[UFO Chicago] Re: Solaris 10?
Philip Parker
perlguy at hotmail.com
Thu Feb 3 14:19:04 CST 2005
I've got Solaris 10 b72 days before it finally went "gold" and was released.
All I can say to this point (since it's hanging at a very early point in
installation) is that it already doesn't seem as flexible as Linux. I feel
myself starting to hate it. I'll give it a chance though since I technically
do have a beta release and I'm now dealing with the learning curve.
I have no real use for it, I just wanted to install and play with it.
Philip Parker - perlguy ~ at - hotmail com
>From: ufo-request at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Reply-To: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>To: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Subject: ufo Digest, Vol 19, Issue 2
>Date: 3 Feb 2005 08:46:30 -0800
>
>Send ufo mailing list submissions to
> ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>
>To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
> http://ufo.chicago.il.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ufo
>or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
> ufo-request at ufo.chicago.il.us
>
>You can reach the person managing the list at
> ufo-owner at ufo.chicago.il.us
>
>When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
>than "Re: Contents of ufo digest..."
>
>
>Today's Topics:
>
> 1. Solaris 10? (Brian Sobolak)
> 2. Re: Solaris 10? (Jesse Becker)
> 3. Re: Solaris 10? (Jordan Bettis)
> 4. Re: Solaris 10? (Brian Sobolak)
> 5. Re: Solaris 10? (Nate Riffe)
> 6. Re: Solaris 10? (Brian Sobolak)
> 7. free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?] (Carey Tyler Schug)
> 8. Re: free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?] (Brian Sobolak)
> 9. Re: free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?] (Nate Riffe)
> 10. Re: free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?] (Nate Riffe)
> 11. Re: free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?] (Neil R. Ormos)
>
>
>----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>Message: 1
>Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 14:43:15 -0600 (CST)
>From: "Brian Sobolak" <brian at planetshwoop.com>
>Subject: [UFO Chicago] Solaris 10?
>To: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Message-ID: <49661.63.73.213.5.1107376995.squirrel at webmail.psys.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>Does publishing the source code make Solaris10 a more attractive entity
>for anyone? Anyone actually using it?
>
>http://www.opensolaris.org/
>
>brian
>
>
>--
>Brian Sobolak
>http://www.planetshwoop.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 2
>Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 13:06:36 -0800 (PST)
>From: Jesse Becker <jesse_becker at yahoo.com>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] Solaris 10?
>To: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Message-ID: <20050202210637.42385.qmail at web60004.mail.yahoo.com>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>
>--- Brian Sobolak <brian at planetshwoop.com> wrote:
>
> >
> > Does publishing the source code make Solaris10 a more
> > attractive entity
> > for anyone? Anyone actually using it?
> >
> > http://www.opensolaris.org/
>
>If anyone could actually download it, we'd try it out here.
> Sun's servers are slammed right now.
>
>
>=====
>Jesse Becker
>GPG-fingerprint: BD00 7AA4 4483 AFCC 82D0 2720 0083 0931 9A2B 06A2
>
>
>
>__________________________________
>Do you Yahoo!?
>Yahoo! Mail - 250MB free storage. Do more. Manage less.
>http://info.mail.yahoo.com/mail_250
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 3
>Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:09:55 -0600 (CST)
>From: "Jordan Bettis" <jordanb at hafd.org>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] Solaris 10?
>To: <ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us>
>Message-ID: <1542.163.191.24.14.1107378595.squirrel at webmail.hafd.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>Brian Sobolak said:
> >
> > Does publishing the source code make Solaris10 a more attractive entity
> > for anyone? Anyone actually using it?
> >
> > http://www.opensolaris.org/
>
>
>I had to use solaris a lot at school. It was actually useable if you
>installed GNU.
>--
>Jordan Bettis -- Chicago Il.
> <http://neighborhoods.chicago.il.us>
> Photographs of Life in the Neighborhoods of Chicago
>
>
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 4
>Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:12:49 -0600 (CST)
>From: "Brian Sobolak" <brian at planetshwoop.com>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] Solaris 10?
