Posted by
ryuzaki0
on from the sunshine-lollipops-and-rainbows dept.
ptolemu writes "The Register has the scoop on Sun's latest iteration of Solaris. The article includes some details of the new and improved features that will be included in the OS. The OS is scheduled to be released in the second half of 2004."
Sun has also added a new security tool with Solaris Privileges. This lets the root user create sub roots that can have permission, for example, to patch applications but not to touch hardware components.
It should be interesting to see how the N1 Grid Containers work. It would be great to setup a shared server with this so scripts can't eat all the CPU and crash the entire server.
--
"But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
Re:so what's better, bsd, linux or solaris?
by
0xfc
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
> i always wondered why nobody ever writes articles that include solaris.
1. not open source 2. costs money 3. runs on overpriced hardware 4. bsd and linux can do everything it can cept maybe scale to extremes 5. solaris is not the only stable OS anymore 6. way too many people were burned by sun back in the day and said enough is enough, they never went back
Sun has also added a new security tool with Solaris Privileges. This lets the root user create sub roots that can have permission, for example, to patch applications but not to touch hardware components.
This is a very interesting feature. Except for using sudo, does anyone know of any effort going on in linux to provide a similar feature ? Maybe Sun can port it to linux just to prove how OSS friendly they are;)
-- My mom never taught me to sign.
Re:so what's better, bsd, linux or solaris?
by
BiggerIsBetter
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
1. Yup. 2. Yup, but it's cheaper than RedHat/SuSE Linux for a single CPU *professional* version. 3. There's an x86 version (Sun harware fanboys can STFU about how crappy it is on non-SPARC hardware), and low-end Sun hardware starts at around 1000 USD. 4. Yup. 5. Fair enough.
-- Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
So is this version going to
by
Anonymous Coward
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
So is this version going to include the feature of it not being *fricking painful* to compile nearly anything not specifically targetted at Solaris?
No, I'm not trolling. Anyone who's worked with previous Solaris versions knows what I'm talking about. Anyone who's tried to compile GNOME as a non-root user on Solaris 9 is rolling on the floor crying from the memories right now. It seems like Solaris has everything just *barely* different enough that absolutely everything is a slightly different kind of complete pain to compile.
Yes I realize that at least part of this is that apps are targetted for Linux, so of course it isn't Sun's fault when shit doesn't compile. And yes, I'm exaggerating, the compilation problems only happen occationally, it's just that when they do happen it's really bad. But through the shit-colored glasses of memory, it seems like every time you try to compile some large free software package in solaris you uncover some new and painful oddity about the OS.
Re:So is this version going to
by
plankers
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
never do anything with the odd release of solaris.
by
Desmoden
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
think of it like odd linux kernels.
5.6 stable we all used it. 5.7 we played with, tested 5.8 we all upgraded to, used, liked. 5.9 play with and test 5.10 upgrade and enjoy.
most oracle products for example will never be certified on 5.9. It's too much work to requalify and upgrade to a new solaris version. So the odds introduce new features and work out the bugs, and the evens is what we use.
Re:A simple question
by
Brandybuck
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Linux and BSD aren't really UNIX
In all but name, BSD is every bit as much UNIX as Solaris. In fact, Solaris's precessor, SunOS, was directly derived from BSD. If you're hung up on names and trademarks, than BSD is not UNIX. But in every other sense it is.
-- Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Re:Solaris vs. Linux - mod parent up
by
javiercero
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Not really, actually I have had the opposite experience with Solaris running much better on desktop sparc machines than linux.
Also most of the software out there that can be compiled in linux can also be ported over Solaris with minimal grief.
And I do not particularly feel like spending 2 days compiling in order to have a stable machine. A solaris install with the extra software CD provides most of the functionality than a linux install. But if you like linux by all means go and use it. Saying that linux is somehow better or makes more sense than solaris just because is just plain dumb.
Why all the bad comments?
by
KidSock
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
Excuse me but this actually sounds pretty good. This "containers" thing permits running hundreds of virtual machines on one host (and not a moment too late as that idea is becoming a very popular -- I have a VPS runing UML and it's very snappy). The DTrace utility sounds nice although I probably shouldn't say that considering I've never tried it. And they're going to run Opteron and claim that they can beat the Linux benchmarks. I don't know about you but I wouldn't mind having an Opteron box running Solaris 10.
[disclaimer: I have 50 shares of SUNW]
Re:so what's better, bsd, linux or solaris?
by
0xfc
·
· Score: 4, Interesting
> 1. You can get the source to Solaris.
google showed this link for seach "solaris source". From this link it reads:
The Solaris 8 Foundation Source Program has concluded. Source code for the Solaris Operating System is available for qualified educational institutions and partners; please contact your Sun sales team for details. Maybe this info is old...
