Beta
×

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!

Illumos Sporks OpenSolaris

kdawson posted more than 4 years ago | from the may-grow-up-to-be-a-fork dept.

Open Source 161

suraj.sun sends in this news from The Register. "If you were hoping that someone would fork the OpenSolaris operating system, you are going to have to settle for a spork. You know, half spoon and half fork. That, in essence, is what the Illumos, an alternative open source project to continue development on the core bits of OpenSolaris, is all about. ... Development on OpenSolaris has all but stopped, so Garrett D'Amore, a former Sun and Oracle software engineer who worked on Solaris for many years, decided to do something about it. ... What Illumos is doing is taking the core OpenSolaris kernel and foundation, which is called OS/Net or ON inside of the former Sun, and creating a repository and development community around that. ON includes the kernel, C libraries, shell and shell utilities, file systems, and networking functions of OpenSolaris. 'We are not a distribution in a normal sense,' says D'Amore. 'It is more of a code base.' And one that Nexenta, Belenix, and SchilliX, who do create alternative distros for OpenSolaris, can in theory base their future releases upon if they don't like what is — or isn't — coming out of OpenSolaris."

Sorry! There are no comments related to the filter you selected.

should read ... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128500)

larry sporks OSOL community in the solaris ...

Greedy Jews (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128518)

Why do Jews have such huge noses? Because air is free.

How was copper wiring invented? Two Jews fighting over a penny.

Use the FreeBSD userland please! (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128588)

I hope they decide to use the FreeBSD userland on top of the OpenSolaris kernel. The FreeBSD userland is the premiere UNIX-like userland environment available today, and is also released under an extremely liberal license that maximizes everybody's freedom.

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (2, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129276)

Here I was, thinking that GNU was the premier userland, at least in terms of the number of users who depend on. Oh, wait, I see what you did there, you started a GPL-vs.-BSD license flamewar.

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129524)

No, the FreeBSD userland wins in terms of market share too thanks to Apple.

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130030)

How do you count premiere? Features? How about code quality? Compare these two for a trivial example:

FreeBSD cp.c: view [freebsd.org]
Coreutils cp.c: view [gnu.org]

The latter is embarrassing and the person should be ashamed to call himself a programmer. And this is, by far, one of the better-written GNU parts. I have long felt that the FreeBSD tools are better suited to being paired with Linux than the GNU tools are, as they both (FreeBSD & Linux) maintain similar coding standards, and the FreeBSD tools are better documented and undeniably more secure & bug-free.

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130674)

The latter is embarrassing and the person should be ashamed to call himself a programmer.

What are you talking about? This is just awesome!

#define AUTHORS \
    proper_name_utf8 ("Torbjorn Granlund", "Torbj\303\266rn Granlund"), \
    proper_name ("David MacKenzie"), \
    proper_name ("Jim Meyering")

/snark

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130676)

Well, and the BSDs also like to ignore standards like POSIX, e.g. OpenBSD having an nm without the -P option, some other BSD deprecating od in favour of some other tool that is even less standardized and certainly not part of POSIX.
They also since years don't manage to get such simple things like includes in the system headers right, you usually need to sprinkle random #include into code that works on almost all other systems (almost since in that regard they are quite similar to Solaris).
Not that I doubt you can find a lot of faults in GNU stuff, just saying that the BSD tools often are quite a PITA in their very own way.

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130320)

The BSD userland is far closer to the existing Solaris userland than the GNU userland utilities are, thanks to a shared heritage (both were or are derived from real UNIX, unlike Linux and the GNU utilities). This has serious compatibility implications for people who want to transition existing shell scripts, for instance, from a Solaris system to a system running this new OS.

The BSD userland code is also far, far better than the GNU code. It's better documented, it has far fewer bugs, and it's much nicer to work with from a development perspective. Go check the code yourself, assuming you know C (given your high level of ignorance, you might not).

The BSD license does give much more freedom to more people than the GPL ever could. That's indisputable. The GPL is about limiting what people can do with the source code. It takes away the freedom to not distribute changes.

