Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Kernel Mode-Setting Coming To OpenSolaris

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #16
    THe licensing model used by Sun is not to close the source, it is to allow Models and ideas, licensed to a company or individual to be used by the community.

    I know that some guys reverse engineered the Intel network cards and Broadcom cards for Linux, but on Solaris the Intel network card drivers were written by Intel ... which would you have the most confidence in when using them in a high performance server environment.

    Why won't bits be released GPL? ... Some have been, but Sun cannot release all it's code this way; It doesn't own the right to do that.

    I guess you're the sort of person who if begging in the street and given a fiver would complain that since the guy was earning in excess of 30K a year he should have given you close to a ton.

    Comment


    • #17
      Originally posted by susikala View Post
      This logic fails. You cannot possibly compare those two projects in size, length, distribution, acceptance... OpenSolaris is at best a marginal project that is only allowed to stay alive because of a few 'advantages' it has
      over Linux.
      The problem is, you haven't used Solaris/OpenSolaris extensively, so you have only heard of DTrace, ZFS, there are tons of other features that make it much better than Linux for me.

      But this will soon be history with btrfs etc.,
      Yeah, right "Btrfs is under heavy development, and is not suitable for any uses other than benchmarking and review.". Make sure to let us know when it will be ready for actual use with bootable clones, in four+ years or so.

      Comment


      • #18
        Originally posted by susikala View Post
        Aren't you being a little bit harsh here? His suggestion wasn't all that bad; there's also a lot of duplication in *BSD community, for example.

        It's the same deal as was with Compiz and Beryl. Sometimes the whole fork culture just turns the people who do it into a laughing stock. Just because you -can- do something doesn't mean you have to. Forks are more than not a matter of ego (see OpenBSD). I'm not saying competition is needless, but sometimes the reasons are not justified and quite ludicrous. Maybe the BSDs never managed to become a real competition to Linux because those people's talent is getting spread like butter over too much bread.

        I personally think the suggestion wasn't all that bad. A few more developers joining the development of Linux wouldn't hurt (especially if they're specialised in ZFS etc).
        Yeah, I'm sure all the people running the infrastructure, firewalls, and routers running on BSD instead of Linux would agree with you there.

        The systems have their niche, and I don't see any problem with a little differentiation.

        Besides, you all are biased. OpenSolaris CDDL code can be implemented (and has been implemented) in BSD-licensed systems like FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD, and proprietary systems like Mac OS X. It could potentially be implemented in RTOSes, Windows, AIX, HP-UX, just about anything. Linux is the odd man out here with the restrictive GPL. Yet you guys are pointing at OpenSolaris as if that's the big bad wolf forking everyone.

        Comment


        • #19
          BSD-Licensing is completely compatible with the CDDL (not the other way around)

          the CDDL is there to give the supporting companies confidence that their IP is not gonna be ripped off by any old person.

          If you're talking 10Gb networking get a grip, OpenSolaris is the only OS to support it at full speed atm, a large part of that is down to the fact that Sun "collaborates" with the network card manufacturers, and that will produce code that the manufacturers will want to be at least somewhere that they can control.

          Comment


          • #20
            Originally posted by joffe View Post
            Besides, you all are biased. OpenSolaris CDDL code can be implemented (and has been implemented) in BSD-licensed systems like FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD, and proprietary systems like Mac OS X. It could potentially be implemented in RTOSes, Windows, AIX, HP-UX, just about anything. Linux is the odd man out here with the restrictive GPL. Yet you guys are pointing at OpenSolaris as if that's the big bad wolf forking everyone.
            Thanks to GPL 'we' don't support windowses or macoses. It's another advantage over Solaris and BSD's.

            The problem is, you haven't used Solaris/OpenSolaris extensively, so you have only heard of DTrace, ZFS, there are tons of other features that make it much better than Linux for me.
            There are tons of other features that make Linux much better than Solaris or BSD's for me.

            Yeah, right "Btrfs is under heavy development, and is not suitable for any uses other than benchmarking and review.". Make sure to let us know when it will be ready for actual use with bootable clones, in four+ years or so.
            Oh, it should be ready to use next year (maybe even in the end of this year). I wonder if OpenSolaris or BSD's will not die in four years? Many reasons why people use them are just habits or fear to try something new.

