From mlh at zip.com.au Fri Sep 5 03:11:41 2008 From: mlh at zip.com.au (Matthew Hannigan) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:11:41 +1000 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:21:48AM +0200, Peter Bonivart wrote: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Klaus Heinz wrote: > > pkg-get destroys existing files "catalog" and "descriptions" in the > > current directory when performing implicit updates of the catalog. > > I've also noted that it leaves catalog files all over the place. Even > worse if one had files named catalog and descriptions in the current > directory of course. Similarly, if you have a directory named after the package in your current directory it silently uses that instead of the repo, leading to strange error messages. This has bitten me twice. In general it's bad form to rely on or use anything in the current directory by default; the tool can change behavior depending on $pwd. Matt From dam at opencsw.org Sat Sep 6 20:27:18 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 20:27:18 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: Hi Matt, Am 05.09.2008 um 03:11 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:21:48AM +0200, Peter Bonivart wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Klaus Heinz >> wrote: >>> pkg-get destroys existing files "catalog" and "descriptions" in the >>> current directory when performing implicit updates of the catalog. >> >> I've also noted that it leaves catalog files all over the place. Even >> worse if one had files named catalog and descriptions in the current >> directory of course. > > Similarly, if you have a directory named after the package in your > current > directory it silently uses that instead of the repo, leading to > strange > error messages. > > This has bitten me twice. > > In general it's bad form to rely on or use anything in the current > directory > by default; the tool can change behavior depending on $pwd. Have you files a bug report in mantis? If not, please do so. Thanks! -- Dago From mlh at zip.com.au Sun Sep 7 08:54:42 2008 From: mlh at zip.com.au (Matthew Hannigan) Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 16:54:42 +1000 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> Hi Dago, No I haven't but I will. I haven't found csw/blastwave particularly welcoming in the past. But I've signed up on Mantis just now and I'll submit a bug report. Regards, Matt On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 08:27:18PM +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Matt, > > Am 05.09.2008 um 03:11 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: > > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:21:48AM +0200, Peter Bonivart wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Klaus Heinz > >> wrote: > >>> pkg-get destroys existing files "catalog" and "descriptions" in the > >>> current directory when performing implicit updates of the catalog. > >> > >> I've also noted that it leaves catalog files all over the place. Even > >> worse if one had files named catalog and descriptions in the current > >> directory of course. > > > > Similarly, if you have a directory named after the package in your > > current > > directory it silently uses that instead of the repo, leading to > > strange > > error messages. > > > > This has bitten me twice. > > > > In general it's bad form to rely on or use anything in the current > > directory > > by default; the tool can change behavior depending on $pwd. > > Have you files a bug report in mantis? > > If not, please do so. > > Thanks! > > -- Dago > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > users at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/users From phil at bolthole.com Mon Sep 8 20:50:49 2008 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:50:49 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] Announcement: CSW packages on the way Message-ID: <20080908115049.D51015@bolthole.com> This is a much overdue announcement, to all you nice folks out there still interested in using "CSW packages". Apologies for the loong delay. We hoped to have something you could actually "poke at" by now, but things are sadly taking even longer than we anticipated. Hence the somewhat pre-emptive announcement A brief summary of where things are: Yes, CSW packages for Solaris, and maintainers interested in maintaining them, are still around. What was formerly known as "the CSW project at blastwave", is no longer "at blastwave" any more, but has found a new home at opencsw.org. Most maintainers who were formerly active, as of early this year, have moved over to opencsw.org Rest assured that we will be keeping focus on the "core values" of what CSW packaging has been all about, since I founded it back in 2002: Supporting officially released, and sun-supported, "Production Solaris", with quality binary packages, in Solaris-native package format. We are commited to NOT doing the following things: We are NOT going to force, or pressure ANYONE, to pay for support, or "licenses" to use our packages We are NOT going to gut support for older releases of solaris, until Sun officially de-supports them first. (Thus, Sol8 will no longer "officially" be supported by us next year, when Sun drops it from its front-line support. But we will still support Sol9!) This is why we have moved away from blastwave.org: so that we can continue to do so, without interference from the domain owner. As mentioned, sadly, package updates are still "in the works"... we have a lot of cleanup, to get rid of some legacy references, before we can officially annnounce a release. There was more cleanup to be done, than was anticipated. Rest assured, though, that we ARE working on it, and hope to have a release in the next 1-2 weeks. Sorry for the delay! We have taken the liberty of preserving the list membership of folks who were previous users of the "CSW packages" mailing list, in this one. We hope you appreciate our efforts, and will continue to stay interested in our work. However, anyone who choses to unsubscribe,(which you can do through the standard mailman methods, on lists.opencsw.org) will not be troubled further by us. Philip Brown CSW packages founder, and author of pkg-get From dam at opencsw.org Tue Sep 9 13:04:50 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:04:50 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: Hi Matthew, Am 07.09.2008 um 08:54 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: > No I haven't but I will. > > I haven't found csw/blastwave particularly welcoming > in the past. But I've signed up on Mantis just now > and I'll submit a bug report. Sorry for this, but you may have heard about the fork which nobody really enjoys: If you are interested in joining the OpenCSW effort let me give a warm welcome now :-) Best regards -- Dago From dclarke at blastwave.org Tue Sep 9 20:11:52 2008 From: dclarke at blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:11:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [csw-users] A little honesty about Blastwave.org please Message-ID: <54026.10.0.66.17.1220983912.squirrel@interact.purplecow.org> The article at heise-online.co.uk is entirely a knee jerk reaction and not based on long term vision. See : http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/news/forum/S-The-facts-of-the-matter-are-somewhat-different/forum-110420/msg-14369969/read/ Also, if you receive this email from the mail server at opencsw.org then it is because your email address was taken by them. You subscribed at users at lists.blastwave.org but somehow ended up somewhere else. Simply be advised about whom you are getting your information from. Any reply or future communication from this maillist will not be received. See the public forums at wiki.blastwave.org. -- Dennis Clarke dclarke at blastwave.org From a.cervellin at acm.org Tue Sep 9 20:22:57 2008 From: a.cervellin at acm.org (Alessio) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:22:57 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: <48C6BF01.20400@acm.org> Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > Am 07.09.2008 um 08:54 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: >> No I haven't but I will. >> >> I haven't found csw/blastwave particularly welcoming >> in the past. But I've signed up on Mantis just now >> and I'll submit a bug report. > > Sorry for this, but you may have heard about the fork > which nobody really enjoys: > Solaris-repository--/news/111286> well, just for equity here is also the "sound of the other bell": http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/news/forum/S-The-facts-of-the-matter-are-somewhat-different/forum-110420/msg-14369969/read/ From gaa at ulticom.com Tue Sep 9 21:29:25 2008 From: gaa at ulticom.com (Gary Algier) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:29:25 -0400 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? Message-ID: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> Hello: I have created a Solaris 10 sparse root