It's too bad the GP was modded "flamebait". What he says is absolutely true. It's too bad some GNU fanatics just can't accept reality.

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130862)

Here I was, thinking that GNU was the premier userland, at least in terms of the number of users who depend on. Oh, wait, I see what you did there, you started a GPL-vs.-BSD license flamewar.

nice try. GP was talking about BSD userland vs CDDL Solaris. His opinion is that BSD is the premier userland. Don't try to pick fights.

Re:Use the FreeBSD userland please! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130842)

The FreeBSD userland is the premiere UNIX-like userland environment available today, and is also released under an extremely liberal license that maximizes everybody's freedom.

Especially the freedom of developers to have companies profit from their hard work while giving nothing back. Hey, who wouldn't want that? That's why I can't understand why Open Source didn't truly take off as a movement until after the GPL was created...

Is it worth the effort? (0, Flamebait)

ClaraBow (212734) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128602)

Does Opensolaris have something unique to offer than Linux doesn't?

Re:Is it worth the effort? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128636)

ZFS!

Re:Is it worth the effort? (-1, Redundant)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128654)

Does Opensolaris have something unique to offer than Linux doesn't?

ZFS

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128664)

No, but perhaps the codebase is cleaner and has fewer bugs? Clearly, someone is interested in it.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

fnj (64210) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130218)

Incorrect. Linux will "never" have ZFS.

Unreasonable licensing in the way? (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130324)

In spite of the licensing issues, has anyone tried to just port ZFS code directly to Linux?

Re:Unreasonable licensing in the way? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130814)

Upcoming btrfs (aka butterfs) I think has similar snapshot features

Re:Is it worth the effort? (4, Informative)

captrb (1298149) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128680)

Zones, ZFS, and DTrace don't have equivalents in Linux with feature parity.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Informative)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128750)

Unless I am confused, "Zones" are virtual machines. If you think there is no equivalent, I guess you are not familiar with Xen or KVM, or the dozens of other VMs out there. ZFS is available as a FUSE driver, and Linux already has attachable debugging, although perhaps not with "feature parity."

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Informative)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128940)

Unless I am confused, "Zones" are virtual machines.

This is easy, you clearly are.

If you think there is no equivalent, I guess you are not familiar with Xen or KVM

Yah, we've heard of that too. http://prefetch.net/blog/index.php/category/solaris-xen/ [prefetch.net]

although perhaps not with "feature parity."

Exactly.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128972)

Would you perhaps like to explain to me and people like me how "Zones" are different from "virtual machines?"

Re:Is it worth the effort? (3, Informative)

berashith (222128) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129134)

one kernel shared amongst the zones, not VMs populated with independent OSes. The zones can "loopback" filesystems, so /usr is only created once . Each zone has independent configs for users and such, and is visible as files from the global OS. VMs dont have a global OS, they just sit on a hypervisor.

this is the first 5 seconds of differences. The biggest thing to note is they are nothing alike.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

wumpus188 (657540) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129512)

Ok, so how is this different from OpenVZ or FreeBSD jails?

Re:Is it worth the effort? (4, Informative)

nathanh (1214) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129682)

OpenVZ and FreeBSD Jails are equivalent conceptually to Solaris Containers. The difference is the extent to which they've been implemented. Sun went the whole hog and made Solaris Containers "first class citizens". All the user space tools were modified to understand zones. All the documentation was updated. All the application suites were updated. They're not a ill-supported second-rate tack-on so you can tick the "we've got that" feature box.

If you want the analogy, it's like Microsoft saying "don't use Apache, we've got a webserver too" and pointing to IIS. In theory, true. In practise, bullshit.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Interesting)

mr_da3m0n (887821) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129910)

If you want the analogy, it's like Microsoft saying "don't use Apache, we've got a webserver too" and pointing to IIS. In theory, true. In practise, bullshit.

I am annoyed at how I have been 'defending' Microsoft lately -- but you might want to revist that analogy since IIS7 is actually a pretty decent web server now :)

On topic, I think it's worth mentioning that the current OpenSolaris codebase doesn't support sparse root zones, which makes me sad. IPS apparently doesn't account for them at this point. Last I checked, they were still discussing wether to implement them or just scrap them in favor of full root zones with ZFS deduplication.

