisoft.us/sudo/history.html As long as we're tuning up the way back machine... I first logged into Unix at a little hole in the wall University in La Jolla in early 80's: <http://hpwren.ucsd.edu/~hwb/NSFNET/NSFNET-200711Summary/> Of course at the time I was not a compsci major and unaware of just how lucky I had it... ;-P > It's the same old Solaris admin versus Linux admin thingy. Any > shortcomings/non-existing feature in Solaris are ignored/brushed off and > anything remotely 'Linux' related gets put on the grill immediately. > > I can understand wanting to keep the same interfaces but making rabid > attacks on stuff that are additional just because they are the current > Linux practice is really irrational. Hence stuff like sudo is a Linux > thing... To be clear, I never implied that sudo was a Linux thing but rather expressed my irritation over the "Ubuntu does it that way so we should too" mentality of justification for the change. (Not that there aren't some good Linux distros out there. Ubuntu just isn't one of them, as many who've tried using in production have found out.) Also not that there weren't other justifications for changing default user role that weren't justifiable, but in my mind to make things more Linux like is not one of them. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Mon, 2011-05-23 at 21:51 -0400, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: > On May 23, 2011, at 9:10 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > > > On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 08:51 AM, Gary wrote: > >> > >> I must have missed that part of the thread but sudo predates Linux by at > >> least ten years; http://www.gratisoft.us/sudo/history.html > >> > > > > It's the same old Solaris admin versus Linux admin thingy. Any > > shortcomings/non-existing feature in Solaris are ignored/brushed off and > > anything remotely 'Linux' related gets put on the grill immediately. > > > > I can understand wanting to keep the same interfaces but making rabid > > attacks on stuff that are additional just because they are the current > > Linux practice is really irrational. Hence stuff like sudo is a Linux > > thing... > > Nothing wrong with sudo, or even with having both RBAC and sudo. > > Something wrong with changing Solaris to look more like Linux when > there's no good reason except familiarity for Linux users, since > it _breaks_ familiarity for Solaris users. I don't think it's unreasonable > that might upset people, although this case is not a great example of one > worth picking a fight over, IMO. > > OTOH, either finding a better way to use RBAC for this particular purpose, or > using sudo instead, is probably an improvement on how RBAC was previously > being used for this. +1 What he said. Well put. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 10:09 +0800, Christopher Chan wrote: > On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 09:51 AM, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: > > > > On May 23, 2011, at 9:10 PM, Christopher Chan wrote: > > > >> On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 08:51 AM, Gary wrote: > >>> > >>> I must have missed that part of the thread but sudo predates Linux by at > >>> least ten years; http://www.gratisoft.us/sudo/history.html > >>> > >> > >> It's the same old Solaris admin versus Linux admin thingy. Any > >> shortcomings/non-existing feature in Solaris are ignored/brushed off and > >> anything remotely 'Linux' related gets put on the grill immediately. > >> > >> I can understand wanting to keep the same interfaces but making rabid > >> attacks on stuff that are additional just because they are the current > >> Linux practice is really irrational. Hence stuff like sudo is a Linux > >> thing... > > > > Nothing wrong with sudo, or even with having both RBAC and sudo. > > > > Something wrong with changing Solaris to look more like Linux when > > there's no good reason except familiarity for Linux users, since > > it _breaks_ familiarity for Solaris users. I don't think it's unreasonable > > that might upset people, although this case is not a great example of one > > worth picking a fight over, IMO. > > Even for me. When I installed OI_147, I had to go and add that Primary > administrator role (what's that about secure installations?) so that I > can use pfexec. But sheesh, going rabid to the point to treating sudo as > a GNU / Linux thing? > > > > > > OTOH, either finding a better way to use RBAC for this particular purpose, > > or using sudo instead, is probably an improvement on how RBAC was > > previously being used for this. > > > > Using sudo to switch to 'administrative' mode is something that I don't > really like. It's an Ubuntu thing. sudo is for scripts and for giving > limited access to certain stuff to certain accounts. If I had to become > root, I prefer doing 'su -'. > > So please, drop the 'sudo is a Linux thing'. It is not. It is specific > to only one particularly popular Linux distro aimed at users and not > admins. For the record. Perchance did you read the thread referenced?? <https://defect.opensolaris.org/bz/show_bug.cgi?id=4885> -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 01:21 +, Ben Taylor wrote: > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 1:10 AM, Christopher Chan > wrote: > > On Tuesday, May 24, 2011 08:51 AM, Gary wrote: > >> > >> On Mon, May 23, 2011 at 5:16 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > >> > >>> Yeah, I read the thread, and that aspect I do agree with. The part that > >>> irked me was the this makes things more familiar for Ubuntu Linux users > >>> (ir)rationale. > >> > >> I must have missed that part of the thread but sudo predates Linux by at > >> least ten years; http://www.gratisoft.us/sudo/history.html > >> > > > > It's the same old Solaris admin versus Linux admin thingy. Any > > shortcomings/non-existing feature in Solaris are ignored/brushed off and > > anything remotely 'Linux' related gets put on the grill immediately. > > > > I can understand wanting to keep the same interfaces but making rabid > > attacks on stuff that are additional just because they are the current Linux > > practice is really irrational. Hence stuff like sudo is a Linux thing... > > path of least resistance. the do it for me attitude, instead of do it > for myself. > Are studio compilers free? Yep. Do many people use them? Nope, because > they are different from gcc, and things gcc/g++ let you get away break with > the studio compilers because those were written to standards, not the whim > of a developer. And fixing said source might mean I have to spend a little > more time making it "Solaris" ready, and then I might have to fight with the > upstream maintainers, oh my. > > I'm not shocked. In the least. Interesting that you should bring this up because OI is going precisely this direction. See today's "Transitioning from Sun Studio to gcc & clang/llvm" thread on oi-dev list. <http://openindiana.org/pipermail/oi-dev/2011-May/000406.html> -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 17:28 +1000, Scott O'Brien wrote: > Ok, enough with the troll wars.. Who cares? It's be nice to not get spammed > with a million off-stopic e-mails imo > I find the discussion relevant and appropriate for the list at hand. If you don't please filter on topic and delete. Thank you. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 01:11 -0700, Gary Driggs wrote: > On May 24, 2011, at 12:36 AM, "LinuxBSDos.com" wrote: > > > List as many as you can and I'll still be able to prove that "most of the > > distros using sudo are derived from Ubuntu" is a statement of fact. > > OpenBSD ships with sudo and a root account accessible by anyone in the wheel > group. Where does that fit? As do the other *BSD's. Ironically enough, Fedora 15 beta has now added the wheel group requirement and calling it an "innovation". -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 02:44 -0600, LinuxBSDos.com wrote: > At least 99.99% of all the distros ship with sudo installed, and yes, a > few make it easy, when creating a user account, to add it to the > administrative group (the wheel group). That, in my opinion, is how it > should be done. That is how we all used to do it. > > This might seem to be off topic, but I think the point of this discussion > is we do not have to do something simply because a popular distro does it > that way. +1 Especially when that distro is loosing respect from those who actually have a clue or two due to continued track record of bugs that result in very unreliable platform choice for the server room. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 16:29 +0800, Allan E. Registos wrote: > > > > >From: "LinuxBSDos.com" > > > >How many of those distros that are not based on Ubuntu can you name? > > > >Remember that we are talking about using sudo instead of the root account > >system, not just having sudo installed as an application. > > > >List as many as you can and I'll still be able to prove that "most of the > >distros using sudo are derived from Ubuntu" is a statement of fact. > > > > > As per *distro* I mean not derived from Ubuntu *confusion*. It is quite > normal that Ubuntu derivatives like Linux Mint will not change the default > security of Ubuntu, for improving the usability of Ubuntu is their common > goal. And that other *distros* like Redhat derivatives and others are not > using sudo the way Ubuntu does. It is not that these distros imitated > Ubuntu's sudo, which is quite untrue, they did not change it. I cannot find > any reason to call Ubuntu derivatives as *distros* that were using sudo the > way Ubuntu does, and then post it here, for it is obvious, those derivatives > did not change the default sudo implementation of Ubuntu, so what's the > point? > > > The statement of fact here is that some of us are annoyed of the most popular > Linux distro at distrowatch, I don't know why, for despite of its > shortcomings, it is useful in the desktop, am not using it on server. So to > make OI good on the desktop is for you to start porting those popular > applications in Linux rather than whining and FUD'ng against Ubuntu aside > from your OI admin tasks. The presumption that something is the best based on distrowatch listing is a fallacy. Ubuntu has buzz, and it's intended as seamless as possible transition for Winblows users. Hence, lot's of said users are hearing about it and downloading for a test drive. I think OI, and indeed, all OS platform should place a higher premium on values such as reliability, robustness, security, performant, etc. rather than the number of downloads by relatively low tech users. Unless your hidden FOSS agenda is to create a revenue stream by providing support contracts to said lower tech users. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 09:21 +0100, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > Hi All, > > I too don't appreciate the flamewar on here of Solaris vs Linux, sudo vs > pfexec. With all due respect, I think the technical signal is high enough to qualify as relevant discussion. > If you don't like sudo, you don't have to use it. It's as simple as that. Unless it's forced on you a'la Ubuntu. > But bringing the default in-line with other modern-day Unixes such as MacOS > and most of the major Linux distributions seems entirely sane to me. People > expect sudo, therefore we will give them sudo. So if you don't like the > default, I suggest you investigate distro-constructor. MacOS had it's heday but that day is past. Now it's OpenIndiana's turn. Bringing things into conformance with other modern day *nices IS valid. Targeting Ubuntu as the role model simply because it's currently in vogue with relatively low tech Linux newbie type users is what I took issue with. Decisions should be founded on technical merit. Not that there wasn't some technical merit in adding an authentication component. > > RBAC/pfexec is in no way being deprecated and server administrators will be > advised to make use of it for obvious reasons, such as auditing. But it's > unreasonable to insist that users bend to fit the OS. You don't win users > that way. Like it or not, Solaris is a minority fringe OS these days, and if > we don't want to fade into obscurity further, decisions like this have to be > made. This is the reality we are living in. Failing to accept the reality is > not helpful for anyone. True. But I think it's also important to keep in mind _why_ Solaris declined to fringe status. Had Sun open sourced it 5 years sooner and actually gotten the job done in a timely manner their employees may well still be sporting @sun.com email addresses... -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 13:33 +0100, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > On 24 May 2011, at 13:10, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > Especially when that distro is loosing respect from those who actually > > have a clue or two due to continued track record of bugs that result in > > very unreliable platform choice for the server room. > > Inflammatory and arrogant comments like this are not constructive, nor are > they welcome. > > We're trying to create a friendly, open and inclusive community here. > Attacking other distributions and the users of those distributions has the > opposite affect, and will drive people away. > > Please can people be mindful of the language they use on-list and realise > that list members are ambassadors for the OS. > > Keep it technical, don't get personal. I don't want to get into a tit for tat with you here but my remarks were not intended to come off as arrogant. To clarify, my opinion of Ubuntu is based on technical merit as result of having used it. Until incessant bugs drove management to pony up for significantly more costly RHEL. I don't think it's appropriate for this list to get into the nitty gritty technical details. I also base my opinion on feedback from other Linux users: seasoned administrators I have had discussion with often express similar experiences/frustrations regarding Ubuntu. Those who I talk with who like it _tend_ to be lower tech and newer to Linux types. My use of "those who have a clue or two" to differentiate these different users was probably less than optimal, but hopefully doesn't invalidate the larger point I was trying to make - that copying Ubuntu simply because it is popular with a certain subset of users should not be considered best practice. This latter aspect was what prompted my initial comment on the subject. And yes, I've already allowed that I agree with the technical/security side of the decision on this particular issue. And to end on a positive note, I think Debian is a very nice Linux distro. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 11:06 -0400, Dave Miner wrote: > On 05/24/11 08:54 AM, Gary Mills wrote: > > On Tue, May 24, 2011 at 06:26:33AM -0600, Ken Gunderson wrote: > >> On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 09:21 +0100, Alasdair Lumsden wrote: > >>> Hi All, > >>> > >>> I too don't appreciate the flamewar on here of Solaris vs Linux, > >>> sudo vs pfexec. > >> > >> With all due respect, I think the technical signal is high enough to > >> qualify as relevant discussion. > > > > My preference would be to: > > > > 1. Make root a role > > 2. Retain sudo as an option > > 3. Find a secure way to use RBAC for system administration > > > > Not surprisingly, that's what we are trying to do, the decision that > prompted this sub-thread was about moving in that direction and removing > a security issue we'd created with the experimentation in OpenSolaris > releases. RBAC. properly configured, is highly secure, but doesn't > provide one important thing yet: authentication of the user (using his > password) at the keyboard when assuming privileges. A solution to that > will happen and allow us to refine what we're doing with Solaris. > > Dave Hi Dave: Yeah, I get technical part of it. My comments were meant to be taken in context of sarcastic, tongue-in-cheek groan to the "just like Ubuntu" familiarity goal, wh/upon subsequent review was made by Glenn Faden rather than yourself. Thanks for your time. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Failure while upgrading OpenIndiana
