Hi all,
Could you please provide me a document which explains the installation of a
third party product on sun cluster.(I came to know that i can install the
product on all individual nodes of a cluster or on a shared directory of
cluster).
I need the document explaining that which method is b
On 2/15/06, Roland Mainz <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cyril Plisko wrote:
> > Having Solaris on zSeries will be a nice complement to Polaris which
> > targets IBM pSeries among other platforms, leaving IBM no options
> > but one - to embrace Solaris across all the product range:)
> >
> > OpenSolar
As if I'm ever in my office long enough for anyone to bug me. ;)
John raises a good point, though... Next time this happens, you guys can tell
everyone in MPK17 to come and bug me. I always wanted to recreate the TPS
report bit in Office Space in real life. As I walk down the hall, everyone can
> Hello All,
>
> The OpenSolaris Project is a monster of a project.
> t. By my count we've
> got 38 communities, 5 projects, 93 mailing lists
> (many of those are the
> OSUG lists), and hundreds of blogs. This is
> absolutely no way to stay
> informed about whats happening in the project, and
On 2/13/06, Bill Rushmore <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, Derek E. Lewis wrote:
> > We may also define "functional" as how many apps each desktop environment
> > has. CDE or JDS both have file managers -- dtfile and Nautilus,
> > respectively; however, as everyone has said, CDE,
Forwarded-From: http://lists.kde.org/?l=kde-solaris&m=113997299912587&w=2
This patch adds Xine playback support for Microsoft Windows *.avi and
*.wmv files.
--Stefan
--
Stefan Teleman
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-d
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 10:28 am, Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 01:42:23PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> > In think this requirement is because of some putback to b33 on Jan 20th;
> > so bits before that time, including all of b 32 should still build.
>
> Correct. Som
Sure, I'll give that a try. I just need to remember to "pester" the right
people regularly.
- Karyn
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Hi:
I have been asking that question for a while now too.
I have this idea working with SXCR 30 ... that is, I've
set up Solaris on one VMWare machine, and have
successfully PXE/DHCP booted Solaris onto a VMWare client
machine. In the menu.lst.01MAC, I just don't specify
the jumpstart options [-
Hi Mike,
It works now, onboard networking and nvidia and all
Rgds
Robin
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Hello All,
The OpenSolaris Project is a monster of a project. By my count we've
got 38 communities, 5 projects, 93 mailing lists (many of those are the
OSUG lists), and hundreds of blogs. This is absolutely no way to stay
informed about whats happening in the project, and where people are
Hi.
i am not sure this is the right forum for this question, but since
this forum is a catch-all, maybe i could start here and then move to
the appropriate one.
and the question is: would it be possible to make libsmedia.so a
public interface ? it is a very useful library, and it is currently
mar
Alan> The lawyers really hate ...
Al> Its a human perception type thing ... brutal honesty always works...
You're using "human perception" and "brutal honesty" as counter-arguments
to restrictions imposed by lawyers? Have you forgotten what country we
live in? ;-) (I know, Sun is a global comp
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> Rich Teer wrote:
> > I respectfully disagree, and from an outsider's perspective, Dennis
> > is right. Until I read this 2 minutes ago, all I knew was that there
> > was some legal issue with build 31+, but no details.
>
> The lawyers really hate us
Hi!
Did anyone thought about creating a tuneable in /etc/system to set the
(preferred) default page size for stack&head to something else than 8k
(e.g. 64k) globally (instead of using libmpss.so - which does not work
for inital processes, deamons started from SMF/inetd/etc., from a empty
EN
While I love the accolades, I didn't solve the problem at all. The team was
diligently working on making this available as quickly as possible (and earlier
than they would have normally), and it was just good timing on my part.
- Karyn
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
Hi!
Did anyone test it yet whether it is possible to boot an ON build as
diskless VMware guest OS, e.g.
1. Build ON
2. Package it
3. Prepare it for usage as diskless client (but how ?! ... I have no
idea how to do that for x86... ;-( )
4. Configure VMware guest
5. Boot it from the (virtual)
Bill Rushmore wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
The lawyers really hate us publically stating "We distributed build XX
in such a way that we violated our license with ___, and had to stop."
If __ didn't notice yet, we'd be sending their legal department a
free case of
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> The lawyers really hate us publically stating "We distributed build XX
> in such a way that we violated our license with ___, and had to stop."