>To: "Jordan Bettis" <jordanb at hafd.org>
>Cc: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Message-ID: <55474.63.73.213.5.1107378769.squirrel at webmail.psys.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>Jordan Bettis said:
> >
> > Brian Sobolak said:
> >>
> >> Does publishing the source code make Solaris10 a more attractive entity
> >> for anyone? Anyone actually using it?
> >>
> >> http://www.opensolaris.org/
> >
> >
> > I had to use solaris a lot at school. It was actually useable if you
> > installed GNU.
>
>Unlike HP-UX, which I didn't find useable at all. Hateful OS.
>
>brian
>
>--
>Brian Sobolak
>http://www.planetshwoop.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 5
>Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 16:35:10 -0500
>From: Nate Riffe <inkblot at movealong.org>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] Solaris 10?
>To: UFO <ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us>
>Message-ID: <20050202213510.GA26302 at movealong.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Brian Sobolak said this (probably recently):
> >
> > Does publishing the source code make Solaris10 a more attractive entity
> > for anyone? Anyone actually using it?
>
>It was guys like Bryan Cantrill who *wrote* Solaris:
>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.sys.sun.hardware/msg/242387aeaa5b5456?dmode=source
>
>Would you use it, knowing that?
>
>--
>--< ((\))< >----< inkblot at movealong.org >----< http://www.movealong.org/
> >--
>"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury,
>ammo. Use in that order." --Ed Howdershelt
>pub 1024D/05A058E0 2002-03-07 Nate Riffe (06-Mar-2002)
><inkblot at movealong.org>
> Key fingerprint = 0DAC F5CB D182 3165 D757 C466 CD42 12A8 05A0 58E0
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 6
>Date: Wed, 2 Feb 2005 15:57:33 -0600 (CST)
>From: "Brian Sobolak" <brian at planetshwoop.com>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] Solaris 10?
>To: "Nate Riffe" <inkblot at movealong.org>
>Cc: UFO <ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us>
>Message-ID: <53408.63.73.213.5.1107381453.squirrel at webmail.psys.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>Nate Riffe said:
> > Brian Sobolak said this (probably recently):
> >>
> >> Does publishing the source code make Solaris10 a more attractive entity
> >> for anyone? Anyone actually using it?
> >
> > It was guys like Bryan Cantrill who *wrote* Solaris:
> >
>http://groups-beta.google.com/group/comp.sys.sun.hardware/msg/242387aeaa5b5456?dmode=source
> >
>
>That is absolutely one of my favorite websites of all time. I think I
>spit coffee all over my monitor the first time I read it.
>
>brian
>
>
>--
>Brian Sobolak
>http://www.planetshwoop.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 7
>Date: Thu, 03 Feb 2005 09:10:38 -0600
>From: Carey Tyler Schug <SqrFolkDnc at comcast.net>
>Subject: [UFO Chicago] free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?]
>To: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Message-ID: <42023EEE.3000301 at comcast.net>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>Does free in UFO refer to licensing costs or does it really mean "the
>source is publicly available"?
>
>Are RHEL and other "pay for it only" versions of Linux disqualified?
>
>Is Solaris 10 (with or without source) included because one can get a
>free educational/developers license? There are other OSes like this, or
>used to be.
>
>Is VM/370 (mainframe) included because IBM has said they will not pursue
>anybody that uses it without a license, and when licenses were
>available, the license was free, and it comes with full source?
>
>Brian Sobolak wrote:
>
> >Does publishing the source code make Solaris10 a more attractive entity
> >for anyone? Anyone actually using it?
> >
> >http://www.opensolaris.org/
> >
> >brian
> >
> >
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 8
>Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 09:25:52 -0600 (CST)
>From: "Brian Sobolak" <brian at planetshwoop.com>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?]
>To: "Carey Tyler Schug" <SqrFolkDnc at comcast.net>
>Cc: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Message-ID: <56734.63.73.213.5.1107444352.squirrel at webmail.psys.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain;charset=iso-8859-1
>
>
>Carey Tyler Schug said:
> > Does free in UFO refer to licensing costs or does it really mean "the
> > source is publicly available"?
