Beta

Slashdot: News for Nerds

×

Welcome to the Slashdot Beta site -- learn more here. Use the link in the footer or click here to return to the Classic version of Slashdot.

Thank you!

Before you choose to head back to the Classic look of the site, we'd appreciate it if you share your thoughts on the Beta; your feedback is what drives our ongoing development.

Beta is different and we value you taking the time to try it out. Please take a look at the changes we've made in Beta and  learn more about it. Thanks for reading, and for making the site better!

OpenSolaris Indiana Released

ScuttleMonkey posted more than 6 years ago | from the strangers-tempting-you-with-candy dept.

359

Lally Singh writes "The Linux-friendly OpenSolaris Indiana has been released! A new, modern package manager and all the goodies of Solaris: ZFS, DTrace, SMF, and Xen on a LiveCD that was designed for Linux users. 'Why use the OpenSolaris OS you ask? It's pretty simple, you'll find it full of unique features like the new Image Packaging System (IPS), ZFS as the default filesystem, DTrace enabled packages for extreme observability and performance tuning, and many many more. We think you'll be quite happy to came by to take a look!'"

cancel ×

359 comments

Hey! It's Debian! (5, Funny)

Jeremiah Cornelius (137) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305188)

Without all that free crap.

Re:Hey! It's Debian! (4, Interesting)

Curtman (556920) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305942)

No this [nexenta.org] is Debian.

Still not sold (0, Troll)

RiotingPacifist (1228016) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305200)

ZFS doesnt offer me anything as im not managing servers
Dtrace doesnt offer me anything as im not a developer
SMF doesnt offer me anything i cant do with startup
IPS doesnt seam any better than deb or rpm

Is there any reason to switch?

Re:Still not sold (5, Insightful)

gardyloo (512791) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305222)

I'm tempted to tinker with ZFS just for its snapshotting abilities. You don't have to run a server to find that useful.

Re:Still not sold (1)

Brian Gordon (987471) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305240)

Java is platform portable? Oh wait this is a platform :[

Re:Still not sold (4, Interesting)

QX-Mat (460729) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305246)

They employ sexy-code formatting monkeys. The solaris kernel is a hack of a lot simpler to understand than the Linux kernel - I hege this on my comparison of the sources a while back.

There is still no mighty IOKit killer on the horizon tho... Apple (and libkern, the cpp runtine) wins.

Matt

Re:Still not sold (2, Insightful)

icebike (68054) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305354)

> The solaris kernel is a hack

You were correct up to this point.

Re:Still not sold (4, Insightful)

QX-Mat (460729) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305462)

I'm missing g's and e's :(

As a proud LDD touting, LWN gazing, MSc wielding geek; the Solaris kernel is a heck of a lot better coded, structured and organised than the Linux kernel. But alas, it lacks the many new features that have truly driven linux over the last decade.

Naturally my opinions lie with the ease of code readability and ease of initial development - these are not the same as a lkml hardened pro

Re:Still not sold (1)

Digi-John (692918) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305406)

As long as they don't employ sexy code-formatting monkeys! What a difference a - can make.

Re:Still not sold (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305288)

Oh, how silly of us. For a moment it seemed as if everybody had forgotten your place as the center of the universe. After all, nobody is a developer, or manages servers, and even if such people did exist, you most certainly would not find them here. We apologize, oh great Lord RiotingPacifist, also know as number... wait, 7 digits? You must be new here.

Re:Still not sold (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305312)

If you're looking for an easily maintainable desktop platform for web browsing, chat and stealing music, use Ubuntu. Solaris isn't like Linux; no one is going to start ranting at you or calling you an M$ shill if you don't run it on everything from your server to your blender.

Re:Still not sold (3, Insightful)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305456)

I am not even sure I can get worked up about Solaris anymore even for "serious work".

That train already left the station.

It's not just good enough that you make something cool but you should also make it available when people want it rather than 10 years later.

Now Sun has to put on a good showing just to keep from looking silly.

Although this is ultimatey a good thing as it's one of the key benefits of free market competition.

Re:Still not sold (1)

atrus (73476) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305356)

No, no reason to switch. No one said you had to.

Solaris has its strengths (ZFS, etc), but it also has its weaknesses (why would you use it on an average desktop system?)

