Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 30th Jan 2006 21:55 UTC
Sun Solaris, OpenSolaris The NexentaOS project has released the 2nd alpha of their OpenSolaris distribution, which uses the Debian userland and tools. It includes a new installer (with auto-partitioning), the addition of KDE, WiFi drivers, full support from booting off of removable drives such as USB sticks, the complete Mono platform including Beagle, Java runtime environment, OpenSolaris build 30, and much more. You can visit the getting started page (screenshots included), read the changelog, and then proceed to the downloads.
Order by: Score:
Differences to Linux
by miketech on Mon 30th Jan 2006 23:00 UTC
miketech
Member since:
2005-07-21

Hi,

hm what are the advantages of OpenSolaris for a user instead of Linux? Solaris has a monolithic kernel too, right?

Greetings

Mike

Reply Score: 1

RE: Differences to Linux
by s_groening on Mon 30th Jan 2006 23:48 UTC in reply to "Differences to Linux"
s_groening Member since:
2005-12-13

To my best beliefs, it has the advantage of being based on the most advanced Unix out there (sorry Apple...)...

I cannot wait to install this on my PC, having just deleted Windows XP and decided to settle myself 100% on Unix for my operating system joys.

I am gonna love poking around with ZFS and Solaris Zones and stuff like that...

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Differences to Linux
by Jake on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:23 UTC in reply to "RE: Differences to Linux"
Jake Member since:
2006-01-08

The big advantage of Solaris seems to be the ability to micromanage and fine-tune the system. ZFS, for example, allows as many filesystems as you want, each taking up only as much space as they need, and each supporting independent quotas, reservations, snapshots, compression, etc. Gurus are able to track down obscure problems with DTrace. Unfortunately, as useful as Zones are, I don't think Nexenta supports them yet.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Differences to Linux
by erast on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:46 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Differences to Linux"
erast Member since:
2006-01-31

ZFS and DTrace are fully supported in Nexenta as well as any other OpenSolaris features like Zones and BrandZ's...

BrandZ is especially cool since one could run multiple OS's with *zero* overhead if OS is OpenSolaris based and very small overhead if it is RedHat GNU/Linux for example.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Differences to Linux
by Jake on Tue 31st Jan 2006 07:37 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Differences to Linux"
Jake Member since:
2006-01-08

ZFS and DTrace are fully supported in Nexenta as well as any other OpenSolaris features like Zones and BrandZ's...

# zoneadm -z test install
sh: /usr/lib/lu/lucreatezone: No such file or directory
sh: line 0: exec: /usr/lib/lu/lucreatezone: cannot execute: No such file or directory
zoneadm: zone 'test': '/usr/lib/lu/lucreatezone' failed with exit code 126.
#

Reply Score: 1

RE[5]: Differences to Linux
by erast on Tue 31st Jan 2006 08:02 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Differences to Linux"
erast Member since:
2006-01-31

to make Zones work in Nexenta, you need to do some scripting at the moment... It is not quite user-ready, yes, but user with developer's skills could make it work.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: Differences to Linux
by steve-parker.org on Tue 31st Jan 2006 02:36 UTC in reply to "RE: Differences to Linux"
steve-parker.org Member since:
2006-01-12

I suspect that you'll need a large disk array to really see the benefits of zfs, since that's what zfs is aimed at.

Reply Score: 2

RE[3]: Differences to Linux
by captrb on Tue 31st Jan 2006 07:15 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Differences to Linux"
captrb Member since:
2005-09-16

I haven't had time to play with ZFS, so take this with a grain of salt..

I think there are a few other features to ZFS. For one, it automagically deals with endian issues, which could be a significant boon if you have a mixed sparc/x86/(soon powerpc?) environment. Additionally, it appears to simplify the coordination of multiple filesystems, quotas, and diskspace.

Personally, I'm curious about the differences between SDS/UFS and ZFS io scheduling. UFS has always "felt" rather slow and stagnant. I believe that ZFS schedules disk activity with a very different algorithm and I hope it performs better. My experience could be a product of my antique hardware though :-)

All in all, I feel that there are gains to be had by merging the filesystem and RAID capabilities into a single layer. While there should be a proper distinction between physical devices and filesystems, I don't think that the reasoning behind the fs/volume distinction is as easy to make in 2006. I've got a lot of spindles in my life and I'd like them to coordinate a bit better without the requisite of a fancy RAID controller.

Reply Score: 1

Who are these people?
by stephanem on Mon 30th Jan 2006 23:21 UTC
stephanem
Member since:
2006-01-11

Contact Nexenta
We are located in the San Francisco Bay Area, California, U.S.A.

Email us at: support@nexenta.com


That should really give me some warm and fuzzies about running my company on their Operating System.

