From miceli at buffalo.edu  Wed Aug  1 21:12:27 2012
From: miceli at buffalo.edu (Lenny Miceli)
Date: Wed, 01 Aug 2012 15:12:27 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
Message-ID: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>

Hi Everyone,

Is a 64 bit apache v2 package being considered?  We used to install 64 
bit apache v2.2.15 using Blastwave from the harvard mirror.

I don't see a 64 bit apache package in OpenCSW.  It would be a nice 
addition to add a 64 bit apache package since Solaris 10 doesn't come 
with a 64-bit version.

Thanks,
   Lenny

From maciej at opencsw.org  Thu Aug  2 10:18:34 2012
From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=)
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 09:18:34 +0100
Subject: [csw-users] Selecting 32 or 64 MySQL server
In-Reply-To: <4FF473E5.5060408@elanor.org>
References: <4FF1C10A.9090100@elanor.org>
	<E32618FF-595C-49C5-99EB-F1E395735D88@opencsw.org>
	<4FF1CBFF.7010605@elanor.org> <4FF1F742.2030003@elanor.org>
	<4FF473E5.5060408@elanor.org>
Message-ID: <CALtRa-57Hq_JBT9c7Btw7ypo8h0YCDXbbb4cXe93Jz11Yw9Vnw@mail.gmail.com>

2012/7/4 Laurent Blume <laurent at elanor.org>

> Not extensively tested, Works On My System is all I can say about it so
> far, I'm also going to try it on sparc (and run it there if it works).


Very cool, thanks for the script. I've rolled it into the MySQL package and
made it available in the experimental catalog:

http://buildfarm.opencsw.org/experimental.html#mysql-5.5

I haven't tested it, sorry!

Maciej
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120802/a1e98aaa/attachment.html>

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Thu Aug  2 15:41:12 2012
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 09:41:12 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <1343914606-sup-8228@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Lenny Miceli's message of Wed Aug 01 15:12:27 -0400 2012:

Hi Lenny,

> Is a 64 bit apache v2 package being considered?  We used to install
> 64 bit apache v2.2.15 using Blastwave from the harvard mirror.

I could add it to the list of TODO items for apache.  It looks like
all of the library dependencies already offer 64-bit versions so
that's good...Let me see what I can do.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From bonivart at opencsw.org  Thu Aug  2 15:56:06 2012
From: bonivart at opencsw.org (Peter Bonivart)
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 15:56:06 +0200
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
Message-ID: <CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>

On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Lenny Miceli <miceli at buffalo.edu> wrote:
> Hi Everyone,
>
> Is a 64 bit apache v2 package being considered?  We used to install 64 bit
> apache v2.2.15 using Blastwave from the harvard mirror.
>
> I don't see a 64 bit apache package in OpenCSW.  It would be a nice addition
> to add a 64 bit apache package since Solaris 10 doesn't come with a 64-bit
> version.

What's the benefit of a web server being 64-bit if you don't mind me asking?

/peter

From trygvis at opencsw.org  Thu Aug  2 16:00:56 2012
From: trygvis at opencsw.org (Trygve =?utf-8?B?TGF1Z3N0w7hs?=)
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 10:00:56 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
	<CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <20120802140056.GF23800@inamo.no>

On Thu, Aug 02, 2012 at 03:56:06PM +0200, Peter Bonivart wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Lenny Miceli <miceli at buffalo.edu> wrote:
> > Hi Everyone,
> >
> > Is a 64 bit apache v2 package being considered?  We used to install 64 bit
> > apache v2.2.15 using Blastwave from the harvard mirror.
> >
> > I don't see a 64 bit apache package in OpenCSW.  It would be a nice addition
> > to add a 64 bit apache package since Solaris 10 doesn't come with a 64-bit
> > version.
> 
> What's the benefit of a web server being 64-bit if you don't mind me asking?

The ability to serve files >2GB.

-- 
Trygve

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Thu Aug  2 16:07:53 2012
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 10:07:53 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <20120802140056.GF23800@inamo.no>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
	<CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120802140056.GF23800@inamo.no>
Message-ID: <1343916378-sup-4422@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Trygve Laugst?l's message of Thu Aug 02 10:00:56 -0400 2012:

> The ability to serve files >2GB.

We should be able to do that already (although I haven't checked) as a
result of large file support.  If that support isn't working, let me
know.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From miceli at buffalo.edu  Thu Aug  2 16:37:43 2012
From: miceli at buffalo.edu (Lenny Miceli)
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 10:37:43 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
	<CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <501A90B7.1040506@buffalo.edu>

For my case I need it for Coldfusion v9.  As of that version it only 
comes in a 64 bit version on Solaris.  So I need a 64 bit apache to 
place in front of it.