Re:Still not sold (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305730)

Then you don't really understand the file system. Seriously, I think this is the BEST reason to look at Solaris .. ZFS is amazing: snapshots; Z-RAID; Zetabyte file ssytem; prevention of bit rot ...

They have also forcibly crashed it over a million time and it has never lost data even once. Try doing that with your home PC.

And what ... you don't care about your photos, docs and music???

Re:Still not sold (1)

Digi-John (692918) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305360)

But maybe Solaris comes with a spell-checker! That should be a major selling point for you.

Re:Still not sold (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305390)

ZFS doesnt offer me anything as im not managing servers.

Not yet. When home network storage servers and easy-to-use file backup become a commonplace item, however, ZFS and similar technologies will become quite important.

A pair of Apple predictions: (1) OS X will at some point in the future move to ZFS, and use its snapshotting capabilities to improve Time Machine; (2) Time Capsule will evolve into a line of user-friendly home NAS units, with ZFS under the covers, that allow users to add more storage easily, and ready for online offsite backup right out of the box (which of course, will only be compatible with .Mac).

Re:Still not sold (5, Informative)

Tuzanor (125152) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305424)

ZFS doesnt offer me anything as im not managing servers
Don't want easy raid/storage expansion on your desktop? You don't want efficient storage?
Dtrace doesnt offer me anything as im not a developer
You don't want to know how your system is performing [opensolaris.org] in a way like never before? I'm not a developer, but a sysadmin and use dtrace every day to tell those pesky developers that yes, it's actually THEIR CODE that's at fault at not the server I setup for them. It's also neat to be able to easily see what process is using how much network bandwidth in realtime. That was difficult before.
SMF doesnt offer me anything i cant do with startup
I don't like the complexity of SMF, but it's self-healing for the stuff that's already built for it is cool as is it's dependancy checking.
IPS doesnt seam any better than deb or rpm
It's better than just RPM, but it's about the same as deb or yum. It's a big step foreward for what was a commercial OS.

I can tell you haven't even tried solaris 10, but give it a swig. Before solaris 10 I wrote (often rightly) wrote of Sun. Why would I pay a premium for something FreeBSD can do for free and outperforms it? The hardware is cool (see coolthreads processors...it's hyperthreading done right), it's affordable, and it's innovative. It may not be compelling enough to switch from linux or whatever if all you use from a desktop is firefox and thunderbird, but there is actually some VERY cool stuff in there. Don't write it off. There's a reason FreeBSD is taking in a lot of these features.

Re:Still not sold (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305490)

>> ZFS doesnt offer me anything as im not managing servers
> Don't want easy raid/storage expansion on your desktop? You don't want efficient storage?

ZFS is a marginal improvement at best over what's already available.

>> Dtrace doesnt offer me anything as im not a developer
> You don't want to know how your system is performing

At the level that dtrace provides? You might as well claim that most end users read the kernel source for fun.

Unless someone already has a yen for strace/truss/valgrind, dtrace isn't going to get them excited. HELL, they won't even understand what it's for.

Re:Still not sold (3, Funny)

MrMr (219533) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305692)

Well the only special thing I could find on sun.com is that thanks to ZFS I can now hook up
$59,889,696,578,085,169,569,553,930,907,991,205,216.26
  worth of harddisks to my desktop instead of the puny $3,246,626,956,972,881,084.41 I can spend on a 64-bit filesystem.

Re:Still not sold (2, Insightful)

Tuzanor (125152) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305828)

Yeah, and you have to fsck that with a traditional filesystem. Plus, zfs takes care of bit rot (which is becoming a problem as HD sizes get larger) volume management (and makes it extremely easy). Well you can make fun of the theoretical limits, when your modern 1GB hard drive crashes or 1.5 tarabyte array crashes you'll be happy when you can boot without having to wait for the filesystem to be checked. Have you had to deal with volume management before? It was a pain in the ass.

Re:Still not sold (5, Informative)

Sillygates (967271) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305872)

ZFS is a marginal improvement at best over what's already available.
I disagree. I guess you haven't seen one of the common types of data corruption that can happen with raided disks.
It's a common misconception that raid "prevents" data corruption.

RAID only protects you against (complete) hardware failures, and "noisy" IO errors.
Consider:
You have bad data on disk, but the hard drive reads the bad data without error.
With parity, (even assuming the parity is read upon each read request, which would be a faulty assumption), raid 5 has no way of telling which disk is bad, or whether the parity is bad.