> If __ didn't notice yet, we'd be sending their legal department a
> free case of ammo to fire at u
Cyril Plisko wrote:
> Having Solaris on zSeries will be a nice complement to Polaris which
> targets IBM pSeries among other platforms, leaving IBM no options
> but one - to embrace Solaris across all the product range:)
>
> OpenSolaris WD Edition :)
Will "Polaris" be 64bit only or will it be th
* Jeff Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-14 14:34]:
> OK, I see the difference; it doesn't seem quite right that you can
> have a project without it being part of a community.
It allows people to start working on a specific item--and have
supporting infrastructure--before any community is con
Roland Mainz wrote:
> This prototype would also help finding any serious problems before we
> move the work to the main OpenSolaris repository, hopefully avoiding
> something which was called the "quality death spiral" (e.g. things in
> the "trunk" branch are broken so people do not install it and
OK, I see the difference; it doesn't seem quite right that you can have a
project without it being part of a community.
So, we want to change this proposal from a community to a project.
Jeff
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-dis
Mike Kupfer wrote:
"Rich" == Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rich> Given that build 31 (source) has been available for weeks now,
Rich> it's understandable that people get a little frustrated by the
Rich> lack of SXCR ISOs.
Indeed. Also, it appears that although we've posted a workarou
On 2/14/06, Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Rich Teer wrote:
> > I respectfully disagree, and from an outsider's perspective, Dennis
> > is right. Until I read this 2 minutes ago, all I knew was that there
> > was some legal issue with build 31+, but no details.
>
> The lawyers reall
Is there any kind of "rule of thumb" or something about when releases of SXCR
should be expected?
It would be nice to have a place to check if looking for releases infos/status.
Or maybe even some infos about skipped released.
Phil.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
Michelle Olson wrote On 02/14/06 12:02,:
> /etc/hostname. is documented in several procedures on
> docs.sun.com
That's good, I expect to find examples, procedures, tutorials and the
like in the System Administration Guides and similar documents on
docs.sun.com. But I don't usually look there for
Rich Teer wrote:
I respectfully disagree, and from an outsider's perspective, Dennis
is right. Until I read this 2 minutes ago, all I knew was that there
was some legal issue with build 31+, but no details.
The lawyers really hate us publically stating "We distributed build XX
in such a way t
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 07:39:39PM +, Sean Sprague wrote:
> I don't know wether I have fallen over the edge completely
> here or not, but is there any way that we could have a way
> that we could effectively have a process similar to BFU that
> would update an ON instantiation to a certain
Stephen Hahn wrote:
* Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-14 08:55]:
Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
http://www.sun.com/software/star/gnome/faq/generalfaq.xml#q23
Mmm, how is this related to star?
I believe it's reflecting the organizational genealogy, as GNOME's
thanks derek - can you post in the announcements forum?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
this has been done to death by now, but i'd like to add my voice to those
asking for more timely communication on this significant component.
looking now from the outside, i can attest that despite the fact that things
are scurrying about and happening under the covers, it's not apparent from
w
Michelle Olson writes:
> No, the examples don't use IPv4 addresses with CIDR notation.
They should, though.
> Very few
> of the IPv4 address examples use CIDR prefixes. I
> should think that you could use CIDR prefixes in the
> /etc/hostname.interface file, but I am not sure.
Yes, you can. A
I just posted the links to Build 33 on the site:
http://www.opensolaris.org/os/downloads/on/
CD
http://javashoplm.sun.com/ECom/docs/Welcome.jsp?StoreId=7&PartDetailId=Sol-Express_b33-x86-SP-G-B&TransactionId=try
DVD
http://javashoplm.sun.com/ECom/docs/Welcome.jsp?StoreId=7&PartDetailId=Sol-Expre
* Jeff Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-14 11:57]:
> I'm not sure I understand the significance of a community versus a project.
>
> Who needs to second the proposal, someone else working on it here or
> within the OpenSolaris community?
See the leading paragraphs of
http://opensolaris.org
On 2/14/06, Mike Kupfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Rich" == Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
>
> Rich> Given that build 31 (source) has been available for weeks now,
> Rich> it's understandable that people get a little frustrated by the
> Rich> lack of SXCR ISOs.
>
> Indeed. Also, it
> "Rich" == Rich Teer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Rich> Given that build 31 (source) has been available for weeks now,
Rich> it's understandable that people get a little frustrated by the
Rich> lack of SXCR ISOs.