zone and I am trying to install Apache and Subversion to it. This requires other packages. I am getting a lot of errors like: Can't save cache in "/usr/openwin/lib/locale/zh_TW/X11/fonts/TrueType/" Why? Shouldn't all the CSW packages only write to /opt/csw/...? Will this matter? Is there a work around or am I doomed to burn disk space? -- Gary Algier, WB2FWZ gaa at ulticom.com +1 856 787 2758 Ulticom Inc., 1020 Briggs Rd, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 Fax:+1 856 866 2033 Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals: People don't read documentation voluntarily. From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Tue Sep 9 21:35:37 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:35:37 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? Message-ID: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> I've been away and out of touch for a while and clearly I'm behind the times here, but what the hell happened? If there is a fork, will blastwave abandon the production releases and support opensolaris exclusively? Will the fork abandon opensolaris and support the production releases exclusively? What a shame it all is... A couple of relevant links I can glean the full horror story from would be much appreciated. If my scant understanding is anywhere near accurate, I must say with no ill will toward anyone that I come firmly down on the side of package development and support for the stable production versions of solaris. I say this not least because S10 and S8 are what I use, but even without that bias it strikes me that this was originally the whole point of blastwave. Is it reasonable to abandon support for solaris releases that are are actively and currently being distributed and supported by Sun Microsystems? Is it unreasonable to expect such support to continue? Is it not the production releases that really *need* a project like blastwave? Isn't it fair to say the opensolaris project intends to do a decent job itself - without a parallel CSW effort - of including up to date end-user orientated software with frequent releases? -- http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail... From a.cervellin at acm.org Tue Sep 9 21:35:53 2008 From: a.cervellin at acm.org (Alessio) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:35:53 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> Message-ID: <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> Gary Algier wrote: > Hello: > > I have created a Solaris 10 sparse root zone and I am trying to install > Apache and Subversion to it. This requires other packages. > I am getting a lot of errors like: > Can't save cache in "/usr/openwin/lib/locale/zh_TW/X11/fonts/TrueType/" > Why? Shouldn't all the CSW packages only write to /opt/csw/...? not all, there are packages that write outside /opt/csw. the above error seems caused by the fc-cache process (maybe from CSWfconfig?) and should be harmless From a.cervellin at acm.org Tue Sep 9 21:50:02 2008 From: a.cervellin at acm.org (Alessio) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:50:02 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <48C6D36A.7090106@acm.org> Willie wrote: > I've been away and out of touch for a while and clearly I'm behind the > times here, but what the hell happened? > If there is a fork, will blastwave abandon the production releases and > support opensolaris exclusively? if by "blastwave" you mean the previous blastwave.org project, it will support solaris 10, opensolaris, solaris sxce and derivated (schillix, belenix, and so on). Currently, it supports sol8 & 9 too. It will not be a CSW-only project but it will be a community hosting different projects. The new home page is going to be http://wiki.blastwave.org > Will the fork abandon opensolaris and support the production releases > exclusively? if by "fork" you mean the new opencsw.org project, it is currently dedicated to sol8,9, and 10 and its aim is to continue the CSW-only packaging effort. The new home page is going to be http://www.opencsw.org > What a shame it all is... > A couple of relevant links I can glean the full horror story from would > be much appreciated. Opencsw side: http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/Quarrels-about-Blastwave-Solaris-repository--/news/111286 Blastwave side: http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/news/forum/S-The-facts-of-the-matter-are-somewhat-different/forum-110420/msg-14369969/read/ From dam at opencsw.org Tue Sep 9 21:51:32 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 21:51:32 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: Hi Willie, Am 09.09.2008 um 21:35 schrieb Willie: > A couple of relevant links I can glean the full horror story from > would > be much appreciated. Well, there are two kinds of posts: Pro-OpenCSW: - (Please also note the comments from Dennis and me) Pro-Blastwave: - http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/?q=node/111 Neutral?: - Please judge for yourself who you believe. > If my scant understanding is anywhere near accurate, I must say > with no > ill will toward anyone that I come firmly down on the side of package > development and support for the stable production versions of > solaris. I > say this not least because S10 and S8 are what I use, but even without > that bias it strikes me that this was originally the whole point of > blastwave. > > Is it reasonable to abandon support for solaris releases that are are > actively and currently being distributed and supported by Sun > Microsystems? > > Is it unreasonable to expect such support to continue? > > Is it not the production releases that really *need* a project like > blastwave? > > Isn't it fair to say the opensolaris project intends to do a decent > job > itself - without a parallel CSW effort - of including up to date > end-user orientated software with frequent releases? There will of course be packages for production versions of Solaris. Most of the people maintaining packages still do, so the packaging efforts will continue. Best regards -- Dago From laurent at opensolaris.org Tue Sep 9 23:11:48 2008 From: laurent at opensolaris.org (Laurent Blume) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:11:48 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> Message-ID: <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> Alessio a ?crit : > not all, there are packages that write outside /opt/csw. > the above error seems caused by the fc-cache process (maybe from > CSWfconfig?) and should be harmless To be more precise: the fc-cache process writes an index of fonts in each directory where fonts reside. It's not placing any package file there, and uses very little space. The CSW version uses a different name for the cache than Sun's to avoid conflicts (fonts.cache-csw, something like that). However, I disagree that it's harmless. Not having up to date fonts.cache can lead to very serious performance degradation if there are many fonts, as each process using fontconfig scans all directories to list fonts, every time. It's best to let the fc-cache process write its files (they don't need to be writable afterwards since fonts aren't going to change much). Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm working, but not speaking for \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org | From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Wed Sep 10 00:16:25 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:16:25 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: References: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <1220998585.8108.1273092749@webmail.messagingengine.com> Thanks Dago, > Neutral?: > - Neutral? Well since you're not American I can attribute this to a finely honed sense of irony. I found the superior, judgemental tone almost offensive. > Please judge for yourself who you believe. There's the rub. I don't know any of these people well enough to make a call on personal integrity, but regardless of what direction anyone feels solaris open software development should take, the sequence of events recently outlined by Dennis Clarke can only be described as theft - a particularly odious theft, concurrent with deceit and relying for its success on the trust of a long standing colleague. If these comments are true someone needs his balls chewing off. Yes, there are two sides to every story - you pays your money and you takes your choice as we say here in blighty, but after what I've read so far over the past couple of hours I'll be surprised if my choice is to stick around here. Bye for now. Willie -- http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users: http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html From gaa at ulticom.com Wed Sep 10 04:13:08 2008 From: gaa at ulticom.com (Gary Algier) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:13:08 -0400 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> Message-ID: <48C72D34.1010903@ulticom.com> Laurent Blume wrote: > Alessio a ?crit : >> not all, there are packages