Unlike raid, ZFS has end to end checksumming, so it knows when the data on disk is bad, and it knows which copy is bad, too.

Unfortunately though, from what I've heard, ZFS isn't stable enough for production environments yet:
http://www.datacenterknowledge.com/archives/2008/Jan/15/joyent_backup_services_down_for_three_days.html [datacenterknowledge.com]
read these comments [prefetch.net]

Re:Still not sold (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305440)

You don't manage servers or develop code? What exactly are you doing here, looking at the pretty pictures?

Re:Still not sold (3, Funny)

a_nonamiss (743253) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305748)

ZFS doesnt offer me anything as im not managing servers
Dtrace doesnt offer me anything as im not a developer
SMF doesnt offer me anything i cant do with startup
IPS doesnt seam any better than deb or rpm

Is there any reason to switch?
Well, for one, Solaris (and a few other OSes) support a new key just to the left of the "enter" key called the "apostrophe" key. ;)

Re:Still not sold (1)

bridson (713624) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305778)

You should be running Windows.

Re:Still not sold (1)

njcoder (657816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305884)

ZFS doesnt offer me anything as im not managing servers
Dtrace doesnt offer me anything as im not a developer
SMF doesnt offer me anything i cant do with startup
IPS doesnt seam any better than deb or rpm

Is there any reason to switch?
So what is it exactly that you do and what are you using now?

Re:Still not sold (4, Informative)

QuantumRiff (120817) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305952)

Sun has a video out that I'm too lazy to search for here, where they run ZFS on a bunch of pen drives, plugged into a USB 2.0 Hub. Faster, and fault tolerant. Pretty amazing. ZFS is not for just servers. Think of apples "time machine" software. Also, ZFS includes lots of Metadata and checksums, to prevent bit-rot of your files.

Who cares? (3, Interesting)

OriginalArlen (726444) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305206)

I assert that it's too little, too late. If Solaris had been freed in the early part of the century, it might have made some headway against Linux. As it is, it'll be stripped of anything useful and portable and will be as irrelevant as HP/UX or OpenVMS for all but locked-in legacy users.

Re:Who cares? (4, Insightful)

njcoder (657816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305978)

I assert that it's too little, too late. If Solaris had been freed in the early part of the century, it might have made some headway against Linux. As it is, it'll be stripped of anything useful and portable and will be as irrelevant as HP/UX or OpenVMS for all but locked-in legacy users.
This is an idiotic statement and I can't believe anyone modded you up. The source for OpenSolaris has been available for years. When will the stripping start? Where is ZFS for Linux? Where is DTrace, Zones, or any of the other cool new stuff?

Those are just some of the big items that get mentioned. Solaris' resource management and auditing tools are very impressive and I haven't seen anything comparable in linux that can give as much control for as little overhead.

Image Packaging System? (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305216)

Anyone here know what's so special about the Image Packaging System? I found the homepage [opensolaris.org] , but it didn't really explain how it differed from traditional packaging methods. (More annoyingly, it didn't even explain that intriguing name!) A quick check of Wikipedia doesn't offer much help, either. Anyone know the scoop on this (new?) system?

Re:Image Packaging System? (1)

eudaemon (320983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305272)

If you have ever administrated a Solaris system, you know that it can be slow to add packages and patches.

I think this represents an uptick on speed, in an attempt to bring Solaris in line with Linux. I say attempt because I don't know if anyone's actually sat down
  and drag raced the two OS's installing identical applications via their respective packages and package managers

Re:Image Packaging System? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305328)

Nothing. It's a piece of shit actually. Sun is all about Java so many of the tools like IPS are written in it. It eats memory like no tomorrow and performance suffers. Don't even think of running this stuff on a machine with less than 1GB of RAM.

And the stuff that isn't newly written in Java is like a throwback to the early 90's. Cryptic and hard to use. Sun uses a lot of GNU software but it's a big mix of bastardized custom stuff, stuff from the old Solaris, and GNU tools. It's difficult to get stuff working right because it doesn't work exactly like the old Solaris or something newer like Linux.

Linux kills OpenSolaris in every way.

Re:Image Packaging System? (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305550)

Sun is all about Java so many of the tools like IPS are written in it.

Except that IPS is written in Python, not Java. See the FAQ [opensolaris.org] :

"The Image Packaging System (IPS) software is a network-centric packaging system written in Python."