            Comment


            • #21
              Could the Linux trolls please stop with the trolling? This is a thread about KMS getting into OpenSolaris, not an operating system war thread.

              Comment


              • #22
                Originally posted by nanonyme View Post
                Could the Linux trolls please stop with the trolling? This is a thread about KMS getting into OpenSolaris, not an operating system war thread.
                So why are you trolling here? Tell the same your trolly friends. Some of us try to figure out if there's any good reason to duplicate work. As fanboy you don't see this. Oh, you even fear to show your real nick...
                Last edited by kraftman; 04-19-2009, 03:34 PM.

                Comment


                • #23
                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  So why are you trolling here? Tell the same your trolly friends. Some of us try to figure out if there's any good reason to duplicate work. As fanboy you don't see this. Oh, you even fear to show your real nick...
                  For the "duplication" see Alanc' reply, DRI is under BSD license, so there's no duplication. As for trolling, I thought I've seen you on the forums here asserting that ZFS is slow without backing up your words ?

                  Comment


                  • #24
                    Originally posted by etacarinae View Post
                    For the "duplication" see Alanc' reply, DRI is under BSD license, so there's no duplication. As for trolling, I thought I've seen you on the forums here asserting that ZFS is slow without backing up your words ?
                    Just look at Linux vs OpenSolaris I/O benchmarks (here, at Phoronix). I said in some post what I think about it (I was talking about using it on desktop). ZFS is/may be 'slower' then EXT4 or other file systems, but has some features which give it great advantage over other fs in some environments. It's still duplication for me, because I want they to work only on Linux :> I'm just looking at things from my point of view. Btw. BTRFS will probably be 'slower' than EXT4 too.

                    Comment


                    • #25
                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      Just look at Linux vs OpenSolaris I/O benchmarks (here, at Phoronix). I said in some post what I think about it (I was talking about using it on desktop). ZFS is/may be 'slower' then EXT4 or other file systems, but has some features which give it great advantage over other fs in some environments. It's still duplication for me, because I want they to work only on Linux :> I'm just looking at things from my point of view. Btw. BTRFS will probably be 'slower' than EXT4 too.
                      Given how the phoronix test suite is written, I'm not accepting any of their results until they will start using gcc 4.4 on opensolaris as well, and not 3.4. It took me less than 20 minutes to compile binutils 2.19.1 and gcc 4.4RC on my laptop, if they can't do it to show actual results, I don't see why they bother running their "test suite" on opensolaris in the first place...

                      P.S. Oracle is buying Sun, so I wonder what will happen to btrfs given that they already have ZFS...

                      Comment


                      • #26
                        Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                        So why are you trolling here? Tell the same your trolly friends. Some of us try to figure out if there's any good reason to duplicate work. As fanboy you don't see this. Oh, you even fear to show your real nick...
                        FYI I'm personally a Linux user, I just don't see any point in arguing whether or not an OS should exist. That's inherently being a flamebait. Even if I did not consider it that bad, this isn't the right thread. Move on.

                        Comment


                        • #27
                          Originally posted by etacarinae View Post
                          Given how the phoronix test suite is written, I'm not accepting any of their results until they will start using gcc 4.4 on opensolaris as well, and not 3.4. It took me less than 20 minutes to compile binutils 2.19.1 and gcc 4.4RC on my laptop, if they can't do it to show actual results, I don't see why they bother running their "test suite" on opensolaris in the first place...

                          P.S. Oracle is buying Sun, so I wonder what will happen to btrfs given that they already have ZFS...
                          It was only for backing up my words Maybe we'll have them both now (as someone stated ZFS!=BTRFS) :>

                          P.S. Oracle is using Solaris too, so it's possible they won't let it just die:

                          There are substantial long-term strategic customer advantages to Oracle owning two key Sun software assets: Java and Solaris.


                          http://www.oracle.com/corporate/pres...ril/018363.htm

                          @nanonyme

                          If you don't see a point it doesn't mean others don't see it too. I don't care what system are you using.
                          Last edited by kraftman; 04-20-2009, 12:19 PM.

                          Comment


                          • #28
                            Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                            I don't care what system are you using.
                            You labeled me a Solaris fanboy, I simply noted I'm not.

                            Comment

                            Working...
                            X