OpenSolaris One Year On 141
daria42 writes "In June of last year, Sun Microsystems open sourced its flagship operating system Solaris. This article asks the question, where is the OpenSolaris project after one year of operation? It contains views from Sun itself as well as insights from an external contributor to the code." From the article: "Sun is yet to release some aspects of Solaris as open source software, although that process is due for completion by the year's end. Meanwhile, non-Sun programmers have to date offered some 165 code contributions to the OpenSolaris project, said Eagleton. Of those, 70 have been accepted into the project's code base, while another 95 are still in the review process. To allay early community concerns that the process of getting external code contributions accepted was taking too long, Sun has a temporary buddy system whereby external contributors are partnered with Sun employees."
This is all good news (Score:4, Insightful)
--
Krazy Kat, George Herriman [ignatzmouse.net]
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
Perhaps, I'm not seeing the benefit here...
-H-
Re:This is all good news (Score:3, Informative)
Sun is new to open sourcing its proprietary products? That strange, because amongst other things, they open sourced their implementations of RPC and NFS years ago. Sun are by no means new to this open source thing and as well as their own stuff, they've acted as mentors to a number of outside projects. For instance, Sun provided John Ousterhout with an office to use while he worked on Tcl/Tk.
Re:This is all good news (Score:3, Informative)
Re:This is all good news (Score:4, Insightful)
Do you really think the sharing would be in anything other than one direction? What incentive would Sun have to see all their crown jewels taken and added to Linux?
Re:This is all good news (Score:3, Insightful)
Do you really think the sharing would be in anything other than one direction?
Yes.
What incentive would Sun have to see all their crown jewels taken and added to Linux?
Some people understand the open source model and some don't. What incentive does any company have to contribute code to open source projects? The answer, free labor from the community and wider adoption of the technologies for interoperability and mind share.
For example, as a result of Solaris being open sourced, Ubuntu now has reason
Re:This is all good news (Score:5, Informative)
1. Containers
2. Zones
3. Awesome fast TCP/IP Stack
4. Dtrace
5. ZFS
Those five alone would be the bump Linux needed to morph into a really solid Enterprise class O/S that is open source.
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
What's Linux got that OpenSolaris doesn't?
Why do we talk about moving these five pretty huge and fundamental things into Linux, instead of using OpenSolaris and moving the things Linux has into it?
-F
Re:This is all good news (Score:2, Informative)
1) Vendor Neutrality. OpenSolaris is closely associated with Sun, but no company has a stranglehold over Linux.
2) Portability. Linux has been ported to an amazing array of hardware. Ubuntu runs on more architectures than OpenSolaris, even though they dropped most of the archs supported by Debian.
3) Scalability. Linux scales up to supercomputers and mainframes (where Solaris also has a respectable tra
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
I think Motif is now open source, but wasn't CDE developed by some huge consortium of big companies back when open source wasn't cool? There might be too much legal wrangling in there between rival companies. It's probably better to bet on GNOME in the longer term. I use Sun's GNOME on Solaris Express (aka fetal Solaris 11) fairly frequently, and it is definitly improving with each update and is pretty well integrated. There are some issues with lesser-used utilities, such as some panel applets, but the
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
I've been playing with Nexenta [gnusolaris.org] a bit. It's basically Ubuntu but with the OpenSolaris kernel. Or at least it's trying to be. On the whole it looks and feels like a Linux distro. Too bad zones don't work yet though.
Very cool stuff.
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Solaris *IS* better than Linux.
with Sun's Kernel and everything else that Solaris10 brings to the table, why would you use any of the Linux Variants?
the ONLY argument that Linux wins is use of crufty hardware.
Well, if you want a datacenter filled with old PS2 hardware have fun with your Red Hats.
As for me, running AMD64 using Solaris AND Sun Hardware is the way to go.
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Well, obviously, millions of Linux users disagree.
Solaris *IS* better than Linux.
"Better" in what sense?
As for me, running AMD64 using Solaris AND Sun Hardware is the way to go.
How nice for you. But you are in a tiny minority.
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
This is not the purpose of opensource. (you opensource this or that so that 'we' can port it to linux) The purpose of licenc
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
Mod parent up, grandparent down.
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
This is not collaboration, this is one way flow of information and it is not good for anyone.
Let's asume I am a company that for the last x years has developed the software named S.
If you come to me saying
I would certainly have second thoughts on opensourcing, because that is not collaboration.
