Simon Phipps wrote:
I would like to suggest follow-up is directed solely to advocacy-
discuss (I have set reply-to).
On Jun 26, 2007, at 01:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And yes, I feel that some kind of prize or reward is essential,
otherwise
we don't stand a very good chance of getting the
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Before I get to the question in the subject, let me spell out
the background for it:
Linux - *the* open source operating system/kernel
FreeBSD - promotes itself as being the BSD to use for desktop/server
NetBSD - promotes itself as being easy port
OpenBSD - promotes itse
On 6/26/07, MC <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
[i]The advantage[s] of a stable ABI are all mitigated when binary packages of
proprietary drivers are available. [/i]
http://www4.osnews.com/permalink?250425
Can someone smarter than me comment on that post? :)
I believe that post refers to propriet
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Hahn wrote:
...
I think these are all good points, and think your proposed slogans are
pretty good candidates, too. I believe I've seen similar ideas in
both the Advocacy group and the Indiana project, too--I also remember
that Dennis has pushed out some p
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To make it an attractive destination for other companies,
besides Sun, to donate cash/hardware.
And what would we do with that? (Really - I'm coming from
a background of the X.Org Foundation, which is having a har
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Ian Collins wrote:
I just tried installing the codec pack from
http://opensolaris.es/codec-pack.sh and the install fails with
In case this helps, on indiana-discuss, the author of the codec
pack wrote:
= ...
= The bright side is that I committed all the patches I wrote for
Glynn Foster wrote:
>
> Garrett D'Amore wrote:
>> Hmm... but I *can* imagine bounties for development effort being
>> offered. As well as SoC type sponsorships. Those kinds of effort are
>> very useful, and cost far far less than actually hiring a well paid
>> engineer.
>
> Let's focus some o
Garrett D'Amore wrote:
> Hmm... but I *can* imagine bounties for development effort being
> offered. As well as SoC type sponsorships. Those kinds of effort are
> very useful, and cost far far less than actually hiring a well paid
> engineer.
Let's focus some of that energy into getting kick a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is making OpenSolaris a non profit organisation on the
agenda of the OGB?
No - what would the benefit of that be?
To make it an attractive destination for other companies,
besides Sun, to donate cash/hardware.
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Kristin Amundsen wrote:
I am really curious now how much is missing from the sources currently
available. I will have to look at this.
One major hole missing is a standards compliant shell (since Solaris ksh
source is not released) though Roland is getting close to f
If you need help regarding as developing solaris drivers, please feel
free to send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] or
[EMAIL PROTECTED], I am glad to help.
Colin
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Hi,
Yeap, I'm current learning some C - hopefully porting the Linux driver
for the Ricoh camera won't take too l
On Jun 26, 2007, at 02:59, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Sun going bust shouldn't disrupt OpenSolaris. Whether or not
that will ever happen, who knows, but the two shouldn't be joined
at the hip.
The source code is forkable, GenUnix.org exists, we have a large,
diverse membership as well as a s
> Hopefully I can get one of those who actually did the work to post a
> blog entry about it. Anyway, the executables and libraries which need
> to remain stable during the entire duration of the patching application
> and would be affected by the patch operation are copied into a temporary
>
Hey,
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>> To make it an attractive destination for other companies,
>> besides Sun, to donate cash/hardware.
>
> And what would we do with that? (Really - I'm coming from
> a background of the X.Org Foundation, which is having a hard
> time findi
On 6/25/07, Alan Coopersmith <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
And what would we do with that? (Really - I'm coming from
a background of the X.Org Foundation, which is having a hard
time finding ways to spend it's cash - it's not enough to hire
a stable of full-time developers, so has avoided paying f
Simon Phipps wrote:
On Jun 26, 2007, at 02:39, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't anyone in the least bit interested seeing OpenSolaris
actually be able to employ people or pay for things itself
rather than depend on the good will of Sun to do it all?
