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!

Open Solaris Derivative Available

Zonk posted more than 9 years ago | from the zonkx-is-coming-next dept.

Unix 209

tezbobobo writes "Well, Open Solaris has only been available a matter of days and already there are new projects available. SchilliX is an OpenSolaris-based live CD and distribution that is intended to help people discover OpenSolaris. When installed on a hard drive, it also allows developers to develop and compile code in a pure OpenSolaris environment. More details are available on the author's blog."

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

Been in dev for some time. (5, Interesting)

DAldredge (2353) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852555)

Thursday, March 24, 2005
Pure OpenSolaris boots on x86
Today, I have been able to boot from a disk that was empty before I did install a self compiled OpenSolaris on it.

So we now reached a certain limit that makes it possible to start with creating a OpenSolaris based x86 distribution at BerliOS.

bootloader screenshot (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852612)

ok nice of him to show us he's got a bootloader working with that screenshot..

HI NIGGER (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852640)

Welcome to America. The cotton fields are to your left.

Re:Been in dev for some time. (2, Interesting)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852704)

Why do your own distro? Just wait, Debian people will probably start a Debian GNU/Opensolaris clone soon

Re:Been in dev for some time. (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852838)

STFU, moronic shitbag. Take your ignorant lies elsewhere.

This has a good chance of getting /.ed (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852568)

Could someone put a torrent up please?

whats the difference ? (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852582)


between solaris and linux ?

Re:whats the difference ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852666)

They are different operating systems [wikipedia.org] .

Re:whats the difference ? (4, Funny)

node 3 (115640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852733)

between solaris and linux ?

One sucks, and the other doesn't.

Or it might be the other way around.

Re:whats the difference ? (4, Informative)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852769)

They are two different OS and run on different kernels for a start(note that linux is just a kernel anyway)
Linux has a broader compatibility with x86 hardware
Solaris has by default a better permissions system
Linux is under the GNU GPL and thus a little freer than OpenSolaris
Solaris has far better NFS support , not that you would notice unless your running with allot of clients
Solaris is certified POSIX complient and linux is just pretty much POSIX compliant (mainly due to the cost of being declared posix compliant , and the rate the linux kernel evolves)
Those are some of many many many differences.

Re:whats the difference ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852835)

But they are both UNIX-like systems right, with everything you could expect from such an operating system? (chown, ls, /, etc.)

Re:whats the difference ? (2, Informative)

rhizome (115711) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852864)

>But they are both UNIX-like systems right, with everything you could
>expect from such an operating system? (chown, ls, /, etc.)

Solaris is full-blooded SysV, Linux is a hodgepodge of SysV and BSD style Unix.

Re:whats the difference ? (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852871)

Yes pretty much ,if you want to really simplify things .
At the user level they should feel very similar (Depending on your installed Desktop environment or if its pure text mode, your installed shells).
The differences are very much admin level differences, the average Luser would not have to worry ,bar of course if you wanted to install some programs then you may run in to trouble (of-course on most my systems installs are purely admin level, so its a moot point)

Re:whats the difference ? (1)

pete-classic (75983) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853162)

Allot means to parcel out or assign. I think you meant "a lot". I guess you are to be congratulated for not writing "alot".

-Peter

Re:whats the difference ? (1)

Empty Threats (543523) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853227)

Yes. You won't notice that Linux NFS is totally, completely broken unless you're running with "a lot" of clients.

In this case, "a lot" actually means "any non-zero number."

Re:whats the difference ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12853289)

IT was ment to be a-lot , shouldn't leave spell checker on auto correct

linux knows about laptops (1)

steve_l (109732) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853351)

the 2.6 kernel knows enough about ACPI and laptops to be usable on the move, with a laptop that can switch from network location to location, the WLAN rebinding, power management engaging. It also knows enough about mainstream hardware that I managed to get both ubuntu and Suse 9.3 working on a 2 year old laptop, even the WLAN working. It suspends to disk! and comes back!

