Hi Hernan,
Thanks for the tip!
P.S Any "noticeable" changes in snv_142 ?
On 21-6-2010 8:44, Hernan Saltiel wrote:
> Hi, Bruno!
> Yes, I booted again into snv_134, and then back into onnv_142.
> Take special care to the instructions about "image-update"!!!
> If you want to see this command list i
Hi, Bruno!
Yes, I booted again into snv_134, and then back into onnv_142.
Take special care to the instructions about "image-update"!!!
If you want to see this command list in Spanish, go to AOSUG web site -
HowTos section: http://www.aosug.com.ar/?q=node/40 .
Thanks to all!!!
Best regards,
HeCSa.
Hi,
Thanks to all that made this really nice howto.
BTW, after this procedure is it still possible to boot into snv_134
environment, i.e will the grub.conf be updated to have have snv_134 and
snv_142 boot entries?
Thanks,
Bruno
On 21-6-2010 8:15, Hernan Saltiel wrote:
> Thanks to Rich Lowe, I k
Zones + ZFS ~= Virtualisation Perfection!
Zones is the way to go, there so easy to set up, rock solid and the way they
partition resources is unparalleled by any other virtualisation framework.
After ZFS, I'd say zones are second best feature of Solaris. IMHO it's worth
finding the right web, m
Thanks to Rich Lowe, I know what I did in the wrong way.
Here is what needs to be done in order to have a working onnv_142
OpenSolaris:
a) Install OpenSolaris snv_134 (this is my case only).
b) Create a directory where to put the untar'ed, unbzip2'ed binaries:
1) mkdir -p /export/repo
c) Unta
> > I also recommend Debian for servers, CentOS when
> rpm based distros are
> > preferred; and Linux Mint for the desktop.
>
> I recommend Solaris or OpenSolaris for servers, but
> what do I know?
We use SXCE for two our servers, and they serve our needs. But these servers
are hidden in intrane
> Realistically, it's just for the installer. Exactly what it's doing you'd
> have to ask the Solaris folks, but its not used during network/jumpstart
> installs, only for the interactive ones, IIRC.
>
>
>
One word: I18N
-John
___
opensolaris-discuss m
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Dmitry G. Kozhinov
>
> Would you recommend Fedora?
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Mark
> From: opensolaris-discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org [mailto:opensolaris-
> discuss-boun...@opensolaris.org] On Behalf Of Edward Martinez
>
> quote:
>
> As you may have heard, Oracle has exercised its right to terminate HP's
> Solaris technical support agreement. If you have purchased Solaris 10
>
On 6/20/2010 12:36 PM, W. Wayne Liauh wrote:
--
Erik Trimble
Java System Support
Mailstop: usca22-123
Phone: x17195
Santa Clara, CA
Hi Erik,
Thanks a whole lot for taking time to post your thoughts. Different people
will react differently. I am sure you are aware that the stro
On 6/20/2010 3:23 PM, Dave Koelmeyer wrote:
Do us _all_ a favor and please shut up. You're doing
OpenSolaris no favors with all the crap you've been
vomiting out. Really, more harm than good since its
all based on what you think, or what you ate that
day, or if traffic was bad that morning, or an
> Do us _all_ a favor and please shut up. You're doing
> OpenSolaris no favors with all the crap you've been
> vomiting out. Really, more harm than good since its
> all based on what you think, or what you ate that
> day, or if traffic was bad that morning, or any one
> of a million factors that ob
I hope you're right and all of that is true. I dont want to see OpenSolaris
become another orphan OS or another "might have been."
BTW, I use it as a desktop OS, not as a server. There are some things I have to
use Windows 7 for, but most of my day to day computing tasks can be
accomplished wit
Why does zfs produce a batch of writes every 30 seconds on opensolaris b134
(5 seconds on a post b142 kernel), when the system is idle?
On an idle OpenSolaris 2009.06 (b111) system, /usr/demo/dtrace/iosnoop.d
shows no i/o activity for at least 15 minutes.
The same dtrace test on an idle b134 sys
On 06/21/10 06:02 AM, HeCSa wrote:
On 06/20/10 12:38 PM, Alexander wrote:
RHEL, SLES, or possibly Debian
Would you recommend Fedora?
IMHO, it is positioned as desktop or "feature-preview" of RHEL-next.
After living with Ubuntu on laptop for several years, I'm not
satisfied with its stabilit
Hi, Ken!
I didn't BFU'ed since first OpenSolaris 2008.05 appeared.
Taking a look to the README you posted, it seems that if I want to upgrade
from snv_134 to 142 I need to:
a) Create a new Boot Environment and boot into it:
1) beadm create new134
2) beadm activate new134
3) poweroff and b
>
> --
> Erik Trimble
> Java System Support
> Mailstop: usca22-123
> Phone: x17195
> Santa Clara, CA
Hi Erik,
Thanks a whole lot for taking time to post your thoughts. Different people
will react differently. I am sure you are aware that the stronger a person is
devoted to Solaris, the
On 06/20/10 12:38 PM, Alexander wrote:
RHEL, SLES, or possibly Debian
Would you recommend Fedora?
IMHO, it is positioned as desktop or "feature-preview" of RHEL-next. After
living with Ubuntu on laptop for several years, I'm not satisfied with its stability in
last two release
> Putting the flag does not seem to do anything to the
> system. Here is my power.conf file:
...
> autopmenable
> autoS3enable
> S3-supportenable
Problem seems to be that all power managed devices
must be at their lowest power level, otherwise a
> >RHEL, SLES, or possibly Debian
>
> Would you recommend Fedora?
IMHO, it is positioned as desktop or "feature-preview" of RHEL-next. After
living with Ubuntu on laptop for several years, I'm not satisfied with its
stability in last two releases. So, maybe Debian would be more adequate even
Le 19/06/10 18:08, Mark Kaiman a écrit :
I dont think its at all clear that OpenSolaris (or Solaris for that matter!)
has a future under Oracle. They're as bad as Apple. Secretive. Uncommunicative.
Leaving customers in the dark.
Time to jump ship to Ubuntu?
Time to provide something else
Basically, you can recreate the test DVD based on OSOL-DEV-134 and initial work
based on enhancements from:
1. Nexenta Core v3.0rc1 CD (initial work on that platform):
http://www.nexenta.org/projects/site/wiki/DownloadUnstable
http://www.genunix.org/dist/nexenta/nexenta-core-platform_3.0-b134-rc1
> keithk wrote:
>
> > Hi eam1,
> > I did. After which, I reboot the system. Still nothing happens.
>
> This is a well known bug that was introduced with SXCE build 130.
Is there a bug filed to track this problem?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
_
keithk wrote:
> Hi eam1,
> I did. After which, I reboot the system. Still nothing happens.
This is a well known bug that was introduced with SXCE build 130.
Build 129 correctly auto-suspends but there are other problems
(like e.g. massive performance problems in the 3d support that slows
down n
>RHEL, SLES, or possibly Debian
Would you recommend Fedora?
--
This message posted from opensolaris.org
___
opensolaris-discuss mailing list
opensolaris-discuss@opensolaris.org
25 matches
Mail list logo