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 12:05 -0400, Gary Gendel wrote: > I tried to upgrade with the following command: > > pkg image-update --accept --be-name snv_151 --require-new-be > > but it got hung. I tried it several times with the same result: > > DOWNLOAD PKGS FILESXFER (MB) > mail/thunderbird/plugin/thunderbir... 206/878 2422/15133 112.6/483.4 > > > Errors were encountered while attempting to retrieve package or file > data for > the requested operation. > Details follow: > > 1: Framework error: code: 28 reason: Operation too slow. Less than 1024 > bytes/sec transfered the last 30 seconds > URL: > 'http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/file/1/30587f092830594caedb71f6cf028119d705da45'. > 2: Framework error: code: 56 > URL: > 'http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/file/1/30587f092830594caedb71f6cf028119d705da45'. > > (happened 3 times) > > Gary Apparently oi's pkg repo is overloaded, as I'm trying same now and downloadling at circa mid 90's 14k modem speeds Yet as I just checked again it's at more reasonable 163 kBps, interspersed with dips down into the 30's and 40's. In any event, I have confirmation from Andrzej that Gnome's update gui is broke and I'll let you know how things go from command line mode. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Failure while upgrading OpenIndiana
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 12:05 -0400, Gary Gendel wrote: > I tried to upgrade with the following command: > > pkg image-update --accept --be-name snv_151 --require-new-be > > but it got hung. I tried it several times with the same result: > > DOWNLOAD PKGS FILESXFER (MB) > mail/thunderbird/plugin/thunderbir... 206/878 2422/15133 112.6/483.4 > > > Errors were encountered while attempting to retrieve package or file > data for > the requested operation. > Details follow: > > 1: Framework error: code: 28 reason: Operation too slow. Less than 1024 > bytes/sec transfered the last 30 seconds > URL: > 'http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/file/1/30587f092830594caedb71f6cf028119d705da45'. > 2: Framework error: code: 56 > URL: > 'http://pkg.openindiana.org/dev-il/file/1/30587f092830594caedb71f6cf028119d705da45'. > > (happened 3 times) Fwiw, my update using essentially same command line completed successfully. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Wed, 2011-05-25 at 00:22 +0600, Dmitry G. Kozhinov wrote: > > I think Debian is a very nice Linux distro. > > Many OpenSolaris/OI users share this feeling - this is because > OpenSolaris has (kind of) inherited it's look and feel from Debian - > thanks to Ian Murdock. > > My personal favorite in Debian is System -> Administration -> Services. > Nice and simple. My Debian usage far predates that - I think I still have 1.0 CD's around here somewhere That said, there's reasons I got away from Linux. If our objective is to simply emulate Linux, and I know/hope that it is not, then I have many mature Linux distros to choose from w/o having to endure the growing pains of OI. OI's attraction is that it has the potential to be far, far more than just another Linux. Incorporating features from various Linux distros based on sound technical merit is just dandy. Emulating e.g. Ubuntu primarily for the sake of lowering the bar to entry, however, would not lead to a success, merely just another also ran "Linux" distro. Part of my reaction to this is that I've sat in on meetings where decision makers did precisely this, to the point of going against sound technical analysis, so mayhaps I'm a bit sensitive when I read comments which may be even remotely construed as such. Peace-- ken -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Update info?
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 18:50 -0400, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: > Presumably there's a balance with this, as with most things. > > But giving in is not without costs. Making the quarterly look good often > leaves one out of position for the long haul. Peter F. Drucker, widely acknowledged as the father of modern management science wrote some verbiage about this very problem decades ago. Many of his predictions of dire consequences for such behavior came home to roost in 2008. But yet those who do not learn from history are still doomed to repeat it.... sigh -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] OI meeting 24th May 2011 write up
On Tue, 2011-05-24 at 23:56 +0100, Deano wrote: > Hi, > > > > This OI meeting was dominated by one topic 151 and the road to stable! My > write up /synopsis of the OI meeting is at > > > > http://wiki.openindiana.org/oi/oi-meeting+24th+May+2011 > > > > Hope that is interesting and if anybody in the meeting notices any mistakes, > let me know and I'll get them fixed Thanks, Deano. Could someone please repost link to actual irc logs? I seem to have lost it...:-[ -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] oracle gives openoffuce to apache
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 15:51 -0400, Dan Swartzendruber wrote: > Apostolos Syropoulos wrote: > > > > http://blog.internetnews.com/skerner/2011/06/oracle-gives-openoffice-to-apa.html > > > > Of course the article is terrible and myopic since it assumes that the > > center of > > the universe is Linux, which of course is the stupidest thing one can say. > > > Unfortunately, in some ways, it is. Like it or not :( Unfortunately. For example, I'd really like to be using OI, OS, or whatever. But reality is that Linux meets my needs on the desktop workstation front _much_ better. So after much patience and testing of oi-151b I've reluctantly had to admit that I need to go with Debian until OI has come along a bit further. Server side 151 release may yet see some action though. In any case, w.r.t. oo.org going to Apache, might this be thinly veiled (and now relatively meaningless in real world since giving away oo.org is akin to nothing in light of superior libreoffice) peace offering following hostilities over other things? ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] NVIDIA driver update
On Wed, 2011-06-01 at 23:56 +0400, Andrey N. Oktyabrski wrote: > On 01.06.11 23:42, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote: > >> Is it possible to replace the nvidia driver packages 256.44 by the 270.41 > >> (from the NVIDIA site) in the openindiana.org IPS repository? > > > > Yes and I am using 270.41.06 but you need to do something like the > > following to install the new driver: > > > > $ pfexec beadm list > > $ pfexec beadm create oi-nvidia > > $ pfexec beadm mount oi-nvidia /mnt > > $ pfexec pkg -R /mnt uninstall -r driver/graphics/nvidia > > $ pfexec /bin/sh NVIDIA-Solaris-x86-270.41.06.run --extract-only > > $ cd NVIDIA-Solaris-x86-270.41.06 > > $ pfexec pkgadd -R /mnt -d . NVDAgraphics NVDAgraphicsr > > $ pfexec bootadm update-archive -R /mnt > > $ pfexec beadm unmount -f oi-nvidia > > $ pfexec beadm activate oi-nvidia > > $ pfexec reboot -p > > Thank you, I'll try this. > > Anyway, "pkg image-update" is much more right way :-) I brought this up on oi-dev recently and was informed that nvidia drivers will be updated for 151 release. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] oracle gives openoffuce to apache