I suspect solaris is more server/desk workstation centric. I know sun dont make laptops, and stopped funding powerbook purchases a few years back. I also know that Java (J2SE) lacks any APIs for power management features, and the implementation cannot handle things like IP addresses changing during the lifespan of a process. (e.g. all DNS lookups are cached forever by default, there is no way to turn this off in an app itself, only the command line).

If solaris drivers dont have power management in there, it will take a lot of work to retrofit it.

Good news! (0, Flamebait)

f0d0 (140677) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852589)

Perhaps Jörg will leave xcdroast to more Open Standards minded people now that he's got something new on his hands?

Re:Good news! (2, Insightful)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852703)

I don't think that Jörg is part of xcdroast. He wrote and maintains cdtools. xcdroast is just a gui for cdrecord. cdtools is released under the GPL. Why don't you find some open standards minded people yourself and fork it to fix it. From what I've read on the lkml it doesn't seem to have anything to do with open standards anyway and you can get around it by running it as root.

That's one of the benefits of open source. :)

Re:Good news! (-1, Troll)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852758)

That's one of the benefits of open source. :)

That, and the large amounts of hairy, sweaty anal sex.

You're an idiot! (3, Insightful)

Some Random Username (873177) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853134)

He does cdrecord, not xcdroast. And he does use open standards, that's why it works on several unix OSs. Just because linux developers make some random change does not mean its magically an "open standard", its non-standard, linux-specific behaviour. Linux making random stupid changes and not informing people who use the now altered API is entirely the fault of linux developers. If you don't like it, use an OS that doesn't do this, or complain to the linux developers who created the problem.

BSD, Linux and now Solaris-derivatives.. (2, Interesting)

E IS mC(Square) (721736) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852593)

Battle of *nix(es) is on!!

Re:BSD, Linux and now Solaris-derivatives.. (4, Insightful)

node 3 (115640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852754)

And Darwin.

Battle of *nix(es) is on!!

This time, it's all open (amazing!).

This time, everyone's a winner.

In Soviet Russia .... (-1)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852606)

... the 'open' operating System compiles and executes developers.

MOD PARENT UP !!! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852803)

ha ha ...that was funny !!

Hooray! (1)

duncanbojangles (787775) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852615)

This was just the thing I needed to convince me to try Open Solaris. Hopefully porting drivers from Linux and the *BSD's to Open Solaris won't prove too difficult.

Re:Hooray! (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852887)

Well, is this not one of the impacts Suns license has, that it is not compitable with the GPL, as such, drivers can not be freely ported?

Re:Hooray! (2, Interesting)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853045)

"This was just the thing I needed to convince me to try Open Solaris. Hopefully porting drivers from Linux and the *BSD's to Open Solaris won't prove too difficult."

BSDs more likely than Linux because of licensing restrictions. Although a good number of drivers for the linux kernel are written as modules and don't have to have to be GPL'd. In fact there are a number of drivers that are released under a BSD license as well as proprietary, binary-only drivers. Also more hardware venders might support the Solaris x86 platform. nVidia released Solaris 10 x86/x64 drivers. [nvnews.net]

Re:Hooray! (1)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853063)

This was just the thing I needed to convince me to try Open Solaris. Hopefully porting drivers from Linux and the *BSD's to Open Solaris won't prove too difficult.

:) If you have any problems, just email the author. You will be suprised at how helpful and understanding good ol' "Schily" is. *Turns purple while choking back laughter* You could also ask him why he insists on using his own broken version of printf in mkisofs while you're at it.

Oh great, let the fun begin (-1, Flamebait)

teslatug (543527) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852619)

Let's start fragmenting Solaris into a bajillion distros that serves people's whim. Let's get it to the point where you don't know if you can ship binaries because you don't know what's supported. Let's get it to the point where you have to hunt down your favorite programs and their dependencies, and compile everything by hand. Let's take it a step further and shuffle all the program locations and make a distro out of that. Let's change the packaging system because the current one sucks, and let's replace it with an incompatible, but better! one. Diversity is good right? You get your OS just the way you like it, and damn the compatibility. Sure it's no where near the Linux mess, but man would I hate for Solaris to become another Linux.