OpenSolaris is still useful, though.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

mehemiah (971799) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130112)

less setup, doesn't require a kernel patch (which i think OpenVZ does) http://cgrouphacking.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Informative)

kg8484 (1755554) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129146)

Wikipedia has a decent article [wikipedia.org] on the subject.

[A] zone does not have its own separate kernel (in contrast to a hardware virtual machine)

Re:Is it worth the effort? (4, Informative)

Massacrifice (249974) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129242)

explain to me and people like me how "Zones" are different from "virtual machines?"

Zones share the same kernel. Much, much less overhead than full-blown VMs, both in setup and resource use. You can flavor your zones to be Linux or BSD compatible. You can give them their own (virtual or physical) network adapters. Think Apache Virtual Hosts, but at the OS layer. Or a midaway cross between a chroot and a VM. It's really nice stuff.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130896)

Would you perhaps like to explain to me and people like me how "Zones" are different from "virtual machines?"

Zones have 1% overhead:

                http://blogs.sun.com/bmseer/entry/virtually_no_overhead_solaris_zones

Virtual machines (specifically VMware) can have 36% overhead:

                http://blogs.sun.com/BestPerf/entry/sun_x4270_virtualized_for_two

Zones are super-charged FreeBSD jails (they're explicitly mentioned as a source of inspiration). They add the ability to mount /usr and other file systems (and even raw disk devices) as R/O so that you only have to keep one OS image patched (though you can optionally have an independent /usr et al.).

Recent improvements include Project Crossbow:

              http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Project+crossbow/WebHome
              http://www.cuddletech.com/blog/pivot/entry.php?id=999

Solaris also runs just fine in VMware and Xen if you want to use that. You can actually have a Solaris VM on ESX, and then create zones in that VM. Zones work the same whether under x86 or SPARC.

Add Solaris Cluster, and you can also have fail over services or even entire zones from one physical machine to another.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129468)

at least you replied politely and without a snarky attitude. >_>

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129088)

Zones are not VMs. FreeBSD jails are probably the closest thing to it. Virtualization technologies are eventually going to render both of those obselete, I think, but it hasn't gotten there yet. And if you think a FUSE driver is any kind of substitute for a full implementation, you have no business running a data center. Even FreeBSD's port of ZFS isn't always up to snuff, and it's leaps and bounds beyond the FUSE driver.

Look, you've obviously picked a "side" and you'll pull out any comparison you need to support it, so stop pretending you can offer any kind of objectivity. I rather doubt you've even got any experience with a Unix OS that isn't Linux.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

morgan_greywolf (835522) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129582)

FreeBSD jails are probably the closest thing to it. Virtualization technologies are eventually going to render both of those obselete

Right. FreeBSD jails, AIX LPARs, and Solaris Zones are all about the same thing, with perhaps AIX LPARs and Solaris Zones being the two most scalable.

And I don't think that full virtualization or even paravirtualization is going to replace these technologies anytime soon. They are far more scalable, far easier to setup, and have had high availability features for years that virtualization technologies only recently have begun adding. For example, an AIX LPAR can run on one machine, and if that machine goes down, another machine with an identical instance can pick it up and run with it -- all without the LPAR's users even knowing about it. I think Zones can do this too.

On the filesystem front, the Linux equivalent that will eventually be on-par feature-wise with ZFS is btrfs. Unfortunately, btrfs isn't ready for prime-time yet. In the meantime, high-end NAS/SAN devices like EMC's Celerra do what ZFS does, only better.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (3, Informative)

nathanh (1214) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129382)

Unless I am confused, "Zones" are virtual machines. If you think there is no equivalent, I guess you are not familiar with Xen or KVM, or the dozens of other VMs out there.

Yes, you are confused, which probably indicates your lack of familiarity with Solaris Zones.