Lenny

On 08/02/2012 09:56 AM, Peter Bonivart wrote:
> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Lenny Miceli <miceli at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> Is a 64 bit apache v2 package being considered?  We used to install 64 bit
>> apache v2.2.15 using Blastwave from the harvard mirror.
>>
>> I don't see a 64 bit apache package in OpenCSW.  It would be a nice addition
>> to add a 64 bit apache package since Solaris 10 doesn't come with a 64-bit
>> version.
>
> What's the benefit of a web server being 64-bit if you don't mind me asking?
>
> /peter
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/users
>


From gadavis at opencsw.org  Thu Aug  2 18:14:56 2012
From: gadavis at opencsw.org (Geoff Davis)
Date: Thu, 2 Aug 2012 09:14:56 -0700
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
	<CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <D007BE59-0126-45C0-BAE4-3CED29469DF6@opencsw.org>

In my case I need it to link to a third party software package that is 64 bit only. I also need 64 bit PHP.

On Aug 2, 2012, at 6:56 AM, Peter Bonivart <bonivart at opencsw.org> wrote:

> On Wed, Aug 1, 2012 at 9:12 PM, Lenny Miceli <miceli at buffalo.edu> wrote:
>> Hi Everyone,
>> 
>> Is a 64 bit apache v2 package being considered?  We used to install 64 bit
>> apache v2.2.15 using Blastwave from the harvard mirror.
>> 
>> I don't see a 64 bit apache package in OpenCSW.  It would be a nice addition
>> to add a 64 bit apache package since Solaris 10 doesn't come with a 64-bit
>> version.
> 
> What's the benefit of a web server being 64-bit if you don't mind me asking?
> 
> /peter
> _______________________________________________
> users mailing list
> users at lists.opencsw.org
> https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/users

From bwalton at opencsw.org  Thu Aug  2 18:31:25 2012
From: bwalton at opencsw.org (Ben Walton)
Date: Thu, 02 Aug 2012 12:31:25 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <D007BE59-0126-45C0-BAE4-3CED29469DF6@opencsw.org>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
	<CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<D007BE59-0126-45C0-BAE4-3CED29469DF6@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <1343924996-sup-7054@pinkfloyd.chass.utoronto.ca>

Excerpts from Geoff Davis's message of Thu Aug 02 12:14:56 -0400 2012:

> In my case I need it to link to a third party software package that
> is 64 bit only. I also need 64 bit PHP.

I haven't looked, but I'd be willing to wager (only in Drachma!) that
a 64-bit php is going to be much more involved as there are likely
libraries that would need an update for 64-bit support too.

Ultimately, it would be good to build everything with 64-bit support.

Thanks
-Ben
--
Ben Walton
Systems Programmer - CHASS
University of Toronto
C:416.407.5610 | W:416.978.4302


From ihsan at opencsw.org  Mon Aug  6 19:56:54 2012
From: ihsan at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?B?xLBoc2FuwqBEb8SfYW4=?=)
Date: Mon, 06 Aug 2012 19:56:54 +0200
Subject: [csw-users] 64 bit apache v2 package
In-Reply-To: <20120802140056.GF23800@inamo.no>
References: <50197F9B.7020307@buffalo.edu>
	<CABY0g1WqX-JN=j7vgTgExTVvQBo6EtAO_Jynv4mBj7B-Z2U2+A@mail.gmail.com>
	<20120802140056.GF23800@inamo.no>
Message-ID: <50200566.3030808@opencsw.org>

Am 02.08.2012 16:00, schrieb Trygve Laugst?l:

>> What's the benefit of a web server being 64-bit if you don't mind me asking?
> 
> The ability to serve files >2GB.

That works also with the 32-Bit version of Apache.




Ihsan

-- 
ihsan at dogan.ch        http://blog.dogan.ch/

From dam at opencsw.org  Sat Aug 25 09:43:55 2012
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Sat, 25 Aug 2012 09:43:55 +0200
Subject: [csw-users] OpenCSW primary mirror is down
Message-ID: <F353ABFA-EDC8-4FB5-BBBE-7EEE0A210785@opencsw.org>

Hi,

as you may have noticed the OpenCSW primary mirror
  mirror.opencsw.org
  rsync.opencsw.org
is down at the moment. I am in contact with the colocation provider to
investigate the issue.