Hate to rain on your parade... (1)

Moth7 (699815) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852649)

But the article says "Derivative" not "Dervivatives".

No need to jump the gun.

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852650)

Yes, Linux is such a "mess" that Sun have been _forced_ to copy it !

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852894)

Actually, Solaris is way more advanced than Linux, and there were fears a lot of the stuff is going to be copied into Linux once Solaris is open sourced.

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (3, Interesting)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852987)

" Yes, Linux is such a "mess" that Sun have been _forced_ to copy it !" Actually, it looks like the reverse [lkml.org] is already starting to happen. And in the past the linux kernel guys were able to get info from solaris and solaris engineers. here [google.com] Some comments are negative some are positive but Solaris is mentioned the most by far out of any of the commercial Unixes. I can't find the link right now but I remember someone saying that back in the day Sun was a lot more open with it's technology. Sun engineers would publish info about their hardware and software. Especially when someone was having some sort of trouble. Then they got a little more closed down. Probably when they were making a ton of money. Sounds like Scott McNealy recognizes that and wants Sun to go back to being more open [bayosphere.com] .

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (4, Insightful)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852681)

Honestly i think your Jumping the gun a little. This wont happen to solaris , solaris will always be solaris and compatible with itself . If this distros goes so far as to be incompatible with Solaris main then it will cease to be a solaris.
Solaris is an OS as opposed to linux which is just a kernel

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (2, Insightful)

mph_az (880372) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853291)

BSD is an OS as opposed to linux which is just a kernel, and yet look at how fragmented BSD is.

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (1)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853307)

No BSD is the equivalent of system V , its a type of UNIX kernel

Coding in Parallel (1, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852731)

You gotta love it. We need more open source desktops, word processors, image editors, code editors, FTPers, news readers, groupware, web browsers, mulimedia players, and so on...

The more parallel libraries that I have to install on my machine...the better. Sure, the libraries perform the same task, and you have to have at least 2 gigs to fit a common distro, but that's how the ball bounces when you're dealing with egos the size of china managing projects.

LET THE FLAMES BEGIN: (i'll help)

- freedom of choice
- competition is good
- projects don't have similar licenses, so if one license fails it won't kill everything
- freedom of choice
- it's difficult to get many programmers working on the same project. (Tell that to Linus)
- I'll do what I want to do


You know, after reading those points again....I've thought about it and I actually like the idea of coding in parallel. HEY LINUS, you have too much control of the kernel and we need more freedom. I say we fork the kernel into 10 different projects. And I'm not talking about the standard forks where the good stuff is added back into the main branch....I'm talking about permanent forks baby. I want each kernel fork to reinvent the same wheels, solve the same problems, deal with the same issues. I mean, you expect me to believe that the hundreds of people can contribute to the same project....THAT'S IMPOSSIBLE. It will surely fail. In addition, if the GPL fails, we're in big big big trouble. LINUS, please, for me, fork the kernel.

Here's the deal: the majority of the OSS community is made up of ego driven men striving to be the alpha. It needs a benelovent dictator (like Linus is with the kernel) to get all this crap cleaned up.

OSS? (3, Insightful)

pedantic bore (740196) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852808)

... majority of the OSS community is made up of ego driven men striving to be the alpha.

No need to smear the OSS community. That describes the non-OSS community perfectly also.

There are people who hack for the love of it, and there are people who write code because they have a vision of making the world a better place through better technology... you just don't hear about them too much. They don't feel the need to self-promote.

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852791)

Try reading the article. This is a very minor modification to OpenSolaris that lets it run as a livecd. I imagine the modifications are purely in the boot code. If anything, this is good for OpenSolaris because it'll let people experiment with it and maybe grow the user/dev base a bit.

And who the hell are you? (1)

cbreaker (561297) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852810)

I mean, how much did you pay for Linux? Or OpenSolaris? How much code did you write for either? What's your personal stake in this?