Xen, KVM, VMware, Sun Logical Domains, and Sun Virtualbox, are all examples of hardware virtualisation. They simulate a hardware platform; a virtual machine. Each VM has its own kernel and scheduler and memory space and device drivers and virtualised storage.

Solaris Zones is an example of operating system virtualisation. There is no direct equivalent on Linux. There is a single kernel for all the zones. A single set of device drivers. A single process tree. Potentially a single storage system. It's extremely lightweight compared to virtual machines.

Thinking of Zones as "virtual machines" is simply wrong. They are more like process groups, or process sets, and in fact on Solaris they are implemented in part by using resource groups. There is virtualisation but it's not at the machine layer; that's why they're not virtual machines.

To illustrate the significant differences, on the same hardware that Xen can run 10 VMs, Solaris can run 100s of zones. Xen can lose 10% or more CPU to overheads, Solaris Zones loses less than 1%. Xen can lose as much as 90% of I/O performance, Solaris Zones loses less than 1%. Xen places restrictions on the resources available to each VM, Solaris Zones can gain access to the full resources of the hardware. Xen requires each VM to be patched and maintained separately, Solaris Zones are patched and maintained through the "host" OS.

These benefits are only possible because Solaris Zones are not VMs.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130662)

As others have said, you're clearly confused.

Zones ~= BSD jails or Linux jail environment, but better in many ways (security/compartmentalization, independence, implementation, configuration, adaptability). Security can be much more tightly defined as to what the zone can or can not do (more like a host level ACL) as can be in Linux.

Containers ~= virtual machines. It's a zone with the ability to do true VM type stuff. Except better, in that it's able to run pretty much anything (try vbox under a container, for instance). Except unlike VMWare, Xen, XenServer, or the like, it's actually pretty easy to change a bunch of settings like bandwidth, memory allocation, nice, etc. of a container instance, and has been possible for some time - unlike the "real soon now" for many VM implementations.

And surely you're trolling about ZFS. ZFS FUSE is even worse than the FreeBSD implementation in terms of performance and stability.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Informative)

Junta (36770) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128772)

lxc exists in linux as a Zones alternative.
I don't know first hand, but some would say systemtap is on the level of DTrace.
btrfs may eventually provide zfs parity (but not today, even if considered stable the featureset lags in some ways).

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

berashith (222128) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129172)

a dtrace script will work when run against a solaris10 server regardless of patch levels. Systemtap has some similarity, but the scripts that work on one are not reliably portable between patch revisions or systems.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

nathanh (1214) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129462)

LXC will one day be a zones alternative. Right now it's a pre-1.0 alpha with severely reduced functionality. I consider it basically unusable in its current form.

Same deal for BTRFS. One day it will be a ZFS alternative. Right now it's only for BTRFS developers.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130284)

???

LXC now has network/PID/FS virtualization, and is even supported by SELinux. There's also support for live migration of containers.

Its userspace tools are indeed immature, but kernel-level features are OK.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128778)

Don't forget Crossbow.

For ZFS alone it's worth it (1)

SIGBUS (8236) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129520)

When I started trying out OpenSolaris early this year, ZFS actually saved me from losing files to a hard drive that was silently corrupting data. Needless to say, my file server now runs OpenSolaris, even though the rest of my network is a mix of Linux and Windows.

Yes, FreeBSD has ZFS now, but it lags behind the OpenSolaris version - and I don't have the time for the compile-the-world approach for updates that the FreeBSD world prefers.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129630)

but none of those are required to do mission critical business computing, which is why Solaris and OpenSolaris have lost (too little too late in both cases) and GNU/Linux has won. Go ahead and flog your dead horse, but the Solari are toast.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Insightful)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129654)

no, but FreeBSD jails are basically the same thing as Solaris Zones, and FreeBSD supports ZFS and DTrace, too. Plus, the added benefit of also not being Linux.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

rubycodez (864176) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129794)

I'm glad my Linux doesn't have the FreeBSD feature of seizing up under heavy IPC under SMP load because the locking model is too complex

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

bsDaemon (87307) | more than 4 years ago | (#33131144)

