[osol-mktg] reference distribution

[Patrick Finch]

Agree that highly restricted device support doesn't win many converts, 
but one approach I've seen is that Ubuntu installs a (pretty terrible) 
open driver for my ATI graphics card and helps me download and install a 
better performing, closed one if I choose to.  This is also probably 
related to how they keep their install image down to one CD.

Would this be a smart approach for an OpenSolaris reference distro?


Patrick




Tim Foster wrote:
> Hey Patrick, Steve & co.
> 
> [ mostly thinking out loud here ]
> 
> On Tue, 2007-04-24 at 11:33 +0200, Patrick Finch wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>>  > At the same time, we'd continue moving the production of (what was
>>  > called) Solaris Express out into the open. Wouldn't that achieve the
>>  > same thing ?
> 
>> presumably Sun Microsystems will want to reserve the 
>> option of including some closed components in its distribution of 
>> OpenSolaris, no?
> 
> That makes sense alright, I agree.
> 
> Do any of the existing distributions do what's being suggested ?
> [ a freely distributable reference distribution of OpenSolaris ]
> 
> Schillix being the closest to Solaris would seem like a candidate,
> though it hasn't been updated in a while.
> 
> Belenix has a wow-factor that's pretty cool, and fits on one CD, but
> doesn't ship the JDS consolidation.
> 
> Nexenta is more aimed at GNU/Linux userland fans. Martux is sparc-only
> (isn't it?) and so cuts out a large portion of the install-base.
> 
> So - we'd be left with needing to create a new distribution for this,
> possibly with worse hardware support than Solaris Express ? (unless
> there exists open source equivalents for every closed source driver
> shipping in Express ?)
> 
> 
> Given an open source reference edition of OpenSolaris, then it'd loose,
> say Nvidia 3d support & whatever closed-source wifi/ethernet drivers are
> out there, fluendo mp3 support.. Speaking for myself, that'd make such a
> distribution less attractive for my (fictional) laptop.
> 
> On the other hand, perhaps I'm not the target market.
> 
> Is a reference distribution aimed at developers of new distributions,
> that is, is it intended to be used as a base for building new
> distributions from ?
> 
> Or is it aimed at developers of open source drivers/components for
> OpenSolaris who don't like the restrictions of running closed-binaries
> that ship in Express?  If it isn't as good as Solaris Express, then
> what, other than it's unencumbered-status would be the attraction of it
> for a casual end-user ?
> 
> [ sorry for all the questions - I'm thinking about the answers as well,
> lest you think I'm just trying to shoot down everyone's ideas ;-) ]
> 
> 	cheers,
> 			tim
> 
>> Tim Foster wrote:
>>> Hey All,
>>>
>>>  - here goes!
>>>
>>> On Mon, 2007-04-23 at 11:07 -0700, Stephen Lau wrote:
>>>> Question...
>>>> if a community-driven reference/base distribution of OpenSolaris were 
>>>> created with only the open sourced components
>>> Ok, why ?
>>>
>>>> I think this could considerably help the evangelism (advocacy, whatever 
>>>> the accepted PC word of the day is) of OpenSolaris.
>>> So replace "Solaris Express" with "OpenSolaris Reference", and continue
>>> down our path of gradually replacing the closed portions of Solaris with
>>> the (presumably newly written) open components and you're on to a
>>> winner.
>>>
>>> At the same time, we'd continue moving the production of (what was
>>> called) Solaris Express out into the open. Wouldn't that achieve the
>>> same thing ?
>>>
>>>  [ and leave Solaris Express Developer edition where it is, with
>>>    support, etc. as before ]
>>>
>>>
>>> I guess I'm thinking that building a community reference edition would
>>> be a bit of a duplication of effort, given that there's already a group
>>> of people paid to do release engineering, program management, etc. of
>>> something that includes the OpenSolaris source base. Now, it's not fully
>>> open source, but as I understand it, that's something that Sun are
>>> trying to fix.
>>>
>>> If the problem we're trying to solve is that Solaris Express isn't
>>> freely distributable, then can't we just[1] make it freely distributable
>>> and re-brand it as $foo ?
>>>
>>>> Bonus points if we could make it fit onto 1 install CD media.
>>> 6 CDs for Solaris Express is pretty bad I admit.
>>>
>>> 	cheers,
>>> 			tim
>>>
>>> [1] Yeah, I know - the same way most coding problems are /just/ a simple
>>> matter of programming