This discussion has been archived.
No new comments can be posted.
Solaris 10 to be Released Late in 2004
Related Links Top of the: day, week, month.
Remember to say hello to your bank teller.
Remember to say hello to your bank teller.
Re:SO????? (Score:5, Informative)
It's actually SunOS 5.10. (SunOS 4.x was Solaris 1.x, SunOS 5.x was Solaris 2.x up until 2.7, then they changed it to just Solaris 7 with the underworkings of SunOS 5.7... got that?)I can't imagine they're going to break into the next major version number. (i.e. SunOS 6) but you never know.
Solaris vs. Linux (Score:4, Informative)
But then again, I might be a bit biased [gentoo.org] in my opinion
Re:so what's better, bsd, linux or solaris? (Score:1, Informative)
Actually Linux runs a 512 CPU supercomputer at NASA. I think Linux 2.6 is now at least as scalable as Solaris if not more so.
Solaris goes to IIRC 108 CPUs...
IRIX, however, is in a league of its own.
Re:sub roots (Score:5, Informative)
This feature sounds like the privilege model from Trusted Solaris is being mainlined into the plain ol' Solaris tree. In which case, yes, someone is working to bring that into Linux. That's one of things SELinux [nsa.gov] is doing.
selinux (Score:5, Informative)
Link [redhat.com]
I've been running the beta for a while.... (Score:5, Informative)
Has some cool features. Once apps (oracle etc) get "blessed" it will be nice to have a new core OS to go to since no one will support 5.9.
If for no other reason than getting away from a 101.5MB recommended patch cluster.
There are a lot of cool new commands for kernel info. There is also a performance increase depending on which cpus you are running.
Re:sub roots (Score:5, Informative)
this is Security Enhanced Linux.
It basicly isolates every thing from everything else in linux right down to the kernel level.
For example if you have a Apache webserver and it gets comprimised, a hacker can't use Apache's security level to give him elevated permissions to control another part of the OS. In a regular OS you have to allow the Apache some root control over the computer to have it work properly and a hacker can use this to violate your computer.
In SELinux even if a hacker gained root access their is a limited amount of damage he can do, depending on how you set it up.
You could if you wanted to use this to set up roles for users, like a apache admin or a sendmail admin, or a filesystem admin or a
SeLinux is brought to us by our freinds and future government overloads: the NSA.
Re:hmmm... (Score:5, Informative)
Therefore Solaris 9 is the last stop for the sun4m machines.
Re:Is Unix Unix? (Score:5, Informative)
one word: support.
i have worked in two shops in the last four years. one is a red hat shop. we use rhel es with paid support. the other was a full-meal-deal sparc/solaris shop.
in the solaris shop we had a dramatic failure of a storedge sena array. i called the sun support line and a guy in tweed jacket was at my door in 40 minutes with a grocery bag full of spare parts (gbic cards, if you care). the problem was solved in a total time of one hour.
in the linux shop i made a web support request for a very simple question (that being: is stronghold bundled with rhel es like the marketing material says? it doesn't seem to be... anyone know?). i logged that request twelve days ago and it's still listed as "awaiting technician". twelve days! and every time i go to check the status the web page throws a NullPointerException. and i got an email for resolution on a support request i didn't even make. i informed red hat that i'd received someone elses support mail and they replied that it would be rerouted, but the erroneous issue still shows up on my incident tracker a week later.
so... sun costs a bundle. but if you need tech support from a team that makes the justice league of america look like a quilting bee, they're your guys.
2.2 in Debian stable? (Score:1, Informative)
Or when you say "checked" do you mean "heard from a troll on slashdot"?
Re:SO????? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Slow Solaris Upgrades (Score:4, Informative)
Solaris 8 is SunOS 5.8, 9 is 5.9, 7 is 5.7, 2.6 is 5.6, etc. Guessing Solaris 10 will be SunOS 5.10. Part of why, pre-Solaris was 4.x so Solaris became 5.x, for eg version testing by scripts.
Other, have noticed that for whatever reason several companies deployed the even numbered Solaris versions, mostly skipped the odd ones. Meaning they were on 2.6, played with 7 a little, upgraded to 8 soon after it came out, have only played with 9. Seems they are treating it as if it were the Linux even/odd release/devel scheme.
Re:so what's better, bsd, linux or solaris? (Score:5, Informative)
Lets flesh that out a bit...
1. You can get the source to Solaris.
2. You can download Solaris for free.
3. Solaris runs on good hardware which is a good thing if you are trying to get serious work done. (Not everyone working with *nix is building web servers, internet hosting, or using samba to replace a few Windows PCs.) If you are only trying to recycle crap hardware, any OS will do. FreeDOS or DR DOS will recycle hardware that Linux is too fat to run on.
4. BSD and Linux lack the thousands of mature, commerical applications Solaris has, but they are catching up.
5. Solaris is not only stable, it is one of the best. Linux is still in catch up mode in terms of standards and features. Linux still has a tendency to cheat, or only partially implement a standard. It is getting better. Standards are a good thing if you are trying to get equipment from multiple vendors to work together.