I think it's great - GNU/Linux has been made possible by people writing software that suits their needs. We've got some great software, viable operating systems, and Linux systems are all basically compatible with one another. Your "favorite programs" wouldn't exist without it.

So why don't you stop bitching about what YOU want, and appreciate the work that's been done thus far. Sure, sometimes the dependencies thing is a pain, but it's only because OSS is moving so fast that it can be painfull. And I'll take that trade-off any day.

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (1)

swordgeek (112599) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852856)

Don't forget, though. Sun will regularly be releasing updates of their code. OpenSolaris isn't just a one-time fork from the Solaris code, it's an ongoing concern. In other words, there will be a stable and current base--always--to work from.

Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (2, Informative)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852908)

Just to emphasize... According to Eric Boutilier in his blog [sun.com] "under the new Solaris/Opensolaris model, in order for a Sun developer to put code into regular Solaris (the Solaris that Sun ships), he/she will have to put it into Opensolaris first."

Torrents (4, Informative)

RickPartin (892479) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852624)

In case the Open Solaris site goes down or you just don't feel like clicking two links on the page

Torrents! [sun.com]

Derivation on the purest form (2, Interesting)

Transcendent (204992) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852629)

Technically, can't I change one line of code or some small functionality and call it a derivative? It even sounds like they didn't do much: "When installed on a hard drive, it also allows developers to develop and compile code in a pure OpenSolaris environment."

It seems just a cut-down version (text only) of Solaris, so where's the improvement?

Re:Derivation on the purest form (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852645)

Why is it a cut-down version?

Re:Derivation on the purest form (3, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852659)

It seems just a cut-down version (text only) of Solaris, so where's the improvement?

The improvement is that it's a LiveCD.

Re:Derivation on the purest form (3, Funny)

FidelCatsro (861135) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852692)

Text only is a vast improvement to CDE ;)

Re:Derivation on the purest form (1)

CdBee (742846) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852752)

Especially if you have the initials C.D.E, use them to sign off emails, and have to work with CDE every day. The potential for confusion can be immense.

Re:Derivation on the purest form (3, Insightful)

node 3 (115640) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852779)

It seems just a cut-down version (text only) of Solaris, so where's the improvement?

It's a milestone.

After months (years?) of "show us the code" from the /. crowd, this sort of makes Open Solaris real.

Re:Derivation on the purest form (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12853313)

The real OpenSolaris still has lots of binary
only part. The improvement of schillix is that
it only consists of truly free components.

However he does not seem to supply source code
(or I don't see it on the ftp site) so he may be even be in violation of the CDDL.

gnaa (-1, Troll)

eneville (745111) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852644)

www.gnaa.us

echo OpenSolaris | sed s/O// | sed s/Solar// (3, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852653)

Enough said.

Re:echo OpenSolaris | sed s/O// | sed s/Solar// (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852736)

Wow, the things one encounters when browsing at Score:0

Re:echo OpenSolaris | sed s/O// | sed s/Solar// (0, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852958)

Why don't you learn how to use `sed` properly before trying to be funny:

echo "OpenSolaris" | sed -e 's/O//' -e 's/Solar//'

Learn UNIX first, mmmmkay?

And it's NOT FUNNY, BTW.

What will be funny is when Linux starts losing share to (Open)Solaris.

Re:echo OpenSolaris | sed s/O// | sed s/Solar// (4, Funny)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853120)

Why don't you learn how to use `sed` properly before trying to be funny:

The AC sed it wasn't funny? Seriously, the people I know who can use sed correctly don't have a sense of humor. They also tend to use emacs instead of the superior vi. :)

Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ? (-1, Offtopic)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852661)

SchilliX? Is he trying to flatter Linus, naming the OS by using his own name with the last syllable replaced with an 'X' ?

Re:Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852672)

Yes. Because we have never seen a UNIX OS whose name ends in "X" before Linux.