Sorry for the inconvenience

  -- Dago

From George.Wyche at pw.utc.com  Tue Aug 28 19:38:56 2012
From: George.Wyche at pw.utc.com (Wyche, George             PW)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:38:56 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] How to get libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3)?
Message-ID: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD1FE0@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>

I cannot run unstable's emacs because ALL of our Solaris workstations lack libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3).

What are my options to resolve this?
 1. I could undertake to become part of the Oracle empire.
    I sort of started down that path by registering for Support so I could find out if the patch which is mentioned in one of the google search results was freeware. I got nowhere. I couldn't even figure out how much it would cost to obtain it. So much for that path at the moment.
2. Don't use unstable?
  All of our Solaris workstations are prohibited from connection to the internet. Thus I must add CSW*gz packages to a particular workstation to be the repository of sparc/5.10/* files. Those files get there by first doing pkgutil --install <desired_program> and observing the NEW packages and UPDATES packages, then using a windows box to download them to a local PC directory, then copying them from there to sparc/5.{8/9/10} and finally, where appropriate, 5.10> ln -s ../5.9/<blah>.gz
  As you might imagine the first poor guy (me) to engage "unstable" spends the entire day moving files and installing programs.
  Only to encounter libmlib.so.2 failure at the end of the day.
   ----
   There is no reasonably easy way to back off from unstable with assurance that any other choice will be successful, no?
3. Try Solaris 9?
  All of this only happened when we bought a used 2500 and attempted to clone one of the workstations with Solaris 10 on it. Sure enough all DID work until there was a program that clone was missing, and I wanted to add it. I have never, ever downloaded the 5.10 packages required for that program (subversion). Classic problem. You want something new? You have to upgrade over 90% of the packages. My old, dead workstation was doing subversion from Solaris5.8. OpenCSW has abandoned Solaris 5.8. Yes, can't live in the last century. I am loathe to go with Solaris 9 for pretty much the same reason.
4. Abandon openCSW?
  That would be a brave step for me after this many years.
5. Try OpenSolaris?
  Is that project even still alive?

George Wyche

From George.Wyche at pw.utc.com  Tue Aug 28 20:02:01 2012
From: George.Wyche at pw.utc.com (Wyche, George             PW)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 14:02:01 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] firefox? Any html browser?
Message-ID: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD201B@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>

Emacs comes before an html browser.
I guess I haven't been reading closely enough, what are "unstable" users expected to do about an html browser?

George Wyche

From dam at opencsw.org  Tue Aug 28 23:13:54 2012
From: dam at opencsw.org (Dagobert Michelsen)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 23:13:54 +0200
Subject: [csw-users] How to get libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3)?
In-Reply-To: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD1FE0@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
References: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD1FE0@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
Message-ID: <36FF2AB7-CE6E-4A15-BB7E-574EFA91EE0C@opencsw.org>

Hi George,

Am 28.08.2012 um 19:38 schrieb "Wyche, George             PW" <George.Wyche at pw.utc.com>:
> I cannot run unstable's emacs because ALL of our Solaris workstations lack libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3).
> 
> What are my options to resolve this?
> 1. I could undertake to become part of the Oracle empire.
>    I sort of started down that path by registering for Support so I could find out if the patch which is mentioned in one of the google search results was freeware. I got nowhere. I couldn't even figure out how much it would cost to obtain it. So much for that path at the moment.

You can update to Solaris 10u10 which has libmlimb.so.2

> 2. Don't use unstable?
>  All of our Solaris workstations are prohibited from connection to the internet. Thus I must add CSW*gz packages to a particular workstation to be the repository of sparc/5.10/* files. Those files get there by first doing pkgutil --install <desired_program> and observing the NEW packages and UPDATES packages, then using a windows box to download them to a local PC directory, then copying them from there to sparc/5.{8/9/10} and finally, where appropriate, 5.10> ln -s ../5.9/<blah>.gz
>  As you might imagine the first poor guy (me) to engage "unstable" spends the entire day moving files and installing programs.
>  Only to encounter libmlib.so.2 failure at the end of the day.
>   ----
>   There is no reasonably easy way to back off from unstable with assurance that any other choice will be successful, no?

We did have some snapshots of unstable in the past which we probably will have in the future.

> 3. Try Solaris 9?
>  All of this only happened when we bought a used 2500 and attempted to clone one of the workstations with Solaris 10 on it. Sure enough all DID work until there was a program that clone was missing, and I wanted to add it. I have never, ever downloaded the 5.10 packages required for that program (subversion). Classic problem. You want something new? You have to upgrade over 90% of the packages. My old, dead workstation was doing subversion from Solaris5.8. OpenCSW has abandoned Solaris 5.8. Yes, can't live in the last century. I am loathe to go with Solaris 9 for pretty much the same reason.
> 4. Abandon openCSW?
>  That would be a brave step for me after this many years.
> 5. Try OpenSolaris?
>  Is that project even still alive?

