On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 21:08 -0700, Sriram Natarajan wrote:
> is there a plan to integrate Gnome 2.14 (JDS4) into Nevada builds ?
Yes, we are targetting snv_41.
Laca
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Hi
is there a plan to integrate Gnome 2.14 (JDS4) into Nevada builds ?
thanks
sriram
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Darren J Moffat wrote:
> I need to calculate (plus or minus about 5%) what percentage of the
> whole Solaris product is open source today and what percentage it is
> likely to be when Solaris 11 releases. It doesn't matter if the
> source is hosted on opensolaris.org or is source like stuff in th
We are stuck at the following error
We have JES4 installed on the system
Can somebody help?
bash-3.00# zoneadm -z zonename boot
zoneadm: zone 'zonename': WARNING: icge0:9: no matching subnet found in
netmasks(4) for IPaddress ; using default of 255.0.0.0.
zoneadm: zone 'zonename': could not stat
Tao Chen wrote:
Not supporting Update Connection (http://www.sun.com/service/sunupdate/) or
"smpatch update" in Nevada means it will not be tested like other componens
by us "beta-users".
They are there and should be supported - they just won't offer any updates to
the system itself, only unbun
Tao Chen writes:
> Not supporting Update Connection (http://www.sun.com/service/sunupdate/) or
> "smpatch update" in Nevada means it will not be tested like other componens
> by us "beta-users".
There just are no patches associated with marketing releases under
development. Patches are difficult
On 5/5/06, Matty <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> 6 - have they tried live upgrade?
>
> I sure have, and I personally don't think you can compare 'yum upgrade' with
^
* Al Hopper <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2006-05-05 14:08]:
> Is it possible for an average Joe OpenSolaris Developer to file a bug
> against /usr/bin/mail (and libmail.so) in Solaris 8?
The failure is not reproducible on recent Nevada bits?
--
Stephen Hahn, PhD Solaris Kernel Development, Sun Micros
Is it possible for an average Joe OpenSolaris Developer to file a bug
against /usr/bin/mail (and libmail.so) in Solaris 8?
Thanks,
Al Hopper Logical Approach Inc, Plano, TX. [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Voice: 972.379.2133 Fax: 972.379.2134 Timezone: US CDT
OpenSolaris.Org Community Advisory
On Thu, 4 May 2006, Dave Miner wrote:
Matty wrote:
I don't want to expand upon the issues I face with Solaris 10 (01/06),
considering the nastiness I received on the yahoo mailing list; lets
just say that compared to even Windows XP, the experience as a
workstation 'user' has been less than
Oooops -- I made a rather large typo, which is fixed below.
Sorry about that.
- Ryan
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Matty wrote:
6 - have they tried live upgrade?
I sure have, and I personally don't think you can compare 'yum upgrade' with
^
Anyone going to NSDI in San Jose next week? Want to meet up (e.g.,
lunch Monday or dinner Tuesday)?
mike
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Ian Collins wrote:
A few observations.
1 - I agree, we are almost there, all that is missing is PHP.
PHP is a start, but there are numerous other modules (LDAP authentication,
fast cgi, mod_jk, etc.) and packages (e.g., Ruby, recent version of
MySQL, etc.) that should b
On Fri, 2006-05-05 at 00:17, Glynn Foster wrote:
> Hey,
> >
> > http://daemons.net/~matty/blog/?p=413
>
> Absolutely, completely agree 100% on #2. We suck monkeys.
>
> Having JDS in Solaris 10 based on a 2 year old version of GNOME [2.6] as
> opposed to what Red Hat have in Fedora Core 5 is pre
I agree. If you have tags (which I like) then making them as short as possible
is the way to go.
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Richard L. Hamilton wrote:
A third metric (arguably as silly) is the percentage of bytes in files in the
whole
Solaris distro derives entirely from open-sourced source files (counting shared
libraries separately from what links to them).
Perhaps you just need to:
* think about what metric is m
James Carlson wrote:
Darren J Moffat writes:
I need to calculate (plus or minus about 5%) what percentage of the
whole Solaris product is open source today and what percentage it is
likely to be when Solaris 11 releases. It doesn't matter if the source
is hosted on opensolaris.org or is sourc
A third metric (arguably as silly) is the percentage of bytes in files in the
whole
Solaris distro derives entirely from open-sourced source files (counting shared
libraries separately from what links to them).
Perhaps you just need to:
* think about what metric is most acceptable to the audienc
Holger Berger wrote:
There is no way for a shell script to read, write, rename or delete an
attribute file.
Huh ?
runat(1)
Example 2: Creating extended attributes
example% runat file.2 cp /tmp/attrdata attr.1
example% runat file.2 cat /tmp/attrdata > attr.1
Applications w
On Fri, 5 May 2006, Darren J Moffat wrote:
Holger Berger wrote:
On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if the "application" is the shell itself? The shell cannot access
This is not really true. the shell may access the file
On 5/5/06, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Holger Berger wrote:
> On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> "Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>
>> > What if the "application" is the shell itself? The shell cannot access
>>
>> This is not really true. the sh
Holger Berger wrote:
On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if the "application" is the shell itself? The shell cannot access
This is not really true. the shell may access the files after it
has been
started using runat(1) o
Holger Berger wrote:
On 5/2/06, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Thurlow wrote:
> I don't agree with Darren that runat is a problem, and it's in
> the wild, so I don't expect it to go anywhere.
Let me clarify what I meant by my statement.