Re:Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ? (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852729)

The ones before Linux weren't named after a person. This one is. The guy's name is Schilling.

Re:Imitation is the sincerest form of flattery ? (1)

Cross-Threaded (893172) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852994)

Hmmm... Knoppix ring a bell?

Yes but... (4, Funny)

diegocgteleline.es (653730) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852662)

does it have cdrecord?

Re:Yes but... (1)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853149)

does it have cdrecord?

No, you'll have to get the "Professional" version of cdrtools from "Schily".

When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (3, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852667)

What is the *primary* reason anyone would use Open Solaris over Linux, *BSD, and Windows?

When I use Linux, it is because I am hosting/running existing software like Trac/Subversion/PostgreSQL/... which appear most heavily used/tested on Linux than any other platform.

When I use FreeBSD, it is because I am hosting/running/distributing my own software and I don't want to deal with LGPL requirements regarding binaries linked to LGPL C libs (yes, I consultant an IP attorney about differences between GPL and LGPL requirements and also consulted FSF.ORG).

When I use Windows, it is because I am running software that is not available on either FreeBSD or Linux. And also for distributing software on a platform that has the largest marketshare.

When I use Open Solaris, it is because ???

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (2, Insightful)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852732)

It is a very stable, scalable and secure OS with extremely good backwards compatibility, derived from BSD UNIX and created by a reputable company.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852840)

Not BSD derived.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (2, Informative)

spauldo (118058) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852934)

Not BSD derived.

Depends how you look at it.

Solaris 2 (2.7 became 7, 2.8 is 8, etc.) is based on the SunOS 5 kernel - which is SysV based.

However, Solaris 1 (also known as SunOS 4 and below - sun has a thing for changing names and version numbers) had a BSD derived kernel and userspace.

So there's a lot of BSD in Solaris 2 - they'd have been stupid to completely trash all the SunOS 4 code. Solaris 2 still runs a lot of SunOS code fine.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (2, Informative)

civilizedINTENSITY (45686) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852975)

It was SunOS that was BSD derived: "Joy left Berkeley with a master s degree in electrical engineering, and became cofounder of Sun Microsystems (Sun stands for Stanford University Network). Sun s implementation of BSD was called SunOS."

Of course, then, "1993 Sun announced that SunOS, release 4.1.4, would be its last release of an operating system based on BSD. Sun saw the writing on the wall and moved to System V, release 4, which they named Solaris. System V, release 4 (SRV4) was a merger of System V and BSD, incorporating the important features found in SunOS." http://unixed.com/Resources/history_of_solaris.pdf [unixed.com]

So, then, uh, looks like BSD *is* in the Solaris Family Tree...

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (3, Interesting)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852812)

The OpenSolaris license is the CDDL. It is not a viral license like the GPL. It was derived from the Mozilla Public License.

OpenSolaris is based off of the Solaris Next source tree which is the working codebase after (and built on code from) Solaris 10. I've run PostgreSQL 7.3, 7.4 and 8.0 on Solaris. http://www.sunfreeware.com/ [sunfreeware.com] has Subversion binaries. As for Trac it should compile fine. Solaris has a lot of development behind it and a lot of resources from Sun. OpenSolaris is still in its early stages though. Solaris 10 (the commercial one) might be a good fit for your hosting/running apps instead of FreeBSD. Solaris 10 is free to use but not open source. For distributing OpenSolaris might be a good choice but it was just released and not quite all the code is out there.

The CDDL is a per file license so unless you're hacking the actual OpenSolaris code it should serve the needs you have for using the BSD's. Some different benchmarks (like the mysql os benchmark) showed Solaris doint better than FreeBSD. Different independant benchmarks (think zdnet had some and different ISV's) show that the new Solaris can even hold it's own against Linux.

Though you'd probably want to consult a lawyer or at least check out the cddl faq and not just take my opinion.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852900)

Solaris 10 is free to use but not open source.

Not true. Solaris 10 is free to use for development and evaluation purposes only.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (2, Informative)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852938)

"Not true. Solaris 10 is free to use for development and evaluation purposes only."