OK, I'm confused. Earlier you asserted tha
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To make it an attractive destination for other companies,
besides Sun, to donate cash/hardware.
And what would we do with that? (Really - I'm coming from
a background of the X.Org Foundation, which is having a hard
time finding ways to spen
On Jun 25, 2007, at 9:46 PM, Simon Phipps wrote:
On Jun 26, 2007, at 02:39, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't anyone in the least bit interested seeing OpenSolaris
actually be able to employ people or pay for things itself
rather than depend on the good will of Sun to do it all?
OK, I'm confu
On 6/25/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I would be very much in favour of seeing OpenSolaris become a
501(c)(3) entity. In fact, I think it is essential that OpenSoalris
does so, otherwise OpenSolaris is not exactly attractive for
people/companies to donate anything towards in t
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
To make it an attractive destination for other companies,
besides Sun, to donate cash/hardware.
And what would we do with that? (Really - I'm coming from
a background of the X.Org Foundation, which is having a hard
time finding ways to spend it's cash - it's not enoug
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Lau wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
From the very start of this, my position has been that getting this
to properly motivate people requires a competition with a prize at
the end and that for this reason it requires more thought than the
community "just d
On Jun 26, 2007, at 02:39, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Isn't anyone in the least bit interested seeing OpenSolaris
actually be able to employ people or pay for things itself
rather than depend on the good will of Sun to do it all?
OK, I'm confused. Earlier you asserted that open source was all a
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is making OpenSolaris a non profit organisation on the
agenda of the OGB?
No - what would the benefit of that be?
To make it an attractive destination for other companies,
besides Sun, to donate cash/hardware.
Or is making OpenSolaris a
Keith M Wesolowski wrote:
...
If you feel strongly about that strategy in general, perhaps you'd
like to go do the legwork and find out what's required to set up an
independent 501(c)(3) or similar foundation (or a non-US equivalent if
that would be advantageous). Without something like that,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is making OpenSolaris a non profit organisation on the
agenda of the OGB?
No - what would the benefit of that be?
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
Simon Phipps wrote:
I would like to suggest follow-up is directed solely to advocacy-
discuss (I have set reply-to).
On Jun 26, 2007, at 01:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And yes, I feel that some kind of prize or reward is essential,
otherwise
we don't stand a very good chance of getting th
I would like to suggest follow-up is directed solely to advocacy-
discuss (I have set reply-to).
On Jun 26, 2007, at 01:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And yes, I feel that some kind of prize or reward is essential,
otherwise
we don't stand a very good chance of getting the right result
unless
I would like to suggest follow-up is directed solely to advocacy-
discuss (I have set reply-to).
On Jun 26, 2007, at 01:04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And yes, I feel that some kind of prize or reward is essential,
otherwise
we don't stand a very good chance of getting the right result
unless
On Mon, Jun 25, 2007 at 05:04:18PM -0700, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Does a community group have the power to decide that a monetary
> prize is awarded to whoever comes up with the winner?
The way I see it, you're welcome to so declare, but you don't (as a
CG) have the ability to collect and disb
Stephen Lau wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
From the very start of this, my position has been that getting this
to properly motivate people requires a competition with a prize at
the end and that for this reason it requires more thought than the
community "just doing it."
The only priz
Stephen Lau wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
And further to that, does the community group have the power to
award that kind of prize in OpenSolaris's name?
No, but it (the CG) has the power to conduct all the investigation &
research and request either the OGB to approve it or request for a
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Lau wrote:
I still maintain that identity and 'creating a mark' are not issues
that should involve the OGB. The OGB should be about governance,
not a generic leadership board. These sorts
Eric Boutilier wrote:
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Stephen Lau wrote:
I still maintain that identity and 'creating a mark' are not issues
that should involve the OGB. The OGB should be about governance,
not a generic leadership board. These sorts of things are best left
DVD's are MPEG-2 which is inluded in the pack from Fluendo, I gather you would
have difficulty with zoning and the like though...maybe a wiser soul can shed
light on this...