Indeed. Also, it appears that although we've posted a workaround for
the build
Hi Mike and all,
/etc/hostname. is documented in several procedures on
docs.sun.com (these links will change at re-publish, but for
convenience, I have provided them).
Follow the link below to a procedure that describes how to configure
an interface after Solaris installation and make that con
Stephen,
Given that SXCR has far more legal constraints than OpenSolaris source,
does it make sense to:
1) Tighly couple the releases and cause the OpenSolaris sources/BFU to
have the same lag?
or
2) Release the source/BFU as often as we can, and leave SXCR to release
whenever they can.
I d
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 02:55:04PM +0200, Cyril Plisko wrote:
> As I said SchilliX may or may not be self hosted, but it doesn't
> matter as long as opensolaris.org clearly states that it is
> SXCR b32 that is needed to build OpenSolaris
The documentation states this because it's what's known to
Rich Teer wrote:
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Karyn Ritter wrote:
Also, just as a reminder, I did post a note about this on Thursday
(2/9) when there were some questions. Still not early enough, I know,
but the information was out there. I just talked to the program manager
and got an update. Build 33
Yep. SXCR build 33 will be released today.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 04:15 am, Cyril Plisko wrote:
> How can legal issues with RealPlayer10, which presumably appears in b32
> hold off release of b31 ?
I heard the license was changed, not sure.
--
Alan DuBoff - Sun Microsystems
Solaris x86 Engineering
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Karyn Ritter wrote:
> Also, just as a reminder, I did post a note about this on Thursday
> (2/9) when there were some questions. Still not early enough, I know,
> but the information was out there. I just talked to the program manager
> and got an update. Build 33 will be out
I agree with you all that this is a problem and that more information (and
earlier) is needed, and apologize for not providing information more quickly.
As others have pointed out, Solaris Express is a completely separate team. I do
get information before many people, but don't usually get it im
I am planning on building a BT878 based video capture card driver for Solaris
to build a PVR (Myth-TV like).
I don't know what the numbers are anymore but I believe in the 2000 time frame
greater than 50% of the corporate and financial information in the United
States was locked away in mainfr
Peter Tribble stated:
< On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 11:06, Sean McGrath - Sun Microsystems Ireland
< wrote:
< > Ian Collins stated:
< > < Peter Tribble wrote:
< > <
< > < >
< > < >This is especially an issue when you have hundreds of otherwise
< > < >identical
< > < >terminal windows. I'm not aware of a
On Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 01:42:23PM +0100, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> In think this requirement is because of some putback to b33 on Jan 20th;
> so bits before that time, including all of b 32 should still build.
Correct. Some context for the doubters: the Net-SNMP update packages
(aka 'workaroun
>
>> >Mmm, how is this related to star?
>>=20
>> Sorry J=F6rg, but "star" is an ordinary word or is astrology the
>> science devoted to "s-tar"?
>
>Astrology isn't a science, and it's not related to stars either.
Astronomy, my bad.
Casper
___
opensolar
I'm not sure I understand the significance of a community versus a project.
Who needs to second the proposal, someone else working on it here or within the
OpenSolaris community?
Jeff
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mai
> >Mmm, how is this related to star?
>
> Sorry Jörg, but "star" is an ordinary word or is astrology the
> science devoted to "s-tar"?
Astrology isn't a science, and it's not related to stars either.
At best, it's pseudoscience interpreting planet positions within
a 2500-year-old coordinate syst
I think IBM is going to balk at embracing Solaris.
We're using the Polaris port as the model for our efforts.
Jeff and Pat
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
>Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> Qt licensing was part of it, avoiding the nightmare of C++ binary
>> incompatibility between compilers (or even between different g++ versions)
>> was another. The official FAQ answer is at:
>>
>> http://www.sun.com/software/star/gnome/faq/ge
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Cyril Plisko wrote:
> I think that we are getting pulled in wrong direction here -
> the point is yes, glitches can happen,
> whether they are in the legal realm or technical realm or just the key
> guy/gal getting married and being out of keyboard. The idea is to
> communica
Stephen Hahn wrote on 02/14/06 09:43:
* Anup Sekhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-14 08:21]:
Jim Grisanzio wrote on 02/13/06 17:39:
Here's an update on community and project proposals.
. . .
Name Services Community
* Proposed 1/20/06 by Anup Sekhar
* Community consensus: yes
* CAB vote: no ±
Stephen Hahn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > > http://www.sun.com/software/star/gnome/faq/generalfaq.xml#q23
> >
> > Mmm, how is this related to star?