Not true according to Sun you can use Solaris for free [sun.com] "As software business models are evolving Sun is taking an innovative lead role in making the Solaris 10 OS freely available for commercial use - and at zero cost." Though this does not extend to previous versions of Solaris like Solaris 9. Those you can only use for testing and development. RedHat doesn't even let you do that with RHEL. They only give you a 30 day trial license.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (4, Interesting)

Curtman (556920) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853115)

The OpenSolaris license is the CDDL. It is not a viral license like the GPL

Too bad they fucked up the Sun Contributor Agreement [opensolaris.org]

2. You hereby assign to Sun joint ownership in all worldwide common law and statutory rights associated with the copyrights, copyright applications and copyright registrations in Your Contribution, to the extent allowable under applicable local laws and copyright conventions, and agree never to assert against Sun any "moral rights" therein. You understand that
(i) this Agreement may be submitted by Sun to register a copyright in Your Contribution, and
(ii) Sun may exercise all rights as a copyright owner of Your Contribution. This Agreement supersedes and replaces all prior copyright assignments for Contributions made by You to Sun. Neither party has any duty whatsoever to render an accounting to the other party for any use of a Contribution.

If I contribute to Linux, I don't have to assign the copyright to Linus.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (2, Informative)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853169)

"If I contribute to Linux, I don't have to assign the copyright to Linus."

No you don't but the FSF recommends that you assign your copyright to them for GPL'd code. Sun is asking for joing ownership. You don't give up your copyright completely. When GPL v3 comes out, if Linus wants to upgrade to it he'll have to track down all the copyright holders to get their permission to relicense it. Didn't something like this already happen?

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (1)

Curtman (556920) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853206)

When GPL v3 comes out, if Linus wants to upgrade to it he'll have to track down all the copyright holders to get their permission to relicense it.

Bullshit [gnu.org] .

9. The Free Software Foundation may publish revised and/or new versions of the General Public License from time to time. Such new versions will be similar in spirit to the present version, but may differ in detail to address new problems or concerns.

Each version is given a distinguishing version number. If the Program specifies a version number of this License which applies to it and "any later version", you have the option of following the terms and conditions either of that version or of any later version published by the Free Software Foundation. If the Program does not specify a version number of this License, you may choose any version ever published by the Free Software Foundation.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (4, Insightful)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853342)

If you read that quote directly, the licensor has to specifically state [fsf.org] "any later version" in the license. "If each program lacked the indirect pointer, we would be forced to discuss the change at length with numerous copyright holders, which would be a virtual impossibility. In practice, the chance of having uniform distribution terms for GNU software would be nil."

So if the file doesn't say "Version 2 of the GPL or any later version" then that clause does not apply.

If you look at the linux kernel readme it says "It is distributed under the GNU General Public License - see the 19 accompanying COPYING file for more details. "

Also note that in the COPYING file it specifically states

"Also note that the only valid version of the GPL as far as the kernel is concerned is _this_ particular version of the license (ie v2, not v2.2 or v3.x or whatever), unless explicitly otherwise stated."
And there were only a couple files I found that explicityly stated it.

Next time, know what you're talking to before you call bullshit. This is from the 2.6.11 kernel. I didn't look at 2.6.12

same rule as Apache though (1)

steve_l (109732) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853308)

The ASF take ownership of your code when you donate it to them.

difference is, you know that Apache themselves wont run off with your code, though they may change the ASF license to something you dont agree with.

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (4, Insightful)

pedantic bore (740196) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852862)

Why run OpenSolaris:

Tools like DTrace. The ability to scale to large numbers of processors. A security model that is quite strong. A stable code base. A reasonable license. Decent management tools; a server mindset.

There's nothing all that revolutionary about it; it doesn't so much as fill a hole as provide another choice. Personally I see it as something to use when I would have used *BSD but I don't want to deal with the politics...

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (1)

bloo9298 (258454) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853014)

A security model that is quite strong.

