Hello,
I know that /usr directory is mounted as read-only in default in a sparse root
zone.
Is there no way to give specific users write privileges to /usr in a sparse
root zone either using Solaris's role privileges or using sudo?
Is it possible remove /usr from inherit-pkg-dir entries?
Than
> Have a look at Microsofts Channel 9 - you can listen to engineers speal> of
> the changes they've made to Windows kernel, the benefits, etc. etc.That's
> exactly what the Sun engineers have been doing for the past two years.In
> fact, Sun engineers were the first to popularize it.> What it so
Bump ???
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 08:50 -0700, Aaron Epps wrote:
> Perhaps I wasn't clear. Once I've installed Solaris, surely there are
> pathces/etc that are released, currently it looks as if I need to "register"
> my installation of Solaris in order to get access to these patches and that
> appears to r
The USB FAQ storage section might help you.
http://www.sun.com/io_technologies/usb/USB-Faq.html#Storage
The scsa2usb.conf property is mentioned in question 20.
- Colin
Stefan Parvu wrote:
> For FireWire: nope. Nothing reported from scsa1394 driver.
>
> However after your suggestion Im able to see
> Hey,
>
> Stephen Hahn blogged awesomely about his thoughts on
> packaging - if you're
> interested in the discussion, you should probably
> subscribe to
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] and comment on
> things.
>
> [this mail is just a heads up, so that people don't
> feel like they're missing
> something -
Hey,
Stephen Hahn blogged awesomely about his thoughts on packaging - if you're
interested in the discussion, you should probably subscribe to
[EMAIL PROTECTED] and comment on things.
[this mail is just a heads up, so that people don't feel like they're missing
something - it's purposely not real
For FireWire: nope. Nothing reported from scsa1394 driver.
However after your suggestion Im able to see now: c4t0d0p0.
[EMAIL PROTECTED]>rmformat -l
Looking for devices...
1. Logical Node: /dev/rdsk/c4t0d0p0
Physical Node: /[EMAIL PROTECTED],0/pci1043,[EMAIL PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL
PRO
> - USB: I will try to add reduced-cmd-support=true, reboot my system and see
> whats going on.
Don't forget the semicolon at the end, or it won't take effect.
-Artem.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
> - FireWire: I was not able at all to access the disk, the storage is not
> detected.
That's peculiar. Nothing at all in /var/adm/messages?
-Artem.
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Hi Artem,
Thanks for comments.
- USB: I will try to add reduced-cmd-support=true, reboot my system and see
whats going on.
- FireWire: I was not able at all to access the disk, the storage is not
detected.
Stefan
This message posted from opensolaris.org
__
> Jul 19 21:16:27 earth usba: [ID 349649 kern.info] Maxtor OneTouch III
> 2CAD0L5P
> Jul 19 21:16:27 earth genunix: [ID 936769 kern.info] scsa2usb0 is /[EMAIL
> PROTECTED],0/pci1043,[EMAIL PROTECTED],1/[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Jul 19 21:16:27 earth genunix: [ID 408114 kern.info] /[EMAIL
couple of more info:
- I was able to fdisk it in Redhat AS. In Solaris it was not possible.
- The device ships as MacOSX device so I needed to repartion it
- Even if I have defined in Redhat AS 2 partitions Im not able to use fdisk
nor format, rmformat in S11. Not sure whats going on.
stefa
Hi
Write here when you success , i'm more than happy to do some testing :-)
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Apologies. Moving over to smf-discuss ...
-- Jim C
Jim Connors wrote:
>> Toying around with using a minimal RAM-resident version of
>> OpenSolaris (currently 80MB) as an appliance platform. The idea
>> here would be that the OS would be real small, would boot real fast
>> (from flash), woul
Hey,
Anyone any ideas if Solaris can see this device: Maxtor 1TB OneTouch III Turbo
Edition USB or firewire ? Connecting this to my Solaris Express build 64a, USB:
Jul 19 21:16:27 earth usba: [ID 349649 kern.info] Maxtor OneTouch III
2CAD0L5P
Jul 19 21:16:27 earth genunix: [ID 936
James Carlson wrote:
> Epps, Aaron writes:
>> I'm talking about Solaris Express...
>
> OK.
>
>> So, if there are never going to be
>> any patches issued for Solaris Express, then why have the Update-Manager
>> applet loaded on the default gnome panel? For that matter, why not just
>> remove or hi
* Aaron Epps ([EMAIL PROTECTED]) wrote:
> I'm just attempting to familiarize myself with how OpenSolaris differs
> from Fedora. For example, eventhought Fedora is a development project,
> they still release and make patches freely available without having to
> buy a support contract; of course if y
Aaron Epps wrote:
> I'm just attempting to familiarize myself with how OpenSolaris differs from
> Fedora. For example, eventhought Fedora is a development project, they still
> release and make patches freely available without having to buy a support
> contract; of course if you buy RHEL then yo
Epps, Aaron writes:
> I'm talking about Solaris Express...