That much is easy enough to find. What Sun isn't saying is how this differs from existing packaging systems. i.e. The rational for creating a new packaging system rather than adopting an existing packaging system. And why is it called the "Image Packaging System"? Using the term "image" brings concepts like OS X's DRGs to mind. Yet I see nothing published on the site that gives a good explanation of the naming scheme.

What this all tells me is that the info on this system is probably buried in the OpenSolaris forums and communiques between the developers. Given that such communications are not easy to track down, I decided to ask if anyone here was "in the know"? (Which one would think there'd be at least a couple people. I mean, they did list it as a major feature.)

Re:Image Packaging System? (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305706)

The high level parts of the system may be written in Python but the underlying tools it uses are Java. You can actually run some of the command line tools to save memory.

It doesn't help much but it does help. It only took 48 hours to run the updates on a fresh install on my Blade (LOL, it's ridiculously slow, using the GUI version probably would have taken a solid week to finish running).

Re:Image Packaging System? (2, Informative)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305976)

The high level parts of the system may be written in Python but the underlying tools it uses are Java. You can actually run some of the command line tools to save memory.
You use the term "underlying", but then refer to the ability to run command-line tools directly. I think you're confused. You're probably thinking of the Sun Management Center [sun.com] , a graphical tool that allows you to manage your Solaris-based system. It is based on Java, but it's also sitting ABOVE the command-line tools, not below them as you surmised.

As it happens, it's actually not a bad tool. From SMC you can manage users, track workloads, install patches, and do dozens of other day-to-day functions for all the servers on your network. The "slowness" you're talking about is just Solaris, not the tool. It takes just shy of forever to get a fresh Solaris system up to date with the latest patches. (I swear, Sun releases WAY too many patches.) A secret for you is that you don't actually have to install all of those patches. Pick the patches that apply to you and ignore the rest. (e.g. If you don't have a Sun Elite Graphics Card, why are you bothering to install patches for it? On occasion, some of the patches can even be exclusive to each other depending on your configuration!)

Of course, all of this has absolutely NOTHING to do with the new IPS system. Standard Solaris 10 installs include the tradition Solaris packaging system, not the updated IPS system. So you should really give back that mod point that was so kindly provided to your rant.

Turn in your geek card (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305334)

Honestly, I get 398,000 hits via a google search for "solaris image packaging system".

You're just trying to get other people to do your work for you.

Re:Image Packaging System? (1)

atrus (73476) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305340)

Its a vast improvement over Solaris' previous "package" system (if you could even call it that). The exact technical details? No idea.

Why they didn't just choose apt/dpkg is probably having to do with licensing.

Re:Image Packaging System? (5, Informative)

anilg (961244) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305852)

"Image" in the name refers to the ability of the packageiung system to install to a chroot-like enviornment. The Distribution constructor (what actually builds the iso) basically creates an "image" area, installs the packages to this are, compresses it, and converts it to an iso.

Apart from that, you can also create partial images, which is a space you as a normal user can install packages to. These link back to the libraries already installed.

I'm sure some of these features are available in existing linux packaging systems. But these are things the Opensolaris community has wanted for a long time.

Apart from these features IPS also has automatic snapshoting (using ZFS in the background), so you can revert your system back to earlier snapsots.

All in all a very effective packaging system

Re:Image Packaging System? (1)

AKAImBatman (238306) | more than 6 years ago | (#23306026)

That actually sounds like a pretty decent system. A bit heavyweight for non-enterprise users, but pretty smart none the less. Thanks for the info!

ZFS simply rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305262)

I'd really like to see ZFS become the default filesystem on Linux distros. Especially Debian and Ubuntu Server.

If I'm not mistaken, the latest FreeBSD includes support for ZFS.

C'mon Linux, lets get this filesystem! If we don't like the license, maybe we can come up with a cleanroom implementation that offers similar features.

Re:ZFS simply rocks (3, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305346)

ZFS on Linux won't happen. But Linux on ZFS is possible today. Solaris has a LX BRANDZ container which emulates the linux system call api. So you can create linux container and install RedHat in it.

Re:ZFS simply rocks (1)

chuckymonkey (1059244) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305468)

Really? Can you provide some links please? I would also like to know about performance etc.

Re:ZFS simply rocks (3, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305928)

Sure.