How does the (Open)Solaris security model differ from that of a "standard" UNIX?

Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (2, Informative)

njcoder (657816) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853110)

"How does the (Open)Solaris security model differ from that of a "standard" UNIX?"

This is a good writeup of Solaris 10 Security [securityfocus.com] . They pulled some things in from Trusted Solaris such as process rights management.

author is well known (3, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852668)

You might know the author from cdrecord. He has a rather low opinion of the ide-scsi/ide-cd component of the kernel in general and Linus in particular. Good to see him where he is happy.

And solaris has a kick-ass kernel, no doubt about that. Debian/SunOS is the ultimate Unix environment in my mind. One day it will become reality, or so I hope...

Re:author is well known (1)

Arker (91948) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852776)

Debian/SunOS is the ultimate Unix environment in my mind. One day it will become reality, or so I hope...

Not likely. Take a look at the OSolaris license.

Re:author is well known (1)

rpozz (249652) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852898)

To make Debian/SunOS, you probably wouldn't need to mix CDDL and GPL code. There's nothing to stop CDDL and GPL binaries co-existing together.

Just out of interest, has anyone started working on this? I've got a bit of free time and would like to look into it.

Re:author is well known (1)

Arker (91948) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852945)

It may be technically feasible, but not socially. Most of the volunteers that make a project like Debian work care about Free Software, and read licenses.

Re:author is well known (1)

BobVila (592015) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852821)

I like that he is now acting on this opinion of linux. I would bet this is an attempt to get people on OpenSolaris so that people will see how much better cdrtools work on that platform. I don't know relaly, but maybe that is what he is thinking. And I respect that. If you think your operating system of choice is better than Linux, you should make it has easy to try has a Linux LiveCD. This is the way to go. You shouldn't bitch about it to Forbes magazine. That is bad.

Re:author is well known (1)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853222)

I would bet this is an attempt to get people on OpenSolaris so that people will see how much better cdrtools work on that platform.

Because Solaris supports so much more PC hardware than Linux? Y'know Bob, I never thought you knew very much during your home remodeling shows either.

ask debian-legal about CDDL and "Debian/Solaris" (1)

civilizedINTENSITY (45686) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853015)

Two threads appears on the debian-legal mailing list. One commented on the draft license, and the other on the OSI-approved license. I think the most pertinant entry from the former thread was this one, by Juhapekka Tolvanen which states: It probably fails the Chinese Dissident test, but I don't think that's a problem. The requirement to not modify "descriptive text" that provides attributions /may/ be a problem, but that'll depend on specific code rather than being a general problem... Andrew Suffield elaborates, saying: > Is that license free according to DFSG? Not intrinsically. Individual applications of it may be, with a liberal interpretation, or may not be, with a lawyer one. Notably it's capable of failing the Chinese Dissident test, and of containing a choice-of-venue provision. It also has a number of weasel-worded lawyer clauses that could be used in nasty ways... Yeah, it's another of those irritating buggers. We'll have to analyse each license declaration that invokes this thing. Followups in the later thread reinforce that none of the problems debian-legal had with the orignal draft appears to have shifted. To close out this entry I'd like to bring the sagely words of Stuart Yeates from debian-legal to bear: The CDDL is almost certainly better from pretty much every point of view (including that of the DFSG) than the current licences for Solaris. If you had ethical no problems with the old licences for Solaris, you're unlikely to have ethical problems with the CDDL.

Re:author is well known (3, Insightful)

vsprintf (579676) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853171)

You might know the author from cdrecord. He has a rather low opinion of the ide-scsi/ide-cd component of the kernel in general and Linus in particular. Good to see him where he is happy.

If you have any evidence to support your claim that he has ever been happy, quite a few of us would like to see it. Or maybe all those caustic replys to mailing lists are a sign of hidden joy?

What really disappoints me... (5, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852685)

...is that there were those of us in Sun who wanted to do this kind of thing 5 years ago, but the pointy-hairs just didn't get it. There was talk of a GNU/Solaris as well.