On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 10:42 +0100, Jonathan Adams wrote: > Apache didn't want OpenOffice originally according to press/blogs of > people in the know ... probably because Apache got bitten over the > whole Java thing. > > There was, however, a contract with Sun to keep maintaining and > improving OpenOffice, which passed to Oracle, and after all the dev > team left and formed LibreOffice Oracle were left with a project that > they couldn't afford to keep up to date (as is seen in the lack of > development in comparison to LibreOffice ... 3.4 due out this week) > > The big thing will be if rather than just giving the code, and control > of the code to Apache they give the name to Apache too ... this is the > only bit missing from LibreOffice, and the only bit worth having from > whats left of the original OpenOffice (yes the plugins on OOo are > good, but most have been transferred to LibreOffice). > > According to the missive from LibreOffice; Apache are keen to talk to > the LibreOffice team, although where those talks lead is yet to be > decided, some people are wondering if Oracle are handing the name to > Apache so as not to lose face by giving it to LibreOffice directly, > and are wondering if that is the only reason that Apache changed it's > mind to "take on" the project. > > Jon > > PS. I'm not affiliated, I'm just interested. Yeah, that's basically what I was getting at w/o going into details. At this juncture, I'm of the opinion that LibreOffice would be taking a step backwards if it took on the Openoffice name. Folks know that LibreOffice is the path for future. The LibreOffice name is also, imo, more enticing to me as end user - especially in this day and age of "fake bake" corporate "open source" projects. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] oracle gives openoffuce to apache
On Thu, 2011-06-02 at 04:39 -0700, Apostolos Syropoulos wrote: > > Unfortunately. For example, I'd really like to be using OI, OS, or > > whatever. But reality is that Linux meets my needs on the desktop > > workstation front _much_ better. So after much patience and testing of > > oi-151b I've reluctantly had to admit that I need to go with Debian > > until OI has come along a bit further. Server side 151 release may yet > > see some action though. > > > > Well in cases like this I suggest people to switch to Windows or MacOS. > In other words, people demand too much without contributing anything. > A.S. > > PS I think Kennedy said something similar but of course in a different > context. Well, gee, guess I'd better do some self examination - I first logged into Unix shell account in 80 or 81. - Been using BSD's (Free and Open) in production since mid to late 90's. - Seasoned sysadmin, certified on HP-UX. - Over the years have provided support to a couple open source projects. - Been Microsoft free on the home front since the new millennium. - Only use MS in business contexts when forced to do so. - Kids have been using *nix since preteen years. Yep. It's official. I'm too stupid and definitely not l337 enough for OpenIndiana so I should go use Windows or MacOS and not leech off of OI. Given this state of affairs, it's probably also amoral for me to remain subscribed to these lists and waste OI.org bandwidth. Thanks for helping me work that out cuz I'm surely too challenged mentally to have worked that out on my own. Have a nice day. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] zfs only to version 5 after upgrading to oi-151?
On Wed, 2011-06-08 at 18:08 +0200, Bruno Damour wrote: > Of course it's me, but i think it suggests it's on par with sol 11 express > which is snv_151a. > As oi_147/8 was based on snv_147/8 > > But as we of course have to get used to oi being a real fork of solaris, why > not change the numbering scheme ? > > Bruno > PS : Please, do not think I'm complaining, I'm not Iirc, OI version numbering will change with first stable release, wh/I think will be something like 1.0.x, or 1.0_RELEASE, or maybe that was RELEASE-1.0. Not 100% sure about the names. This was touched upon during #oi-meeting yesterday, the specifics of which were left for further discussion. In any case, similar to FreeBSD with RELEASE, TESTING/DEV, and EXPERIMENTAL branches. -- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] User roles and acting as root
On Tue, 2011-06-14 at 11:23 -0700, Alan Coopersmith wrote: > On 06/14/11 10:05 AM, Gabriele Bulfon wrote: > > Thanx for your reply, > > I understand the security issue. > > But, is it so much more secure when you can just sudo commands? > > Where is the difference? > > With sudo, you choose to only run commands that need extra privileges > with those privileges - most of the commands a normal user runs don't > need that, so why use it and run the risk of either operator error > or buggy software doing more damage than normal? > Which is useful in environments where you have jr. sysadmins, backup operators, etc., i.e. different roles, not all of which you want/trust to have full root access, so tasks can be limited to only those necessary to fulfill that role. On a boxes where I, or one or two others I know and trust, are the only admin(s), I find sudo a complete pita and never use it. When I want root it's because I need to get something done and sudo just gets in my way and adds unnecessary typing w/o any benefit - if I'm going to make a typo or brain fart so bad as to blow up the box, sudo is not going to save me. Much better to actually have a # in your prompt and adhere to the old sysadmin adage of sitting on your hands for 5 seconds before hitting enter... The point being here, that while sudo does have it's place, it's not the magic bullet some would have us believe it is. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 19:58 -0700, Marion Hakanson wrote: > What's wrong with just "illumos"? If you need to distinguish, just use > "illumos, the kernel" or "illumos, OS/Net" vs "illumos, the distribution". > The original "OpenSolaris, the distribution" was based on "OpenSolaris, > the kernel", and other distributions based on "Opensolaris, the kernel" > did exist. > > One can even get more specific about distros, e.g. "illumos desktop", > "illumos server", or "illumos live usb", if needed. > > Sure, OI-147 and OI-148 did not come from "illumos, the kernel", but it > seems unlikely anyone is going to go back to a base of "OpenSolaris, the > kernel" for OpenIndiana, once it's completed the shift to the illumos base. > > Do we really need a different name for the "main" distribution? I personally > find it unnecessary, and it makes explaining to people what the heck OS I'm > using a lot harder. I have to give a whole family tree history instead of > just saying, "Illumos is the open source fork of Solaris 11." > > I also happen to think "illumos" is an excellent name. Use it everywhere. Uh... Excuse me, but what have you been smoking? Drinking, maybe? I think Illumos is a pretty lame name, nothing against the people who chose it. I kind of like OpenIndiana, particularly when contracted to "oi", as compared to Illumos in that at least it conveys that this is supposed to be an "Open" project (although "Open" has been so misused by marketroids trying to cash in on the Open Source phenom that in more recent times its use has almost become a red flag, particularly following the Orcale OpenSolaris fiasco). But all that is neither here nor there. The point is that your idea was/is lame. And that your mother probably dresses you funny... -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 23:03 -0600, Ken Gunderson wrote: > On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 19:58 -0700, Marion Hakanson wrote: > > What's wrong with just "illumos"? If you need to distinguish, just use > > "illumos, the kernel" or "illumos, OS/Net" vs "illumos, the distribution". > > The original "OpenSolaris, the distribution" was based on "OpenSolaris, > > the kernel", and other distributions based on "Opensolaris, the kernel" > > did exist. > > > > One can even get more specific about distros, e.g. "illumos desktop", > > "illumos server", or "illumos live usb", if needed. > > > > Sure, OI-147 and OI-148 did not come from "illumos, the kernel", but it > > seems unlikely anyone is going to go back to a base of "OpenSolaris, the > > kernel" for OpenIndiana, once it's completed the shift to the illumos base. > > > > Do we really need a different name for the "main" distribution? I > > personally > > find it unnecessary, and it makes explaining to people what the heck OS I'm > > using a lot harder. I have to give a whole family tree history instead of > > just saying, "Illumos is the open source fork of Solaris 11." > > > > I also happen to think "illumos" is an excellent name. Use it everywhere. > > Uh... Excuse me, but what have you been smoking? Drinking, maybe? > I