> >
> > Are RHEL and other "pay for it only" versions of Linux disqualified?
> >
> > Is Solaris 10 (with or without source) included because one can get a
> > free educational/developers license? There are other OSes like this, or
> > used to be.
> >
> > Is VM/370 (mainframe) included because IBM has said they will not pursue
> > anybody that uses it without a license, and when licenses were
> > available, the license was free, and it comes with full source?
>
>I don't think there is an official policy statement on this fact on behalf
>of our little group. If you use VM/370 somewhere, rad. Same for HURD,
>QNX, or 'pay for it only' linux. But if you wear a Caldera shirt to a
>meeting, we'll give you grief.
>
>Our discussions at meetings (and hopefully by extension) on this list are
>free-ranging. We're not going to help anyone solve a VB.NET programming
>problem on Windows, but I think most things are fair game here.
>
>I reserve the right to flame Jordan though for giving me grief when I got
>started with this group for admitting in public that I used MacOSX.
>
>Of course that's just my opinion. (shrugs) You should come to a meeting
>and talk to us about it - you'd be amazed at the arcane crap we know.
>
>brian
>
>ps Carey - Do you square dance?
>
>--
>Brian Sobolak
>http://www.planetshwoop.com/
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 9
>Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 10:45:54 -0500
>From: Nate Riffe <inkblot at movealong.org>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?]
>To: UFO <ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us>
>Message-ID: <20050203154553.GA31290 at movealong.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Carey Tyler Schug said this (probably recently):
> > Does free in UFO refer to licensing costs or does it really mean "the
> > source is publicly available"?
>
>Free as in speech.
>
> > Are RHEL and other "pay for it only" versions of Linux disqualified?
>
>Certain parts of some non-gratis distributions are not freely
>licensed. The "freeness" of the distribution depends on whether those
>parts are adjunct or integral to the distribution at large. In
>general, they are adjunct, and so the distribution is still a free
>operating system. The one exception I can think of is Caldera
>OpenLinux, which had a few proprietary libraries at very low levels of
>the system. I think we all know what those folks are up to these
>days, and it's probably safe to generalize that this type of chimeric
>distribution isn't worth toying with in the first place.
>
> > Is Solaris 10 (with or without source) included because one can get a
> > free educational/developers license? There are other OSes like this, or
> > used to be.
>
>Solaris 10 as available under Sun's open source license (I forget what
>they decided to call it) is free for purposes of qualifying for UFO.
>The reality though, is that the Sun open source license is just
>another isolated camp is the space of all freely-licensed copyrights.
>The Sun license isolates the Solaris 10 code from being comingled with
>GPL code and vice versa, because both of these licenses have an
>exclusivity clause governing the licensing of derived works. The same
>is true with Mozilla/GPL, Mozilla/Sun, and other pairs of licenses.
>The result is that the space of freely-licensed copyrights is
>partitioned into these licensing camps. Each camp is totally free to
>share with itself, and the actual copyright holder of any given piece
>of code could dual- or treble-license their chunk of it so that it's
>in more than one camp. However, separate camps are by and large
>verboten from sharing, despite the fact that they may each be
>independently free. There is, of course, a large body of code
>licensed under MIT- and BSD-style licenses which do not have an
>exclusivity clause. This code can be comingled with code from any of
>the freely-licensed camps, but the result stays in that camp.
>
>In conclusion, every time someone uses a new license with exactly the
>same terms as the GPL, but which is not itself the GPL.... God kills a
>kitten.
>
> > Is VM/370 (mainframe) included because IBM has said they will not pursue
> > anybody that uses it without a license, and when licenses were
> > available, the license was free, and it comes with full source?
>
>No. OSI could never approve that license, and the good graces of IBM
>do not make that irrelevant.