We are currently testing map files for linking with old Solaris versions and emacs
may be a good candidate to link to an older release. Feel free to join #opencsw
on IRC free node for updates.


Best regards

  -- Dago

-- 
"You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something,
and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 2351 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://lists.opencsw.org/pipermail/users/attachments/20120828/4f8b71f1/attachment.p7s>

From George.Wyche at pw.utc.com  Tue Aug 28 23:56:20 2012
From: George.Wyche at pw.utc.com (Wyche, George             PW)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:56:20 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] How to get libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3)?
In-Reply-To: <36FF2AB7-CE6E-4A15-BB7E-574EFA91EE0C@opencsw.org>
References: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD1FE0@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
	<36FF2AB7-CE6E-4A15-BB7E-574EFA91EE0C@opencsw.org>
Message-ID: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD2173@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>

I am working on giving 10u10 a try. Thanks for your advice.

Since I am going to the trouble with 2.2+ Gigs of DVD iso download for 10u10, does anyone have a reason NOT to go for Solaris11?

-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces+george.wyche=pw.utc.com at lists.opencsw.org [mailto:users-bounces+george.wyche=pw.utc.com at lists.opencsw.org] On Behalf Of Dagobert Michelsen
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 4:14 PM
To: Questions and discussions
Subject: Re: [csw-users] How to get libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3)?

Hi George,

Am 28.08.2012 um 19:38 schrieb "Wyche, George             PW" <George.Wyche at pw.utc.com>:
> I cannot run unstable's emacs because ALL of our Solaris workstations lack libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3).
> 
> What are my options to resolve this?
> 1. I could undertake to become part of the Oracle empire.
>    I sort of started down that path by registering for Support so I could find out if the patch which is mentioned in one of the google search results was freeware. I got nowhere. I couldn't even figure out how much it would cost to obtain it. So much for that path at the moment.

You can update to Solaris 10u10 which has libmlimb.so.2

> 2. Don't use unstable?
>  All of our Solaris workstations are prohibited from connection to the 
> internet. Thus I must add CSW*gz packages to a particular workstation to be the repository of sparc/5.10/* files. Those files get there by first doing pkgutil --install <desired_program> and observing the NEW packages and UPDATES packages, then using a windows box to download them to a local PC directory, then copying them from there to sparc/5.{8/9/10} and finally, where appropriate, 5.10> ln -s ../5.9/<blah>.gz  As you might imagine the first poor guy (me) to engage "unstable" spends the entire day moving files and installing programs.
>  Only to encounter libmlib.so.2 failure at the end of the day.
>   ----
>   There is no reasonably easy way to back off from unstable with assurance that any other choice will be successful, no?

We did have some snapshots of unstable in the past which we probably will have in the future.

> 3. Try Solaris 9?
>  All of this only happened when we bought a used 2500 and attempted to clone one of the workstations with Solaris 10 on it. Sure enough all DID work until there was a program that clone was missing, and I wanted to add it. I have never, ever downloaded the 5.10 packages required for that program (subversion). Classic problem. You want something new? You have to upgrade over 90% of the packages. My old, dead workstation was doing subversion from Solaris5.8. OpenCSW has abandoned Solaris 5.8. Yes, can't live in the last century. I am loathe to go with Solaris 9 for pretty much the same reason.
> 4. Abandon openCSW?
>  That would be a brave step for me after this many years.
> 5. Try OpenSolaris?
>  Is that project even still alive?

We are currently testing map files for linking with old Solaris versions and emacs may be a good candidate to link to an older release. Feel free to join #opencsw on IRC free node for updates.


Best regards

  -- Dago

--
"You don't become great by trying to be great, you become great by wanting to do something, and then doing it so hard that you become great in the process." - xkcd #896


From maciej at opencsw.org  Wed Aug 29 00:13:05 2012
From: maciej at opencsw.org (=?UTF-8?Q?Maciej_=28Matchek=29_Blizi=C5=84ski?=)
Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 23:13:05 +0100
Subject: [csw-users] firefox? Any html browser?
In-Reply-To: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD201B@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
References: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD201B@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
Message-ID: <CALtRa-4a1xDjF1AG5wb0SQfU-xQtdLhXtE__8Y+JxW_+0AG8pQ@mail.gmail.com>

2012/8/28 Wyche, George PW <George.Wyche at pw.utc.com>
> Emacs comes before an html browser.
> I guess I haven't been reading closely enough, what are "unstable" users expected to do about an html browser?