From my point of view it is all about the attitude.
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
1. Group quota's (or has this been added recently?)
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Note that just because Sun's marketing department says that ZFS or DTrace are superior to their Linux counterparts (or incorrectly states that they don't have any Linux counterparts) doesn't mean that they are right.
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
Re:This is all good news (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:This is all good news (Score:1)
Re:This is all good news (Score:5, Informative)
Among pieces of software that have significant use, are free according to the DFSG, and are not GPL compatible, I can name just openssl, old apache, core parts of TeX, and that's about it. (Before you correct me, read again the first clause of the previous sentence).
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
you already mentioned openssl, add to that anything else under licenses similar to the 4 clause BSD.
and then there is the mpl and its variants............
Re:This is all good news (Score:2)
So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1, Interesting)
Can anyone with first hand knowledge answer my question?
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:5, Insightful)
I've used Solaris since...well, since before it was named Solaris, and I've used Linux since not long after the first experimental releases, and BSD for nearly as long, and I think all three are great systems, but they're not interchangable. They each have different strengths and weaknesses. If I had to pick just one, I'd probably pick Linux, as it seems to be the most versatile overall, but I'm very glad I don't have to pick just one, and can instead use the one that's best for a specific job or role.
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1)
SuSE [wikipedia.org] and KDE [wikipedia.org] both have some German roots which is probably a big reason for it. Linux is outrageously popular in Germany and that means that (much like here) on any given day there are more Linux admins looking for a job than Solaris admins, which drives costs down.
my 00000010
Nix
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1)
Cheers.
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:2)
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1)
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1)
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1)
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1)
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:2, Informative)
Solaris has its advantages in a big environment. Advantages you would never grasp by having it installed on your machine for an hour. One example is binary compatibility. If it worked on Solaris 2.6, 99% of the time it will work on versions 2.7, 2.8, 2.9 and 2.10. You may not care about that, but we're in a constant cycle of upgrading old systems
Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... (Score:1, Informative)
I use Solaris everyday on my desktop for reasons you might not have thought about.
1) The overall documentation is better than for Linux.
2) Changes are well documented between updates.
3) Compatibility between kernel revisions is pretty darn good (even guaranteed, IIRC).
4) I actually prefer a slightly more conservative system, with clearly staged releases (OpenSolaris/Solaris Express/official numbered releases/quarterly updates).
5) If using Sun hardware with Solaris, the combined documentation is often outsta
WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:5, Funny)
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:1)
Solaris is Unix-like and Linux is Unix-like. That doesn't make Solaris any more Linux then it is today: not.
In your view, we might break all the news there is about *BSD, MacOS X and ancient Unices / Multics under this category. Fine with me, but rename it to "Operating Systems" or "Unix, Unix-clones, Unix-likes and Unix-deriatives". (Windows news can be included in both, thank you)
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:3, Funny)
Solaris is Unix-like and Linux is Unix-like. That doesn't make Solaris any more Linux then it is today: not.
Woosh.
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:3, Informative)
Why is this bit of "news" listed under Linix-category?
From the article: As an example, Eagleton cited recent cooperation between Sun and the wider programmer community that occurred at the LinuxWorld Australia conference.
That's as Linuxy as it gets. I think perhaps Sun has the idea that by going open source, they can tap into the Linux developer base. There may be more than one Linux developer that is thinking they could make vast improvements in how Solaris performs, while perhaps gleaning some new
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:2)
Almost all articles about an operating system — any operating system — today make (at least, a passing) reference to Linux. Slashdot's own piece today on OpenBSD's WiFi drivers is an example.
Do all such articles belong under "Linux" banner? No, they don't.
Actually, I'd say, this is more BSD-ish t
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:2)
Since version 8, Solaris has performed on par with Linux on the same gear. As of Solaris 10, Linux is now substantially slower (~20%) for almost all tasks. As far as new life goes, Solaris 10 was a ground-up rewrite which in ten years will be 'the thing' that people talk about as the biggest change in Unix for ages. Service manifests, dtrace, zones, self-healing, and zfs are the five things that will cha
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:2)
Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? (Score:2)
Okay I guess I need to add something more, cause that took less than the quantum time period for a reply.
Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:5, Insightful)
I've done a few console installs of Solaris 10 on some headless (and ancient) sparc netras. Here are some things that would make my life easier.
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:2)
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:2)
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:4, Informative)
They already are. Most of the vital libraries in /usr/lib are softlinks back into /lib.