that write outside /opt/csw. >> the above error seems caused by the fc-cache process (maybe from >> CSWfconfig?) and should be harmless > > To be more precise: the fc-cache process writes an index of fonts in > each directory where fonts reside. It's not placing any package file > there, and uses very little space. The CSW version uses a different name > for the cache than Sun's to avoid conflicts (fonts.cache-csw, something > like that). > > However, I disagree that it's harmless. Not having up to date > fonts.cache can lead to very serious performance degradation if there > are many fonts, as each process using fontconfig scans all directories > to list fonts, every time. It's best to let the fc-cache process write > its files (they don't need to be writable afterwards since fonts aren't > going to change much). > > Laurent In this case, since this will be a subversion server I doubt there will much font activity. However, in general this is a problem on a Solaris zone. One of the advantages of the sparse root zones is that /usr is shared so it need not be replicated. This saves a lot of space. Since the CSW packages seem to all go in /opt, one would think this is safe. Perhaps a different way to cache fonts could be developed that does not write to the font directories. The current method would also be a problem in other shared-/usr environments such as diskless clients (does anyone use those anymore?). Perhaps the cache should go in /var? -- Gary Algier, WB2FWZ gaa at ulticom.com +1 856 787 2758 Ulticom Inc., 1020 Briggs Rd, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 Fax:+1 856 866 2033 Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals: People don't read documentation voluntarily. From laurent at opensolaris.org Wed Sep 10 11:20:19 2008 From: laurent at opensolaris.org (Laurent Blume) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:20:19 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C72D34.1010903@ulticom.com> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> <48C72D34.1010903@ulticom.com> Message-ID: <48C79153.3060205@opensolaris.org> Gary Algier a ?crit : > Perhaps a different way to cache fonts could be developed that does > not write to the font directories. The current method would also be > a problem in other shared-/usr environments such as diskless clients > (does anyone use those anymore?). Perhaps the cache should go in > /var? Actually, that is the case in recent versions of fontconfig, recently introduced in Solaris 10 by a patch. It now goes in /var/cache/fontconfig/ Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm working, but not speaking for \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org | From srogers5790 at rogers.com Wed Sep 10 20:52:44 2008 From: srogers5790 at rogers.com (STAN ROGERS) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:52:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? Message-ID: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Willie wrote: From: Willie Subject: Re: [csw-users] blastwave forked? To: "questions and discussions" Received: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 10:16 PM Thanks Dago, > Neutral?: > - Neutral? Well since you're not American I can attribute this to a finely honed sense of irony. I found the superior, judgemental tone almost offensive. > Please judge for yourself who you believe. There's the rub. I don't know any of these people well enough to make a call on personal integrity, but regardless of what direction anyone feels solaris open software development should take, the sequence of events recently outlined by Dennis Clarke can only be described as theft - a particularly odious theft, concurrent with deceit and relying for its success on the trust of a long standing colleague. If these comments are true someone needs his balls chewing off. Yes, there are two sides to every story - you pays your money and you takes your choice as we say here in blighty, but after what I've read so far over the past couple of hours I'll be surprised if my choice is to stick around here. Bye for now. Willie I have to agree After reading several posts on this whole scenario, my views are this is the equivalent of smash & grab style looting of an established site. A site years in the making. Shame on Baltic Online & CND AG for being involved in this practice. I would doubt their client base would be impressed by their dubious tactics. Stash -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20080910/bd1f9319/attachment.html From ihsan at opencsw.org Wed Sep 10 23:11:32 2008 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (Ihsan Dogan) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:11:32 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> Hello Stan, Am 10.9.2008 20:52 Uhr, STAN ROGERS schrieb: > I have to agree > After reading several posts on this whole scenario, > my views are this is the equivalent of smash & grab > style looting of an established site. A site years > in the making. > Shame on Baltic Online & CND AG for being involved > in this > practice. I would doubt their client base would > be impressed by their dubious tactics. Please do not judge so quickly without knowing the facts. CND sponsored _only_ the disks for the mail server and Baltic Online wanted to sponsor and SSL certificate. Can you please explain me, what kind of damage Blastwave has got from those disks? Sun sponsored by the way the server hardware where this list is running on, so according to your logic, Sun should be also blamed for damage, isn't it? Ihsan -- ihsan at dogan.ch http://blog.dogan.ch/ From javier.augusto at gmx.net Wed Sep 10 23:24:06 2008 From: javier.augusto at gmx.net (Javier Augusto) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:24:06 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> Hey folks, Why don't we relax and work together for quality packages for Solaris 8,9,10. After all, that's the only thing we can do ;-) Peace, Javier -- GMX Kostenlose Spiele: Einfach online spielen und Spa? haben mit Pastry Passion! http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/free/puzzle/6169196 From laurent at opensolaris.org Thu Sep 11 10:38:43 2008 From: laurent at opensolaris.org (Laurent Blume) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:38:43 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> Message-ID: <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> Javier Augusto a ?crit : > Hey folks, > > Why don't we relax and work together for quality packages for Solaris 8,9,10. > After all, that's the only thing we can do ;-) > > > Peace, > > Javier And is the only thing I'm interested in as well! :-) Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm working, but not speaking for \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org | From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Thu Sep 11 22:06:28 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 13:06:28 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> Message-ID: <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:38:43 +0200, "Laurent Blume" said: > Javier Augusto a ?crit : > > Hey folks, > > > > Why don't we relax and work together for quality packages for Solaris 8,9,10. > > After all, that's the only thing we can do ;-) > > > > > > Peace, > > > > Javier > > And is the only thing I'm interested in as well! :-) That's the only thing you're interested in. Really? Nothing else? Do you buy slightly used cell phones and notebook computers from rarely seen customers in backstreet Parisian bars at remarkable knock-down prices? Ok - a tenuous association, but not entirely off the mark. How low does someone have to sink before your sense of right and wrong, assuming you have one, overtakes your sense of "self"? I find it interesting that Phil Brown makes little attempt to refute Dennis Clarke's allegations. His seems more of an effort to justify events. To some degree I can see his point, since Dennis certainly doesn't own all that software on the blastwave servers. Or does he? I may be missing something crucial here; is/was the software served from blastwave.org open source or not? If so, surely it shouldn't even have been possible for Dennis to hold jurisdiction over the resource. Regardless of the answer, the way Phil went about things leaves a stench I can't ignore. With regard to the misappropriation of the blastwave gpg key, this maillist, and hacking of the DNS boxes, I'd have no problem seeing him behind bars. How old are you anyway, Phil? I maintain that it's a sorry state of affairs when such clearly brilliant people can't muster enough civility to resolve a situation before it disrupts the lives of so many others, even if it means going their separate ways in an amicable fashion. -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Email service worth paying for. Try it for free From dam at opencsw.org Thu Sep 11 23:01:20 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:01:20 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: Hi Laurent, Am 11.09.2008 um 22:06 