think Illumos is a pretty lame name, nothing against the people who > chose it. I kind of like OpenIndiana, particularly when contracted to > "oi", as compared to Illumos in that at least it conveys that this is > supposed to be an "Open" project (although "Open" has been so misused by > marketroids trying to cash in on the Open Source phenom that in more > recent times its use has almost become a red flag, particularly > following the Orcale OpenSolaris fiasco). > > But all that is neither here nor there. The point is that your idea > was/is lame. And that your mother probably dresses you funny... > > P.S.; In the event it may have been less than obvious... above was intended to be taken with a sense of humor ;-P -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 16:53 -0700, Blake wrote: > Does anyone besides me feel that we need a more unified naming/branding > approach for the community-driven descendants of OpenSolaris? I feel that > the there is no obvious connection (for those new to the platform) between > Illumos/OpenIndiana, which I think is counterproductive given that > OpenIndiana is sort of the 'Fedora Core' of Illumos. > > Some possible names: > > Illumos Live > > Illumos Core > > Illumos [version_number] - [adjective] [animal] Illumos is a different project. Hence all of the above are inappropriate. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 00:45 -0700, Marion Hakanson wrote: > kgund...@teamcool.net said: > > But all that is neither here nor there. The point is that your idea > > was/is lame. > > Yeah, but what do you think of my idea? > > > > And that your mother probably dresses you funny... > > Not for several decades, she hasn't (:-). > > > kgund...@teamcool.net said: > > P.S.; In the event it may have been less than obvious... above was intended > > to be taken with a sense of humor ;-P > > Phew, for a minute there I thought you might not entirely agree with me (:-). > > > > ...Marion Hakanson wrote: > > > I also happen to think "illumos" is an excellent name. Use it everywhere. > > OK, I may have exaggerated a bit. But I do like the name -- I think it's > a clever play on words, in multiple directions. And the fact that most of > my immediate family members are well-versed in the Harry Potter stories > probably has nothing to do with it. I think it comes off as a less than successful effort to be witty. Nor does it roll off your tongue. OpenIndiana suffers from this as well, but hey, at least it leaves us with short and sweet contraction; oi, which rolls off the tongue quite agreeably, eh? I also think that it's time to make clean break from Oracle/Solaris dependencies/associations - particularly since Larry is doing such an excellent job of alienating SMB's and reasonably large sized enterprises alike. > kgund...@teamcool.net said: > > I kind of like OpenIndiana, particularly when contracted to > > "oi", as compared to Illumos in that at least it conveys that this is > > supposed to be an "Open" project (although "Open" has been so misused by > > marketroids trying to cash in on the Open Source phenom that in more > > recent times its use has almost become a red flag, particularly > > following the Orcale OpenSolaris fiasco). > > I'm enough of an old Unix geek that I dislike the "Indiana" name's > association with a project that was an attempt to make Solaris more > Linux-like. I completely agree. Indiana was a marketroid driven effort to make things more Linux like, err.. I mean Ubuntu like, because all hip marketroids know that Linux equals Ubuntu. > I'm also one of those who puts /usr/gnu/bin at the end of the > PATH at install time (yet note that I do not remove it entirely), just so > you know which segment of the target audience I'm in. Of course, my spouse > is from Indiana, and that relationship is going pretty well, so you never > can tell > > Never mind my opinion, however. We all know that I have no future in > marketing, nor likely in any popular or for-profit enterprise of any kind. > > We now return you to your lameness-free content (:-) I'm not averse to dropping OpenIndiana in favor of something better. I AM against that being any kind of play/dependency on Illumos. I don't have anything against the Illumos project. But therein lies the salient issue - Illumos and OI are two separate projects. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 18:12 +0200, Nikolam wrote: > As long as Anyone contribute a bit on some real projects and problems > , there is always room for change in some future or something over > branding. > > But currently I would rather shoot myself in the foot then changing > branding in a moments mostly crucial to the distribution and core OS > future. (And crucial moments are already all the time from the > beginning - there is still to come stable OI release that could be > recommended for production use an from where wider audience could be > gathered. > > I woud rather like to see X server drivers (intel) movements , Xen > support resurrected and High Availability put into the move and > software porting community refreshed with more coherent IPS publishers > hosted around. > And newcomer contributors mentoring facilities. > > OI is what you get when you put uname -a and there and is already in a > number of software and scripts using it to identify platform. > I think that further changes in branding could be considered when > development community is at least 10X the present volume. (And there > IS a space for branched distributions production - a la Ubuntu,etc) > > If we put $5-10 in a Jar or spend hour or two on some distribution's > coordinated effort, > - every time we got Eureka idea about branding, then I wouldn't mind > any great branding ideas. +1 -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 21:11 -0400, Jake wrote: > I totally agree. OpenIndiana describes the distro quite well, since it is the > opensource bits of the Solaris Indiana release; but the reference is totally > lost to anyone not familiar with what OpenSolaris was. > > I think a Sun reference would be fitting. Why? The Sun has set some time ago. There's nothing to see here now. Time to move along, move along. Perhaps you're thinking that a reference to Sun obscure enough to avoid a lawsuit would in some way be attractive to business. I think the opposite - anyone who's been around for a while has their Oracle horror story so why would we want to associate. And by Oracle, I'm referencing the corporate entity, not contributing individuals who happen to be employed by same. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 22:46 -0400, Paul Gress wrote: > On 06/20/11 10:32 PM, Magnus wrote: > > On Jun 20, 2011, at 10:20 PM, Tim Aslat wrote: > >> How about FlareOS (offshoot of the Sun) > > Mithros.org is available. I intentionally didn't capitalize the "os". It's > > less awkward to read and to pronounce. > > > > There are some tenuous connections between Mithras& Sol, the Sun God, in > > ancient Roman art. But it's a simple name, and the domain is available. > > Don't be a b*d and squat on this name if it's not going to be for the > > productive use of this project. ;) > > > > > "Moonshine". It goes along with Celestial objects (Moon), and Shine as in > Rays of Sun. Also programming at night. Not to mention bootleg liquor!! -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 11:32 -0700, Blake wrote: > I agree that Sun's engineering legacy is impressive. > > Unfortunately, the words 'Sun' and 'Solaris' are anathema to most young > startups and newbie engineers. Rather than forcing a history lesson on > them, I feel we should look forward when evangelizing the platform. > > Blake Amen, brother!! I about hurled reading Jake's reply. Glad to see that someone else "gets it". -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:34 -0400, Jamon Camisso wrote: > On 06/21/2011 03:05 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 11:32 -0700, Blake wrote: > >> I agree that Sun's engineering legacy is impressive. > >> > >> Unfortunately, the words 'Sun' and 'Solaris' are anathema to most young > >> startups and newbie engineers. Rather than forcing a history lesson on > >> them, I feel we should look forward when evangelizing the platform. > >> > >> Blake > > > > Amen, brother!! I about hurled reading Jake's reply. Glad to see that > > someone else "gets it". > > Like it or not, Jake's reply is just as legitimate as yours. Solaris has > caché to some, myself included. Me not knowing anything about it beyond > the fact that it was SunOS before Solaris doesn't change a thing. > > Please don't be so dismissive. People bring different backgrounds and > expectations to the discussion and it is good to hear all of them. > > I for one disagree with Blake - I am a newbie and am quite attracted to > the legacy of Solaris by way of Illumos and OpenIndiana. Awesome! By all means we should be checking our rear view and ensuring we honor history rather than looking forward and making history. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Tue, 2011-06-21 at 15:43 -0400, Jamon Camisso wrote: > On 06/21/2011 03:38 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > >> Like it or not, Jake's reply is just as legitimate as yours. Solaris has > >> caché to some, myself included. Me not knowing anything about it beyond > >> the fact that it was SunOS before Solaris doesn't change a thing. > >> > >> Please don't be so dismissive. People bring different backgrounds and > >> expectations to the discussion and it is good to hear all of them. > >> > >> I for one disagree with Blake - I am a newbie and am quite attracted to > >> the legacy of Solaris by way of Illumos and OpenIndiana. > > > > Awesome! By all means we should be checking our rear view and ensuring > > we honor history rather than looking forward and making history. > > The two are not mutually exclusive, both are equally important. Wrong. Looking forward is much more important. Let Wikipedia memorialize the past. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] [illumos-Discuss] branding for illumos/openindiana
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 07:09 +1000, Matt Connolly wrote: > On 21/06/2011, at 3:54 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > > On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 23:03 -0600, Ken Gunderson wrote: > >> On Mon, 2011-06-20 at 19:58 -0700, Marion Hakanson wrote: > >>> > >>> I also happen to think "illumos" is an excellent name. Use it everywhere. > >> > >> Uh... Excuse me, but what have you been smoking? Drinking, maybe? > >> I think Illumos is a pretty lame name, nothing against the people who > >> chose it. I kind of like OpenIndiana, particularly when contracted to > >> "oi", as compared to Illumos in that at least it conveys that this is > >> supposed to be an "Open" project (although "Open" has been so misused by > >> marketroids trying to cash in on the Open Source phenom that in more > >> recent times its use has almost become a red flag, particularly > >> following the Orcale OpenSolaris fiasco). > >> > >> But all that is neither here nor there. The point is that your idea > >> was/is lame. And that your mother probably dresses you funny... > >> > >> > > > > P.S.; In the event it may have been less than obvious... above was > > intended to be taken with a sense of humor ;-P > > > > -- > > Regards-- Ken Gunderson > > Odd sense of humour, Ken... :/ Perhaps. But can we please get back to the bike shed now?? -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] About the Gnome "slowdowns"
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 19:24 +0530, Sriram Narayanan wrote: > Hi everyone: > > I've been using openindiana as my primary desktop environment while I > work on Belenix related development (illumos kernel, rpm, etc). > > I've not felt a single slow down ever in my use of OI. I've used both > build 147 as well as 148. IPS sucks for me given the low bandwidth and > the calculations it does each time. But Gnome itself it fine. > > However, I've seen these recent threads (one on branding, and one test > drive) where Gnome was mentioned as being slow. > > Has anyone else also experienced this ? Are there any known reasons ? Pretty much everything seems to run slower on "Slowaris" on the desktop front. If in doubt, buy another hd, same as you're using now, and make a native install Linux poison of choice, e.g. Fedora 15, Debian-6, etc. (i.e. not virtualized) and the difference is quite noticeable. Solaris derivatives like OI have their attractions. But speed isn't one of them. At least this is my experience, since you asked. Let the flame fest begin... -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] About the Gnome "slowdowns"
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 21:13 +0530, Sriram Narayanan wrote: > On Wed, Jun 22, 2011 at 9:00 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 19:24 +0530, Sriram Narayanan wrote: > >> Hi everyone: > >> > >> I've been using openindiana as my primary desktop environment while I > >> work on Belenix related development (illumos kernel, rpm, etc). > >> > >> I've not felt a single slow down ever in my use of OI. I've used both > >> build 147 as well as 148. IPS sucks for me given the low bandwidth and > >> the calculations it does each time. But Gnome itself it fine. > >> > >> However, I've seen these recent threads (one on branding, and one test > >> drive) where Gnome was mentioned as being slow. > >> > >> Has anyone else also experienced this ? Are there any known reasons ? > > > > Pretty much everything seems to run slower on "Slowaris" on the desktop > > front. If in doubt, buy another hd, same as you're using now, and make > > a native install Linux poison of choice, e.g. Fedora 15, Debian-6, etc. > > (i.e. not virtualized) and the difference is quite noticeable. > > > > "Slowlaris" was a term used only for the TCP/IP stack of Solaris 9. > The entire TCP/IP stack was changed with the FireEngine project which > improved things a lot. Crossbow built on top of that and brought about > even further improvements. > > Solaris 10 and above are not "slow". > > > Solaris derivatives like OI have their attractions. But speed isn't one > > of them. At least this is my experience, since you asked. Let the flame > > fest begin... > > > > I have asked if others have seen a slow Gnome desktop with OI, and if > they know the reasons for this. > > Ken, I use a 4500 rpm disk for belenix and illumos builds, and > everything works just fine for me. This has been the case since 2006. > > I run a very large setup at work, and I'm soon going to move over all > our source code systems (git, hg, svn) onto openindiana. > > Here are some numbers that I consistently get every month (I check > every month) for a specific disk intensive activity: > 5400 rpm disk - Windows XP - 38 minutes > 5400 rpm disk - Windows Server 2008 - 23 minutes > 5400 rpm disk - Windows 7 - 17 minutes > 5400 rpm disk - FC13 - 12 minutes > 7200 rpm disk - Windows 7 - 17 minutes > 7200 rpm disk - OSX - 8 minutes > 4500 rpm disk - openindiana/illumos/build_111a - 4.5 minutes > > Here's another set of numbers: > P4 2.2 Ghz with 2.72 TB RAIDZ and 8 GB RAM running Solaris 10 update 8 > used for serving iSCSI content off ZFS filesystems -> I have a > specific requirement where I've snapshotted a 600 GB ZFS filesystem > containing 9 VMs, and have then cloned this 20 times. This is for a > test setup. After the cloning and regular use, I see that an overall > diskspace of 800 GB has been used. > > I get no noticable performance difference at all. And this is with a > single Ethernet card. > > These are my numbers. > > Given the above, and my own work with Belenix, as well as zero Gnome > issues with OI, I've asked if anyone knows more. > > This was not asked to incite a flamefest, and I request that we don't > walk that path. Hence my hesitancy to even reply in the first place. Since you mentioned Gnome specifically, my comments were directed specifically to desktop/workstation usage. Perhaps such is not the case with disk I/O or tcp/ip throughput. But again, such was also not the topic of your query. So back to your specific questions: "Has anyone else also experienced this ? Are there any known reasons ?" In _my_ experience Gnome is significantly slower on s10, OS, and OI. I have not investigated as to why this might be, as it pretty much always has been my experience, so I've just accepted it as one of the "costs" one pays to get the "benefits" of features such as zfs, crossbow, zones, etc. If this is not your experience, then that's fine with me. I have better things to do than argue the matter. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] About the Gnome "slowdowns"