OK.
> So, if there are never going to be
> any patches issued for Solaris Express, then why have the Update-Manager
> applet loaded on the default gnome panel? For that matter, why not just
> remove or hide it all together if it's not goi
I'm just attempting to familiarize myself with how OpenSolaris differs from
Fedora. For example, eventhought Fedora is a development project, they still
release and make patches freely available without having to buy a support
contract; of course if you buy RHEL then you do need to purchase a co
Aaron Epps writes:
> Perhaps I wasn't clear. Once I've installed Solaris, surely there are
> pathces/etc that are released, currently it looks as if I need to "register"
> my installation of Solaris in order to get access to these patches and that
> appears to require some kind of support contra
Solaris and OpenSolaris are not the same thing.
As this is an OpenSolaris forum, it's not the best place to discuss topics that
are specific to Solaris (like support contracts and patch availability).
--
Darren
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
Aaron Epps wrote:
> Perhaps I wasn't clear. Once I've installed Solaris, surely there are
> pathces/etc that are released, currently it looks as if I need to "register"
> my installation of Solaris in order to get access to these patches and that
> appears to require some kind of support contrac
Jim Connors wrote:
> Toying around with using a minimal RAM-resident version of OpenSolaris
> (currently 80MB) as an appliance platform. The idea here would be that the
> OS would be real small, would boot real fast (from flash), would have no disk
> footprint, and most importantly -- be state
Perhaps I wasn't clear. Once I've installed Solaris, surely there are
pathces/etc that are released, currently it looks as if I need to "register" my
installation of Solaris in order to get access to these patches and that
appears to require some kind of support contract with Sun. Is there any w
Aaron Epps wrote:
> Is the only way to get updates for OpenSolaris to buy a annual contract from
> Sun?
No - there is no contract from Sun you can buy that will give
you anything more than you can get from the free downloads on
OpenSolaris.org.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- [EMAIL PRO
Is the only way to get updates for OpenSolaris to buy a annual contract from
Sun?
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
Toying around with using a minimal RAM-resident version of OpenSolaris
(currently 80MB) as an appliance platform. The idea here would be that the OS
would be real small, would boot real fast (from flash), would have no disk
footprint, and most importantly -- be stateless. The stateless part
UNIX admin wrote:
>> Really? I don't abhore the Linux fragmentation, and
>> I don't recall a
>> consensus-community message where we communicated
>> that at all.
>
> I already covered the "blanket statement" part, but while
> on the subject, this just in:
>
> "Too Many Linux Distros Make For Op
Hi,
I couldn't able to understand the difference between milestones and
runlevels. As far as I understand they are somehow related
What I understand is for example svc:/milestone/multi-user:default is
runlevel 2. And if I want to see what is run in runlevel2 I can see that
with:
bash-3.00# svcs
This is a modified JumpStart environment question for a standalone SPARC system
using a bootable DVD and a USB Thumb-Drive.
In its simplest form the JumpStart DVD installs a baseline configuration...but
it cannot be modified. Is it possible to override the default DVD information
with suppleme
On Thu, 2007-07-19 at 01:38 -0700, UNIX admin wrote:
> > I find the professional documentation for Solaris
> > fairly typical of
> > professional documentation these days, and not
> > terribly useful. It is,
> > as you say, detailed and step-by-step. What it
> > *doesn't* do is give me
> > any
On 7/19/07, UNIX admin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> My question to you is, how is the documentation supposed
> to answer a question as undefined as yours?
>
> First you need to communicate what it is that you'd like to
> know, in more precise terms, then I can point you to the
> corresponding docum
On 7/19/07, a b <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > Voluminous - yes
> > Detailed - yes
> > Usability - I have mixed feelings. Often it has been notes put up on
> > the blogs, mailing list archives or queries on newsgroups that seem to
> > give me the right answers.
> > (I can count myself among those w
> Really? I don't abhore the Linux fragmentation, and
> I don't recall a
> consensus-community message where we communicated
> that at all.
I already covered the "blanket statement" part, but while
on the subject, this just in:
"Too Many Linux Distros Make For Open Source Mess":
http://linux.sl
> I find the professional documentation for Solaris
> fairly typical of
> professional documentation these days, and not
> terribly useful. It is,
> as you say, detailed and step-by-step. What it
> *doesn't* do is give me
> any traction in really understanding how the system
> works;
The ques
> > One of the things we as a community have often communicated is that we
> > abhore the Linux fragmentation and that we want a unified *platform*, in
> > stark contrast with the Linux mentality.> > Really? I don't abhore the
> > Linux fragmentation, and I don't recall a > consensus-community
> > http://docs.sun.com/> >> > Voluminous - yes>
> > Detailed - yes> Usability - I have mixed feelings. Often it has been notes
> > put up on> the blogs, mailing list archives or queries on newsgroups that
> > seem to> give me the right answers.> (I can count mysel
39 matches
Mail list logo
