Slashdot Mirror


OpenSolaris One Year On

daria42 writes "In June of last year, Sun Microsystems open sourced its flagship operating system Solaris. This article asks the question, where is the OpenSolaris project after one year of operation? It contains views from Sun itself as well as insights from an external contributor to the code." From the article: "Sun is yet to release some aspects of Solaris as open source software, although that process is due for completion by the year's end. Meanwhile, non-Sun programmers have to date offered some 165 code contributions to the OpenSolaris project, said Eagleton. Of those, 70 have been accepted into the project's code base, while another 95 are still in the review process. To allay early community concerns that the process of getting external code contributions accepted was taking too long, Sun has a temporary buddy system whereby external contributors are partnered with Sun employees."

15 of 141 comments (clear)

  1. This is all good news by Pieroxy · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Sun is new to Open Sourcing its proprietary products. Solaris is a good step and a few glitches here and there are likely to be minor youth problems. The important thing is to know whether Sun will find in this experience enough incentive to open source other stuff (Java anyone?)

    --
    Krazy Kat, George Herriman

    1. Re:This is all good news by Darkon · · Score: 3, Insightful

      a tiny move could turn them into all-out sharing of code between Linux and Solaris

      Do you really think the sharing would be in anything other than one direction? What incentive would Sun have to see all their crown jewels taken and added to Linux?

    2. Re:This is all good news by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's not Solaris being "intentionally GPL-incompatible" - it's the GPL being intentionally incompatible with everything that isn't the GPL. Get your facts straight instead of spreading FUD.

    3. Re:This is all good news by KiloByte · · Score: 4, Informative

      Uhm, "everything"? And BSD? And MIT? And X11? And LGPL? And a vast majority of free licenses in existence?

      Among pieces of software that have significant use, are free according to the DFSG, and are not GPL compatible, I can name just openssl, old apache, core parts of TeX, and that's about it. (Before you correct me, read again the first clause of the previous sentence).

      --
      The creatures outside looked from Alt-Right to Antifa; but already it was impossible to say which was which.
    4. Re:This is all good news by twiddlingbits · · Score: 4, Informative

      Lets see..things Solaris could add to Linux:
      1. Containers
      2. Zones
      3. Awesome fast TCP/IP Stack
      4. Dtrace
      5. ZFS

      Those five alone would be the bump Linux needed to morph into a really solid Enterprise class O/S that is open source.

  2. Re:WTF does "Linux" have to do with this? by Orange+Crush · · Score: 5, Funny

    Obviously, it's because Solaris is one of many Linux-like operating systems.

  3. Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install by HighOrbit · · Score: 4, Insightful
    [qualifier]I've been working with Solaris 10, not OpenSolaris itself, but since the next Solaris will be a superset distribution of OpenSolaris, this should apply [/qualifier]

    I've done a few console installs of Solaris 10 on some headless (and ancient) sparc netras. Here are some things that would make my life easier.
    • Make then entire system available as a pkg-get repository, not just the blastwave contributed programs. I don't want to download 4 cds of nonsense. Let me have one CD for a base install and ftp just the parts I want with pkg-get.
    • In line with the above, smpatch update seams to be painfully slow process. Pkg-get update for the base system please!
    • I haven't done any X-based installs, but my main bitch with the console install is that it is fairly inflexible. You get four options for package selection 1)really stripped down 2)stripped down 3)everything, 4)everthing plus OEM drivers. Finer grained control in package selection would be nice. Also nice would be a task-based pre-canned install set a la tasksel in debian or like what anaconda gives you in RH. Example: selecting a DNS task would install BIND but not X.
    • Please add some polish and make the default paths sane. Yes, I know this is a minor thing, but why do I have to spend several minutes adding /opt/sfw/bin:/usr/bin/:/usr/local/bin to my skel and .profile .
    • /root. You should have one. Yes, contrary to popular advice, I don't just su, I sometimes actually find it easier to log in as root. I don't like to clutter the / with junk. please make /root a default. Why do I have to munge /etc/passwd to get myself a /root home?
    • Would somebody please statically compile bash already? I've scoured google and I can't find one. Yes, I know sh and ksh, but I prefer bash and think it to be more capable and easier to use. It would be nice to have it available in single user mode.
  4. Re:So, I Wan't To Know Why... by Xtifr · · Score: 4, Insightful
    I don't have first-hand knowledge, but I can certainly think of a number of reasons why they might have done so...
    1. They found that Linux met their specific needs better, or
    2. they found that SUSE in particular met their needs better, or
    3. they got a better deal on support from Novell than Sun was willing to offer, or
    4. they wanted to use SUSE because it is (or was) a German company, while Sun is a US company, or
    5. they discovered that Linux admins are more plentiful/cheaper than Solaris admins in their area, or
    6. their brains exploded when they tried to decypher Sun's convoluted licenses (or maybe that's just me), or
    7. some combination of the above.

