From Rao.Shoaib at Sun.COM Thu Mar 15 10:42:33 2007 From: Rao.Shoaib at Sun.COM (Rao M. Shoaib) Date: Thu, 15 Mar 2007 10:42:33 PDT Subject: [immigrants-discuss] Re: Proposal for a new OpenSolaris project: Pluggable Sockets Message-ID: <27512164.1173980583555.JavaMail.Twebapp@oss-app1> I second this project. Rao. -- This message posted from opensolaris.org From peter.kehl at gmail.com Wed Mar 21 13:29:57 2007 From: peter.kehl at gmail.com (Peter Kehl) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 20:29:57 +0000 Subject: [immigrants-discuss] Distribution DVDs: x86 kernel on DVD always starts in 32bit Message-ID: <23c968710703211329s326757f6p7caf2f77944d13eb@mail.gmail.com> Hi, I've installed current Open Solaris Developer's Edition (2/07) and Solaris 10 11/6 (or whatever the current one that includes non-opensource parts from SUN) on AMD64 Turion X2. Once installed, it nicely starts in 64bit mode. However, when booting up from installation DVDs, it always kicks in 32bit. When I removed 'kernel/unix' from GRUB parameters, then it fails with panic: no kernel. It's fine if installation x86 DVDs start only in 32bit mode. However, that confuses users a lot - it suggests that the release may not run in 64bit on their machine and may not be worth installing (in some situations). Therefore, would you put a not e about it to installation docs. Maybe this should go to other forum (approachability?) - then please let me know. -- Best regards, Peter Kehl From rolnif at mac.com Wed Mar 21 13:45:36 2007 From: rolnif at mac.com (John Martinez) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 13:45:36 -0700 Subject: [immigrants-discuss] Distribution DVDs: x86 kernel on DVD always starts in 32bit In-Reply-To: <23c968710703211329s326757f6p7caf2f77944d13eb@mail.gmail.com> References: <23c968710703211329s326757f6p7caf2f77944d13eb@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <5A0DF6F7-9C5F-49E1-8AD1-08B78D04870A@mac.com> On Mar 21, 2007, at 1:29 PM, Peter Kehl wrote: > ... > It's fine if installation x86 DVDs start only in 32bit mode. However, > that confuses users a lot - it suggests that the release may not run > in 64bit on their machine and may not be worth installing (in some > situations). Therefore, would you put a not e about it to installation > docs. ... A colleague of mine and I were just talking about this very topic this morning. I thought it was odd that Sun did that, but it never really dawned on me as an issue, since I knew the machine was 64 bit capable and that the OS would boot up in 64 bit mode, once installed. But you are right, I can see how some users would be questioning the 64 "bitness" if the OS instance on the install DVD did not come up in 64 bit mode. -john From peter.kehl at gmail.com Wed Mar 21 15:58:01 2007 From: peter.kehl at gmail.com (Peter Kehl) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 22:58:01 +0000 Subject: [immigrants-discuss] Solaris Community Edition and Penguin partitions Message-ID: <23c968710703211558k67f06861g3e634af1c75d2f8f@mail.gmail.com> Hi. I come from Penguin world. I've installed current Solaris, OpenSolaris Developer Edition and Community Edition x86 in VMware Server and liked it. So I wanted to install it as my second main OS on its own fdisk partition. What a surprise that when installing Solaris Community Edition 2/07 (SunOS solaris-devx 5.11 snv_56) it said it didn't support Linux partitions. OK, I thought, so it doesn't mount them - so be it. However, what it did: - changed the active fdisk partition to Solaris' one, but Solaris' GRUB doesn't recognize/offer a way to boot back to other OS(es). This is how it works in world where people enter via "Windows" and not doors. - (I guess) it somehow wrote to existing EXT3 partition, so now it can't be mounted. That is a very bad behaviour. Luckily for me I was testing my new PC and didn't have any data on the UTF3 partition. Real-world user would expect that other main OS' partitions could be mounted, at least some types read/write and others read-only. If nothing else, then the installers should give an option not to touch MBR and not to change the active partition, so tha user can do it themselves until Solaris installation program matures. Best regards, Peter Kehl From binarycrusader at gmail.com Wed Mar 21 17:05:38 2007 From: binarycrusader at gmail.com (Shawn Walker) Date: Wed, 21 Mar 2007 19:05:38 -0500 Subject: [immigrants-discuss] Solaris Community Edition and Penguin partitions In-Reply-To: <23c968710703211558k67f06861g3e634af1c75d2f8f@mail.gmail.com> References: <23c968710703211558k67f06861g3e634af1c75d2f8f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: On 21/03/07, Peter Kehl wrote: > Hi. > > I come from Penguin world. I've installed current Solaris, OpenSolaris > Developer Edition and Community Edition x86 in VMware Server and liked > it. So I wanted to install it as my second main OS on its own fdisk > partition. > > What a surprise that when installing Solaris Community Edition 2/07 > (SunOS solaris-devx 5.11 snv_56) it said it didn't support Linux > partitions. OK, I thought, so it doesn't mount them - so be it. > > However, what it did: > - changed the active fdisk partition to Solaris' one, but Solaris' > GRUB doesn't recognize/offer