>
> I believe it's reflecting the organizational genealogy, as GNOME's
> first home was alongside the then-newly-acquired StarDivision. (S
* Jeff Andre <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-14 05:34]:
> A number of engineers on the Data Management Group are working on a
> port of Solaris to the zSeries mainframe servers and we'd like to
> establish a community supporting and promoting a port. The initial
> efforts of this port would allow the
* Anup Sekhar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-14 08:21]:
> Jim Grisanzio wrote on 02/13/06 17:39:
> >Here's an update on community and project proposals.
> . . .
>
> >Name Services Community
> >* Proposed 1/20/06 by Anup Sekhar
> >* Community consensus: yes
> >* CAB vote: no ± vote yet
> >* Opening d
* Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-14 08:55]:
> Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Qt licensing was part of it, avoiding the nightmare of C++ binary
> > incompatibility between compilers (or even between different g++ versions)
> > was another. The official FAQ answer
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 11:06, Sean McGrath - Sun Microsystems Ireland
wrote:
> Ian Collins stated:
> < Peter Tribble wrote:
> <
> < >
> < >This is especially an issue when you have hundreds of otherwise
> < >identical
> < >terminal windows. I'm not aware of any desktop environment which handles
> <
On 2/14/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > Cyril Plisko wrote:
> > > That is actually an excellent point, Darren. While SXCR happens to be
> > > one of the four publicly existing distributions based on OpenSolaris
> > > it is a special
Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Qt licensing was part of it, avoiding the nightmare of C++ binary
> incompatibility between compilers (or even between different g++ versions)
> was another. The official FAQ answer is at:
>
> http://www.sun.com/software/star/gnome/faq/generalfaq
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Cyril Plisko wrote:
> > That is actually an excellent point, Darren. While SXCR happens to be
> > one of the four publicly existing distributions based on OpenSolaris
> > it is a special one. And the reason for it being such is that one
> > need to inst
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Alan DuBoff wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > Now we have a drop in communications.
>
> I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with
> RealPlayer10,
> and it's been taken care of I believe.
I respectfully disagree,
Hey here's an idea: why don't you devote your resources to getting drivers out
for Solaris 10 x86?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Jim Grisanzio wrote on 02/13/06 17:39:
Here's an update on community and project proposals.
. . .
Name Services Community
* Proposed 1/20/06 by Anup Sekhar
* Community consensus: yes
* CAB vote: no ± vote yet
* Opening date: currently not scheduled
Is is possible to get closure on whether or
On Tue, 14 Feb 2006, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>The point is we are _stuck_ waiting. Wondering. No one is posting a
>mesage anywhere in big RED letters that tells us the situation. We
>simply go off to our little community worlds and talk and work amongst
>ourselves. Or stop working.
>Really, its a
Cyril Plisko wrote:
That is actually an excellent point, Darren. While SXCR happens to be
one of the four publicly existing distributions based on OpenSolaris
it is a special one. And the reason for it being such is that one
need to install it to be able to build OpenSolaris itself. So falling
be
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Cyril Plisko wrote:
How can legal issues with RealPlayer10, which presumably appears in b32
hold off release of b31 ?
RealPlayer first appeared in build 31.
Ah, that explains. Somehow I was thinking it is b32...
Taking my words back then.
SXCR wasn't released for so
Cyril Plisko wrote:
How can legal issues with RealPlayer10, which presumably appears in b32
hold off release of b31 ?
RealPlayer first appeared in build 31.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
_
On 2/14/06, Cyril Plisko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Darren J Moffat wrote:
> > Cyril Plisko wrote:
> >> That is actually an excellent point, Darren. While SXCR happens to be
> >> one of the four publicly existing distributions based on OpenSolaris
> >> it is a special one. And the reason for it b
Bill Rushmore wrote:
On Mon, 13 Feb 2006, UNIX admin wrote:
Perhaps you could clue me in as to why did Sun pick GNOME over KDE exactly?
This is pure speculation on my part but I think they choose GNOME over KDE
because of licensing with KDE Qt libs at that time.
Qt licensing was part of it
Jeff Andre wrote:
A number of engineers on the Data Management Group are working on a port of
Solaris to the zSeries mainframe servers and we'd like to establish a community
supporting and promoting a port. The initial efforts of this port would allow
the Solaris operating system to execute a
On Tue, 7 Feb 2006, Eric Boutilier wrote:
> Albert White wrote:
>
> >Anyway, +1 from me,
> >
> >
>
> Me too.