schrieb Willie: > How > low does someone have to sink before your sense of right and wrong, > assuming you have one, overtakes your sense of "self"? The problem is that it is often hard to decide wether something is right or wrong. Do you know the movie "Falling Down" or "Dogville"? Are the chief character and the inhabitants good or evil? The funny thing is, you can walk a straight path where every step is well thought and end up in a position you never wanted to be in. And yet decide you would walk that same path again. > I find it interesting that Phil Brown makes little attempt to refute > Dennis Clarke's allegations. Maybe he doesn't care any more, maybe he thinks it's pointless, I don't know. But does that mean Dennis' accusitions are right? I at least answer back every time Dennis' incriminations against me when he is wrong. > His seems more of an effort to justify > events. > To some degree I can see his point, since Dennis certainly > doesn't own all that software on the blastwave servers. Or does he? I > may be missing something crucial here; is/was the software served from > blastwave.org open source or not? They are of course open source. But that doesn't necessarily mean Blastwave has no rights in it. As this touches international law about intellectual property things get even more complicated. From my understanding the package authors always has the copyright and therefore the right to relicense his own code to every use he likes. However, the build descriptions were derived from GAR which was released under GPL, so I guess the build descriptions are also under GPL. > If so, surely it shouldn't even have > been possible for Dennis to hold jurisdiction over the resource. Well, he owns the machines, the domain and has root. Until recently the project never questioned the concentration of critical infrastructure to one person. > Regardless of the answer, the way Phil went about things leaves a > stench > I can't ignore. With regard to the misappropriation of the > blastwave gpg > key, this maillist, and hacking of the DNS boxes, I'd have no problem > seeing him behind bars. Neither Phil nor Dennis is a saint or devil. I am astonished how easy you decide for yourself what is good and what is wrong by just reading a few posts. 9/10 of an iceberg are under water, you think that is different here? > I maintain that it's a sorry state of affairs when such clearly > brilliant people can't muster enough civility to resolve a situation > before it disrupts the lives of so many others, even if it means going > their separate ways in an amicable fashion. The atmosphere on the maintainer list was bad for a long time now and a few times before the fork has been avoided, sometime only very closely - until recently, where the cracks couldn't be filled any longer. But again: from the distance all this looks easy and simple. It is not. -- Dago From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Fri Sep 12 00:07:50 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:07:50 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <1221170870.28501.1273517137@webmail.messagingengine.com> Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> His seems more of an effort to justify >> events. >> To some degree I can see his point, since Dennis certainly >> doesn't own all that software on the blastwave servers. Or does he? I >> may be missing something crucial here; is/was the software served from >> blastwave.org open source or not? > They are of course open source. But that doesn't necessarily > mean Blastwave has no rights in it. As this touches international > law about intellectual property things get even more complicated. > From my understanding the package authors always has the copyright > and therefore the right to relicense his own code to every use > he likes. However, the build descriptions were derived from GAR > which was released under GPL, so I guess the build descriptions > are also under GPL. I'm speaking of things I have little knowledge of here, but wouldn't it have been easier all round to start over with the package maintainers resubmitting their work to the new site? If they wanted to, that is. And that begs the question of how many package maintainers _would_ want to, and how they might feel about having their work swiped for a fork if they were happy just where they were. > Neither Phil nor Dennis is a saint or devil. Maybe so, but there's doesn't seem to be a shortage of malevolence at every turn. > I am astonished > how easy you decide for yourself what is good and what is wrong > by just reading a few posts. 9/10 of an iceberg are under > water, you think that is different here? This I accept. It's a little tedious to prefix everything I say with "If true, ...", but all I have is what's written by the two protagonists. As I said, they don't really seem to be in dispute about what actually happened, which suggests they're telling the truth. If that's the case then yes, we can legitimately sit here and play jury and judge. The fact that I've still found nothing of Phil's - even after some effort - that makes events remotely justifiable is my only reason for leaning to the side of blastwave. In principle I'd personally be much happier with development focused on production releases of S8 and S10. > The atmosphere on the maintainer list was bad for a long time > now and a few times before the fork has been avoided, sometime > only very closely - until recently, where the cracks couldn't > be filled any longer. But again: from the distance all this > looks easy and simple. It is not. Accepted again. I'm only an end user with a dim view of the whole mess. -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Does exactly what it says on the tin From dam at opencsw.org Fri Sep 12 12:26:56 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 12:26:56 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1221170870.28501.1273517137@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1221170870.28501.1273517137@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <039E2DD0-6470-4793-B13D-EA75B20D6DEF@opencsw.org> Hi Willie, Am 12.09.2008 um 00:07 schrieb Willie: > I'm speaking of things I have little knowledge of here, but > wouldn't it > have been easier all round to start over with the package maintainers > resubmitting their work to the new site? If they wanted to, that > is. And > that begs the question of how many package maintainers _would_ want > to, > and how they might feel about having their work swiped for a fork if > they were happy just where they were. Well, the existing package descriptions were also derived from others peoples work. A lot of packages are orphaned and it is customary to adopt a package and update it or develop it further. In my opinion continuing work of other people is one of the core principles of open software. It may be cleaner, yes, but IMHO impractical and not necessary. > The fact > that I've still found nothing of Phil's - even after some effort - > that > makes events remotely justifiable is my only reason for leaning to the > side of blastwave. May these few sentences describe most accurately the critical point: It was decided to split CSW packaging from OpenSolaris packaging under the csw subdomain. Dennis intention was to put CSW on one of his machines, Phil put it on the Blastwave mailserver outside of Dennis control without prior talking to Dennis because Dennis temporarily locked the account of Phil some time ago. Dennis considered the mailserver to be not a Blastwave machine and removes packages and DNS information. Other maintainers are wondering why they can't download packages or reach the build machines and decide to set up alternative infrastructure immediately, which includes the mailserver formerly used for Blastwave but not owned by Dennis. Dennis reactivates his servers. Multiply these actions by 10 and you get what each side posts. Dennis opinion is that hosting CSW on the Blastwave mailserver is stealing because he doesn't control it. Phils opinion is that the mailserver belongs to the Blastwave project and it would be ok to host the pages there. That was the cause. Some mixture about misunderstanding and escalation without previous talking. I left Blastwave because you cannot just take the mirror down, it is irresponsible against the users, regardless of what happened and why. It is unprofessional and destroys trust earned in years by careful crafted packages and destroys the work of all the maintainers who have put work in the packages. The packages and descriptions may be available again, but the trust is gone, and that is what the maintainers have worked for: the stable-release you can rely on in a production environment. It will take quite some time (if at all) we reach that point again, on any side. Best regards -- Dago From mlh at zip.com.au Fri Sep 5 03:11:41 2008 From: mlh at zip.com.au (Matthew Hannigan) Date: Fri, 5 Sep 2008 11:11:41 +1000 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:21:48AM +0200, Peter Bonivart wrote: > On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Klaus Heinz wrote: > > pkg-get destroys existing files "catalog" and "descriptions" in the > > current directory when performing implicit updates of the catalog. > > I've also noted that it leaves catalog files all over the place. Even > worse if one had files named catalog and descriptions in the current > directory of course. Similarly, if you have a directory named after the package in your current directory it silently uses that instead of the repo, leading to strange error messages. This has bitten me twice. In general it's bad form to rely on or use anything in the current directory by default; the tool can change behavior depending on $pwd. Matt From dam at opencsw.org Sat Sep 6 20:27:18 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Sat, 6 Sep 2008 20:27:18 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: Hi Matt, Am 05.09.2008 um 03:11 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:21:48AM +0200, Peter Bonivart wrote: >> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Klaus Heinz >> wrote: >>> pkg-get destroys existing files "catalog" and "descriptions" in the >>> current directory when performing implicit updates of the catalog. >> >> I've also noted that it leaves catalog files all over the place. Even >> worse if one had files named catalog and descriptions in the current >> directory of course. > > Similarly, if you have a directory named after the package in your > current > directory it silently uses that instead of the repo, leading to > strange > error messages. > > This has bitten me twice. > > In general it's bad form to rely on or use anything in the current > directory > by default; the tool can change behavior depending on $pwd. Have you files a bug report in mantis? If not, please do so. Thanks! -- Dago From mlh at zip.com.au Sun Sep 7 08:54:42 2008 From: mlh at zip.com.au (Matthew Hannigan) Date: Sun, 7 Sep 2008 16:54:42 +1000 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> Hi Dago, No I haven't but I will. I haven't found csw/blastwave particularly welcoming in the past. But I've signed up on Mantis just now and I'll submit a bug report. Regards, Matt On Sat, Sep 06, 2008 at 08:27:18PM +0200, Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Matt, > > Am 05.09.2008 um 03:11 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: > > On Sat, Aug 30, 2008 at 02:21:48AM +0200, Peter Bonivart wrote: > >> On Fri, Aug 29, 2008 at 8:50 AM, Klaus Heinz > >> wrote: > >>> pkg-get destroys existing files "catalog" and "descriptions" in the > >>> current directory when performing implicit updates of the catalog. > >> > >> I've also noted that it leaves catalog files all over the place. Even > >> worse if one had files named catalog and descriptions in the current > >> directory of course. > > > > Similarly, if you have a directory named after the package in your > > current > > directory it silently uses that instead of the repo, leading to > > strange > > error messages. > > > > This has bitten me twice. > > > > In general it's bad form to rely on or use anything in the current > > directory > > by default; the tool can change behavior depending on $pwd. > > Have you files a bug report in mantis? > > If not, please do so. > > Thanks! > > -- Dago > _______________________________________________ > users mailing list > users at lists.opencsw.org > https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/users From phil at bolthole.com Mon Sep 8 20:50:49 2008 From: phil at bolthole.com (Philip Brown) Date: Mon, 8 Sep 2008 11:50:49 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] Announcement: CSW packages on the way Message-ID: <20080908115049.D51015@bolthole.com> This is a much overdue announcement, to all you nice folks out there still interested in using "CSW packages". Apologies for the loong delay. We hoped to have something you could actually "poke at" by now, but things are sadly taking even longer than we anticipated. Hence the somewhat pre-emptive announcement A brief summary of where things are: Yes, CSW packages for Solaris, and maintainers interested in maintaining them, are still around. What was formerly known as "the CSW project at blastwave", is no longer "at blastwave" any more, but has found a new home at opencsw.org. Most maintainers who were formerly active, as of early this year, have moved over to opencsw.org Rest assured that we will be keeping focus on the "core values" of what CSW packaging has been all about, since I founded it back in 2002: Supporting officially released, and sun-supported, "Production Solaris", with quality binary packages, in Solaris-native package format. We are commited to NOT doing the following things: We are NOT going to force, or pressure ANYONE, to pay for support, or "licenses" to use our packages We are NOT going to gut support for older releases of solaris, until Sun officially de-supports them first. (Thus, Sol8 will no longer "officially" be supported by us next year, when Sun drops it from its front-line support. But we will still support Sol9!) This is why we have moved away from blastwave.org: so that we can continue to do so, without interference from the domain owner. As mentioned, sadly, package updates are still "in the works"... we have a lot of cleanup, to get rid of some legacy references, before we can officially annnounce a release. There was more cleanup to be done, than was anticipated. Rest assured, though, that we ARE working on it, and hope to have a release in the next 1-2 weeks. Sorry for the delay! We have taken the liberty of preserving the list membership of folks who were previous users of the "CSW packages" mailing list, in this one. We hope you appreciate our efforts, and will continue to stay interested in our work. However, anyone who choses to unsubscribe,(which you can do through the standard mailman methods, on lists.opencsw.org) will not be troubled further by us. Philip Brown CSW packages founder, and author of pkg-get From dam at opencsw.org Tue Sep 9 13:04:50 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 13:04:50 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: Hi Matthew, Am 07.09.2008 um 08:54 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: > No I haven't but I will. > > I haven't found csw/blastwave particularly welcoming > in the past. But I've signed up on Mantis just now > and I'll submit a bug report. Sorry for this, but you may have heard about the fork which nobody really enjoys: If you are interested in joining the OpenCSW effort let me give a warm welcome now :-) Best regards -- Dago From dclarke at blastwave.org Tue Sep 9 20:11:52 2008 From: dclarke at blastwave.org (Dennis Clarke) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 14:11:52 -0400 (EDT) Subject: [csw-users] A little honesty about Blastwave.org please Message-ID: <54026.10.0.66.17.1220983912.squirrel@interact.purplecow.org> The article at heise-online.co.uk is entirely a knee jerk reaction and not based on long term vision. See : http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/news/forum/S-The-facts-of-the-matter-are-somewhat-different/forum-110420/msg-14369969/read/ Also, if you receive this email from the mail server at opencsw.org then it is because your email address was taken by them. You subscribed at users at lists.blastwave.org but somehow ended up somewhere else. Simply be advised about whom you are getting your information from. Any reply or future communication from this maillist will not be received. See the public forums at wiki.blastwave.org. -- Dennis Clarke dclarke at blastwave.org From a.cervellin at acm.org Tue Sep 9 20:22:57 2008 From: a.cervellin at acm.org (Alessio) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 20:22:57 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] bug in pkg-get In-Reply-To: References: <20080829065036.149410@gmx.net> <625385e30808291721x3df19319v1510f89151db3800@mail.gmail.com> <20080905011141.GB17296@evofed.localdomain> <20080907065442.GA27330@evofed.localdomain> Message-ID: <48C6BF01.20400@acm.org> Dagobert Michelsen wrote: > Hi Matthew, > > Am 07.09.2008 um 08:54 schrieb Matthew Hannigan: >> No I haven't but I will. >> >> I haven't found csw/blastwave particularly welcoming >> in the past. But I've signed up on Mantis just now >> and I'll submit a bug report. > > Sorry for this, but you may have heard about the fork > which nobody really enjoys: > Solaris-repository--/news/111286> well, just for equity here is also the "sound of the other bell": http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/news/forum/S-The-facts-of-the-matter-are-somewhat-different/forum-110420/msg-14369969/read/ From gaa at ulticom.com Tue Sep 9 21:29:25 2008 From: gaa at ulticom.com (Gary Algier) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:29:25 -0400 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? Message-ID: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> Hello: I have created a Solaris 10 sparse root zone and I am trying to install Apache and Subversion to