The pointy-hairs did get it eventually, but they RIF'd us and let external people do it instead. Meanwhile millions of $s of R&D money was wasted on stupid projects that were not needed, ill-concieved, cancelled, etc.

Re:What really disappoints me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852852)

pointy-hairs or pointy-heads?

Re:What really disappoints me... (0)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852929)

...is that there were those of us in Sun who wanted to do this kind of thing 5 years ago, but the pointy-hairs just didn't get it.

I used to be a SunOS and Solaris user. Basically, once Sun switched from SunOS to Solaris (i.e., around SunOS 5), it was all over: Sun had become a bloated mainframe company producing a bloated mainframe product.

Meanwhile millions of $s of R&D money was wasted on stupid projects that were not needed, ill-concieved, cancelled, etc.

Like Solaris itself.

happens everywhere (1)

steve_l (109732) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853319)

...at least solaris will survive now.

Can anyone dredge a copy of the old NeWS windowing system and release that now too; that could do stuff so much cooler than X11 can do today, even, what, 15 years later. Or is the tar file of the source slowly rotting away in a tape that wont be readable before long.

So how long until we get OpenSCO? (1)

suitepotato (863945) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852725)

Just wondering is all...

Interesting,, but no thanks. (2, Interesting)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852818)

It looks like a interesting distro, and I'd be partially interested in downloading it and taking a look at it if wasn't for the whining and complaining about the GPL he makes. I don't like the idea of my contributions potentially being distributed/used in a closed-source project [total value of my code: err.. about 2 cents] if I contribute to an open-source (GPL or Compatible license) project, and the GPL gives me that control [not that I'm concerned about it]. I've not got much code out there [mostly really small bug-fix snippets], but what is out there is covered under the GPL and anyone can use it under the GPL.

Not that I'm saying Solaris is a bad OS, (OOB it's pretty much worthless until you add GNU tools to it) but it's a damn sight better than Xenix or NT 4.51.

Joerg, please release cdrecord-prodvd source (1)

Hal XP (807364) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852827)

Maybe we could start, while we're busying downloading the bzip2'ed iso, a petition for the author of cdrecord to open the source to the DVD-capable version of CDRecord [berlios.de] . Now that Sun has (or at least claims to have) released the source to what is its second most-valuable asset, Joerg has less reasons to hold on to his binary-only version of cdrecord. Not that there are no alternatives to cdrecord [chalmers.se] . But as far as optical media writing on *n*x is concerned, cdrecord is the gold standard.

for the lazy (1, Informative)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852899)

If you don't want to bother restarting your machine, give it a test drive with qemu @ www.qemu.org

Gentoo? (1)

keesh (202812) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852907)

After all the hype and press releases, where's the Gentoo port? You'd think that they'd've had time to put it together, what with all the promises they made and all...

Re:Gentoo? (1, Funny)

Anonymous Coward | more than 9 years ago | (#12852951)

It's still compiling.

SchilliX? (2, Funny)

Hikaru79 (832891) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852926)

Heh, it should have been called "Scholaris"

Re:SchilliX? (1)

BoomerSooner (308737) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852976)

I think calling it "The David Beckham OS" would have made more sense from a marketing standpoint. For short you could call it BecksOS.

let the better OS win (1)

cahiha (873942) | more than 9 years ago | (#12852957)

Well, it looks like Sun came out with something bootable and runnable. That's nice. Now, users and developers can determine which is the better systems. The next thing after getting it compiled and booting will be to get some unbiased benchmarks and see how much hardware it is compatible with.

Personally, I don't give Solaris much of a chance: I think it scratches itches that few people have. But, hey, in a year or two, we'll know.

Hosting (2, Interesting)

KidSock (150684) | more than 9 years ago | (#12853113)

Wouldn't this be good for hosting? You could sell zones w/ root like linode.com does with UML. Is anyone doing this or planning on it?
Load More Comments
Slashdot Login

Need an Account?

Forgot your password?