*can you say can of worms?*

Reply Score: 1

RE: Who are these people?
by thebluesgnr on Mon 30th Jan 2006 23:58 UTC in reply to "Who are these people?"
thebluesgnr Member since:
2005-11-14

Can you say Free Software?

Reply Score: 0

RE[2]: Who are these people?
by erast on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:18 UTC in reply to "RE: Who are these people?"
erast Member since:
2006-01-31

Absolutely yes! NexentaOS is an open source effort with supporting(Nexenta Systems, Inc) company behind it. http://www.nexenta.com

It is no different from current GNU/Linux offerings like Ubuntu/Canonical, Fedora/Redhat, etc

Reply Score: 3

RE[3]: Who are these people?
by rattaro on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:26 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Who are these people?"
rattaro Member since:
2005-08-22

I would say that it's rather strange that there is NO information about any of the staff of Nexenta, no information about any of the core developers, and no information about the company itself. They have great vision and ideals, but this all seems so "in the dark." No question this is completely open source, but almost all projects have at least this basic information.

Reply Score: 2

RE[4]: Who are these people?
by chekr on Tue 31st Jan 2006 01:09 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Who are these people?"
chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

That has been a characteristic of the project from the word go...a while back i brought this up in the opensolaris forum, they don't seem to think it is too much of an issue.

Each to their own i guess.

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Who are these people?
by stephanem on Tue 31st Jan 2006 01:11 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Who are these people?"
stephanem Member since:
2006-01-11

Atleast Ubuntu has Mark Shuttleworth and Fedora has Matt Szulik as real people to go and strangle should the OS eat your datacenter.

Downloading bits (even in open source) should be not considered safe practice unless you have the name of an individual.

Reply Score: 1

RE[4]: Who are these people?
by steve-parker.org on Tue 31st Jan 2006 02:38 UTC in reply to "RE[3]: Who are these people?"
steve-parker.org Member since:
2006-01-12

Run your datacentre on Ubuntu or FC, and you deserve to be strangled! Seriously. I have both these installed at home, but I would have to be seriously deranged to install either of these in a datacentre.

Reply Score: 4

RE[5]: Who are these people?
by captrb on Tue 31st Jan 2006 07:32 UTC in reply to "RE[4]: Who are these people?"
captrb Member since:
2005-09-16

... depends on what duties your data centre hosts are responsible for, of course. If I had a extemely fault tolerant infrastructure, I might be persuaded to try a less mature combinations of software to get better performance. After all, isn't that how windows and linux originally gained server marketshare? Granted, the performance may have originally been in deployment time and hardware/licensing costs, but in terms of achieving a goal on schedule with a fixed budget, those are actually a factor in net performance.

Speaking of fault tolerant infrastructures, know where I can get one? I've got mainframe needs on beige budget :-)

Reply Score: 1

boring progress bar
by necrosis on Mon 30th Jan 2006 23:54 UTC
necrosis
Member since:
2006-01-18

the ability to play tetris while the OS/distro installs is truly awsome. I don't know if this is the first installer to have such a feature; if yes, I hope others (Ubuntu, Debian) will follow suit.

Reply Score: 3

RE: boring progress bar
by dark child on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:14 UTC in reply to "boring progress bar"
dark child Member since:
2005-12-09

You could play solitaire whilst installing Lycoris.

Reply Score: 2

RE[2]: boring progress bar
by Adam S on Tue 31st Jan 2006 01:04 UTC in reply to "RE: boring progress bar"
Adam S Member since:
2005-04-01

I think thats because Lycoris was built on "Lizard," which was the Caldera Linux installer, which has turned into ... duh duh duh duh.... SCO!

Reply Score: 5

RE: boring progress bar
by helf on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:23 UTC in reply to "boring progress bar"
helf Member since:
2005-07-06

BeOS let you play games while installing if you really wanted too.. ;)

'course beos took 10 minutes to install.. so you really didnt have to wait long.

Reply Score: 3

RE: boring progress bar
by steve-parker.org on Tue 31st Jan 2006 02:42 UTC in reply to "boring progress bar"
steve-parker.org Member since:
2006-01-12

Solaris (not just OpenSolaris) has allowed you to browse the web during the install since (IIRC) Solaris 8. The wisdom of doing so is questionable, of course - I would prefer my OS install to be done with no internet connection, and only to connect a system to the internet once fully built and patched. Within a corporate environment, allowing some access to the network can make sense. Solaris 2.5.1 (if you go with the "GUI" install) allowed for a GUI with a terminal window, allowing you to do whatever you like during the install (rather like Linux installs allow from then til now, with (typically) Alt-F2)

Reply Score: 2

RE: boring progress bar
by DeadFishMan on Tue 31st Jan 2006 04:56 UTC in reply to "boring progress bar"
DeadFishMan Member since:
2006-01-09

the ability to play tetris while the OS/distro installs is truly awsome. I don't know if this is the first installer to have such a feature; if yes, I hope others (Ubuntu, Debian) will follow suit.