A fresh install of SXDE did not play DVD's in my experience :(
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
exactly , given some time rhel 6 with zfs
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Tatyaso wrote:
What is the default NFS server version available on Solaris 10?
When I do rpcinfo it shows version3. Is it correct? How can I have NFS v4 on
Solaris?
# rpcinfo -u localhost nfs
program 13 version 2 ready and waiting
program 13 version 3 ready and waiting
--
Tatyaso
T
On 6/18/07, 陶捷 Euler Tao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Dear all:
I'm compiling the ON build 65's source code now, using "nightly
opensolaris.sh" command.
The prstat reports that system is very idle, but the load average tells me
that the system is very busy. -,-
And then I check the vmstat report,
Hi,
Yeap, I'm current learning some C - hopefully porting the Linux driver for
the Ricoh camera won't take too long - I've had a look through it, and it
seems to be quite a compact/well written driver.
Thank you for your email,
Matthew
On 25/06/07, Colin Zou <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kaiwa
Hi,
How about this one: "OpenSolaris: What ever you want it to be"
Open ended, aiming all areas.
Matthew
On 25/06/07, Jim Grisanzio <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
> Hmm, sex, drugs and rock 'n roll :-)
>
> One would assume that since there isn't that "what is Opensolaris a
On 6/18/07, Wee Yeh Tan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
prstat may miss
Stupid safari3 is chopping off my post.
prstat may miss short lived processes and this seems possible because
you are compiling stuff.
--
Just me,
Wire ...
Blog:
___
opensolaris-di
On 6/17/07, William James <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
On 5/31/07, Dennis Clarke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Therefore, as a leader in this project :
>
> I call for a vote of the members of this project to terminate
> this project at OpenSolaris.org. Please indicate a YES or NO
> belo
On 6/18/07, 陶捷 Euler Tao <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
ok, i see.
Then, how can I correct this problem when using prstat?
I'd try microstate accounting to see but I'm not sure if it will help.
You could also try to reduce the reporting interval.
Or is there any other statistics tool that could c
On 6/18/07, Jean-Francois Richard <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Typically, changing the prstat refresh time doesn't change
anything because the %cpu it is displaying remains the decaying average over
the last minute.
Jean,
You are certainly correct about pcpu. I was hoping that reducing
refresh
Riny Qian wrote:
It could be done. Could you please summarize and send it to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (or any better alias?)
thanks,
Riny
Hi,
I've been working with vconsoles folks and one of the issues I would
like folks in the ON build team to look into is making the tools easier.
---
Hi,
This is better suited to driver-discuss, redirecting.
- F.
On 6/20/07, Tom Chen <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
hello,
I am using ioctl to get GLDv2 network driver information. I find there is a
limitation in Solaris, ie. no matter how big the buffer provided by user
application to the netwo
Hi
I don't know enough about the specifics for Open Solaris so the
following is based on the guess that it is the same as regular Solaris
(the fact that your vmstat r queue is at values like 7 and that idle CPU
is at 0% but prstat shows only about 4% CPU makes this feel like a good
guess) . Hist
Kristin Amundsen wrote:
I am really curious now how much is missing from the sources currently
available. I will have to look at this.
One major hole missing is a standards compliant shell (since Solaris ksh
source is not released) though Roland is getting close to fixing that with
the ksh93 i
Heh, yes I have read it before. This is my job for Sun. I have done
all of Sun's brands in the last 7 years. I know exactly what we need to
do and how it has to happen. What I have not ever done is to try to run
the conformance suites on OpenSolaris.
-Kristin
__
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007 09:36:25 -0700, Bart Smaalders <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
wrote:
> ...
> Basically, you'll find an SS10 violates the assumptions upon which ZFS
> was designed - fast cpus, lots of memory bandwidth. My guess is that
> you would be quite lucky to get anywhere close to 20MB/sec...
