Re: [osol-discuss] Netgear FA311 NIC @ CompUSA

2006-09-07 Thread James C. McPherson
Hi Wayne, W. Wayne Liauh wrote: For those who have been trying to explore a move from Linux to Solaris, "the" most frustrating problem (plse note I didn't say "one of . . .") is the inability to make NIC work under Solaris. Sun's developers seem determined to exclude ALL of those drivers for NI

[osol-discuss] Netgear FA311 NIC @ CompUSA

2006-09-07 Thread W. Wayne Liauh
For those who have been trying to explore a move from Linux to Solaris, "the" most frustrating problem (plse note I didn't say "one of . . .") is the inability to make NIC work under Solaris. Sun's developers seem determined to exclude ALL of those drivers for NICs that are embedded in AMD-base

[osol-discuss] Re: b46 Problems with Integrated e1000g NIC on Asus P4P800 MB

2006-09-07 Thread Xiangtao You
I'm the responsible engineer for the e1000g driver. And we have been aware of this issue. Currently this problem is still under investigation. I'll get the fix soon. And I'll send you the fixed driver at that time. I'll keep you tuned. Thanks, Ted This message posted from opensolaris.org _

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Some questions....

2006-09-07 Thread Boyd Adamson
Hi Stuart! On 07/09/2006, at 4:22 PM, Stuart Remphrey wrote: 3.) What's the actual difference between changing user priority and global priority? What happends if I change both to maximum (say RT). Is the user priority less worth the global? If I as root change the user priority, is there any po

Re: [osol-discuss] Sun SSH and OpenSSH and no CDDL ?

2006-09-07 Thread Octave Orgeron
I remember when ssh appeared in the early builds of Solaris 9 and I was pretty happy about that. There are definitely differences between the OpenSSH and the SunSSH code bases. The three things I point out as show stoppers for anyone trying to shoe horn OpenSSH into Solaris are: - PAM integration.

Re: [osol-discuss] VMware Workstation 5.5.2 Build 29772

2006-09-07 Thread James Dickens
On 9/7/06, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: There is a new release of VMWare Workstation out. VMware Workstation 5.5.2 Latest Version: 5.5.2 | 8/10/06 | Build 29772 Anyone done any testing with snv_46 yet? i have booted b46 that was part of a opensolaris distro i beleve inside of vmw

[osol-discuss] New install, trying to bring up X login blanks screen and locks me out

2006-09-07 Thread David Dyer-Bennet
I believe I have a working scratch install of S10u2 on my new server box, but when I boot it, after relatively few seconds I get a message on the screen that X login screen is coming and I should wait for it. Then the screen blanks, and I cannot talk to the system through the keyboard again. I do

[osol-discuss] VMware Workstation 5.5.2 Build 29772

2006-09-07 Thread Dennis Clarke
There is a new release of VMWare Workstation out. VMware Workstation 5.5.2 Latest Version: 5.5.2 | 8/10/06 | Build 29772 Anyone done any testing with snv_46 yet? I mean .. before I get to it tonight ? :-) -- Dennis Clarke ___ opensolaris-discuss

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread James C. Cotillier
> If the original writer of the code doesn't want their > code released, > that's their right and that's OK, but it would sure > be nice if they > would allow their identity and reasons to be known. > After all, what > ave they got to lose? Their code is still kept > secret. > Here I would have

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread James C. Cotillier
> Sure; I've seen such a thing done before. However, > it doesn't work > with the objects in question and, even if it did, it > turns out that we > can't put much more here than "sorry, but source for > this module isn't > and can't be made available." > > ... which turns out to be exactly the sa

[osol-discuss] Re: Some questions....

2006-09-07 Thread Stuart Remphrey
Yes, but that's really no different than without limits, as if you did not set a limit but just wait a little longer it will reach the real system limits, and have the same problem, but there'll be less you can do about it. The difference is how much this affects other processes. There's actuall

Re: i18n libc bits [was Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:]

2006-09-07 Thread Dave Miner
Rich Teer wrote: On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, James Carlson wrote: ... not encumbered. I can't ... but perhaps there's someone interested who can. Why can't you make such a proposal?* You (and all other Sun engineers) are just as much of our community as anyone else, so in principle there should be

Re: i18n libc bits [was Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:]

2006-09-07 Thread James C. McPherson
Rich Teer wrote: On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, James Carlson wrote: Welcome to the world of contracts. I'm not saying I'm thrilled with the answer, but just that there isn't another one. No matter how urgently or nicely you ask. :-/ Indeed. :-( A productive place to take this conversation would be a

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Can I finally re-distribute /usr/lib/libC* ?