Yeah, I can see where I'd be mad about that, too, if I'd ever encountered it using FreeBSD since 2.2.8 in both a hobbyist and professional environment. Luckily, it's never been an issue.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

Cyberax (705495) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130258)

Zones = OpenVZ / Linux Containers (and they have some features that Solaris lacks)
DTrace = SystemTap (fairly mature)
ZFS = btrfs (not very mature yet)

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Interesting)

CAIMLAS (41445) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130486)

Feature parity? THat's being generous. Linux has nothing that compares with those features (or containers) in and of itself. (And this coming from someone who loves linux and has used it for almost 15 years.) Particularly, (Open)Solaris ZFS is light years ahead of any other filesystem - and yes, I'm excluding the other ZFS implementations from being awesome, because they really aren't yet.

OpenSolaris has also done some work integrating VirtualBox into Containers; it supposedly works very well.

If nothing else, SOlaris provides (or rather, Sun provided) a single, clean, understandable interfacing tool (or set of tools) for their architectures (ZFS, zones, DTrace, VirtualBox) which is something Linux tends to lack. BSDs do it, too (well, mainly NetBSD), but Solaris's is very nice.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128876)

Yes. Zones, ZFS, SMF, dtrace, RBAC, and zero effort porting to Solaris on x86 or sparc. Linux has at best half-assed simulacrums for these features. The first three features alone are enough to justify OpenSolaris over Linux in many situations.

That said, Oracle's ham fisted approach to Solaris is effectively going to kill it. Lack of movement on OpenSolaris and new draconian licensing for Solaris means I'm going to be pushing for Linux to replace Solaris at my sites. I can deal with the reduced features if it means fewer licensing headaches.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

MBGMorden (803437) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129194)

I can deal with the reduced features if it means fewer licensing headaches.

Not to mention the fact that most of those features will likely have equivalents with GPL-compatible licensing within a year or two.

Whenever someone asks if Linux supports some cool feature that this niche project does, rather than "No.", a more appropriate answer will typically be "Not yet.".

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

JabrTheHut (640719) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130726)

Not to mention the fact that most of those features will likely have equivalents with GPL-compatible licensing within a year or two.

I've been hearing that since DTrace was announced. Before then, I was hearing it when Solaris 8 was new and Linux servers had to be rebooted to see new disk, or a reboot caused them to renumber the disks they had. It takes years to get these features implemented, tested, stable and bug-free. Pretending Linux will magically have something that's taken years for a major OS company to get right is delusional.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129898)

Oracle's ham fisted approach to Solaris is effectively going to kill it.

Isn't that what the fork is trying to prevent?

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

JabrTheHut (640719) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130680)

That's only the start of the list. There's also:
Dynamic (hardware) reconfiguration, projects, resource management and resource pools, processor sets and binding, investigative tools and fault management.

I like Linux. It has some definite advantages over Solaris. But Solaris is the best server OS I've used, and after 15 years of being a Unix admin I've used most of them - certainly everything currently Unix or Linux and supported today. It's going to be a real shame when Oracle kills it.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128890)

You mean other than API/ABI stability, less bugs and cleaner code base?

Re:Is it worth the effort? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129500)

Yes, and almost no hardware drivers, and very limited architecture support. But if that wasn't enough to kill solaris, there is no community of developers, almost everything has been done by Sun employees. Unless they GPL it, this will remain a fringe OS.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

Kymermosst (33885) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129786)

The same tired argument that Solaris does not support sound cards from 1995.