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:2)
All Linux distros do this (that I know of), since bash is often used early in the boot procedure way before
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:4, Insightful)
pkgadd, BTW, also supports quite a few URL constructs (e.g., pkgadd http://blah/blah [blah]). In this form, the other end of the pkgadd has to be a package stream, however, so that limits its usefulness with the DVD contents.
It's been a while since I've done the text install, but finer grain control has been there in the past. I'd be surprised if it was removed. That said, using Jumpstart combined with a profile will also get you finer grained control without having to do it manually for each install. Information on network-based installs and the like is available here [sun.com] and here [sun.com].Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:2)
Jumpstart would be great if I was setting up dozens of boxes, but I'm not. Just two or three. I still think pkg-getting off the internet would be the optimal solution if you just want a few boxes (although that would be leeching bandwith depending on how much you are downloading).
Solaris 10 and up doesn't come bundled with *any* statically built binaries anymore. The
That suprises me. Isn't a static
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:2)
Lots of things to cover... :)
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:2)
Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install (Score:2)
SolarisxLinux (Score:1)
I know there isn't an easy answer to this, but a knowledgeable person could shed some light on us.
Re:SolarisxLinux (Score:2)
You're right, there isn't an easy answer. Basically Solaris rocks for some things, sucks for other things. There are situations where I would recommend one over the other, and situations where either one would be fine, and there are even situations where Solaris is the only option. It's not even
Re:SolarisxLinux (Score:1)
Re:SolarisxLinux (Score:3, Informative)
Though on the subject at hand, I run a cluster of Sun v20z's (and 2 v40z's) which run Solaris 10 x86_64. On the whole it's no different to running one with Linux other than the Sun system management tools for clusters are not as advanced as some of the Linux cluster tools sold (yes, sold for lots of money and are closed source) by the Li
Re:SolarisxLinux (Score:2)
Good: Support for unusual or "cheap" X86 hardware. User-friendly default environment. Excellent package dependency and installation tools. Good support for the casual developer. Enormous number of hobbiest or unique applications packages are available.
Bad: Poor API stability, short shelf life for drivers and commer
Re:SolarisxLinux (Score:1)
Has Linux gotten as simple as OpenBSD for firewalls, lately? Last time I looked (couple years back or so), I saw OpenBSD's two or three clear-as-day manual pages and compared that to a myriad of man pages, info pages, and HOWTOs on Linux and just went the (percieved) easy route at the time.
Patch Submission Process is Abysmal (Score:1, Insightful)
Re:Patch Submission Process is Abysmal (Score:1)
Make the install process easier (Score:1, Insightful)
Sun is doing a thorough job (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:Sun is doing a thorough job (Score:2)
Thanks!
Re:Sun is doing a thorough job (Score:2, Informative)
bottom left hand side are links to the evaluations
OMG! Too long? (Score:5, Insightful)
You're kidding, right? Solaris is one of the most mature operating systems out there. It runs some of the most powerful servers on the face of the planet. It is the core for a number of institutions, especially in the financial sector. I am not over-dramatizing when I say that Solaris runs a hell of a lot of crucial systems that make our lives easier in a lot of different ways.
That being the case, do these people really think that Sun is just going to say, "Oh, I see. You tested it in a limited fashion and we tested it in a limited fashion in the matter of a few months. Okay, we'll release it to the customers who run massive databases and financial applications on our servers because of a few months of limited testing." I would much prefer Sun take a year if need be to make sure that any modifications will be completely compatible with as many of their customers and equipment as possible, particularly the higher-end systems and major corporate environments.
I understand and share a lot of the aggravation that people feel when it comes to the lack of features, particularly device drivers, in Solaris. This is the one of the main reasons wy I think that Solaris has become so niche, particularly on the x86 side of things. If we're talking about modification to a common tool or enhancements to a graphical interface, okay, I don't see why it would take a year. But if Sun needs a year to make sure that a new device driver doesn't crash a SunFire 25K running a clustered Oracle server during end-of-month, transaction processing, then I'll grant Sun that year.
Re:OMG! Too long? (Score:4, Insightful)
Re:OMG! Too long? (Score:4, Funny)
Re:OMG! Too long? (Score:1)
Sure, Linux is cool and all, but in terms of maturity - Give me Solaris, or give me Death (actually i'd also accept a flavor of BSD, but that's a whole other post).