We currently don't maintain a build of a HTML browser. Browser builds
are extremely time consuming, and other projects already do a good job
at building for Solaris 10.

For example:
http://releases.mozilla.org/pub/mozilla.org/firefox/releases/latest/contrib/

Sorry that we don't provide an integrated solution for a desktop.
Maintaining a desktop environment is open if anyone wants to pick it
up!

Maciej

From jon.craig at craigslanding.net  Wed Aug 29 13:11:05 2012
From: jon.craig at craigslanding.net (Jonathan Craig)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 07:11:05 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] How to get libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3)?
In-Reply-To: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD2173@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
References: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD1FE0@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
	<36FF2AB7-CE6E-4A15-BB7E-574EFA91EE0C@opencsw.org>
	<239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD2173@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
Message-ID: <CAH40YUJ0uieKDCCmZ8kmF8aEGB6S-Ydm97-+1tch_NomkvDAgA@mail.gmail.com>

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Wyche, George             PW
<George.Wyche at pw.utc.com> wrote:
>
> Since I am going to the trouble with 2.2+ Gigs of DVD iso download for 10u10, does anyone have a reason NOT to go for Solaris11?
>

Personally I love Solaris 11, but be warned it is a very different
beast from Solaris 10.  If you dont have any experience with
OpenSolaris, then your in for a shock.  It uses an IPS packaging
infrastructure which completely changes the installation and patching
processes.  The network layer implements crossbow and is very
different from past generations.  The system becomes more dependent
upon SMF and many of the /etc config files that you are used to
managing for configuration are now auto-generated  from SMF
properties.  Solaris 10u10 is like putting on a round of patches while
Solaris 11 is nearly like a new OS.  Goood changes, but dramatic
changes forcing you into a deeper learning curve.

From George.Wyche at pw.utc.com  Wed Aug 29 17:19:46 2012
From: George.Wyche at pw.utc.com (Wyche, George             PW)
Date: Wed, 29 Aug 2012 11:19:46 -0400
Subject: [csw-users] How to get libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3)?
In-Reply-To: <CAH40YUJ0uieKDCCmZ8kmF8aEGB6S-Ydm97-+1tch_NomkvDAgA@mail.gmail.com>
References: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD1FE0@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us><36FF2AB7-CE6E-4A15-BB7E-574EFA91EE0C@opencsw.org><239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD2173@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>
	<CAH40YUJ0uieKDCCmZ8kmF8aEGB6S-Ydm97-+1tch_NomkvDAgA@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <239E996F5C620A4E8A369B7D818326B203FD2434@PUSMNEI1.pwemail.us>

Thanks Jonathan,

About the worst that could happen is that I compile a fairly generic program and it might refuse to run on our other Solaris10 workstations.

My work places are usually so far behind in releases that any program we make is executable by "all". Do any of you have particular hints about program design for Solaris11 that keeps it runnable under Solaris10?

George Wyche

-----Original Message-----
From: users-bounces+george.wyche=pw.utc.com at lists.opencsw.org [mailto:users-bounces+george.wyche=pw.utc.com at lists.opencsw.org] On Behalf Of Jonathan Craig
Sent: Wednesday, August 29, 2012 6:11 AM
To: Questions and discussions
Subject: Re: [csw-users] How to get libmlib.so.2 (SUNW_2.3)?

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 5:56 PM, Wyche, George             PW
<George.Wyche at pw.utc.com> wrote:
>
> Since I am going to the trouble with 2.2+ Gigs of DVD iso download for 10u10, does anyone have a reason NOT to go for Solaris11?
>

Personally I love Solaris 11, but be warned it is a very different
beast from Solaris 10.  If you dont have any experience with
OpenSolaris, then your in for a shock.  It uses an IPS packaging
infrastructure which completely changes the installation and patching
processes.  The network layer implements crossbow and is very
different from past generations.  The system becomes more dependent
upon SMF and many of the /etc config files that you are used to
managing for configuration are now auto-generated  from SMF
properties.  Solaris 10u10 is like putting on a round of patches while
Solaris 11 is nearly like a new OS.  Goood changes, but dramatic
changes forcing you into a deeper learning curve.
_______________________________________________
users mailing list
users at lists.opencsw.org
https://lists.opencsw.org/mailman/listinfo/users