Nobody running high-end modern servers cares whether or not Solaris supports obsolete hardware.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130252)

Except that Sun (er, Oracle) took obsolete to mean "no longer commercially viable", with much regard to technological capability.

correction: without much regard (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130280)

N/T

Re:Is it worth the effort? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129130)

Yes, as has already been pointed out on LWN: due to its superior handling of the SCSI bus, it's a much better platform for burning CDs :-)

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

Gerald (9696) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129586)

"lsof -o" and SIGINFO come to mind.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (2, Informative)

jschmitz (607083) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129696)

OpenSolaris has DTrace, ZFS, Zones........While Linux' hardware support is wider than that of OpenSolaris, the latter does benefit from having a static driver interface. Where in Linux hardware support might actually break as time goes by, 10 year old Solaris drivers will still work today. There's also a Device Detection Tool which will tell you if your hardware is compatible with OpenSolaris. However the number of applications to choose form is quite limited compared to what Linux distributions generally have to offer. DTrace is really cool you can learn more about it here http://www.brendangregg.com/dtrace.html [brendangregg.com] Cheers - Jeffery

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130184)

Supporting platforms beyond the commercial viability of them(e.g. sun4m machines and early sun4u machines)?

Oh, wait. That's OpenBSD and Linux.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (1)

jonbryce (703250) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130614)

ZFS if you want to run a storage server. You can probably get ZFS running in Linux using FUSE, but it won't be so good, or you could port it as a kernel module, but it won't be legal.

Re:Is it worth the effort? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130832)

100 percent less Linus! :D

Missing sources? (2, Informative)

Antony T Curtis (89990) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128678)

Didn't the OpenSolaris effort have problems because they were always waiting on Sun to compile certain libc binaries for them?

Is this resolved in Illumos or is there still a binary blob issue?

Re:Missing sources? (5, Informative)

gstoddart (321705) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128802)

Didn't the OpenSolaris effort have problems because they were always waiting on Sun to compile certain libc binaries for them?

Is this resolved in Illumos or is there still a binary blob issue?

Apparently, it isn't. From TFA ...

The biggest problem is that an important minority of the code distributed with OpenSolaris is closed source, something that has annoyed the OpenSolaris community for five years. Sun didn't allocate resources to fix this and neither has Oracle.

D'Amore says that a significant percentage of the libc C library (libc_i18n to be precise) is closed, as is the NFS lock manager, portions of the kernel's cryptographic framework and functions, and a bunch of important drives.

So, no, the closed stuff still needs to be written and they don't have it.

Re:Missing sources? (1)

FranTaylor (164577) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129566)

the NFS lock manager

Linux has needed a proper NFS lock manager for many years. If Linux could duplicate its functionality, it would put a LOT of Solaris NFS servers out to pasture.

Re:Missing sources? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129738)

Unless I misunderstood, in the Webinar held today, D'Amore mentioned they have recreated libc. They are still working on other closed bits, but they expect great progress in the coming weeks.

Re:Missing sources? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130132)

That's not correct. From the presentation of D'Amore:

Work Done So Far:

  • Replaced closed bits of libc (including full locale support)
  • Replacements for most critical closed source utilities
  • Replacements for some drivers
  • It boots!
    • Still needs a few closed bits
    • But those will be replaced very soon with open equivalents

Re:Missing sources? (4, Informative)

anilg (961244) | more than 4 years ago | (#33131126)

(I'm in the project leadership team of Illumos)

We've opened the closed bits of libc - specifically the i18n portion of it.

What's still closed (and soon to be opened) is some additional drivers (mpt, etc) that are almost prepared to be released. All of the closed bits would be open in a short timeframe (weeks).

What you've quoted Garrett saying is in reference to OpenSolaris's code. That is followed by the announcement that we've opened it.

~Anil

Re:Missing sources? (1)

guruevi (827432) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128828)

That was slowly getting resolved with the latest development bits of OpenSolaris. However since the Oracle takeover there haven't been any updates (whereas before the schedule was weekly or bi-weekly 'unstable' releases).

Is There A Sufficient Community/Demand? (5, Interesting)

SlashdotOgre (739181) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128780)

While I applaud this effort, I have to wonder if enough folks with the requisite skills to do kernel/driver development will be motivated to assist. It was an excellent product with some cool features (ZFS, Zones, Dtrace, Crossbow, etc.), but it was very clear that the vast majority of the development came from paid Sun engineers. The OpenSolaris community was never anywhere near the size of the Linux community, and even with Linux a significant portion comes from corporations (see "The Myth of the Isolated Kernel Hacker" from last year: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=09/08/20/1342223 [slashdot.org] ). I really do hope OpenSolaris continues (or Oracle changes the license to be GPL compatible), but at this point I wouldn't be basing any new projects on the platform.