The source code [opensolaris.org] (which remaps linux systems calls to open solaris and fudges inconsistencies)

Info on installing debian [sun.com] (it's designed for RedHat based linux, so it's slightly painful ... though possibly out of date).

Brand Z info [opensolaris.org]

Overview of linux support [opensolaris.org]

I haven't tried it, but there shouldn't be much overhead/performance loss.

Re:ZFS simply rocks (4, Interesting)

notamisfit (995619) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305486)

Not bloody likely. Even a "clean-room" interpretation of ZFS will run afoul of Sun's patents, and those patents are only licensed under the CDDL.

Re:ZFS simply rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305712)

nonsense. You don't license a patent, you own it and promess to sue or not sue your competitors. The fact the opensolaris kernel is under CDDL has nothing to do with that.

If that patent claim is right, even if opensolaris was fully GPL, linux couldn't use the code without risks of patent violations

Re:ZFS simply rocks (2, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305824)

You, sir, are unmitigatedly fuckin' retahdid.

"Conditioned upon Your compliance with Section 3.1 below and subject to third party intellectual property claims, the Initial Developer hereby grants You a world-wide, royalty-free, non-exclusive license ... under [patent claim(s), now owned or hereafter acquired, including without limitation, method, process, and apparatus claims, in any patent Licensable by grantor] ... to make, have made, use, practice, sell, and offer for sale, and/or otherwise dispose of the Original Software (or portions thereof)." -CDDL Section 2.1(b)

Re:ZFS simply rocks (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305760)

I'd enjoy seeing Sun sue Linux developers or, even better, Linux users. I recall another company tried that recently and it didn't work out all that well for them.

Anyway, the point is moot as btrfs [oracle.com] is already well on its way.

yawn (0, Flamebait)

nguy (1207026) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305278)

goodies of Solaris: ZFS, DTrace, SMF, and Xen on a LiveCD that was designed for Linux users

In short, a small subset of the functionality I get with Ubuntu, and much less hardware compatibility.

Re:yawn (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305336)

Show me dtrace or zfs on ubuntu.

As for hardware, the solaris kernel doesn't change its ABI every couple of weeks. Drivers written once continue to work.

Re:yawn (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305342)

Um, what repos do I need to enable to get ZFS or DTrace functionality? Perhaps the ones powered by pony magic, because last time I checked Linux has neither of these very very cool (and useful) technologies available (and ZFS-Fuse most assuredly does not qualify as 'available' yet).

But perhaps your zealotry does not allow you to try new things...

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305380)

goodies of Solaris: ZFS, DTrace, SMF, and Xen on a LiveCD that was designed for Linux users

In short, a small subset of the functionality I get with Ubuntu, and much less hardware compatibility.
Sweet! If Debian can integrate ZFS, DTrace and SMF why can't any other Linux distros

Re:yawn (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305382)

DTrace alone is enough to consider taking a look at Solaris.

Re:yawn (1)

njcoder (657816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305816)

According to this blogger at zdnet, OpenSolaris is what Ubuntu wants to be when it grows up. [zdnet.com]

Yeah the title is flamebait but the article is very informative and provides screenshots.

And when I say screenshots. I mean camera shots of the screen?!??!?!

But will it ship with.... (5, Funny)

greenguy (162630) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305282)

...a hat and bullwhip?

"Came by and take a look"? (1)

Skeetskeetskeet (906997) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305292)

I hope the grammar in the OS is better than this article.

Indiana? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305296)

From their website:

[...] go download OpenSolaris 2008.05 now [...]
I'd rather use the ISO-style YYYY-MM version name than weird codenames that only geeks can remember.

Want to smash a harddrive like this guy (4, Interesting)

stm2 (141831) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305298)

With ZFS you can smash a hard drive and keep the system running:

http://youtube.com/watch?v=CN6iDzesEs0 [youtube.com]

Re:Want to smash a harddrive like this guy (1)

jedidiah (1196) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305502)

I had Solaris 2.51 systems I could do this with...

Re:Want to smash a harddrive like this guy (2, Funny)

NotBornYesterday (1093817) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305948)

I want a job like that.

Yay (1)

atrus (73476) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305320)

For someone who has been using OpenSolaris (SXCE) as a server platform for Apache, ZFS, etc for awhile now, I welcome an easy to upgrade and improved userspace Solaris. Will try this one out. Solaris has had a relatively poor userspace experience for someone used to Linux machines. The kernel is top-notch though.