>
> W
> A list could be made of everything that would be needed (though it would
> take a bit of time).
>
> I am really curious now how much is missing from the sources currently
> available. I will have to look at this.
>
> -Kristin
Are you ready for this? :-) Looks at the opening lines on this
>I did a basic fsck but it did not report any errors.
It's not about errors; sorry I should have added "and then look at
the summary line; it says something like Y blocks, X fragments; blocks
may be 0.
>I also upped the file descriptors in an attempt to resolve the issue.
Won't help.
>As you m
> Alan Coopersmith wrote:
>> Dennis Clarke wrote:
>>
>>> Simple question :
>>>
>>> Can a person or person(s) with sufficient craft take the sources
>>> from OpenSolaris.org and build a distro which *may* be certified
>>> as UNIX ?
>>>
>>> Yes or No ?
>>
>>
>> Sources only? I do
Thanks Casper...
I did a basic fsck but it did not report any errors.
I also upped the file descriptors in an attempt to resolve the issue.
As you mentioned I have the former situation where I cannot create a file which
does sugest an inode issue.
I only got to look at this system today (new jo
>Hello all,
>
>I am running Solaris 10 and am getting 'out of disk space' messages from the
>kernel but a df -k sh
ow that only 90% is used and that around 4Gb is available.
>
>I cannot write to this partition though!
>
>What could be the cause of this?
If it's an UFS partition it could be one
Hello all,
I am running Solaris 10 and am getting 'out of disk space' messages from the
kernel but a df -k show that only 90% is used and that around 4Gb is available.
I cannot write to this partition though!
What could be the cause of this?
Thanks
SRG
This message posted from opensolaris.
Alan Coopersmith wrote:
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Simple question :
Can a person or person(s) with sufficient craft take the sources
from OpenSolaris.org and build a distro which *may* be certified
as UNIX ?
Yes or No ?
Sources only? I don't think so, at least not until Proj
Steven Sim wrote:
Folks;
Today Sun BIG ADMIN website posted an article by Lynne Thompson entitled
"What's New in Patching "
See http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/sundocs/articles/patch-wn.jsp
Could somebody here elaborate more on the following statement
".Now, deferred-activation patc
[i]The advantage[s] of a stable ABI are all mitigated when binary packages of
proprietary drivers are available. [/i]
http://www4.osnews.com/permalink?250425
Can someone smarter than me comment on that post? :)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
another link for their init system details:
http://www.pardus.org.tr/eng/projeler/comar/SpeedingUpLinuxWithPardus.html
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Dennis Clarke wrote:
Simple question :
Can a person or person(s) with sufficient craft take the sources
from OpenSolaris.org and build a distro which *may* be certified
as UNIX ?
Yes or No ?
Sources only? I don't think so, at least not until Project Emancipation
is complet
Hello,
i haven't read much about the plans of the new packaging and install system of
Solaris so this post may be a little baseless. But i was wondering what
language will be used during the implementation. There is a Linux distribution
called Pardus, they wrote their install, init and packagin
> As much as we may want to call OpenSolaris UNIX, we cannot. UNIX is a
> trademark owned by The Open Group.
Sounds like a deep deep jungle full of many many landsharks.
:-(
> The UNIX brand is designed to be applied to specific versions of
> specific products from specific vendors. This
As much as we may want to call OpenSolaris UNIX, we cannot. UNIX is a
trademark owned by The Open Group.
The UNIX brand is designed to be applied to specific versions of
specific products from specific vendors. This is the problem. You
cannot brand "OpenSolaris" any more than you could "Linu
Ian Collins wrote
> William James wrote:
> > On 6/10/07, [EMAIL PROTECTED] <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >>
> >> >Are there plans to integrate valgrind in solaris? Linux has a large
> >> >lead in code quality because they have tools like valgrind. I think
> >> >Solaris needs such a tool, too
> >>
>
> Joerg Schilling wrote:
>> This is the most important argument: OpenSolaris is UNIX 03 approved
>
> It's not, and cannot be (as I explained earlier).