Re:Is There A Sufficient Community/Demand? (3, Insightful)

betterunixthanunix (980855) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128900)

The way I see it, OpenSolaris should have happened five years earlier, when people might have still cared. By the time Sun announced OpenSolaris, it was already an uphill battle to find open source developers who even cared about Solaris.

Re:Is There A Sufficient Community/Demand? (1)

Klaruz (734) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129552)

That, and they half-ass open sourced it. A whole bunch essential components are still closed source.

Re:Is There A Sufficient Community/Demand? (3, Informative)

anilg (961244) | more than 4 years ago | (#33131154)

The most important bit (libc_i18n) is opened. The rest is in the process, and will be pushed into the repo in very short time.

Oh the humanity! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128830)

Are the Sporks back? It's being a long time...

Re:Oh the humanity! (1)

cruff (171569) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128886)

Sporks have never left, they still lurk among us if you know where to look.

Re:Oh the humanity! (1)

SnarfQuest (469614) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129048)

And they are still useless for most purposes. It makes a lousy spoon, because liquids spill through the tines. It's like eating soup with a fork. It makes a lousy fork, as the tines are too short.

So, they're saying this OS is built by combining the useful parts together to build one that doesn't fit any real purpose.

Re:Oh the humanity! (1)

Ironhandx (1762146) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129156)

On the other hand I find they are great for eating chicken noodle soup as I like to leave the majority of the broth for last and eat it with bread.

Theres a niche-use field for almost everything :)

Re:Oh the humanity! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130420)

Yet they keep so quiet. What happened to all their hopes and dreams? The great plan...

OpenSolaris isn't dead till Oracle says so (2, Interesting)

ToasterMonkey (467067) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128844)

Development on OpenSolaris has all but stopped

Except it hasn't?

I mean biweekly, binary development builds haven't been released since 134 in March, but development clearly marches on.
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Main/ [opensolaris.org]
http://opensolaris.org/jive/thread.jspa?threadID=125446&tstart=0 [opensolaris.org]
http://cr.opensolaris.org/ [opensolaris.org]
http://hub.opensolaris.org/bin/view/Main/RecentChanges [opensolaris.org]
Think for yourselves..

Community (outside Oracle) development may have been frozen, and it might be worthwhile to have a liberal, free spirited fork to try new things, but if Oracle wanted OpenSolaris dead, there's a very fast an efficient way of doing that, and they have not. Don't call something dead unless you're pretty darned sure it aint going to wake up the next morning.

Re:OpenSolaris isn't dead till Oracle says so (1)

sethstorm (512897) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130418)

I'm not sure it's going to be dead as much as they're going to pick the good fruit and let the rest rot on the vine.

They just want to be able to pick the good parts out over time.

Half spoon and half fork (1)

Bouchmil (1800972) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128868)

I'd rather call it a foon. It sounds cooler.

Re:Half spoon and half fork (2, Insightful)

Phibz (254992) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129094)

I always thought a foon was more fork than spoon, and a spork more spoon than fork.

Re:Half spoon and half fork (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129478)

Fosporonk!

Re:Half spoon and half fork (1)

rickb928 (945187) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130244)

Foon sounds like it is sitting outside a bar in the parking lot with a bloody nose.

Debian GNU/Illumos? (3, Funny)

JSBiff (87824) | more than 4 years ago | (#33128912)

So, we have Debian GNU/Hurd, Debian GNU/Linux, Debian GNU/NetBSD, and Debian GNU/kFreeBSD. Does this mean we'll have Debian GNU/Illumos next?

Re:Debian GNU/Illumos? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129148)

GNU/Illumos would be Nexenta Core Platform.

Illumos is more like a source code repository.