> 2. You can download Solaris for free.
I just tried, it seemed you were right, they made me jump through hoops. I ended up at a page that appeared to allow me to download solaris, but the link was not a link and they wanted me to register. could have told me that at the start... i am too lazy to do it, i will assume you are right.
> 3. Solaris runs on good hardware which is a good thing if you are trying to get serious work done. (Not everyone working with *nix is building web servers, internet hosting, or using samba to replace a few Windows PCs.) If you are only trying to recycle crap hardware, any OS will do. FreeDOS or DR DOS will recycle hardware that Linux is too fat to run on.
You make it sound like ibm,hp,compaq did not make high end x86 servers. Himilaya non stop servers come to mind. Heck even proliants are nice.
> 4. BSD and Linux lack the thousands of mature, commerical applications Solaris has, but they are catching up.
I agree.
> 5. Solaris is not only stable, it is one of the best. Linux is still in catch up mode in terms of standards and features. Linux still has a tendency to cheat, or only partially implement a standard. It is getting better. Standards are a good thing if you are trying to get equipment from multiple vendors to work together.
FreeBSD is amazingly stable. Uptimes of a year are taken for granted. I dont know enough to comment on the rest of your statement.
> 6. Sun's support has been plenty good for the companies I've worked for, and PCs won't be getting the work done that we do anytime soon. Maybe if the Opterons work out well we could use them in a couple of years.
Support? I dont need no stinkin support. You telling me your head admins cannot troubleshoot hardware? You dont have a backup system ready so a hardware failure just is an inconvienence? Software is a whole different issue.
> 7. A standard Sun keyboard has the control key where it should be....
> 8. Documentation. Solaris has it. The documentation is good, and correct. Linux, ha.
I agree. Sun probably employs a crap load of technical writers. Its a good thing. I often find answers to problems from sun docs...
> 9. Solaris can have a System V Unix personality, a BSD personality, a GNU personality, or traditional Sun personality, depending upon your path.
I guess.
> 10. Linux pretty much provides a subset of what Solaris can do.
I wont argue that. Solaris is time tested and powerful.
Re:Is Unix Unix?
by
Veridium
·
· Score: 5, Interesting
I have to agree with you. Sun support kicks butt, second to none. At the one company I worked at as a Solaris admin, the few times I did call Sun, I was never on hold more than a few minutes, and whatever parts were needed were delivered to us within hours.
Though I always saw that as one of the advantages of having the OS & hardware coming from the same vendor. It seems to keep them from playing the "it must be your hardware" game that so many software vendor support people play whenever the answer isn't easy. Though that doesn't explain your experience with RH.
Anyone out there have experience with their X86 support?
Slashdot Mirror
When will I see it in Debian stable? =b
VIVA1023.com | Political Fashion.
It should be interesting to see how the N1 Grid Containers work. It would be great to setup a shared server with this so scripts can't eat all the CPU and crash the entire server.
"But I'm still right here, giving blood and keeping faith. And I'm still right here."
> i always wondered why nobody ever writes articles that include solaris.
1. not open source
2. costs money
3. runs on overpriced hardware
4. bsd and linux can do everything it can cept maybe scale to extremes
5. solaris is not the only stable OS anymore
6. way too many people were burned by sun back in the day and said enough is enough, they never went back
Sun has also added a new security tool with Solaris Privileges. This lets the root user create sub roots that can have permission, for example, to patch applications but not to touch hardware components.
;)
This is a very interesting feature. Except for using sudo, does anyone know of any effort going on in linux to provide a similar feature ? Maybe Sun can port it to linux just to prove how OSS friendly they are
My mom never taught me to sign.
1. Yup.
2. Yup, but it's cheaper than RedHat/SuSE Linux for a single CPU *professional* version.
3. There's an x86 version (Sun harware fanboys can STFU about how crappy it is on non-SPARC hardware), and low-end Sun hardware starts at around 1000 USD.
4. Yup.
5. Fair enough.
Forget thrust, drag, lift and weight. Airplanes fly because of money.
So is this version going to include the feature of it not being *fricking painful* to compile nearly anything not specifically targetted at Solaris?
No, I'm not trolling. Anyone who's worked with previous Solaris versions knows what I'm talking about. Anyone who's tried to compile GNOME as a non-root user on Solaris 9 is rolling on the floor crying from the memories right now. It seems like Solaris has everything just *barely* different enough that absolutely everything is a slightly different kind of complete pain to compile.