a way to boot back to other OS(es). This > is how it works in world where people enter via "Windows" and not > doors. > - (I guess) it somehow wrote to existing EXT3 partition, so now it > can't be mounted. That is a very bad behaviour. Luckily for me I was > testing my new PC and didn't have any data on the UTF3 partition. > > Real-world user would expect that other main OS' partitions could be > mounted, at least some types read/write and others read-only. If > nothing else, then the installers should give an option not to touch > MBR and not to change the active partition, so tha user can do it > themselves until Solaris installation program matures. It would be interesting to see your particular disk configuration. I have run Linux and Solaris from the same hard disk in the past without issue though I can't remember the exact disk configuration. However, I know of one "surefire" way to ensure what you said doesn't happen. Make sure your Linux partitions are inside an extended partition, which Solaris doesn't support at all... -- "Less is only more where more is no good." --Frank Lloyd Wright Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst binarycrusader at gmail.com - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/ From lloy0076 at adam.com.au Thu Mar 22 03:01:39 2007 From: lloy0076 at adam.com.au (David Lloyd) Date: Thu, 22 Mar 2007 20:31:39 +1030 Subject: [immigrants-discuss] Solaris Community Edition and Penguin partitions In-Reply-To: <23c968710703211558k67f06861g3e634af1c75d2f8f@mail.gmail.com> References: <23c968710703211558k67f06861g3e634af1c75d2f8f@mail.gmail.com> Message-ID: <46025403.3040203@adam.com.au> Peter, > I come from Penguin world. I've installed current Solaris, OpenSolaris > Developer Edition and Community Edition x86 in VMware Server and liked > it. So I wanted to install it as my second main OS on its own fdisk > partition. Welcome to the Solaris world! > What a surprise that when installing Solaris Community Edition 2/07 > (SunOS solaris-devx 5.11 snv_56) it said it didn't support Linux > partitions. OK, I thought, so it doesn't mount them - so be it. The installer does support Linux partitions in the sense that with a bit of fiddling and very careful reading of prompts (and summaries), you can get SXCE (Solaris Express Community Edition) to install without overly disturbing one's Linux or other partitions. > However, what it did: > - changed the active fdisk partition to Solaris' one, but Solaris' > GRUB doesn't recognize/offer a way to boot back to other OS(es). This > is how it works in world where people enter via "Windows" and not > doors. Indeed; I find this behaviour particular annoying. > - (I guess) it somehow wrote to existing EXT3 partition, so now it > can't be mounted. That is a very bad behaviour. Luckily for me I was > testing my new PC and didn't have any data on the UTF3 partition. No, it probably overwrote it to be honest. If one isn't careful, the current Solaris installer might very well just blow up all your partitions. > Real-world user would expect that other main OS' partitions could be > mounted, at least some types read/write and others read-only. I'd hope you'd understand that the writers of the GNU/Linux installers, such as Anaconda (RedHat, Debian) and the YaST have put a significant amount of time configuring and improving their install system. During this time they've built GNU/Linux from a very, very different perspective than Sun Solaris (tm). Specifically, GNU/Linux was, for a long time, an operating system "hackers" would have on their machines. Often other distributions would be on the same disk and often Windows would be installed. I remember a time when the GNU/Linux distros would do exactly what you're describing here. The distro vendors obviously took notice of their potential installers (i.e. you and me) and made it easier to put their distro on by configuring Grub or Lilo in the way that you expect. *I* was there when this started to be implemented. *I* also remember when it wasn't implemented and an install of one GNU/Linux would clobber the MBR of the other OSes on the machine. Let's take a look at Sun Solaris' pedigree: * It has, I'd argue, generally only had to live with itself * And if other personalities were about, they were hidden by hardware * And those personalities were probably some version of Solaris anyway * Oh, and on Sparc, some/all of the boot process was OpenBoot's problem (is that its name?) and NOT a program like Grub or Lilo Consequently, Solaris' venerable installer may not play as nicely with other "random" distributions on one's disk! I'd hazard a guess that "commercial" Sun Solaris (tm) wasn't generally installed on the same disk as a "commercial" AIX :P > If > nothing else, then the installers should give an option not to touch > MBR and not to change the active partition, so tha user can do it > themselves until Solaris installation program matures. I'd have to agree here. But to make sure this was effective, there'd have to be effective documentation on how to setup the OTHER Grub or Lilo to boot one's Solaris instance. If you look at a "menu.lst" for a Solaris boot, it's quite different and quite foreign to what a pro-Linux admin might see. Again, welcome! DSL