    I've used Solaris since...well, since before it was named Solaris, and I've used Linux since not long after the first experimental releases, and BSD for nearly as long, and I think all three are great systems, but they're not interchangable. They each have different strengths and weaknesses. If I had to pick just one, I'd probably pick Linux, as it seems to be the most versatile overall, but I'm very glad I don't have to pick just one, and can instead use the one that's best for a specific job or role.
  5. Sun is doing a thorough job by bos · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I used to work at Sun, and it's a company with a slow-moving internal culture. Pretty much any organisation that contains 30,000 people will necessarily not be zippy. The lack of speed says nothing about their intentions, though. For example, I've been talking to a number of Sun people over the past several months as they've been choosing a revision control system for OpenSolaris to use, and they've been keenly aware of the benefits of both doing things in an open manner and doing them carefully. They ended up choosing a wonderful revision control tool called Mercurial, but first they spent a few months evaluating the alternatives and, even better, writing up their evaluations and posting them in public. This is a very useful service to the open source community, as few people have time to evaluate tools in such depth, much less write in detail about why they did or not choose any of half a dozen alternatives.

  6. OMG! Too long? by WidescreenFreak · · Score: 4, Insightful

    To allay early community concerns that the process of getting external code contributions accepted was taking too long,

    You're kidding, right? Solaris is one of the most mature operating systems out there. It runs some of the most powerful servers on the face of the planet. It is the core for a number of institutions, especially in the financial sector. I am not over-dramatizing when I say that Solaris runs a hell of a lot of crucial systems that make our lives easier in a lot of different ways.

    That being the case, do these people really think that Sun is just going to say, "Oh, I see. You tested it in a limited fashion and we tested it in a limited fashion in the matter of a few months. Okay, we'll release it to the customers who run massive databases and financial applications on our servers because of a few months of limited testing." I would much prefer Sun take a year if need be to make sure that any modifications will be completely compatible with as many of their customers and equipment as possible, particularly the higher-end systems and major corporate environments.

    I understand and share a lot of the aggravation that people feel when it comes to the lack of features, particularly device drivers, in Solaris. This is the one of the main reasons wy I think that Solaris has become so niche, particularly on the x86 side of things. If we're talking about modification to a common tool or enhancements to a graphical interface, okay, I don't see why it would take a year. But if Sun needs a year to make sure that a new device driver doesn't crash a SunFire 25K running a clustered Oracle server during end-of-month, transaction processing, then I'll grant Sun that year.

    --
    The Overrated mod is for reversing inappropriate, positive mods, not for voicing disagreement with a post.
  7. Re:OMG! Too long? by twiddlingbits · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Very good points. I for one don't want minimally tested extensions to Solaris (or any other O/S) to be on any system that controls my money! I wonder why no one mentions that IBM isn't doing ANYTHING to make AIX open source, nor is HP doing anything with HP-UX. And hell will freeze before MS does anything open-source with Windoze.