Yes I realize that at least part of this is that apps are targetted for Linux, so of course it isn't Sun's fault when shit doesn't compile. And yes, I'm exaggerating, the compilation problems only happen occationally, it's just that when they do happen it's really bad. But through the shit-colored glasses of memory, it seems like every time you try to compile some large free software package in solaris you uncover some new and painful oddity about the OS.
think of it like odd linux kernels.
5.6 stable we all used it.
5.7 we played with, tested
5.8 we all upgraded to, used, liked.
5.9 play with and test
5.10 upgrade and enjoy.
most oracle products for example will never be certified on 5.9. It's too much work to requalify and upgrade to a new solaris version. So the odds introduce new features and work out the bugs, and the evens is what we use.
Linux and BSD aren't really UNIX
In all but name, BSD is every bit as much UNIX as Solaris. In fact, Solaris's precessor, SunOS, was directly derived from BSD. If you're hung up on names and trademarks, than BSD is not UNIX. But in every other sense it is.
Don't blame me, I didn't vote for either of them!
Not really, actually I have had the opposite experience with Solaris running much better on desktop sparc machines than linux.
Also most of the software out there that can be compiled in linux can also be ported over Solaris with minimal grief.
And I do not particularly feel like spending 2 days compiling in order to have a stable machine. A solaris install with the extra software CD provides most of the functionality than a linux install. But if you like linux by all means go and use it. Saying that linux is somehow better or makes more sense than solaris just because is just plain dumb.
Excuse me but this actually sounds pretty good. This "containers" thing permits running hundreds of virtual machines on one host (and not a moment too late as that idea is becoming a very popular -- I have a VPS runing UML and it's very snappy). The DTrace utility sounds nice although I probably shouldn't say that considering I've never tried it. And they're going to run Opteron and claim that they can beat the Linux benchmarks. I don't know about you but I wouldn't mind having an Opteron box running Solaris 10.
[disclaimer: I have 50 shares of SUNW]
> 1. You can get the source to Solaris.
...
google showed this link for seach "solaris source". From this link it reads:
The Solaris 8 Foundation Source Program has concluded. Source code for the Solaris Operating System is available for qualified educational institutions and partners; please contact your Sun sales team for details. Maybe this info is old...
> 2. You can download Solaris for free.
I just tried, it seemed you were right, they made me jump through hoops. I ended up at a page that appeared to allow me to download solaris, but the link was not a link and they wanted me to register. could have told me that at the start... i am too lazy to do it, i will assume you are right.
> 3. Solaris runs on good hardware which is a good thing if you are trying to get serious work done. (Not everyone working with *nix is building web servers, internet hosting, or using samba to replace a few Windows PCs.) If you are only trying to recycle crap hardware, any OS will do. FreeDOS or DR DOS will recycle hardware that Linux is too fat to run on.
You make it sound like ibm,hp,compaq did not make high end x86 servers. Himilaya non stop servers come to mind. Heck even proliants are nice.
> 4. BSD and Linux lack the thousands of mature, commerical applications Solaris has, but they are catching up.
I agree.
> 5. Solaris is not only stable, it is one of the best. Linux is still in catch up mode in terms of standards and features. Linux still has a tendency to cheat, or only partially implement a standard. It is getting better. Standards are a good thing if you are trying to get equipment from multiple vendors to work together.
FreeBSD is amazingly stable. Uptimes of a year are taken for granted. I dont know enough to comment on the rest of your statement.
> 6. Sun's support has been plenty good for the companies I've worked for, and PCs won't be getting the work done that we do anytime soon. Maybe if the Opterons work out well we could use them in a couple of years.
Support? I dont need no stinkin support. You telling me your head admins cannot troubleshoot hardware?
You dont have a backup system ready so a hardware failure just is an inconvienence? Software is a whole different issue.
> 7. A standard Sun keyboard has the control key where it should be.
> 8. Documentation. Solaris has it. The documentation is good, and correct. Linux, ha.
I agree. Sun probably employs a crap load of technical writers. Its a good thing. I often find answers to problems from sun docs...
> 9. Solaris can have a System V Unix personality, a BSD personality, a GNU personality, or traditional Sun personality, depending upon your path.
I guess.
> 10. Linux pretty much provides a subset of what Solaris can do.
I wont argue that. Solaris is time tested and powerful.
I have to agree with you. Sun support kicks butt, second to none. At the one company I worked at as a Solaris admin, the few times I did call Sun, I was never on hold more than a few minutes, and whatever parts were needed were delivered to us within hours.
Though I always saw that as one of the advantages of having the OS & hardware coming from the same vendor. It seems to keep them from playing the "it must be your hardware" game that so many software vendor support people play whenever the answer isn't easy. Though that doesn't explain your experience with RH.
Anyone out there have experience with their X86 support?
Think for yourself, destroy your television.