6. Sun's support has been plenty good for the companies I've worked for, and PCs won't be getting the work done that we do anytime soon. Maybe if the Opterons work out well we could use them in a couple of years.
7. A standard Sun keyboard has the control key where it should be.
8. Documentation. Solaris has it. The documentation is good, and correct. Linux, ha.
9. Solaris can have a System V Unix personality, a BSD personality, a GNU personality, or traditional Sun personality, depending upon your path.
10. Linux pretty much provides a subset of what Solaris can do.
I could go on, but you should get the point by now.
Dtrace? (Score:2, Informative)
DTrace sends the probes through a server looking for hardware errors and anything that might be slowing application performance.
DTrace is a sweet tool for anyone who's had the chance to run Solaris Express, but a much better description can be found at the source [sun.com].
Re:So is this version going to (Score:5, Informative)
I compiled GNOME and KDE and although I wouldn't say they were easy to compile I did get them working. And no I didn't compile any of it as the root user. I even was able to compile libavcodec something that supposedly runs on Solaris but is coded in a very very gcc specific way.
So I'm not really sure what difficulties you're refering to. So long as you have a sane build environment, gnu make, autoconf, automake, m4, a good compiler, gcc or forte, and know your compiler well you shouldn't have any problems.
Phibz
Re:so what's better, bsd, linux or solaris? (Score:5, Informative)
Re:there's an old saying... (Score:2, Informative)
Actually, Solaris 10 is available to everybody through the Solaris Express [sun.com] program. And it's free (for non-commercial use).
Re:2.2 in Debian stable? (Score:3, Informative)
But you can type 'bf24' to get 2.4 of course.
Re:A simple question (Score:3, Informative)
On the off chance this is a serious inquiry, SunOS is officially "branded [opengroup.org]", *BSD and Linux are not. Said brand is required to be a "real UNIX", costs $$$ to obtain. Vaguely recall reading that some Linux distro was going to try for this. Haven't heard of them in quite a while now (iirc it was with kernel 1.2!).
Re: stronghold (Score:3, Informative)
Linux Business Week says Solaris 10 has.. (Score:3, Informative)
SELinux gives you this (Score:5, Informative)
I haven't run the prerelease of solaris 10 myself yet - but from what I've read, they have really taken the trusted solaris features and put them in solaris 10 - this is not just the RBAC features from solaris 9 (which would actually allow the described sub-root concepts, but not all the other goodies that come with real MAC).
This is what SELinux brings to Linux. You can run Debian stable with SELinux if you really want to. Otherwise, look for RH AS 3.0, or get to work on testing SELinux in debian unstable so that we can all get this functionality in the next debian stable.
Google around for selinux on debian and you should be able to find out how to do this.
Re:so what's better, bsd, linux or solaris? (Score:1, Informative)
Re:there's an old saying... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:So is this version going to (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is Unix Unix? (Score:2, Informative)
Suns support was amazing, if we had any problem I either had someone on the phone in under an hour or onsite in under 6 hours.
With RedHat I get better support using the newsgroups. RH support is a big joke. When we got the 2 systems in the lab and loaded them up, the first problem we had was getting rhn_register to work (i had already updated the rpms for the new keys). A day passed as RH could not find our product ID and referred us to Dell. So I call Dell, I get support immediately and they conference call in RH9 Support.
Get this the cluemonkey at RH said I need to downgrade the kernel to make it work....huh? I cant even upgrade it yet.
Anyhow while Dell is trying to get RH to answer I find the solution in an old RH mailling list post (rhn_register wont work if theres no host entry for the system and no forward dns). I added the hostname and ip in
New Problem the Product ID key doesnt work. Guess what it has been A WEEK and Dell finally gave up with RH and is sending us (at their cost I would guess) a new product key SO WE CAN PATH RH ES shit.
I loved RH until I bought their enterprise line. Heck I still use Fedora at home and get better mailling list support.
RH Enterprise my ass.
pkgsrc may be what you're searching for (Score:4, Informative)
As for libraries compiled with a different C compiler than you're using to link with, that's a common problem between gcc and vendor UNIX C compilers. However, the vendor C compiler suites shouldn't be disregarded as they offer many advantages over gcc (take a look at some of the Solaris bugs in gcc and gdb.)
However, if you want something like /usr/ports on Solaris, check out pkgsrc [netbsd.org]. It's NetBSD's ports collection, and it has been ported to Solaris 8 and 9.
Re:never do anything with the odd release of solar (Score:3, Informative)
http://sdc.sun.com/solaris_list/s9supported_pro
List of ORACLE releases supported on Solaris 9....
Re:Is Unix Unix? (Score:3, Informative)
You obviously aren't used to working in a mission critical environment where downtime costs money. It isn't about the hardware, its about the service that system provides. You can't just throw out a production server.
The only place that makes any sense at all is in a dumby web farm where they are all serving the exact content. But since most companies aren't dot coms, they need their systems to keep running.
