[indiana-discuss] scope

[Bruno Jargot]

+1

On 8/6/07, Josh Hurst <joshhurst at gmail.com> wrote:
> On 8/6/07, I. Szczesniak <iszczesniak at gmail.com> wrote:
> > On 8/6/07, Richard Lowe <richlowe at richlowe.net> wrote:
> > > "I. Szczesniak" <iszczesniak at gmail.com> writes:
> > >
> > > > On 8/1/07, Eric Boutilier <ericb at opensolaris.org> wrote:
> > > >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:
> > > >> > On 26/06/07, Eric Boutilier <Eric.Boutilier at sun.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Shawn Walker wrote:
> > > >> >> > On 26/06/07, Eric Boutilier <Eric.Boutilier at sun.com> wrote:
> > > >> >> >> On Tue, 26 Jun 2007, Peter Tribble wrote:
> > > >> >> >> > By people, what's the target audience at this stage? I think my
> > > >> >> question
> > > >> >> >> is
> > > >> >> >> > really whether the first "release" is aimed at users, or whether there
> > > >> >> >> should
> > > >> >> >> > be a 0.0 "release" solely for the purpose of Indiana bootstrapping?
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> Good question. So that raises the issue of "non-emancipated"
> > > >> >> >> (non-redistributable) files. That is, should there be a 0.0 or 0.1
> > > >> >> >> release that includes them in it? (I vote no, FWIW.)
> > > >> >> >>
> > > >> >> >> And if not, wouldn't that be the main constraint here?
> > > >> >> >
> > > >> >> > Non-emancipated is not the same as non-redistributable. Remember that
> > > >> >> > there are binary "blobs" that are redistributable. There are several
> > > >> >> > files right now that can be redistributed but have not been
> > > >> >> > emancipated that are very important for the basic system. (libm.so
> > > >> >> > comes to mind... I think).
> > > >> >>
> > > >> >> Yes, thanks. I meant non-redistributable.
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I don't even know that we have a list of what is non-redistributable.
> > > >> > I would have to agree that is probably a pretty important point for
> > > >> > the first release. That way the iso can be downloaded, shared, and
> > > >> > mirrored everywhere.
> > > >>
> > > >> I agree, and even more so now in light of the distro constructor project.
> > > >>
> > > >> >
> > > >> > I know there is a list of what is "encumbered", but is anyone aware of
> > > >> > a list of what it isn't redistributable?
> > > >> >
> > > >>
> > > >> There's a place where this is tabulated now:
> > > >>      http://opensolaris.org/os/about/no_source/
> > > >>
> > > >> So for example, if someone used the ON consolidation (click on the ON
> > > >> tab) as a base for something, the following is a list of what must be
> > > >> omitted or replaced, as they are non redistributable, closed binaries.
> > > >> (Question:  Does anybody know if the SUNCreq/SUNWCrnet
> > > >> mini-metaclusters are derived fully from ON or not?)
> > > >>
> > > >> Eric
> > > >>
> > > >>
> > > >> audioens driver     Ensonig 1371/1373 and Creative Labs 5880 driver support
> > > >> pcn driver          AMD PCnet Ethernet controller device driver
> > > >> phx driver          Kernel driver interfaces
> > > >> scmi2c driver       Smart Transporter chip device driver
> > > >> spwr driver         SMC EtherPower II (EPIC) 10/100 (9432) Ethernet device driver
> > > >> ksh88               Korn shell
> > > >
> > > > I thought Opensolaris already reached the consensus on the ksh88
> > > > matter: Replace the old ksh88 with ksh93 - or do you have other plans?
> > > > IMO it would be a shame to throw away all the work of the last year.
> > > >
> > >
> > > Roland's current work is to integrate ksh93 as ksh93.  He also has a
> > > build flag to build it as 'ksh'.
> >
> > I hope Indiana is going to set this build flag to 'ksh' by default.
>
> +1
>
> Shipping ksh88 as /bin/ksh in Indiana would be a disaster - first
> Opensolaris promises to replace the old ksh88 with a far superior
> ksh93, invests a year of development and then we neglect the promise
> and work. We'd be in deep dooo-doo if this happens. Neither would it
> be a good omen for other Opensolaris projects.
>
> Josh
> _______________________________________________
> indiana-discuss mailing list
> indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org
> http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
>
-- 
Bruno