Re:OMG! Too long? (Score:2)
That's right, all of the best software engineers in the world are working for Sun and everyone else is on crack ... and Linux is losing to Solaris in such a b
MOD PARENT DOWN CLUELESS TROLL (Score:2)
One of the main reasons behind OpenSolaris is for people outside of Sun to make drivers, tools, utilities, etc. that can be included into future versions of (non-open) Solaris. Because of the nature of the systems that run on Solaris, it's critical for Sun to make sure that changes, regardless of how benign it might seem, have no impact on any kind of potential, mission-critical appliction. What one indeveloper might think is a great driver or enhancement for their p
Re:OMG! Too long? (Score:1)
You're right. Some of the best software engineers in the world are working for Sun. Sun's been hammered in the market place because it didn't react well to the dot-com bust. No layoffs, no significant restructuring or
Re:OMG! Too long? (Score:2)
I wasn't trying to say that, I think people wouldn't have missed my point if I'd said the same thing in person ... Ahh well, communication via. text sucks sometimes.
Personally I think that the license and the time of release have impeaded adoption of OpenSolaris, and has certainly imeded people from contributing (everyone I know has been told that legally they can't even look at it,
Re:OMG! Too long? (Score:1)
OpenSolaris better run than Darwin (Score:3, Informative)
is quite interesting:
- Source code: Darwin: Must sign up for an Apple account to view source, source code for Intel kernel not even available. Solaris: Source code browseable on web, and available to anybody.
- Installable OS: Darwin was never updated from 8.0.1, which was released over a year ago. Solaris: Solaris Express is released at least monthly.
- Project direction: Darwin code appears after a MacOSX release. There is no way to see the source code of an upcoming MacOSX version, there is no way to even know what features will be present aside for signing up for a $500/yr ADC account. You are not allowed to talk about this in public. This is in stark contrast to OpenSolaris, where Sun engineers publically debate virtues of different features, and future directions on their forums/mailing lists, and anybody is welcome to contribute.
In short, OpenSolaris is a real open source project. Darwin is a sham, and would not survive without Apple.
Re:OpenSolaris better run than Darwin (Score:3, Interesting)
Sun and Apple both ship a proprietary OS based around an "open source" core. Sun's core is OpenSolaris, and Apple's is Darwin. Sun has done a far better job open sourcing their operating system.
Agreed.
I do a 3rd party hardware device driver for both MacOSX and OpenSolaris. To compare Apple's to Solaris' "open source" OS is quite interesting...
This merely reflects the interests of the individual companies. Sun wants to sell more servers to both Solaris and Linux users. They are competing in the server
download OpenSolaris as an iso file ? (Score:1)
Re:download OpenSolaris as an iso file ? (Score:1)
Ancient roots - Enter the City of the Sun (Score:1)
"TOI for ON Developers"
and on a dozen other places.
I like to think that the designation 'ON' that appears all over the Opensolaris pages refers to Heliopolis, the CITY OF THE SUN, in fact I'm pretty sure it does.
Check out the relevant Wikipedia article on Heli [wikipedia.org]
Re:Ancient roots - Enter the City of the Sun (Score:1)
Personally I find these facts compelling:
1. They call themselves Sun [Microsystems Inc.].
2. They have a symbol that reminds of a swastika for a logo
3. The Swastika has been a symbol for the sun as far back as Babylon and is probably even much older than that
I for my part still like to believe that the Solar[is] Elites
don't bother processing this if your cultural operating system doesn't support it.
One year on, shunning sun4m the Stanford Way. (Score:1)
Re:One year on, shunning sun4m the Stanford Way. (Score:1)
The u1 had very serious and real issues operating in 64-bit mode, that were well-known back in Solaris 8.
They didn't just sort of stop supporting the stuff, they dropped 32-bit support entirely from the S10 kernel.
That means the sun4m, sun4c, and early edition of ultrasparc machines are impossible to use. It also means
no expensive engineer time spent trying to deal with 32/64 bit issues in existing code.
MacSolaris X (Score:1)
Re:OpenSolaris is Dying (Score:2, Funny)
Re:OpenSolaris is Dying (Score:1, Interesting)
Re:OpenSolaris is Dying (Score:2)
Re:This matters not a whit (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:This matters not a whit (Score:1)
Re:This matters not a whit (Score:1, Offtopic)
Re:OpenSolaris + Ubuntu (Score:1)
Re:In the mean time (Score:1)
But that would require a brain and learning to use google.
Have fun building sand castles in wonderland.