> +1
Packaging, Installation, and Distribution
+1 from a CAB member.
Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Time
A number of engineers on the Data Management Group are working on a port of
Solaris to the zSeries mainframe servers and we'd like to establish a community
supporting and promoting a port. The initial efforts of this port would allow
the Solaris operating system to execute as a guest on a zSeri
> Just putting this into your /etc/hostname.rh0 file
> will do the job:
>
> my-hostname/24
So should i put it in the file or not.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Cyril Plisko wrote:
That is actually an excellent point, Darren. While SXCR happens to be
one of the four publicly existing distributions based on OpenSolaris
it is a special one. And the reason for it being such is that one
need to install it to be able to build OpenSolar
>Everything. It is official statement that SXCR b32 is a prerequisite
>for building current ON consolidation. I saw no mentions of Nexenta,
>SchilliX or anything else as a supported platform. They can or can not
>be used for that purpose, but as long as opensolaris.org goes it is
>SXCR b32, no les
>Alan DuBoff wrote:
>> On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>> Now we have a drop in communications.
>>
>> I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with
>> RealPlayer10,
>> and it's been taken care of I believe.
>>
>
>How can legal issues with RealPlay
Cyril Plisko wrote:
That is actually an excellent point, Darren. While SXCR happens to be
one of the four publicly existing distributions based on OpenSolaris
it is a special one. And the reason for it being such is that one
need to install it to be able to build OpenSolaris itself. So falling
be
Alan DuBoff wrote:
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Now we have a drop in communications.
I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with RealPlayer10,
and it's been taken care of I believe.
How can legal issues with RealPlayer10, which presumabl
Darren J Moffat wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 2/14/06, Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Now we have a drop in communications.
I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with
RealPlayer10,
and it's been taken c
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--Boundary_(ID_psS4Mz8w2HlD4QtT4suLvQ)
Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
Content-disposition: inline
On 2/14/06, Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Now we have a drop i
Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 2/14/06, Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Now we have a drop in communications.
I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with RealPlayer10,
and it's been taken care of I believe.
What
Ian Collins stated:
< Peter Tribble wrote:
<
< >
< >This is especially an issue when you have hundreds of otherwise
< >identical
< >terminal windows. I'm not aware of any desktop environment which handles
< >this gracefully.
< >
< >
< >
< Use fewer windows and more tabs, which you can name.
In
>
>--Boundary_(ID_psS4Mz8w2HlD4QtT4suLvQ)
>Content-type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
>Content-transfer-encoding: 7BIT
>Content-disposition: inline
>
>On 2/14/06, Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
>> > Now we have a drop in communicat
Dennis Clarke wrote:
On 2/14/06, Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
Now we have a drop in communications.
I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with RealPlayer10,
and it's been taken care of I believe.
What
On 2/14/06, Alan DuBoff <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> > Now we have a drop in communications.
>
> I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with RealPlayer10,
> and it's been taken care of I believe.
What does "RealPlaye
> > * Dave Miner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-02-01
> 13:15]:
> > > Just to elaborate a little on the proposal, this
> community would be the
> > > home for the SVR4 packaging tools code when it's
> released in the near
> > > future, as well as other packaging and
> installation projects.
> >
> > I
On Tuesday 14 February 2006 12:31 am, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> Now we have a drop in communications.
I don't think that is the case at all. It was a legal issue with RealPlayer10,
and it's been taken care of I believe.
Honest, I haven't seen any of the OpenSolaris team in the bathroom, they
liter
Hey,
On Tue, 2006-02-14 at 03:31 -0500, Dennis Clarke wrote:
> My feelings exactly .. and I have a note from someone way up on high
> that told me to question Sun if they are not being open. This feels
> like a monkey with a wrench is now in there loosening bolts and
> pulling apart processes th
On 2/14/06, Cyril Plisko <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi !
>
> Can someone from Solaris Express team share the status
> with the community ? I am sure many (if not all) of us
> will appreciate proactive regular updates on the subject.
> Since the opensolaris.org clearly states that minimum
> base f
Hi !
Can someone from Solaris Express team share the status
with the community ? I am sure many (if not all) of us
will appreciate proactive regular updates on the subject.
Since the opensolaris.org clearly states that minimum
base for building opensolaris is b32 (yes, I know about
workaround) ha
93 matches
Mail list logo