  8. Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install by allenw · · Score: 3, Insightful
    Make then entire system available as a pkg-get repository, not just the blastwave contributed programs. I don't want to download 4 cds of nonsense. Let me have one CD for a base install and ftp just the parts I want with pkg-get.
    You're basically looking for how to setup a jumpstart server. You dump the CD contents onto an NFS server. From there, you can pkgadd till your hearts content.

    pkgadd, BTW, also supports quite a few URL constructs (e.g., pkgadd http://blah/blah). In this form, the other end of the pkgadd has to be a package stream, however, so that limits its usefulness with the DVD contents.

    I haven't done any X-based installs, but my main bitch with the console install is that it is fairly inflexible. You get four options for package selection 1)really stripped down 2)stripped down 3)everything, 4)everthing plus OEM drivers. Finer grained control in package selection would be nice. Also nice would be a task-based pre-canned install set a la tasksel in debian or like what anaconda gives you in RH. Example: selecting a DNS task would install BIND but not X.
    It's been a while since I've done the text install, but finer grain control has been there in the past. I'd be surprised if it was removed. That said, using Jumpstart combined with a profile will also get you finer grained control without having to do it manually for each install. Information on network-based installs and the like is available here and here.

    Please add some polish and make the default paths sane. Yes, I know this is a minor thing, but why do I have to spend several minutes adding /opt/sfw/bin:/usr/bin/:/usr/local/bin to my skel and .profile
    ... except I don't have /usr/local/bin or /opt/sfw/bin on my machines. :) Also, /bin==/usr/bin on Solaris. That said, /usr/ucb really needs to get removed and /usr/sfw/bin and /usr/sbin added. (or perhaps that is what you meant?)

    Would somebody please statically compile bash already? I've scoured google and I can't find one. Yes, I know sh and ksh, but I prefer bash and think it to be more capable and easier to use. It would be nice to have it available in single user mode.
    Solaris 10 and up doesn't come bundled with *any* statically built binaries anymore. The /sbin/sh and friends are all dynamically linked. Building your own statically linked bash puts you at risk from a security perspective unless you rebuild it after every patch installation. This is because the static binary won't be getting fixes that were in the library fix.
  9. Re:OMG! Too long? by killmenow · · Score: 4, Funny
    I wonder why no one mentions that IBM isn't doing ANYTHING to make AIX open source
    Haven't you heard? IBM has contributed "millions of lines" of AIX to Linux. Just ask SCO.
  10. Re:Wishlist: more pkg-get and flexible install by allenw · · Score: 3, Informative
    if usr is not mounted,
    Don't make /usr a separate partition. Seriously. You gain nothing by doing it anymore.

    the libs would have to be available somewhere in /

    They already are. Most of the vital libraries in /usr/lib are softlinks back into /lib.

  11. OpenSolaris better run than Darwin by GrumpyOldMan · · Score: 3, Informative

    Sun and Apple both ship a proprietary OS based around an "open source" core. Sun's core is OpenSolaris, and Apple's is Darwin. Sun has done a far better job open sourcing their operating system. I do a 3rd party hardware device driver for both MacOSX and OpenSolaris. To compare Apple's to Solaris' "open source" OS
    is quite interesting:

    - Source code: Darwin: Must sign up for an Apple account to view source, source code for Intel kernel not even available. Solaris: Source code browseable on web, and available to anybody.
    - Installable OS: Darwin was never updated from 8.0.1, which was released over a year ago. Solaris: Solaris Express is released at least monthly.
    - Project direction: Darwin code appears after a MacOSX release. There is no way to see the source code of an upcoming MacOSX version, there is no way to even know what features will be present aside for signing up for a $500/yr ADC account. You are not allowed to talk about this in public. This is in stark contrast to OpenSolaris, where Sun engineers publically debate virtues of different features, and future directions on their forums/mailing lists, and anybody is welcome to contribute.

    In short, OpenSolaris is a real open source project. Darwin is a sham, and would not survive without Apple.