I believe that the first time that I saw that was back then at 1999 or so with Caldera OpenLinux 2.X. That was at a time when SCO didnīt suck big time as they do today. Actually, it was quite advanced compared to most distributions available at the time with its LISA Control Center (which is somewhat similar to YAST on SUSE).

Reply Score: 2

KDE? Check!
by CaptainPinko on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:39 UTC
CaptainPinko
Member since:
2005-07-21

Now all they need to do is write a HAL for Solaris and they'll have my desktop! (I realise that I don't bring any financial benefit to the company but then again one should never underestimate the value of mindshare and I do my fair bit of adovacy).

Reply Score: 1

RE: KDE? Check!
by erast on Tue 31st Jan 2006 00:52 UTC in reply to "KDE? Check!"
erast Member since:
2006-01-31

HAL GNU/Solaris port is comming... I know some developers are working actively at the moment. Luckily, HAL for GNU/Solaris is not that hard to port comparing to DTrace for GNU/Linux for instance...

Reply Score: 3

Great!
by bullethead on Tue 31st Jan 2006 01:04 UTC
bullethead
Member since:
2005-07-10

I tried the Nextena alpha 1 live-cd. It was amazing how well this was done. I am d/ling the alpha 2 install disk now to give it a whirl. This is truly Ubuntu for OpenSolaris. Literally after trying out their first "aplha" I was really impressed.

I will see how this one goes. This seems to be one great OS so far from my experience.

Reply Score: 2

Licensing?
by drewunwired on Tue 31st Jan 2006 01:45 UTC
drewunwired
Member since:
2005-07-06

Has the whole GPLv2 vs. CDDL debate been settled?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Licensing?
by erast on Tue 31st Jan 2006 02:07 UTC in reply to "Licensing?"
erast Member since:
2006-01-31

Its clarified by FSF leaders during first GPLv3 draft discussion that there is no *any* licensing issue exists in regards to NexentaOS and similar works when kernel and userland components are CDDL-licensed and the rest of OSS is a mix of other licenses like GPLv2, BSD, etc. More details are here:
http://www.opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=5172&tstart=0

So, yes, I beleive it had been settled in a good way.

Reply Score: 5

RE[2]: Licensing?
by drewunwired on Tue 31st Jan 2006 04:27 UTC in reply to "RE: Licensing?"
drewunwired Member since:
2005-07-06

Excellent, thanks.

Reply Score: 1

I will try it
by hraq on Tue 31st Jan 2006 04:11 UTC
hraq
Member since:
2005-07-06

I will give it a try as opensolaris v 5.11 B 30 was almost non functional to me on 5 systems. The reason was mainly hardware support any linux beats solaris and its derivatives at least 2 years in hardware support arena. I will try to compare speed of solaris and linux on X86 machines. Windows being the fastest on x86, but its like an ambulance with no brakes.

Reply Score: 0

RE: I will try it
by erast on Tue 31st Jan 2006 04:32 UTC in reply to "I will try it"
erast Member since:
2006-01-31

opensolaris is a "raw material" and do not offer some drivers developed outside by OSS. NexentaOS integrates all thes drivers together. Things like popular sound and wireless cards should work out of the box.

But really, drivers availability is the matter of time when you have stable kernel DDI. This is where GNU/Solaris makess a lot of difference comparing to GNU/Linux. You write your driver once and it will work as a binary without rebuild for each minor kernel update. For instance, drivers for Solaris 8 will work with OpenSolaris b30 which proves how good kernel interfaces beeing designed at the first place.

GNU/Solaris brings stability to the GNU world. IMHO

Reply Score: 2

Wireless
by fretinator on Tue 31st Jan 2006 05:24 UTC
fretinator
Member since:
2005-07-06

I'd be really interested to see how well the wireless support works. I don't have a laptop to give to it right now, but maybe someone here has installed it on a laptop.

Reply Score: 1

RE: Wireless
by erast on Tue 31st Jan 2006 06:16 UTC in reply to "Wireless"
erast Member since:
2006-01-31

It works very well on my Fujitsu 6120 with ipw driver...
I found that Nexenta's wificonfig is much more consistent than GNU/Linux's iwconfig.