>
> Solaris 10 3/05 is UNIX 03 certified. No Solaris Nevada build has yet
> been certified (since it's not worth paying the Open Group for every
Steven Stallion wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
>
Actually, no.
ZFS works best with 64bit CPUs (and I can testify to that with
issues I've had on i386 PCs), so getting it to run on SPARCv8
systems is goint to mean a compromise in performance for
ZFS vs what you'll see with UltraSPARC and
Joerg Schilling wrote:
This is the most important argument: OpenSolaris is UNIX 03 approved
It's not, and cannot be (as I explained earlier).
Solaris 10 3/05 is UNIX 03 certified. No Solaris Nevada build has yet
been certified (since it's not worth paying the Open Group for every
build), and
> "Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> > What OpenSolaris needs is something like this:
>> >
>> > OpenSolaris: the premier open source server platform
>> >
>> > or...
>> >
>> > "The OpenSolaris project is the only SVR4 based open source
>> > platform that scales evenly from 1 CPU to 12
"Dennis Clarke" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > What OpenSolaris needs is something like this:
> >
> > OpenSolaris: the premier open source server platform
> >
> > or...
> >
> > "The OpenSolaris project is the only SVR4 based open source
> > platform that scales evenly from 1 CPU to 128 CPUs."
>
>
Folks;
Today Sun BIG ADMIN website posted an article by Lynne Thompson entitled
"What's New in Patching "
See http://www.sun.com/bigadmin/sundocs/articles/patch-wn.jsp
Could somebody here elaborate more on the following statement
".Now, deferred-activation patching uses the loopb
Stephen Lau writes:
> Admin->Privacy Options->Subscription Rules
> Set subscribe_policy to "Confirm"
> Admin->Privacy Options->Sender Filters
> Set default_member_moderation to "Yes"
>
> The above should set users to allow to confirm their own subscription
> (without requiring admin a
James Carlson wrote:
Stephen Lau writes:
You can subscribe someone as "moderated" so that they receive all
postings, but can't post themselves. Effectively it's read-only.
Right ... that's what I meant about "simple."
What I'd really like is to have the ability for users to specify
themselve
Moinak Ghosh <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > 2) It slows down to ~ 1/2 the speed it gives a shoert time after the mount.
> > This seems to point to a coneptional problem.
> >
>
>Is this observed on a real CDROM device or using a loopback mounted
> ISO image on
>harddisk ? Also nee
Stephen Lau writes:
> You can subscribe someone as "moderated" so that they receive all
> postings, but can't post themselves. Effectively it's read-only.
Right ... that's what I meant about "simple."
What I'd really like is to have the ability for users to specify
themselves as read-only (defa
Hi Casper,
See comments below.
[EMAIL PROTECTED] 写道:
Clicking on more players does give me a listing of all of the available
players including Solaris x86 (and the ability to download it)
did you test that ?
Yes, at least up to the point where it said:
"Download player
James Carlson wrote:
Simon Phipps writes:
On Jun 22, 2007, at 13:06, James Carlson wrote:
First of all, the archives are open. Anyone can read them. And
anyone can file a subscription request to be added to the list, and as
long as the request is reasonable (and not "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"),
I'll
Will I be able to play DVD's etc with it?
What if i decide to make a fresh installation of say SXCE or SXDE?
Will i not be able to watch DVD's .. listen to mp3's on my OpenSolaris
box now?
Ché Kristo wrote:
> You could always go the "licensed" path:
> http://www.fluendo.com/press/releases/PR-200
If you ever want to unsubscribe or change your options (eg, switch to
or from digest mode, change your password, etc.), you can make such
adjustments via email by sending a message to:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
with the word `help' in the subject or body (don't include the
quotes), and you will get back
>> Clicking on more players does give me a listing of all of the available
>> players including Solaris x86 (and the ability to download it)
>
>did you test that ?