R.I.P. Solaris (4, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128954)

I am a user of Solaris (formerly known as SunOS) for 20 years now. Most of the time, i have worked for a Sun partner. But now i have said my goodbyes to the company that once was Sun. While i still think that Solaris has the best kernel in respect of networking and multicore usage, i just cannot afford to let my attachment cloud business decisions. I should have cut my ties the moment Oracle anounced the takeover.

While it is well known that being a partner and being treated like a partner are quite different things, Oracle has taken this to new unexpected heights. That someone intentionally breaks the business model of partners (while not profiting oneself from that decision) is still something that puzzles me. I know what they intend, but they are really, really busy making enemies. If it were just me, but i have dozens of once loyal customers profanely swearing now, if the name Oracle/Sun is mentioned. I have seen IT managers, who controll several dozen million $ IT budget, vowing to never purchase a system from them again.

Solaris is dead, no fork or spork will change that. Even if they manage the code side, the well upon they sit is well poisoned. May Solaris rest in peace.

CU, Martin

P.S. Hate to post anonymously, but i don't dare other.

P.P.S. ... and it hurts like hell to write it.

Re:R.I.P. Solaris (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33129628)

Solaris is dead, no fork or spork will change that. Even if they manage the code side, the well upon they sit is well poisoned. May Solaris rest in peace.

Same opinion here. 15 years as a Solaris admin. Solaris is an admirable OS, but Oracle has already started destroying it with their licensing. I've been a Linux admin for 15 years too and I'd rather have fewer features if it means simpler licensing. It's going to hurt to lose ZFS and Zones in particular. But what really scares me is the half assed vendor support for Linux. If I get a Dell or HP or IBM system, they might let me install Linux, but it's never going to be the same as getting Sun hardware running Sun Solaris.

Posting anon because I still sub-contract to Sun/Oracle.

Re:R.I.P. Solaris (1)

TrevorDoom (228025) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130386)

Use FreeBSD. Jails may not be quite to the functionality of Zones, but it's better than what Linux has got...and ZFS v.15 (and v. 25 IIRC in 9.0 when it goes -CURRENT) is better than no ZFS at all.

Re:R.I.P. Solaris (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130684)

Use FreeBSD.

No thank you. I'd rather use Linux if I wasn't using Solaris. Too much ideological baggage with FreeBSD.

Re:R.I.P. Solaris (1, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33131116)

Believe me, despite some of the postings here, I'm sure there are a lot of Linux admins (and just *nix in general) that are standing with hat-in-hand, covering their heart, head bowed in remembrance... It's like loosing a cousin you meet with for twice a year. You didn't know them as well as you wanted to, but you know damn well it's not going to be the same once they're gone for good...and watching them die slowly is just fucking painful.

Now, a parting message for Oracle:

You have just fucked the pooch royally. Yeah, your large bloated government contracts and fortune-50-contacts will carry the day and you'll continue to milk those teets of all they're worth. But for everyone else "below your level", you just royally fucked yourself in the ass, in full Technicolor.

Enjoy your shell-of-a-zombie OS, after everyone has left...

*sound of crickets chirping* (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33128980)

And there was much not-caring. Seriously. Does ANYONE really care about OpenSolaris anymore outside Nexenta.com? (the data storage folks, not the distro)
ZFS or not it's just got no ground swell at all.

Re:*sound of crickets chirping* (1)

kthreadd (1558445) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129116)

Joyent care very deeply about it.

Aw man. :( (1)

CeruleanDragon (101334) | more than 4 years ago | (#33129584)

When I read the title and started reading the article for a minute I thought someone had taken a spork and built an OpenSolaris system into it. Now I'm sad and disappointed. :(

What if IBM bought Sun instead of Oracle? (1)

yuhong (1378501) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130040)

OT, but I wonder what would have happened if IBM bought Sun instead of Oracle.

Spork = bork bork bork? (2, Funny)

theNAM666 (179776) | more than 4 years ago | (#33130288)

That's the million-dollar question tonight, here in Solaris-land tonight, ladies and gentlemen.

Coming up next-- Yet-Another-Patent-disputed, filed by... tune in at 10 O'Clock to find out who!

Hopefully Debian will do an official port now (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 4 years ago | (#33130762)

Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?