Re:Yay (1)

njcoder (657816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305688)

I'm still using Solaris 10 for a project I'm working on but am looking to move it to OpenSolaris before release.

Project Crossbow [opensolaris.org] is one of the projects I wish was currently available now. It looks like the easiest way to set up virtual switches and networks which is a great feature to use along with zones. Right now I'm using a hack I found online to do this. Crossbow is a lot easier and integrated with SMF. I haven't really had time to really focus on making a management script for the hack yet. It's not too hard but I have been focusing on other areas.

zfs (4, Interesting)

trybywrench (584843) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305324)

I've played around with ZFS, it's very cool. I mean very very cool.

It's a crying shame the licensing issues keep it from being ported to Linux as part of the kernel

Re:zfs (2, Funny)

eudaemon (320983) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305392)

LOL, that's because Sun views Linux as a stepping stone to Solaris, me boyo.

No reason to give away the toys to the "hobbyists." :-)

Re:zfs (2, Insightful)

thermian (1267986) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305530)

The primary difficulty with OpenSolaris is that is part of a new breed of corporate controlled Open Source.

Much as they might trumpet that it is, it isn't actually proper open source. I can't take it, rip out any bits I want and use them elsewhere. No matter what the license says, if I can't do that, it isn't 'Open', and as you point out, some bits you can't.

Also, it has hardly any developers not already on Suns payroll, and those that are independent are shackled by a lack of proper tools.

Sun doesn't want to engage with the open source community, they want to 'leverage' it, to exploit its advantages, and avoid its more uncomfortable freedoms.

That's a good thing (2, Insightful)

Santana (103744) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305700)

from a BSD point of view. If good open source software makes into their distribution, good for them and all their users. Goal accomplished.

Re:zfs (2, Informative)

larry bagina (561269) | more than 6 years ago | (#23306006)

Apple didn't have a problem putting dtrace and ZFS into darwin/OSX. FreeBSD didn't have a problem putting ZFS into FreeBSD.

Re:zfs (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305782)

I agree ... it really sux that we can't run it natively (heard you can do it in Userland .. but I am not keen to do so).

Still, it may come to MacOSX at some point.

I am guessing that Sun know ZFS is the draw card. If they GPLd it, why would we even look at OpenSolaris??

the true shame... (4, Interesting)

SuperBanana (662181) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305850)

is that ZFS, despite all its goodness, lacks some incredibly basic features compared to 99% of the hardware and software RAID and LVM systems out there. You can't grow (please pay attention here) a ZFS pool except by adding similarly-redundant vdevs, and there is no way to remove a vdev from a pool, unlike LVM2.

So. Got a 4-drive RAID-Z2 array, and you want to add more space by buying another drive to add in to your 5-bay hot-swap cage? You're shit outta luck. If you have a zpool with a vdev that consists of a pair of mirrored drives, you CAN add another vdev of two drives, then another, etc. You also CAN replace the drives in a vdev with larger drives. That's kind of half-okay, but still not on par with RAID cards of a DECADE ago. Even Linux's MD can grow RAID5/6 across more devices!

Someone suggested the ability to grow redundant pools by single devices, and the reaction amongst solaris ZFS developers (!!!) was "now why would you want to do that?", and then when THAT was explained, "well shucks, I wonder how they do that" (they = almost every hardware and software RAID solution on the planet.)

Absolutely astounding that a Solaris filesystem developer would not be able to at least guess as to how a RAID5 array would be re-striped to add a new drive.

Far as I know, they've been working on the grow capability for more than a year and we have yet to see it.

Relegated to VMWare on x86 (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305362)

The darn thing never even boots successfully on most all of my machines - on the one machine where it does - the network card (wired) is not detected making it unusable. OpenSolaris seriously needs a bunch of smart driver developers contributing drivers and general x86 workarounds - just not suitable for x86 hardware as of today (unless the h/w happens to be Sun).

Re:Relegated to VMWare on x86 (2, Informative)

njcoder (657816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305516)

I ran into a similar problem. In a lot of cases, the drivers for the network cards are actually available. The problem seems to be that there is no mapping of the PCI id in /etc/driver_aliases. I've found that in many cases you can just add a line in that file with the appropriate pci vendor and product id and the nic will work. You can find the pci vendor and product id using prtconf -v and searching for the Ethernet Adapter section.