On Wed, 2011-06-22 at 17:16 +0100, Colin Ellis wrote: > Hi, > > I run OI 148 + patches on a sony laptop with 4GB of RAM using gnome as a > desktop. I can say for me I don't notice any desktop slowness. > > A couple of points: > > -My graphics card is reasonably well supported. Ditto. > -My laptop has plenty of ram - often an issue that can cause slowness as OI > loves to cache disks heavily. Ditto. > -the default flash player is broken on 148 and gives issues with full screen +1 But I'm also seeing this on Debian Wheezy, so I think maybe Flash or nvidia driver issue. > video etc. Once that was updated I am able to play full screen HD video > flawlessly. I also have custom-built blender that I also use without any > issue and can render images at a similar speed to linux. > -I updated my bios to allow me full 64 bit access > > Bugs I have found: > -Gnome occasionally ends up corrupting itself on shutdown - not sure what's > causing it and its not often enough to spend my time on. I end up losing +1 > one of the top applets and have to re-insert it. > -NWAM keeps losing my wifi connection. It's a nasty program and needs > replacing with something that works properly. +1 > I haven;t found any good reason not to use OI as a desktop (work) machine. > One thing I would maybe push for is out of the box support for other > filesystems such as ext2/3/4, vfat, etc On oi-151, I could not get any of the 4 different sound cards I have on hand to work, though I seem to recall the onboard nvidia worked with 148. Too many Gnome glitches on 151 to mention. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Shorter subjects for mailing lists
On Mon, 2011-07-11 at 23:00 -0700, Gregory Youngblood wrote: > On Jul 11, 2011, at 9:07 PM, Joshua M. Clulow wrote: > > >> On 2011-07-09 14:20, Roy Sigurd Karlsbakk wrote: > >>> Most of us use GUI-based email readers that handle>80char subjects. Is > >>> this really an issue? > > > > Yes, it is really an issue. Trying to make sense of mailing list > > subjects on my phone, for instance, is a bit tiresome. > > I have my mail app on half my screen and with my current setup the subject I > see is "Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Shorter su..." > > My suggestion is to change the subject prefix in the list software from > "[OpenIndiana-discuss]" to "[oi-disc]" and that will reclaim a lot of subject > line real estate all by itself. My suggestion would be to use just "oi" for the general discussion list and leave hyphen whatever for more specialized lists, e.g. oi-dev, oi-bugs, etc. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Java 7
On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 09:09 -0700, Gary Driggs wrote: > If it's been five years in the making then that would suggest that not many > Java VM and API developers were let go during the acquisition of Sun. Or were > they? > http://www.eweekeurope.co.uk/news/apache-developers-java-7-contains-bugs-35619. > But I have to wonder who would be so bold or ignorant as to put a dot zero > release of anything in to production right away anyhow? > > Regardless, this whole anti-closed source drum beating reminds me of a Usenix > conference I went to ten or more years ago. The GNU zealots kept taking the > open mic every chance they got and -- regardless of relevancy to the subject > at hand -- would start beating their licensing drum. It became especially > tedious when they'd show up at the BSD related events and tried to argue with > the BSD users and devs. > > So I'm not saying I'm against open source (who is?) but I feel that every > business has a choice over which licensing model is most appropriate for > their products and profitability. Long time Solaris users have been around > before Solaris was ever open sourced. Most of us didn't start using > OpenSolaris because someone tacked "open" in front of its name -- we chose it > for its innovation. It sounds to me as if Oracle has decided to keep its > competitors in the OS market from using their innovations before they can > release their own production ready OS. If that's unnerving to you, you're > welcome to look elsewhere as you also have a choice. > > But I should remind everyone that one of the most important parts of being a > community member and advocate (open source or not) is being respectful of > others. And bashing Oracle at very turn is not going to convince anyone to > join your cause -- especially considering that there are current and ex > Oracle employees and customers contributing to the community. Thankfully, > most of us are familiar with the ability to delete an email without > responding to it -- as you're certainly welcome to do with this one. > > kind regards, > Gary Or even choose to reply... The problem in this instance is that Sun DID open source many cool things and post Sun take over Oracle has been systematically "undoing" Sun's open source gifting via a variety of "innovative" tactics at pretty much every chance they can, often in tandem with exorbitant increases in licensing fees. And for that they have earned much well deserved criticism. Additionally, it would be a far stretch to construe criticism of Oracle corporate policies enacted by upper management to extend to rank and file employees who are so far down the food chain I doubt said policy makers even know they exist. My $0.02. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Java 7
On Sun, 2011-07-31 at 15:31 -0700, Gary Driggs wrote: > > On Jul 31, 2011, at 2:48 PM, Ken Gunderson wrote: > > The problem in this instance is that Sun DID open source many cool things > > and post Sun take over Oracle has been systematically "undoing" Sun's open > > source gifting via a variety of "innovative" tactics at pretty much every > > chance they can, > > If I understand things correctly, part of the problem at Sun involved their > bizarre sales bonus policy that was based on volume instead of profit. Not germane to the discussion at hand... > > often in tandem with exorbitant increases in licensing fees. And for that > > they have earned much well deserved criticism. > > Have you ever paid support for AIX or HP/UX and the hardware it runs on? > Solaris prices may seem exorbitant by x86 standards but they're still quite > competitive with other enterprise big- or bi-endian architectures. I wouldn't say they're even in the ballpark of being comparable. Unless perhaps you're talking IBM mainframe, the details of which I'm unfamiliar but hear is pretty spendy. A couple enterprises I'm familiar with saw dramatic price increases across the board. Coupled with the release of PostgreSQL 9, they are presently in process of ridding themselves of _everything_ Oracle. > > Additionally, it would be a far stretch to construe criticism of Oracle > > corporate policies enacted by upper management to extend to rank and file > > employees who > > That said, one might suggest that the golden parachuted former Sun > Microsystems upper management is responsible for steering the company in to > the weeds in the first place. And I didn't see Apple or Google making a bid > for Sun (despite several aborted Apple/Sun mergers). So without someone to > take them out of their nose dive, Sun assets would have ended up as just > another large patent portfolio for sale a la Nortel. Again, not germane to the discussion at hand. Some companies are good and have a sense of ethics. Other companies are just outright bad, evil, greedy, & unethical sob's. Sadly, imo, Oracle falls into this latter category. That Sun management was ineffective does in no way excuse this. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Help with website
