Linked by Robert Escue on Wed 4th Jun 2008 05:06 UTC
Let's take a closer look at OpenSolaris, particularly its use of ZFS, network problems that people have reported, the use of bash, and differences between OpenSolaris and Solaris and Solaris Express. Note: This is the latest article in our OSNews Article Contest.
Thread beginning with comment 317351
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[7]: Solaris 2008.05 - bad direction
by Arun on Fri 6th Jun 2008 08:40
in reply to "RE[6]: Solaris 2008.05 - bad direction"
Member since:2005-07-07
Why should I bother trying to figure out what the brand name is that I want?
Huh?
This is not a new problem with confusing branding/versioning by Sun. Java. JavaScript. Java Desktop System?! Java 1.0...1.1...2...6...7?!
Sun didn't develop Javascript. Netscape did. Shows how much your really know.
Wait, so are updates good or bad? They are good when Solaris has them and bad when Apple has them. Normal Sun logic.
WTF are you on about? You said Sun isn't updating Solaris 10. I pointed out they are just like everyone else you mentioned in your post. Grow up!
How about this. XP, MS managed to fit most of a userland on top of NT. OS X, Apple built an entire f'in OS But Solaris after 5 service packs can't have a nice GUI network configurator.
How about this? Solaris 10 is not meant for home users it is for enterprises. OpenSolaris configures wireless devices quite nicely.
OpenSolaris will have one years from now, but not a normal one. It will sneak around behind your back and do magic. Guess if you are a normal Unix admin and don't need some overthought abstracted Sun invention but just want to be able to select what interface to use or whatever, you are out of luck.
Eh! OpenSolaris 2008.05 is Sun's first ever release. You act as if Sun molested you in your childhood.
Most people seem to have no problem with network settings on OpenSolaris.
What about design stuff? Let's see, stupid example, Apple fit a whole new scheduler into 10.1. Solaris still has CPU affinity problems.
What? Care to provide and example. Solaris has had a far suprerior scheduler to linux or any OS for ages. Ever since the linux guys were dreaming about O(1) scheduling Solaris has had one. Solaris also has modular scheduling classes from interactive to real time.
Broken by design stuff, like RBAC. Why can't you say "everyone in this group has this profile"? Why can't you specify which profile you want to pfexec a command with, if 2 profiles want to use a same command with disjoint privileges? FAIL. This stuff could have been fixed in the first update, but now the opportunity is gone and we are stuck with legacy.
Your inablity to comprehend and use a particular technology doesn't constitute poor design.
Hey how come you can't mount a SMB/CIFS share on Solaris?
Yes you can. Samba has been included with Solaris since Solaris 9.
Right now Sun boxes ship with Solaris 10.
So then why do you and Sun laugh when people have problems with Solaris 10? [/q]
Nobody is laughing. Its all in your head, pal.
RE[8]: Solaris 2008.05 - bad direction
by mickrussom on Fri 6th Jun 2008 09:00
in reply to "RE[7]: Solaris 2008.05 - bad direction"
Member since:2006-05-13
No, you cant mount a SMB or CIFS share with Solaris 9 or 10.
uname -a
SunOS solten 5.10 Generic_127128-11 i86pc i386 i86pc
which smbmount
no smbmount in /sbin /bin /usr/sbin /usr/bin /usr/openwin/bin /usr/dt/bin /usr/ccs/bin /opt/SUNWspro/bin/ /opt/SUNWspro/sfw/bin /usr/xpg6/bin /usr/xpg4/bin /usr/perl5/5.8.4/bin /usr/platform/i86pc/sbin /usr/sfw/sbin /usr/sfw/bin /opt/sfw/bin /usr/X/bin /usr/ucb /usr/java/bin /opt/SUNWvts/bin /usr/local/sbin /usr/local/bin /usr/sunvts/bin
# mount -F smbfs //user:pass@10.11.49.221/share /mnt
mount: Operation not applicable to FSType smbfs
# mount -F smb //user:pass@10.11.49.221/c$ /mnt
mount: Operation not applicable to FSType smb
RE[8]: Solaris 2008.05 - bad direction
by jjgorsky on Fri 6th Jun 2008 09:22
in reply to "RE[7]: Solaris 2008.05 - bad direction"
Member since:2008-06-05
"This is not a new problem with confusing branding/versioning by Sun. Java. JavaScript. Java Desktop System?! Java 1.0...1.1...2...6...7?!
Sun didn't develop Javascript. Netscape did. Shows how much your[sic] really know. "
Let me explain more carefully for you. Sun has a branding problem. They either license their trademark out -- as in the case of JavaScript -- or dilute it themselves for things unrelated to Java. Most of the time this hurts the impression of Java with end users and entry-level developers. Java is routinely dismissed due to bad JavaScript experiences. I'm sure the same applies even more to anyone who's had the misfortune to use the particularly bad GNOME packaging that is JDS (remember the first release of the Java Media Player, anyone?).