2006-09-07 Thread Bonnie Corwin
Moinak Ghosh wrote On 09/07/06 01:32,: > Martin Bochnig wrote: > >>David Comay wrote: >> >> >> >>>I don't know the answer about redistributing libC* but have you brought up >>>the DLJ question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or the appropriate forum >>> >>>http://forums.java.net/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=94

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Compiling sysbench on

2006-09-07 Thread Casper . Dik
>Thanks for the detailed info. > >If v9 infact represents 64-bit then why am I getting 32bit/64bit compilation >conflicts. MySQL conf ig shows that it is compiled with the v9 flag and from what I understand by default the compiler wi ll compile in 64bit (the native architecture, right?) Defaul

Re: i18n libc bits [was Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:]

2006-09-07 Thread Rich Teer
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, James Carlson wrote: > Welcome to the world of contracts. > > I'm not saying I'm thrilled with the answer, but just that there isn't > another one. No matter how urgently or nicely you ask. :-/ Indeed. :-( > A productive place to take this conversation would be a proposal

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Re: Compiling sysbench on

2006-09-07 Thread Frank Mash
Thanks for the detailed info. If v9 infact represents 64-bit then why am I getting 32bit/64bit compilation conflicts. MySQL config shows that it is compiled with the v9 flag and from what I understand by default the compiler will compile in 64bit (the native architecture, right?) I will post l

[osol-discuss] Re: Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread James C. Cotillier
> > We're not allowed to name and shame. > I meant just the name of an object, assuming a question had come in of the form "What is the status of frizzlefraggle.c?" kind of thing. Of course you could not reveal the names of any third party entities in agreements with Sun. But the CDDL response d

i18n libc bits [was Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:]

2006-09-07 Thread James Carlson
Rich Teer writes: > If the original writer of the code doesn't want their code released, > that's their right and that's OK, but it would sure be nice if they > would allow their identity and reasons to be known. After all, what > have they got to lose? Their code is still kept secret. Welcome t

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread Rich Teer
On Thu, 7 Sep 2006, James Carlson wrote: > In other words, if you want the answer as to what the specific > restriction might be, I'm afraid we can't divulge that, and even if we > could, it likely would do you no amount of good. "Can't" is all we > can say. One wonders at the stupidity of compa

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread James Carlson
James C. Cotillier writes: > This may be true for Sun for Solaris, and true for other UNIX > vendors generally, but it is not universally so. > > Another large vendor, in a very large OS, has since 1964 had > the standard of placing such information in human-readable > characters at the start of e

Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal: Object Storage Device (OSD) support for Solaris

2006-09-07 Thread James Carlson
Cyril Plisko writes: > > The T10 OSD model provides a number of advantages over the aging block-based > > storage model in areas such as performance, scalability, and security. > > Storage > > vendors are currently developing storage devices that support the T10 OSD > > protocol, and OSD support f

[osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread James C. Cotillier
[b]As an aside:[/b] > > I think that's flawed. There is no way to determine > what licenses may > or may not apply to a given bit of source code by > looking at the > object file produced. > This may be true for Sun for Solaris, and true for other UNIX vendors generally, but it is not universa

[osol-discuss] Links to rollup reports

2006-09-07 Thread Eric Boutilier
Recently, Glynn Foster wrote: Subject: OpenSolaris Weekly News #27 Adding opensolaris-announce to send these weekly summaries there, as well as -discuss. All follow ups should be to -discuss. Ditto for these reports. --Eric

Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal: Object Storage Device (OSD) support for Solaris

2006-09-07 Thread Cyril Plisko
On 9/7/06, Ed Nadolski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: The T10 SCSI OSD specification defines a command protocol that allows data to be stored and managed as logical objects rather than as blocks of data. We would like to propose an opensolaris project to provide support in Solaris for OSD devices.

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread Casper . Dik
>a boilerplate response could have been made, of the form > >" [is |are] entwined with encumbered code, and certain >agreements are in place that would be repudiated if Sun were to discuss any instant details in a public forum" We're not allowed to name and shame. So that's all we can say "we

[osol-discuss] Re: Real work needs to be done Was: Re:

2006-09-07 Thread James C. Cotillier
The core problem appears to be that Joerg did not get a response at all. With regard to this comment in an earlier post: >Maybe, it was the same reason, why I did not get an answer on the >question why something simple like fnmatch.c from libc is still not >available as source. a boilerplate res

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread James Carlson
Joerg Schilling writes: > Running nm on the .o file makes me asume that it simply calls i8n code > but is not itself encumbered. Could you check this please? I think that's flawed. There is no way to determine what licenses may or may not apply to a given bit of source code by looking at the obje

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread Joerg Schilling
James Carlson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Joerg Schilling writes: > > Maybe, it was the same reason, why I did not get an answer on the > > question why something simple like fnmatch.c from libc is still not > > available as source. > > It is (like all of the special libc i18n code) encumbered.

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread James Carlson
Joerg Schilling writes: > Maybe, it was the same reason, why I did not get an answer on the > question why something simple like fnmatch.c from libc is still not > available as source. It is (like all of the special libc i18n code) encumbered. This is documented in the README file for libc, visib

Re: [osol-discuss] Project Proposal: Object Storage Device (OSD) support for Solaris

2006-09-07 Thread James C. McPherson
Ed Nadolski wrote: The T10 SCSI OSD specification defines a command protocol that allows data to be stored and managed as logical objects rather than as blocks of data. We would like to propose an opensolaris project to provide support in Solaris for OSD devices. This will consist of the util

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread oxygene
On Thu, Sep 07, 2006 at 11:21:01AM +0100, Darren J Moffat wrote: > >This is indeed something that could be fixed by Sun easily. > >My impression is that this is caused by selective perception at Suns side. > >Sun people do not have this problem. this, together with > more likely lack of resources

[osol-discuss] Project Proposal: Object Storage Device (OSD) support for Solaris

2006-09-07 Thread Ed Nadolski
The T10 SCSI OSD specification defines a command protocol that allows data to be stored and managed as logical objects rather than as blocks of data. We would like to propose an opensolaris project to provide support in Solaris for OSD devices. This will consist of the utilities, programming A

[osol-discuss] since opnsolaris has limited driver support..adding wmware esx layer?