There are also a bunch of free network drivers for Solaris can be found here. [nifty.com]

I suppose... (1)

SpiritualRemains (235040) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305374)

...this version completely lacks support for Daylight Saving Time.

Re:I suppose... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305918)

HA! That was funny

modd0 up (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305402)

centralized In ratio of 5 tXo notorious OpenBSD

nvidia support (1)

nuzak (959558) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305404)

Has nvidia gotten around to allowing OpenSolaris to distribute their driver, or do you still have to download and install it manually?

Indiana... (4, Insightful)

Stele (9443) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305428)

We named the dog Indiana.

Re:Indiana... (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305612)

..and it's a girl's name anyway.

Re:Indiana... (0, Redundant)

sharkey (16670) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305762)

I got a lot of fond memories of that dog.

Re:Indiana... (0, Flamebait)

jalefkowit (101585) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305814)

Considering this is from the people who brought you Java, naming it after a dog might not be particularly inappropriate ;-)

Re:Indiana... (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305964)

We named the dog Indiana.
Hey, that's how I got my dog's name! no really!

http://web.ics.purdue.edu/~manncr/images/Indy-partyhat.JPG

installing now (4, Interesting)

Lord Ender (156273) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305432)

I'm installing it right now. It looks like a copy of Ubuntu. It has a LiveCD, standard GNOME desktop, and an online package manager (called pkg).

Don't take that as criticism. Cloning Ubuntu is probably the best design decision an OS team can make these days.

Personally, I don't care whether it's Solaris or Ubuntu or *BSD underneath it all, so long as it supports my hardware and runs my applications.

Re:installing now (3, Interesting)

Tranzistors (1180307) | more than 6 years ago | (#23306024)

If I remember correctly, they swapped linux kernel with sun kernel and added some tools. Since debian (foundation of Ubuntu) is kernel agnostic (but linux is the working kernel), SUN just ported Ubuntu to solaris.
More on it: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nexenta_OS [wikipedia.org]

Finally... (1, Funny)

silvrstar (1282312) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305434)

The first OS fully coded in Java!

Re:Finally... (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305444)

With boot times measured in milliweeks?

Unix is dead (0, Troll)

symbolset (646467) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305460)

Ransom Love killed it with hubris.

And Sun bought the right to open "Open Solaris" from a company that didn't own that right. Install this at your own risk.

cute (-1, Troll)

pak9rabid (1011935) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305464)

I think it's cute how Unix vendors are scrambling to provide features that have been standard features in Linux nearly since it's inception. As the saying goes, too little too late.

Difference between Indiana and Nexenta? (1)

STFS (671004) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305488)

So what exactly do all these names mean?

How is OpenSolaris [opensolaris.com] connected to this Indiana thingy and what is the difference between Indiana and Nexenta [nexenta.org] ?

My take is that Nexenta is compiling the GNU software tools and providing them in their repositories. Is Indiana doing this as well or are they just trying to mimic the package management system itself but providing no GNU software?

Anyone know?

Re:Difference between Indiana and Nexenta? (3, Informative)

njcoder (657816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305608)

Ok, you're going to find better explanations elsewhere but this is my understanding of it.

OpenSolaris is not necessarily a "distribution". Nexenta, Shillix, etc are "distributions" built on OpenSolaris. Project Indiana as I understand it, is a distribution coming directly from the OpenSolaris project.

At first OpenSolaris wasn't supposed to come up with it's own distribution, and now that it is it did some people didn't like it. Or they didn't like that they were going to call it OpenSolaris instead of Indiana or something like that. I'm not clear on all the details.

Since Solaris will be built using OpenSolaris, Project Indiana is also kind of like an early access release of Solaris 11, without JDS.

Re:Difference between Indiana and Nexenta? (1)

mpapet (761907) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305636)

I can tell you why Indiana is *not* called opensolaris. It seems Sun wouldn't allow it.
Which, I think is pretty emblematic of Sun's consistently inconsistent behavior regarding their "community" OS.

It looks like they want the free dev resources AND total control, right down to naming. Which, adds up to a project that doesn't seem viable to me. Maybe I'm wrong though.

Linux-friendly = GPL-compliant license (3, Insightful)

spikenerd (642677) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305492)

therefore, it is *not* Linux-friendly

Re:Linux-friendly = GPL-compliant license (1)

mkcmkc (197982) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305944)

therefore, it is *not* Linux-friendly
Huh? If it has a GPL-compatible license, wouldn't that be Linux-friendly?