it. This requires other packages. I am getting a lot of errors like: Can't save cache in "/usr/openwin/lib/locale/zh_TW/X11/fonts/TrueType/" Why? Shouldn't all the CSW packages only write to /opt/csw/...? Will this matter? Is there a work around or am I doomed to burn disk space? -- Gary Algier, WB2FWZ gaa at ulticom.com +1 856 787 2758 Ulticom Inc., 1020 Briggs Rd, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 Fax:+1 856 866 2033 Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals: People don't read documentation voluntarily. From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Tue Sep 9 21:35:37 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 12:35:37 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? Message-ID: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> I've been away and out of touch for a while and clearly I'm behind the times here, but what the hell happened? If there is a fork, will blastwave abandon the production releases and support opensolaris exclusively? Will the fork abandon opensolaris and support the production releases exclusively? What a shame it all is... A couple of relevant links I can glean the full horror story from would be much appreciated. If my scant understanding is anywhere near accurate, I must say with no ill will toward anyone that I come firmly down on the side of package development and support for the stable production versions of solaris. I say this not least because S10 and S8 are what I use, but even without that bias it strikes me that this was originally the whole point of blastwave. Is it reasonable to abandon support for solaris releases that are are actively and currently being distributed and supported by Sun Microsystems? Is it unreasonable to expect such support to continue? Is it not the production releases that really *need* a project like blastwave? Isn't it fair to say the opensolaris project intends to do a decent job itself - without a parallel CSW effort - of including up to date end-user orientated software with frequent releases? -- http://www.fastmail.fm - mmm... Fastmail... From a.cervellin at acm.org Tue Sep 9 21:35:53 2008 From: a.cervellin at acm.org (Alessio) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:35:53 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> Message-ID: <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> Gary Algier wrote: > Hello: > > I have created a Solaris 10 sparse root zone and I am trying to install > Apache and Subversion to it. This requires other packages. > I am getting a lot of errors like: > Can't save cache in "/usr/openwin/lib/locale/zh_TW/X11/fonts/TrueType/" > Why? Shouldn't all the CSW packages only write to /opt/csw/...? not all, there are packages that write outside /opt/csw. the above error seems caused by the fc-cache process (maybe from CSWfconfig?) and should be harmless From a.cervellin at acm.org Tue Sep 9 21:50:02 2008 From: a.cervellin at acm.org (Alessio) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 21:50:02 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <48C6D36A.7090106@acm.org> Willie wrote: > I've been away and out of touch for a while and clearly I'm behind the > times here, but what the hell happened? > If there is a fork, will blastwave abandon the production releases and > support opensolaris exclusively? if by "blastwave" you mean the previous blastwave.org project, it will support solaris 10, opensolaris, solaris sxce and derivated (schillix, belenix, and so on). Currently, it supports sol8 & 9 too. It will not be a CSW-only project but it will be a community hosting different projects. The new home page is going to be http://wiki.blastwave.org > Will the fork abandon opensolaris and support the production releases > exclusively? if by "fork" you mean the new opencsw.org project, it is currently dedicated to sol8,9, and 10 and its aim is to continue the CSW-only packaging effort. The new home page is going to be http://www.opencsw.org > What a shame it all is... > A couple of relevant links I can glean the full horror story from would > be much appreciated. Opencsw side: http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/Quarrels-about-Blastwave-Solaris-repository--/news/111286 Blastwave side: http://www.heise-online.co.uk/open/news/forum/S-The-facts-of-the-matter-are-somewhat-different/forum-110420/msg-14369969/read/ From dam at opencsw.org Tue Sep 9 21:51:32 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Tue, 9 Sep 2008 21:51:32 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: Hi Willie, Am 09.09.2008 um 21:35 schrieb Willie: > A couple of relevant links I can glean the full horror story from > would > be much appreciated. Well, there are two kinds of posts: Pro-OpenCSW: - (Please also note the comments from Dennis and me) Pro-Blastwave: - http://www.blastwave.org/dclarke/blog/?q=node/111 Neutral?: - Please judge for yourself who you believe. > If my scant understanding is anywhere near accurate, I must say > with no > ill will toward anyone that I come firmly down on the side of package > development and support for the stable production versions of > solaris. I > say this not least because S10 and S8 are what I use, but even without > that bias it strikes me that this was originally the whole point of > blastwave. > > Is it reasonable to abandon support for solaris releases that are are > actively and currently being distributed and supported by Sun > Microsystems? > > Is it unreasonable to expect such support to continue? > > Is it not the production releases that really *need* a project like > blastwave? > > Isn't it fair to say the opensolaris project intends to do a decent > job > itself - without a parallel CSW effort - of including up to date > end-user orientated software with frequent releases? There will of course be packages for production versions of Solaris. Most of the people maintaining packages still do, so the packaging efforts will continue. Best regards -- Dago From laurent at opensolaris.org Tue Sep 9 23:11:48 2008 From: laurent at opensolaris.org (Laurent Blume) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 23:11:48 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> Message-ID: <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> Alessio a ?crit : > not all, there are packages that write outside /opt/csw. > the above error seems caused by the fc-cache process (maybe from > CSWfconfig?) and should be harmless To be more precise: the fc-cache process writes an index of fonts in each directory where fonts reside. It's not placing any package file there, and uses very little space. The CSW version uses a different name for the cache than Sun's to avoid conflicts (fonts.cache-csw, something like that). However, I disagree that it's harmless. Not having up to date fonts.cache can lead to very serious performance degradation if there are many fonts, as each process using fontconfig scans all directories to list fonts, every time. It's best to let the fc-cache process write its files (they don't need to be writable afterwards since fonts aren't going to change much). Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm working, but not speaking for \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org | From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Wed Sep 10 00:16:25 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 15:16:25 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: References: <1220988937.3047.1273062427@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <1220998585.8108.1273092749@webmail.messagingengine.com> Thanks Dago, > Neutral?: > - Neutral? Well since you're not American I can attribute this to a finely honed sense of irony. I found the superior, judgemental tone almost offensive. > Please judge for yourself who you believe. There's the rub. I don't know any of these people well enough to make a call on personal integrity, but regardless of what direction anyone feels solaris open software development should take, the sequence of events recently outlined by Dennis Clarke can only be described as theft - a particularly odious theft, concurrent with deceit and relying for its success on the trust of a long standing colleague. If these comments are true someone needs his balls chewing off. Yes, there are two sides to every story - you pays your money and you takes your choice as we say here in blighty, but after what I've read so far over the past couple of hours I'll be surprised if my choice is to stick around here. Bye for now. Willie -- http://www.fastmail.fm - One of many happy users: http://www.fastmail.fm/docs/quotes.html From gaa at ulticom.com Wed Sep 10 04:13:08 2008 From: gaa at ulticom.com (Gary Algier) Date: Tue, 09 Sep 2008 22:13:08 -0400 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> Message-ID: <48C72D34.1010903@ulticom.com> Laurent Blume wrote: > Alessio a ?crit : >> not all, there are packages that write outside /opt/csw. >> the above error seems caused by the fc-cache process (maybe from >> CSWfconfig?) and should be harmless > > To be more precise: the fc-cache process writes an index of fonts in > each directory where fonts reside. It's not placing any package file > there, and uses very little space. The CSW version uses a different name > for the cache than Sun's to avoid conflicts (fonts.cache-csw, something > like that). > > However, I disagree that it's harmless. Not having up to date > fonts.cache can lead to very serious performance degradation if there > are many fonts, as each process using fontconfig scans all directories > to list fonts, every time. It's best to let the fc-cache process write > its files (they don't need to be writable afterwards since fonts aren't > going to change much). > > Laurent In this case, since this will be a subversion server I doubt there will much font activity. However, in general this is a problem on a Solaris zone. One of the advantages of the sparse root zones is that /usr is shared so it need not be replicated. This saves a lot of space. Since the CSW packages seem to all go in /opt, one would think this is safe. Perhaps a different way to cache fonts could be developed that does not write to the font directories. The current method would also be a problem in other shared-/usr environments such as diskless clients (does anyone use those anymore?). Perhaps the cache should go in /var? -- Gary Algier, WB2FWZ gaa at ulticom.com +1 856 787 2758 Ulticom Inc., 1020 Briggs Rd, Mt. Laurel, NJ 08054 Fax:+1 856 866 2033 Nielsen's First Law of Computer Manuals: People don't read documentation voluntarily. From laurent at opensolaris.org Wed Sep 10 11:20:19 2008 From: laurent at opensolaris.org (Laurent Blume) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:20:19 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] Why is CSW writing to /usr? In-Reply-To: <48C72D34.1010903@ulticom.com> References: <48C6CE95.6040500@ulticom.com> <48C6D019.3060704@acm.org> <48C6E694.1080009@opensolaris.org> <48C72D34.1010903@ulticom.com> Message-ID: <48C79153.3060205@opensolaris.org> Gary Algier a ?crit : > Perhaps a different way to cache fonts could be developed that does > not write to the font directories. The current method would also be > a problem in other shared-/usr environments such as diskless clients > (does anyone use those anymore?). Perhaps the cache should go in > /var? Actually, that is the case in recent versions of fontconfig, recently introduced in Solaris 10 by a patch. It now goes in /var/cache/fontconfig/ Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm working, but not speaking for \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org | From srogers5790 at rogers.com Wed Sep 10 20:52:44 2008 From: srogers5790 at rogers.com (STAN ROGERS) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 11:52:44 -0700 (PDT) Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? Message-ID: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> --- On Tue, 9/9/08, Willie wrote: From: Willie Subject: Re: [csw-users] blastwave forked? To: "questions and discussions" Received: Tuesday, September 9, 2008, 10:16 PM Thanks Dago, > Neutral?: > - Neutral? Well since you're not American I can attribute this to a finely honed sense of irony. I found the superior, judgemental tone almost offensive. > Please judge for yourself who you believe. There's the rub. I don't know any of these people well enough to make a call on personal integrity, but regardless of what direction anyone feels solaris open software development should take, the sequence of events recently outlined by Dennis Clarke can only be described as theft - a particularly odious theft, concurrent with deceit and relying for its success on the trust of a long standing colleague. If these comments are true someone needs his balls chewing off. Yes, there are two sides to every story - you pays your money and you takes your choice as we say here in blighty, but after what I've read so far over the past couple of hours I'll be surprised if my choice is to stick around here. Bye for now. Willie I have to agree After reading several posts on this whole scenario, my views are this is the equivalent of smash & grab style looting of an established site. A site years in the making. Shame on Baltic Online & CND AG for being involved in this practice. I would doubt their client base would be impressed by their dubious tactics. Stash -------------- next part -------------- An HTML attachment was scrubbed... URL: From ihsan at opencsw.org Wed Sep 10 23:11:32 2008 From: ihsan at opencsw.org (Ihsan Dogan) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:11:32 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> Message-ID: <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> Hello Stan, Am 10.9.2008 20:52 Uhr, STAN ROGERS schrieb: > I have to agree > After reading several posts on this whole scenario, > my views are this is the equivalent of smash & grab > style looting of an established site. A site years > in the making. > Shame on Baltic Online & CND AG for being involved > in this > practice. I would doubt their client base would > be impressed by their dubious tactics. Please do not judge so quickly without knowing the facts. CND sponsored _only_ the disks for the mail server and Baltic Online wanted to sponsor and SSL certificate. Can you please explain me, what kind of damage Blastwave has got from those disks? Sun sponsored by the way the server hardware where this list is running on, so according to your logic, Sun should be also blamed for damage, isn't it? Ihsan -- ihsan at dogan.ch http://blog.dogan.ch/ From javier.augusto at gmx.net Wed Sep 10 23:24:06 2008 From: javier.augusto at gmx.net (Javier Augusto) Date: Wed, 10 Sep 2008 23:24:06 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> Message-ID: <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> Hey folks, Why don't we relax and work together for quality packages for Solaris 8,9,10. After all, that's the only thing we can do ;-) Peace, Javier -- GMX Kostenlose Spiele: Einfach online spielen und Spa? haben mit Pastry Passion! http://games.entertainment.gmx.net/de/entertainment/games/free/puzzle/6169196 From laurent at opensolaris.org Thu Sep 11 10:38:43 2008 From: laurent at opensolaris.org (Laurent Blume) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:38:43 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> Message-ID: <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> Javier Augusto a ?crit : > Hey folks, > > Why don't we relax and work together for quality packages for Solaris 8,9,10. > After all, that's the only thing we can do ;-) > > > Peace, > > Javier And is the only thing I'm interested in as well! :-) Laurent -- / Leader de Projet & Communaut? | I'm working, but not speaking for \ G11N http://fr.opensolaris.org | Bull Services http://www.bull.com / FOSUG http://guses.org | From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Thu Sep 11 22:06:28 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 13:06:28 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> Message-ID: <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> On Thu, 11 Sep 2008 10:38:43 +0200, "Laurent Blume" said: > Javier Augusto a ?crit : > > Hey folks, > > > > Why don't we relax and work together for quality packages for Solaris 8,9,10. > > After all, that's the only thing we can do ;-) > > > > > > Peace, > > > > Javier > > And is the only thing I'm interested in as well! :-) That's the only thing you're interested in. Really? Nothing else? Do you buy slightly used cell phones and notebook computers from rarely seen customers in backstreet Parisian bars at remarkable knock-down prices? Ok - a tenuous association, but not entirely off the mark. How low does someone have to sink before your sense of right and wrong, assuming you have one, overtakes your sense of "self"? I find it interesting that Phil Brown makes little attempt to refute Dennis Clarke's allegations. His seems more of an effort to justify events. To some degree I can see his point, since Dennis certainly doesn't own all that software on the blastwave servers. Or does he? I may be missing something crucial here; is/was the software served from blastwave.org open source or not? If so, surely it shouldn't even have been possible for Dennis to hold jurisdiction over the resource. Regardless of the answer, the way Phil went about things leaves a stench I can't ignore. With regard to the misappropriation of the blastwave gpg key, this maillist, and hacking of the DNS boxes, I'd have no problem seeing him behind bars. How old are you anyway, Phil? I maintain that it's a sorry state of affairs when such clearly brilliant people can't muster enough civility to resolve a situation before it disrupts the lives of so many others, even if it means going their separate ways in an amicable fashion. -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Email service worth paying for. Try it for free From dam at opencsw.org Thu Sep 11 23:01:20 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 23:01:20 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: Hi Laurent, Am 11.09.2008 um 22:06 schrieb Willie: > How > low does someone have to sink before your sense of right and wrong, > assuming you have one, overtakes your sense of "self"? The problem is that it is often hard to decide wether something is right or wrong. Do you know the movie "Falling Down" or "Dogville"? Are the chief character and the inhabitants good or evil? The funny thing is, you can walk a straight path where every step is well thought and end up in a position you never wanted to be in. And yet decide you would walk that same path again. > I find it interesting that Phil Brown makes little attempt to refute > Dennis Clarke's allegations. Maybe he doesn't care any more, maybe he thinks it's pointless, I don't know. But does that mean Dennis' accusitions are right? I at least answer back every time Dennis' incriminations against me when he is wrong. > His seems more of an effort to justify > events. > To some degree I can see his point, since Dennis certainly > doesn't own all that software on the blastwave servers. Or does he? I > may be missing something crucial here; is/was the software served from > blastwave.org open source or not? They are of course open source. But that doesn't necessarily mean Blastwave has no rights in it. As this touches international law about intellectual property things get even more complicated. From my understanding the package authors always has the copyright and therefore the right to relicense his own code to every use he likes. However, the build descriptions were derived from GAR which was released under GPL, so I guess the build descriptions are also under GPL. > If so, surely it shouldn't even have > been possible for Dennis to hold jurisdiction over the resource. Well, he owns the machines, the domain and has root. Until recently the project never questioned the concentration of critical infrastructure to one person. > Regardless of the answer, the way Phil went about things leaves a > stench > I can't ignore. With regard to the misappropriation of the > blastwave gpg > key, this maillist, and hacking of the DNS boxes, I'd have no problem > seeing him behind bars. Neither Phil nor Dennis is a saint or devil. I am astonished how easy you decide for yourself what is good and what is wrong by just reading a few posts. 9/10 of an iceberg are under water, you think that is different here? > I maintain that it's a sorry state of affairs when such clearly > brilliant people can't muster enough civility to resolve a situation > before it disrupts the lives of so many others, even if it means going > their separate ways in an amicable fashion. The atmosphere on the maintainer list was bad for a long time now and a few times before the fork has been avoided, sometime only very closely - until recently, where the cracks couldn't be filled any longer. But again: from the distance all this looks easy and simple. It is not. -- Dago From tumbleweed at fastmail.net Fri Sep 12 00:07:50 2008 From: tumbleweed at fastmail.net (Willie) Date: Thu, 11 Sep 2008 15:07:50 -0700 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <1221170870.28501.1273517137@webmail.messagingengine.com> Dagobert Michelsen wrote: >> His seems more of an effort to justify >> events. >> To some degree I can see his point, since Dennis certainly >> doesn't own all that software on the blastwave servers. Or does he? I >> may be missing something crucial here; is/was the software served from >> blastwave.org open source or not? > They are of course open source. But that doesn't necessarily > mean Blastwave has no rights in it. As this touches international > law about intellectual property things get even more complicated. > From my understanding the package authors always has the copyright > and therefore the right to relicense his own code to every use > he likes. However, the build descriptions were derived from GAR > which was released under GPL, so I guess the build descriptions > are also under GPL. I'm speaking of things I have little knowledge of here, but wouldn't it have been easier all round to start over with the package maintainers resubmitting their work to the new site? If they wanted to, that is. And that begs the question of how many package maintainers _would_ want to, and how they might feel about having their work swiped for a fork if they were happy just where they were. > Neither Phil nor Dennis is a saint or devil. Maybe so, but there's doesn't seem to be a shortage of malevolence at every turn. > I am astonished > how easy you decide for yourself what is good and what is wrong > by just reading a few posts. 9/10 of an iceberg are under > water, you think that is different here? This I accept. It's a little tedious to prefix everything I say with "If true, ...", but all I have is what's written by the two protagonists. As I said, they don't really seem to be in dispute about what actually happened, which suggests they're telling the truth. If that's the case then yes, we can legitimately sit here and play jury and judge. The fact that I've still found nothing of Phil's - even after some effort - that makes events remotely justifiable is my only reason for leaning to the side of blastwave. In principle I'd personally be much happier with development focused on production releases of S8 and S10. > The atmosphere on the maintainer list was bad for a long time > now and a few times before the fork has been avoided, sometime > only very closely - until recently, where the cracks couldn't > be filled any longer. But again: from the distance all this > looks easy and simple. It is not. Accepted again. I'm only an end user with a dim view of the whole mess. -- http://www.fastmail.fm - Does exactly what it says on the tin From dam at opencsw.org Fri Sep 12 12:26:56 2008 From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen) Date: Fri, 12 Sep 2008 12:26:56 +0200 Subject: [csw-users] blastwave forked? In-Reply-To: <1221170870.28501.1273517137@webmail.messagingengine.com> References: <196506.79588.qm@web88308.mail.re4.yahoo.com> <48C83804.3070206@opencsw.org> <20080910212406.95930@gmx.net> <48C8D913.8060005@opensolaris.org> <1221163588.1775.1273498227@webmail.messagingengine.com> <1221170870.28501.1273517137@webmail.messagingengine.com> Message-ID: <039E2DD0-6470-4793-B13D-EA75B20D6DEF@opencsw.org> Hi Willie, Am 12.09.2008 um 00:07 schrieb Willie: > I'm speaking of things I have little knowledge of here, but > wouldn't it > have been easier all round to start over with the package maintainers > resubmitting their work to the new site? If they wanted to, that > is. And > that begs the question of how many package maintainers _would_ want > to, > and how they might feel about having their work swiped for a fork if > they were happy just where they were. Well, the existing package descriptions were also derived from others peoples work. A lot of packages are orphaned and it is customary to adopt a package and update it or develop it further. In my opinion continuing work of other people is one of the core principles of open software. It may be cleaner, yes, but IMHO impractical and not necessary. > The fact > that I've still found nothing of Phil's - even after some effort - > that > makes events remotely justifiable is my only reason for leaning to the > side of blastwave. May these few sentences describe most accurately the critical point: It was decided to split CSW packaging from OpenSolaris packaging under the csw subdomain. Dennis intention was to put CSW on one of his machines, Phil put it on the Blastwave mailserver outside of Dennis control without prior talking to Dennis because Dennis temporarily locked the account of Phil some time ago. Dennis considered the mailserver to be not a Blastwave machine and removes packages and DNS information. Other maintainers are wondering why they can't download packages or reach the build machines and decide to set up alternative infrastructure immediately, which includes the mailserver formerly used for Blastwave but not owned by Dennis. Dennis reactivates his servers. Multiply these actions by 10 and you get what each side posts. Dennis opinion is that hosting CSW on the Blastwave mailserver is stealing because he doesn't control it. Phils opinion is that the mailserver belongs to the Blastwave project and it would be ok to host the pages there. That was the cause. Some mixture about misunderstanding and escalation without previous talking. I left Blastwave because you cannot just take the mirror down, it is irresponsible against the users, regardless of what happened and why. It is unprofessional and destroys trust earned in years by careful crafted packages and destroys the work of all the maintainers who have put work in the packages. The packages and descriptions may be available again, but the trust is gone, and that is what the maintainers have worked for: the stable-release you can rely on in a production environment. It will take quite some time (if at all) we reach that point again, on any side. Best regards -- Dago