Re:N1 Grid Containers Look Interesting (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Is Unix Unix? (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Yet another Solaris distribution... (Score:2, Informative)
Re:ibm,hp,compaq *don't* make high end x86 servers (Score:1, Informative)
No, the Intel architecture just lacks the special-purpose hardware and memory bandwidth to maintain cache coherency anywhere near as fast as the SPARC architecture.
Newsflash, one of the two axioms of SMP scalability is to minimise multiple CPUs touching the same data. Guess why? I assume you think sun sparcs do something better? Enlighten us please.
That's nice if you can find programmers smart enough to do that. It's cheaper, faster, and more reliable to throw hardware at a problem.
There are certainly things the Intel architecture does better than SPARC, and Sun is certainly feeling the pressure from it. But right now there are still things you can only get from Sun (unless you want to risk SGI being around in five years...)
Re:Sub roots (Score:1, Informative)
Actually, no you can't. There's nothing easy about it. RBAC (Role Based Access Control), which is an advancement on sudo, has been in Solaris since Solaris 8. Least privilege goes even further.
With RBAC/least privilege you can control things down to not just commands and options, but even down to specific pieces of hardware. Also, since an account has individual privileges, you could in essence take away privileges from root (consider a root account that couldn't su to certain users or read those users files, but still could su to anyone else and read any other files).
Re:Is Unix Unix? (Score:1, Informative)
You know who provides seriously superior support to us atm? Dell... they really go out of their way for us - but I think we're still in the honeymoon phase, so time will tell how long this lasts.
Re:Is Unix Unix? (Score:2, Informative)
No really. What level do you want to do a comparison on, and do you want to compare no-name, white box systems with no enterprise features or would you like to use something reasonable like HP ProLiant DL servers? If you take the support costs out of the mix, a similarly configured DL380 and a V240 is about a 25% cost differential (about 2950 versus 4200). So, how many extra machines can you buy with a 25% cost differential? About 1/4 of a machine.
Well, how much money are you paying RedHat? Anywhere near what you are paying Sun? Even within two decimal orders of magnitude?
Again, if you want to compare apples to apples. HP 3y 24x7x365 4h support for the hardware is $949, plus $4997 to RH for 3 yr 24x7x365 4h support for RHAS 3.0 standard support subscription (total $5946). Or, I can get 3y 24x7x365 4h Gold+ support from Sun for $4400 for both HW and software.
So, let's see... 2950+5950 = 8900. 4200+4400 = 8600. Wow, my Sun is 300 cheaper.
Re:a bit of detail, and what they dont tell you (Score:1, Informative)
While others may have been off, I believe you are also a bit off. SunOS 4.x became SunOS 5.X when they switched to SVR-based. Solaris 2.X was SunOS5.X+OpenWindows until Solaris 2.6. After 2.6, they dropped the 2 part (marketing hype to keep up with everyone who quit using minor numbers), so Solaris 7 is SunOS 5.7, 8 is 5.8, and 9 is 5.9. There has never been a 2.7, 2.8 or 2.9, so there's no question of 3. At best you might question whether Solaris 10 will be SunOS 6; but there's never been any comment or rumor about that.
a mish-mash of Linux kernel, BSD, and Solaris
That rumor has never been mentioned in any reasonable circle. Yes, the kernel is significantly changed (I wouldn't call it a whole new kernel), and yes there are BSD and Linux based features in the OS (probably not the kernel, though).
We all know Sparc is dead, Sun said so themselves
Would you like to provide a cite? To paraphase Mark Twain, "the rumors of SPARC's death have been greatly exaggerated". Considering that Sun just announced the UltraSPARC III+ (90nm technology), the UltraSPARC IV (dual-core or throughput computing), and the UltraSPARC IV+ (again, 90nm) and have a published roadmap at least 5 years out, I don't see where Sun has pronounced Sparc dead.
Solaris 10 will have (primarily) the Linux kernel
Have you actually downloaded the preview releases from Solaris Express? What could possible make you think that the kernel is essentially the linux kernel?
Re:a bit of detail, and what they dont tell you (Score:3, Informative)
Supposedly Solaris10 will be using a totally new kernel [...] something of a mish-mash of Linux kernel, BSD, and Solaris.
While BSD folks won't object if Solaris 10 contained BSD code (all previous Solaris and SunOS releases did), Linux folks will have to enforce compliance to the GPL if Solaris used parts of the Linux kernel. If the rumors were true, Solaris kernel will be GPLed, and we'll soon be able to look at their sources! Great!
Re:GNU/Linux as a High-End competitor... (Score:3, Informative)
I work for a global pharma company as a Solaris admin and we have a dedicated Sun account team. From my discussions with our reps, I can tell you that Sun takes Linux quite seriously.
We were actually considering buying an HPC cluster of Linux X86 blade servers from Sun that their own Professional Services group would support.
If that doesn't say they take Linux seriously, I don't know what would.
I think the perception that Sun has it out for Linux comes primarily from McNeely's big mouth, which has gotten Sun in trouble for years. If they could silence McNeely, they'd be a lot better off all around.