>
>-Nate
>
>--
>--< ((\))< >----< inkblot at movealong.org >----< http://www.movealong.org/
> >--
>"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury,
>ammo. Use in that order." --Ed Howdershelt
>pub 1024D/05A058E0 2002-03-07 Nate Riffe (06-Mar-2002)
><inkblot at movealong.org>
> Key fingerprint = 0DAC F5CB D182 3165 D757 C466 CD42 12A8 05A0 58E0
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 10
>Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 10:52:45 -0500
>From: Nate Riffe <inkblot at movealong.org>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?]
>To: ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>Message-ID: <20050203155245.GA594 at movealong.org>
>Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
>
>Me said this (probably recently):
> > Carey Tyler Schug said this (probably recently):
> > > Does free in UFO refer to licensing costs or does it really mean "the
> > > source is publicly available"?
> >
> > Free as in speech.
>
>Of course, the only real qualification[1] for coming to UFO is that
>you have some vague interest in free operating systems, or at least
>free software.
>
>[1] By "real qualification" I mean, people will wonder why you're
>there, and perhaps harbor guarded fascination with whatever it is that
>comes out of your mouth[2], if you don't.
>
>[2] Rambling about Art Bell and Area 51 drive-bys while illustrating
>your presentation with high-quality renderings of supposed alien
>technology is totally fascinating.
>
>-Nate
>
>--
>--< ((\))< >----< inkblot at movealong.org >----< http://www.movealong.org/
> >--
>"There are four boxes to use in the defense of liberty: soap, ballot, jury,
>ammo. Use in that order." --Ed Howdershelt
>pub 1024D/05A058E0 2002-03-07 Nate Riffe (06-Mar-2002)
><inkblot at movealong.org>
> Key fingerprint = 0DAC F5CB D182 3165 D757 C466 CD42 12A8 05A0 58E0
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>Message: 11
>Date: Thu, 3 Feb 2005 10:45:11 -0600 (CST)
>From: "Neil R. Ormos" <ormos at ripco.com>
>Subject: Re: [UFO Chicago] free operating systems [was: Solaris 10?]
>To: UFO Chicago Mailing List <ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us>
>Message-ID: <Pine.GSO.4.58.0502031020480.6280 at shell2>
>Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII
>
>Nate Riffe wrote:
> > Me said this (probably recently):
> >> Carey Tyler Schug said this (probably recently):
> >>> Does free in UFO refer to licensing costs or
> >>> does it really mean "the source is publicly
> >>> available"?
> >> Free as in speech.
>
> > Of course, the only real qualification[1] for
> > coming to UFO is that you have some vague
> > interest in free operating systems, or at least
> > free software.
>
>This has been asked and answered, in pretty much
>the same way, before. Whether the "Free" in UFO
>means "free beer," "free speech," or "free to use,
>modify, and redistribute," afficionados of
>operating systems with any of these
>characteristics are welcome. And if you're
>running VM/370 (or MTS, for that matter), I'd love
>to hear about it, especially if it's on a
>non-S/360-derived machine.
>
> > [1] By "real qualification" I mean, people will
> > wonder why you're there, and perhaps harbor
> > guarded fascination with whatever it is that
> > comes out of your mouth[2], if you don't.
>
> > [2] Rambling about Art Bell and Area 51
> > drive-bys while illustrating your presentation
> > with high-quality renderings of supposed alien
> > technology is totally fascinating.
>
>IIRC, Brian has been suggesting putting up UFO
>posters at college campuses. I hope he puts a
>couple up at this institution of higher learning:
>
>Considering the proximity of our venue to this
>venerable institution, I'm surprised we don't get
>more such visitors:
>
> Center For Ufo Studies
> 2457 W Peterson Ave
> Chicago, IL 60659
> 773 271 3611
> http://www.cufos.org/
>
>--neil
>
>
>
>------------------------------
>
>_______________________________________________
>ufo mailing list
>ufo at ufo.chicago.il.us
>http://ufo.chicago.il.us/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/ufo
>
>
>End of ufo Digest, Vol 19, Issue 2
>**********************************
More information about the ufo
mailing list