Yes, at least up to the point where it said:
"Download player for Solaris X86 now".
>if you do, you will find that the Sol
Hello,
I have a problem about TX network configuration shown below thread.
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?forumID=13&threadID=33255
I would like to check some logs to find out how to solve my problem,
so I checked files under /var/log. But I couldnt find any logs that showed me
some
>
>
>> I remember that too but that was when it still was the Macromedia site.
>> Now there is
>>a 'More Players' option on the right side of the webpage.
>>http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/alternates/
>>But that brings you back to the link to download the sparc version 7
>> flashplayer.
>>
> I remember that too but that was when it still was the Macromedia site. Now
> there is
>a 'More Players' option on the right side of the webpage.
>http://www.adobe.com/shockwave/download/alternates/
>But that brings you back to the link to download the sparc version 7
>flashplayer.
>I sent
> carlos antonio neira bustos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
>
> > one of the jewels has been stolen ...
>
> What do you mean has been stolen?
>
I think I know what he means with "stolen":
Fact is that many, many more people are trying Linux than OpenSolaris. The media
is writing and talking abo
Simon Phipps writes:
>
> On Jun 22, 2007, at 13:06, James Carlson wrote:
> > First of all, the archives are open. Anyone can read them. And
> > anyone can file a subscription request to be added to the list, and as
> > long as the request is reasonable (and not "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"),
> > I'll app
carlos antonio neira bustos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> one of the jewels has been stolen ...
What do you mean has been stolen?
Jörg
--
EMail:[EMAIL PROTECTED] (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
[EMAIL PROTECTED](uni)
[EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) Blog: http:
userland filesystem? what does it mean?
sounds strange...
2007/6/25, carlos antonio neira bustos <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
one of the jewels has been stolen ...
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-di
On Jun 22, 2007, at 13:06, James Carlson wrote:
First of all, the archives are open. Anyone can read them. And
anyone can file a subscription request to be added to the list, and as
long as the request is reasonable (and not "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"),
I'll approve it. The list itself isn't hidden.
Hi All,
we need the administrative guide and feature list for open solaris (Nevada)
snv_65 version.
We also intend to install different tools available on opensolaris site (iSCSI
initiator, etc) and test them. In case any you can provide any pointers to test
plan that exists for testing variou
Hi,
I want to unsubscribe from this .pls help me...
DISCLAIMER:
This email (including any attachments) is intended for the sole use of the
intended recipient/s and may contain material that is CONFIDENTIAL AND PRIVATE
COMPANY INFORMATION. Any review or reliance by others or copying or
carlos antonio neira bustos wrote:
one of the jewels has been stolen ...
More like one of the jewels have been cloned and that makes the
original even more precious :)
-Ghee
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss ma
You could always go the "licensed" path:
http://www.fluendo.com/press/releases/PR-2007-01.html
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
>> Will ZFS be more stable on its native OS or in userland on Linux? It
>> could be stable on both but I suspect a risk averse decision maker would
>> use ZFS on a Solaris and one of the more well-supported filesystems for
>> Linux...
>
>Right now...I think I would not have much of a choice if you
Hello Gary,
Sorry to hear about your problems.
On 6/22/07, Gary Gendel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Help! Where the heck to I look to track down what's happening.
Some other issues... If I make either of the boards PCI masters in the BIOS, I
can't boot. If I load both the boards BIOS ROMS,
Will ZFS be more stable on its native OS or in userland on Linux? It
could be stable on both but I suspect a risk averse decision maker would
use ZFS on a Solaris and one of the more well-supported filesystems for
Linux...
Right now...I think I would not have much of a choice if you are
talking
Kaiwai Gardiner wrote:
Hmm, sex, drugs and rock 'n roll :-)
One would assume that since there isn't that "what is Opensolaris all about"
means that it is what ever you as an individual want it to be - you want to port it to
your toaster or roaster - great. You want to run it as a desktop opera
95 matches
Mail list logo