I think runat(1) is a good debug/devel
Holger Berger wrote:
I am not aware of any Microsoft proposals. My exceptions are about the
current Solaris implementation which are just an unusable
amyelencephalus.
Unusable for what ?
Exactly what did you try to use them for ?
Exactly how did they fail you ?
Fundamental Architecture
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Wrong: I encourtage you to talk to the people who are working on the
> > project.
> >
> > Unless they did change their mind recently, they are still working on
> > support for XATTRs.
> I asked the Novell kernel engineers at LinuxTag in Wiesbaden. Ne
Ian Collins wrote:
Roland Mainz wrote:
Hi!
Is there somewhere a BugZilla[1] which can be used for OpenSolaris
projects ? If there is no such installation - could genunix.org host
such a beast ?
[1]=I am asking explicitly for "BugZilla" for several reasons... please
no "which-bugtracking
On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 1) Linux & FreeBSD currently work on a full NFSv4 implementation that
> > includes t
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > "Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 1) Linux & FreeBSD currently work on a full NFSv4 implementation that
> > includes the NFSv4 XATTE interface which is the base of the
> >
On 5/2/06, Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Robert Thurlow wrote:
> I don't agree with Darren that runat is a problem, and it's in
> the wild, so I don't expect it to go anywhere.
Let me clarify what I meant by my statement.
I think runat(1) is a good debug/development tool. I don't
On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
1) Linux & FreeBSD currently work on a full NFSv4 implementation that
includes the NFSv4 XATTE interface which is the base of the
Solaris XATTR interface.
Linux will support NFSv4 fu
On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem I see that these "extended attributes" are inaccessible
> from within normal applications and the provided kludges such as
Why do you believe this?
The shell has no access to these f
On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Holger Berger wrote:
> > For which specific application was the XATTR API designed for? JDS?
>
> If I remember my history correctly a large part of the driver for this
> was a previous project at S
On 5/5/06, Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if the "application" is the shell itself? The shell cannot access
This is not really true. the shell may access the files after it has been
started using runat(1) or in case you did 'cd -
All
While not strictly a Solaris issue, some of my emacs binds don't work and
wondering if anyone can help out.
Specifically, the 'backspace' and 'C^@' are not working. 'backsapce'
appears to be bound to C^H instead of delete.
Also the 'C^@' appears to be bound to nothing instead of set-mark-com
Darren J Moffat writes:
> I need to calculate (plus or minus about 5%) what percentage of the
> whole Solaris product is open source today and what percentage it is
> likely to be when Solaris 11 releases. It doesn't matter if the source
> is hosted on opensolaris.org or is source like stuff in
> The subject line is halfway to useless anyway,
> because most people on the various opensolaris
> maillists happily changes the subject of the
> message itself without changing the subject line.
So, are we looking for a technical solution to a
user problem? Hardly ever works. How about
worki
Is there an issue with using the normal bug system? Is there a reason to have
a special separate bug tool for projects? Won't that create confusion as to
where the proper place to open a bug is? And how will those bugs get
transferred to the main system when the code is integrated?
-spp
Robert Thurlow <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Holger Berger wrote:
>
> > For which specific application was the XATTR API designed for?
>
> To permit Solaris to provide SMB/CIFS "named streams" or subfiles,
> also similar to the resource fork files have on MacOS. This was
> adopted by NFS Version 4
Peter Tribble <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I trialled xattrs on a couple of little projects, just for
> storing metadata about files, and found runat very useful
> for development and debugging. I think it should be kept.
+1
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Holger Berger wrote:
> > For which specific application was the XATTR API designed for? JDS?
>
> If I remember my history correctly a large part of the driver for this
> was a previous project at Sun that was attempting to do CIFS support -
> more tha
Joerg Schilling wrote:
I see no reason to change the current API.
Thanks thats good to know.
I am however interested in some definitions that would allow people to map
between the Sun XATTR system and other XATTR systems.
This is very important as other people currently implement NFSv4 XATTR
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What if the "application" is the shell itself? The shell cannot access
This is not really true. the shell may access the files after it has been
started using runat(1) or in case you did 'cd -@ file' on a xattrs enabled
shell.
> those files and m
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The whole point of them is that they aren't part of the normal file
> system name space. They aren't on MacOS X either as best as I can tell,
> and I don't believe (though I have no way to check nor the skill to do
> so) that they are on Windows XP e
I need to calculate (plus or minus about 5%) what percentage of the
whole Solaris product is open source today and what percentage it is
likely to be when Solaris 11 releases. It doesn't matter if the source
is hosted on opensolaris.org or is source like stuff in the SFW
consolidation that is
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem I see that these "extended attributes" are inaccessible
> from within normal applications and the provided kludges such as
Why do you believe this?
> runat(1) are not usable outside a lab environment. First at all these
> extended attribut
Darren J Moffat <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > I think this is wasted time. The whole XATTR API is brain dead and
> > should IMHO be depreciated in favor of a extension which will allow
> > all applications to access such attribute files. You should also take
> > into consideration that the XATTR
"Holger Berger" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I think this is wasted time. The whole XATTR API is brain dead and
> should IMHO be depreciated in favor of a extension which will allow
> all applications to access such attribute files. You should also take
> into consideration that the XATTR API will
> Also what did the scanpci report?
>
> Check the Asus web site
> http://support.asus.com.tw/download/download.aspx?SLan
> guage=en-us
>
> Contact there support to voice your opinions on using
> Solaris and would like there Eng. to have evolvement
> with OpenSolaris!
I don't know what you are ta
48 matches
Mail list logo
