[indiana-discuss] Indiana, just a Linux clone with different kernel?

[Jacob Israel]

Or maybe, Sun should start building the "Solaris* brand" for the desktop.

* Not the OpenSolaris but the Solaris brand (without the open)

On 01/11/2007, Jacob Israel <otanix at gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I'm so sad to hear Indiana trying to be a Linux wannabe. Now, the answer
> to the months-old question "Why isn't opensolaris GPLed?" is slowly being
> revealed. Maybe because they want to get Linux users by saying
> "zfs/smf/dtrace are opensolaris only and not found in linux. Come join us!
> Experience GNU with us better than Linux because we got this zfs and
> stuffs."
>
> But I'm a user, and although I do not represent the majority of
> solaris-converts, let me state the reason why I'm considering to use
> OpenSolaris as my desktop OS...
>
> 1. I want OpenSolaris not because of ZFS. If I would want the ZFS
> functionality per se, I'd rather buy Mac Leopard.
> 2. I want OpenSolaris not because of its innovations such as self healing,
> dtrace, smf, etcetera, because I'm not gonna run it on a server box. I just
> want an OS for my desktop and Linux with its abundant drivers and software
> applications can make me contented.
> 3. I want OpenSolaris not because it is FOSS because Linux/BSDs are FOSS
> as well.
> 4. I want OpenSolaris not because it is more beautiful than linux
> aesthetics-wise. Because if I'm after beauty, I'd rather get the GNU-loaded
> mac.
>
> so... why would I like opensolaris?
>
> 5. I want OpenSolaris because it is derived from Solaris and for the first
> time, it's targeting the desktop users like me.
>
> If this OpenSolaris distro will become a "GNU/Linux experience without
> Linux but the Solaris kernel", then there's no more point for the likes of
> me to wait for this "opensolaris build for the desktop." I'd rather stick
> with Linux which has the great advantage when speaking of drivers.
>
> But I still hope for the establishment of this project's philosophy and
> goal (if there's still none) so that there would be always a tough guide
> when the team is deciding on something.
>
> Just my 2 cents. Please don't hate me.
>
> On 01/11/2007, Jennifer Pioch <piochjennifer at googlemail.com> wrote:
> >
> > On 11/1/07, Mario Goebbels <me at tomservo.cc> wrote:
> > > > Fight over nothing? What about those people who worked hard and
> > > > accepted community input? It's a slap in their face, that's it.
> > >
> > > ksh93 was ported because people asked for it and there was a long
> > > lingering ARC. That didn't imply instant inclusion. Solaris shipped
> > with
> > > ksh88 since quite some time, ostensibly better than the old Bourne
> > > shell, too. Not default either. No one rose a stink over this, either.
> > >
> > > As in that other huge discussion regarding the GNU tools, it's a
> > > preview, a beta, still in development. Things may and will change.
> > >
> > > The reason why bash is the default shell currently may as well just be
> > > the same why the GNU tools are preferred in this preview.
> >
> > I thought Indiana is not a Linux clone and makes better choices, yes?
> > Maybe not and the Indiana developers - whoever they are - are just
> > resistant against any community input. Indiana appears to be a Linux
> > clone with Solaris kernel, GNU tools and no real improvements.
> >
> > Jenny
> > --
> > Jennifer Pioch, Uni Frankfurt
> > _______________________________________________
> > indiana-discuss mailing list
> > indiana-discuss at opensolaris.org
> > http://mail.opensolaris.org/mailman/listinfo/indiana-discuss
> >
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mail.opensolaris.org/pipermail/indiana-discuss/attachments/20071101/c582bd82/attachment.html>