"How about this. XP, MS managed to fit most of a userland on top of NT. OS X, Apple built an entire f'in OS But Solaris after 5 service packs can't have a nice GUI network configurator.
How about this? Solaris 10 is not meant for home users it is for enterprises. "
Yes, and business users never need to connect their business laptop to the business network....
If that's the case, why does Sun bother with old GUIs anyway? All Solaris sysadmins I know use text installer, text commands, shell scripts.
"Broken by design stuff, like RBAC. Why can't you say "everyone in this group has this profile"? Why can't you specify which profile you want to pfexec a command with, if 2 profiles want to use a same command with disjoint privileges? FAIL. This stuff could have been fixed in the first update, but now the opportunity is gone and we are stuck with legacy.
Your inablity to comprehend and use a particular technology doesn't constitute poor design. "
I'm sure you're right; please tell me from your Solaris sysadmin experience how you'd accomplish these tasks:
1. I want everyone in group "foo" to be able to run stuff from profile "bar". I don't want to have to run scripts whenever the group membership changes.
2. I have 2 3rd-party products each of which create their own RBAC profiles. There is an intersection in the commands referenced by each profile, but each profile wants a different set of privileges? How come I can't (especially from a shell script that shouldn't have to know about the full set of packages/profiles on the system if it only cares about one) say "-p profile", analagous to "-u user" in sudo?
Seems to me Sun makes a lot of things orthogonal to its own traditions and normal Unix usage but leaves a lot of legacy cruft around without much way to integrate.
"Hey how come you can't mount a SMB/CIFS share on Solaris?
Yes you can. Samba has been included with Solaris since Solaris 9.
"
Cool, how?
$ uname -a
SunOS pegasus 5.10 Generic_120011-14 sun4u sparc SUNW,Ultra-60
$ sudo mount -F smbfs //galactica/files /mnt/files
mount: Operation not applicable to FSType smbfs
$ sudo mount -F smb //galactica/files /mnt/files
mount: Operation not applicable to FSType smb
$ sudo mount -F cifs //galactica/files /mnt/files
mount: Operation not applicable to FSType cifs
$ ls -d /usr/lib/fs/*smb*
no matches found: /usr/lib/fs/*smb*
$ which smbclient
/usr/sfw/bin/smbclient
$ which smbmount
smbmount not found
$ which smbmnt
smbmnt not found
"Right now Sun boxes ship with Solaris 10.
So then why do you and Sun laugh when people have problems with Solaris 10? "
Nobody is laughing. Its all in your head, pal. [/q]
True, I'm laughing that Sun and its fans think insulting potential customers is the way to win a userbase.
Recent Original Stories
Recent Comments
Headlines
Random Comments
Random Stories
Random OS Link
Member since:
2008-06-05
I'll accept that's my failure. I don't care. Sun needs to win me over. They can't prescribe homework and expect me to say oh clearly Linux sucks. Why should I bother trying to figure out what the brand name is that I want?
This is not a new problem with confusing branding/versioning by Sun. Java. JavaScript. Java Desktop System?! Java 1.0...1.1...2...6...7?!
Normal software has stable/unstable/development. You would think Ian Murdoch would have remembered that from Debian.
Really! Solaris 10 updates are constantly released. Solaris 10 Update 5 being the latest. Which means 5 updates have been released.
Solaris 10 has had 5 updates so far (service packs in Microsoft parlance). Mac OS X Leopard has had 3 till date and it wasn't released that long ago. "
Wait, so are updates good or bad? They are good when Solaris has them and bad when Apple has them. Normal Sun logic.
How about this. XP, MS managed to fit most of a userland on top of NT. OS X, Apple built an entire f'in OS But Solaris after 5 service packs can't have a nice GUI network configurator.
OpenSolaris will have one years from now, but not a normal one. It will sneak around behind your back and do magic. Guess if you are a normal Unix admin and don't need some overthought abstracted Sun invention but just want to be able to select what interface to use or whatever, you are out of luck.
What about design stuff? Let's see, stupid example, Apple fit a whole new scheduler into 10.1. Solaris still has CPU affinity problems.
Broken by design stuff, like RBAC. Why can't you say "everyone in this group has this profile"? Why can't you specify which profile you want to pfexec a command with, if 2 profiles want to use a same command with disjoint privileges? FAIL. This stuff could have been fixed in the first update, but now the opportunity is gone and we are stuck with legacy.
Hey how come you can't mount a SMB/CIFS share on Solaris?
So then why do you and Sun laugh when people have problems with Solaris 10?