2006-09-07 Thread Cedric Walter
hi, I need some driver for opensolaris or belenix that do not exist currently... but if wmware esx abstract the hardware and has support for raid card (esx is a linux layer). what does the Solaris Guru think? I really want to use ZFS, and want a dedicated NAS running Solaris ... This mes

[osol-discuss] IOTA 2006

2006-09-07 Thread ankur chauhan
RVCE, Bangalore Computer science department is organizing a 2 day tech fest - "IOTA 2006", on the 29th and 30th September 2006 in which more than 3000 students from various colleges are expected to participate. IOTA 2006 is sponsored by SPICE Telecom Ltd. and other companies like TISCO and NOVEL

[osol-discuss] Atlanta OpenSolaris User Group - Tuesday, Sept. 12

2006-09-07 Thread Scott Dickson - Systems Engineer
The next meeting of the Atlanta OpenSolaris User Group will be Tuesday, Sept 12, at 7 PM in the offices of Sun Microsystems. Sun is located at 3655 North Point Parkway in Alpharetta, GA. For directions and details, see the ATLOSUG web site at http://www.opensolaris.org/os/community/os_user_gr

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread Joerg Schilling
Gavin Maltby <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > I'm not sure I understand how we got on to mention 'star' in this thread, > but let's just say we all knew it was inevitable :-) There is a simple way to avoid this kind of hints: Make sure that people from Sun do not tell me that _I_ am preventing real

Re: [osol-discuss] Proposal: Project star integration

2006-09-07 Thread Joerg Schilling
Mike Kupfer <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > "Jörg" == Joerg Schilling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > > Jörg> as it seems that real work is done with ksh93 integration after a > Jörg> maling list and a project hast bee created, I propose to create > Jörg> something similar for star. > > Just so e

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread Darren J Moffat
Joerg Schilling wrote: Martin Bochnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Certainly very useful! However SUNW, what about allowing Schillix, Belenix and marTux the (closed) redistribution of the 4 tiny libs, on whom your so called ""Distro""-JDK __depends__ ? You youself violate DLJ's terms requiring c

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread Joerg Schilling
Martin Bochnig <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > Certainly very useful! > > However SUNW, what about allowing Schillix, Belenix and marTux the > (closed) redistribution of the 4 tiny libs, on whom your so called > ""Distro""-JDK __depends__ ? > You youself violate DLJ's terms requiring compatibility of

Re: [osol-discuss] Proposal: Project star integration

2006-09-07 Thread Joerg Schilling
"James C. McPherson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > The second step would be to replace /usr/bin/tar by star, but this may be > > done > > in a more relaxed way > > Hi Jörg, > it seems like you have relaxed your plans for world domination > a little bit :-) Hi James, it seems that you got

[osol-discuss] Re: Some questions....

2006-09-07 Thread Nergal Dimitri
But what if an application has memory limit and fills the limited memory with memory leaks, then when the memory limit is reached it cannot allocate memory for its own actual behavior, which leads to starvation of itself? Can this happen? This message posted from opensolaris.org

Re: [osol-discuss] Real work needs to be done Was: Re: License rathole:

2006-09-07 Thread Gavin Maltby
On 09/07/06 01:20, Joerg Schilling wrote: John Plocher <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: Can we please go back to discussing more productive topics? If you have time to do more productive work and are interested in doing so, you could help to finally integrate star into opensolaris. I'm not sure

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Can I finally re-distribute /usr/lib/libC* ?

2006-09-07 Thread Martin Bochnig
James C. McPherson wrote: > Moinak Ghosh wrote: > >> Martin Bochnig wrote: >> >>> David Comay wrote: >>> I don't know the answer about redistributing libC* but have you brought up the DLJ question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or the appropriate forum http://forums.java.net/jive/fo

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Can I finally re-distribute /usr/lib/libC* ?

2006-09-07 Thread James C. McPherson
Moinak Ghosh wrote: Martin Bochnig wrote: David Comay wrote: I don't know the answer about redistributing libC* but have you brought up the DLJ question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or the appropriate forum http://forums.java.net/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=94 I'll make some inqueries myself but the DL

Re: [osol-discuss] Re: Can I finally re-distribute /usr/lib/libC* ?

2006-09-07 Thread Moinak Ghosh
Martin Bochnig wrote: David Comay wrote: I don't know the answer about redistributing libC* but have you brought up the DLJ question to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or the appropriate forum http://forums.java.net/jive/forum.jspa?forumID=94 I'll make some inqueries myself but the DLJ folks might know