On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 18:12 -0400, Alex Viskovatoff wrote: > Hi Fini, > > On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 11:56 -0600, LinuxBSDos.com wrote: > > > > Hi, > > > > There seems to be plenty of resources for devs, but very little for > > end-users, especially those new to the Solaris way of doing stuff. > > > > There is a general discussion list, but I think it would be better if all > > that discussion takes place in a forum-like setting, instead of via a > > mailing list. > > > > I can volunteer to help set up and maintain one, and take care of other > > basic web-related chores. > > The idea that OpenIndiana should have a forum has come up before, but > nothing has happened with that, because no one has stepped forward to > create one. I did long ago and also threw out a couple of suggestions but iirc correctly the consensus was that the mailing lists worked fine and oi's limited resources would be better utilized elsewhere?? It's been some time though so maybe I'm having a brain fart. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Help with website
On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 17:34 -0700, Gregory Youngblood wrote: > On Oct 8, 2011, at 5:15 PM, Jason J. W. Williams wrote: > > >> As Bernd Helber remarked, forums can play a significant role in Linux > >> distributions, as they allow users to "have conversations". It would be > >> great if an initiative to create one for OI could be started. > > > > I agree that forums are more user-friendly when you're searching for > > an answer that already exists. However, I find mailing lists easier to > > interact with and reply to on a regular basis. I think the reason the > > OpenSolaris forums worked so well is that each forum also had a > > mailing list bridged with it, so you got the best of both worlds (easy > > search and easy participation). My request would be the the mailing > > lists not be dumped in favor of forums, but rather set up as another > > way of participating with the forums. > > +1 > > At least initially, having the mailing list bridged with the forums provides > best of all possibilities. > > If we see a nice surge in users/traffic, then the volume might tend to cause > mailing list traffic to grow too unwieldy, but we can cross that bridge if we > ever get to it. And, it would be a great problem to have too. :) > Oh god, please no! Not another lame forum/mlm cluster fsck -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Help with website
On Sat, 2011-10-08 at 18:35 -0600, LinuxBSDos.com wrote: > >> As Bernd Helber remarked, forums can play a significant role in Linux > >> distributions, as they allow users to "have conversations". It would be > >> great if an initiative to create one for OI could be started. > > > > I agree that forums are more user-friendly when you're searching for > > an answer that already exists. However, I find mailing lists easier to > > interact with and reply to on a regular basis. I think the reason the > > OpenSolaris forums worked so well is that each forum also had a > > mailing list bridged with it, so you got the best of both worlds (easy > > search and easy participation). My request would be the the mailing > > lists not be dumped in favor of forums, but rather set up as another > > way of participating with the forums. > > > > I didn't call for abandoning the mailing list, rather for setting up > something that is more community-oriented. Mailing Lists are inherently community oriented. That some other johnny-come-lately technology, e.g. web based forums, has subsequently gained popularity does not invalidate mailing lists communities. I haven't looked in recent years, but the last time I did look, port 25, not port 80, was responsible for the lions share of Internet traffic. And if modern numbers reverse that, it may be more of an artifact that web pages are ten to 50 times fatter than they were back in the day when I had to keep 28k modem (the cat's meow at the time because it had doubled the previous speed) capabilities in mind. And yes, with streaming media port 80 may well have supplanted 25 but my point remains valid. I personally much, much prefer mlm's because its a push, rather than pull medium. Once I'm subscribed to a list, everything is there in my inbox. The problem might be finding it, but that's another problem. Modern MLM's, e.g. Mailman, typically sport searchable web archives as well for those desiring pull medium. That doesn't mean forums are useless. I like forums too. But for technical discussions I prefer mailing lists. For example, consider a newbie querry. If posted to mlm, the q AND as well as any and all follow ups are pushed to the entire community at large. Maybe joe grey beard expert spots an error in the part of the response that isn't quite correct, so they post follow up. If web forums, this expert may never see the question or follow ups unless they take the time to "pull" from the web site. So forums need larger base out of the gate to reach critical mass compared to mlm. Bridging the two may sound like a good solution, but I've _never_ seen such a solution that actually worked _well_ in practice. At least for those of us who prefer mlm, as threads rapidly become horked up top the point were one now _must_ view via forum interface to be able to follow. One area where web forums clearly superior to mlm is where you have want/need to monetize the community via ads and such. Now I don't want to "scare" you off from contributing to OI but I think much of what you say is predicated upon some erroneous assumptions as well as your personal preferences, wh/because you can point to some others who share those preferences becomes a mandate for OI to follow. This is not necessarily so. I also curious if you may have _any_ type of affiliation with Vanilla because I'm pretty familiar w/a number of forum packages, never heard of vanilla until recently, and fail to see what, if any, advantage it offers over various alternatives. -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
Re: [OpenIndiana-discuss] Help with website
On Sun, 2011-10-09 at 02:51 -0400, Richard L. Hamilton wrote: > On Oct 8, 2011, at 9:49 PM, Josef 'Jeff' Sipek wrote: > > > On Sat, Oct 08, 2011 at 06:35:57PM -0600, LinuxBSDos.com wrote: > >>>> As Bernd Helber remarked, forums can play a significant role in Linux > >>>> distributions, as they allow users to "have conversations". It would be > >>>> great if an initiative to create one for OI could be started. > >>> > >>> I agree that forums are more user-friendly when you're searching for > >>> an answer that already exists. However, I find mailing lists easier to > >>> interact with and reply to on a regular basis. I think the reason the > >>> OpenSolaris forums worked so well is that each forum also had a > >>> mailing list bridged with it, so you got the best of both worlds (easy > >>> search and easy participation). My request would be the the mailing > >>> lists not be dumped in favor of forums, but rather set up as another > >>> way of participating with the forums. > >> > >> I didn't call for abandoning the mailing list, rather for setting up > >> something that is more community-oriented. > >> > >> So, who's gonna make the decision? > > > > I think that having a bridge between the two would be great. Either way, we > > could set up some experimental thing and see if it works. > > > > Jeff. > > I must be old-fashioned, but I find an NNTP server easier than forums (and > less junk accumulating on my mail server). Seamonkey has an adequate reader, > although I prefer knews. Those have nice threading, killfiles, etc. And > they're usually _much_ faster and less problems than a web forum. +1!!! Sad that newer generation seems to have missed this very useful protocol - indeed, as some have argued, "the original groupware". -- Regards-- Ken Gunderson ___ OpenIndiana-discuss mailing list OpenIndiana-discuss@openindiana.org http://openindiana.org/mailman/listinfo/openindiana-discuss