Reply Score: 1

Not bad for an Alpha
by hraq on Tue 31st Jan 2006 09:16 UTC
hraq
Member since:
2005-07-06

I was playing with this OS but the problem is that still hardware wise it's still primitive. This OS reminds me very much with ubuntu; but of course nothing to compare. It didn't recognize 2 very common sound cards that all linux distros (7) recognized them ( AC97 and Audigy 2ZS).
The screen resolution was choosen 1650x1050 which was OK, but not what I wanted 1920x1200. Then came the surprise, after a reboot the system didn't load properly, it said file system corruption then "fsck" didn't solve it. The OS said choose safe mode but safe mode was not available from GRUB menu. Anyway it will take at least 5 years to mature till them I will hibernate the burned CD of the OS.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Not bad for an Alpha
by makc on Tue 31st Jan 2006 12:57 UTC in reply to "Not bad for an Alpha"
makc Member since:
2006-01-11

solaris != desktop ;)

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Not bad for an Alpha
by taschenorakel on Tue 31st Jan 2006 13:09 UTC in reply to "RE: Not bad for an Alpha"
taschenorakel Member since:
2005-07-06

> solaris != desktop ;)
Tell this Sun (and get smashed). Just 'cause Sun wasn't successful yet, in beating Windows on the Desktop it doesn't mean they don't try... Remember that Sun always delievered Workstations and Thin Clients beside their servers, and they all were running Solaris so far... ;-)

Reply Score: 1

RE[3]: Not bad for an Alpha
by makc on Wed 1st Feb 2006 16:52 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Not bad for an Alpha"
makc Member since:
2006-01-11

Well I'm using old Sun workstations almost daily in my university. CDE is not the most comfortable desktop environment - but yes, it does the job ;)

Back to the topic: while I highly appreciate Solaris as on OS, my point is that it isn't geared towards the mass desktop market like Windows or OSX by design.
No doubt it can work well, but it's not Solaris purpose. And market, for instance...
Ever seen a SPARC flavour in a normal user home? (:

I wish NexentaOS a good future, it can be an excellent developer workstation OS imho.

Reply Score: 1

Registration? Why!?
by taschenorakel on Tue 31st Jan 2006 11:19 UTC
taschenorakel
Member since:
2005-07-06

Just wondering why I have to register for trying OpenSolaris. It's exactly this registration crap which holds me back from trying OpenSolaris - be it Sun's or be int Nexentra's flavour.

Reply Score: 2

RE: Registration? Why!?
by chekr on Tue 31st Jan 2006 20:47 UTC in reply to "Registration? Why!?"
chekr Member since:
2005-11-05

"Just wondering why I have to register for trying OpenSolaris. It's exactly this registration crap which holds me back from trying OpenSolaris - be it Sun's or be int Nexentra's flavour."

You don't have to register for OpenSolaris, go to genunix.org and download it. I think you may have mistaken Sun's Solaris as being the authoritive OpenSolaris. Solaris (Nevada releases) is a distro of OpenSolaris. It is a mistake to think of OpenSolaris as a system in which you can download an iso and run OpenSolaris much like you can not download a vanilla Linux iso and expect a functioning OS. Maybe in the future things will change but as it stands now this is the case.

Reply Score: 1

developer documentation
by mormon on Tue 31st Jan 2006 12:42 UTC
mormon
Member since:
2005-08-13

i've looked at opensolaris.org. developer's documentation of opensolaris is great. you've got there tutorials for making drivers, architecture of system. that is what, i think, makes this project very interesting to developers. opensolaris would have new hardware support very quick.

Reply Score: 2

Torrents
by Leoandru on Tue 31st Jan 2006 13:14 UTC
Leoandru
Member since:
2006-01-15

It would be nice if they had torrent downloads

Reply Score: 2

Its awwful perty lookin....
by NixerX on Tue 31st Jan 2006 13:33 UTC
NixerX
Member since:
2006-01-04

When it goes stable Ill give it a whirl being the OS Junkie that I am.

Barkeep...another please.
-nX

Reply Score: 2

Slow startup?
by blixel on Tue 31st Jan 2006 16:03 UTC
blixel
Member since:
2005-07-06

Has anyone else installed this yet? I installed it last night on a spare hard-drive I had. The first thing I noticed was how long it took to install. It wasn't that big of a deal because I was watching a movie, but I've installed multi-CD distros in less time.

After it was installed, I noticed it took an extraordinarily long time to boot my machine. And once it was booted, I couldn't help but notice how slow everything was in general. Navigating menus, moving windows around the screen, starting programs, etc...

I'm wondering if it's some kind of hard-drive DMA issue?

Reply Score: 2

RE: Slow startup?
by Leoandru on Tue 31st Jan 2006 21:43 UTC in reply to "Slow startup?"
Leoandru Member since:
2006-01-15

I spent the last 45 minutes installing only to get
"Bad PBR sig" error at boot. Too bad cause I wont be trying again anytime soon.

The tertris game wasn't bad but it was pretty annoying, I could only manage 5 lines at level 1.

Reply Score: 1