Dtrace link is wrong (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305504)

The dtrace link points to an article on ZFS...

For one... (1)

silvrstar (1282312) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305522)

Stanislaw Lem would be proud.

IP Issues with OpenSolaris? (3, Interesting)

Rob Riggs (6418) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305548)

Given what's happening to SCO lately, how valid is the license that Sun purchased to allow them to release the source code to Solaris?

Re:IP Issues with OpenSolaris? (2, Informative)

njcoder (657816) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305860)

Sun had a lot of rights under previous licensing agreements before Novell even purchased the rights to Unix. The SCO deal seemed to be for some additional licensing and some drivers. Novell has claimed they won't be suing anybody over Unix anyway.

"Linux Friendly"? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305650)

Hmm, something isn't clicking here. Is not OpenSolaris Sun's "Project Copy Linux"? Doesn't that in turn imply "NOT Linux Friendly"? Can anyone argue that OpenSolaris is here to bolster Linux adoption? It's meant to be a direct competitor and uses a license that isn't compatible with the GPL.

"Linux-friendly" would also imply that the Linux development community has a say in the direction of the project. OpenSolaris doesn't have much of a non-Sun developer* community - almost all contributions are Sun employees. The "Sponsor" program clearly and fundamentally indicates that the community is not in control.

My point is that much of it may be open sourced, but that doesn't automatically mean it's "Linux friendly."

[* User community yes, but every operating system that survives past beta has a user community.]

warm brewing on the inexpensive health care front (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 6 years ago | (#23305668)

that would be kombucha, a strange brew that's also good for you.

Too many exclamations. (0, Flamebait)

Kingrames (858416) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305742)

So who wrote that summary?
Richard Simmons, or the Oxy Clean guy?

new tag: toomanyexclamations.

seriously, it's a real turn off.

Powered by Unixware 7.x! (2, Funny)

tushar (205002) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305846)

Thanks SCOSource. Without Unixware 7.x, this release would not have been possible. The previous releases based on Sys V were really crappy.

ZFS? Don't forget FreeBSD! (1)

Dri (16940) | more than 6 years ago | (#23305968)

My home servers are in screaming need of ZFS (A NetApp Filer for home use). I want ZFS implemented in Linux, like everyone else. Moving to a OpenSolaris based distribution just feels awkward and wrong, especially when ZFS has made it into FreeBSD 7.0 as an experimental feature [freebsd.org] .

I'm eyeballing the FreeNAS [freenas.org] project daily. Sooner or later we will have a ZFS appliance [sourceforge.net] , free as in beer at least. Sun have to work harder to win me over but things look promising. (Ubuntu on Sun hardware [ubuntu.com] [+], trying to release Java under an Open Source license [sun.com] [+], closing some MySQL features [slashdot.org] [-])

What is the news ? (2, Insightful)

slashdotlurker (1113853) | more than 6 years ago | (#23306012)

While ZFS is cool, it will someday be ported to Linux (the market forces are such). The advantages over ext3 etc. are simply not compelling enough for me to abandon an entire universe of software and hardware I have gotten used to with Linux distributions.

I see no use for Dtrace as I use nothing more fancy than Matlab for analyzing my data. No fancy number crunching or developing here. I used to do a lot of heavy duty Fortran 95 programming, but that is history (which will not be repeated).

So, Sun wants me to trial an OS that is about 5 years late, and has major hardware problems while offering no compelling reasons for the switch. Sorry, but Microsoft beat Sun by a year or so. Its called Vista.

I used to be a Solaris user (on Sun hardware) - used it for about 5-6 years. The image of pricey hardware that worked at half the speed of commonly available Intel/AMD hardware running Linux has sort of stayed with me.
Load More Comments
Slashdot Account

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?

Don't worry, we never post anything without your permission.

Submission Text Formatting Tips

We support a small subset of HTML, namely these tags:

  • b
  • i
  • p
  • br
  • a
  • ol
  • ul
  • li
  • dl
  • dt
  • dd
  • em
  • strong
  • tt
  • blockquote
  • div
  • quote
  • ecode

"ecode" can be used for code snippets, for example:

<ecode>    while(1) { do_something(); } </ecode>
Create a Slashdot Account

Loading...