Slashdot Mirror
OpenSolaris vs. Linux, For Linux Users
An anonymous reader writes "With Sun busy being swallowed up by Oracle, should Linux geeks pay any interest to OpenSolaris? TuxRadar put together a guide to OpenSolaris's most interesting features from a Linux user's perspective, covering how to get started with ZFS and virtualisation alongside more consumer-friendly topics such as hardware and Flash support."
how long did it take you to copy a 17 meg file from one folder to another?
Do you even lift?
These aren't the 'roids you're looking for.
At home I love to use Ubuntu, I've long given up on Windows. I've tried out OpenSolaris a few times, mainly to get use to the subtle differences between Linux and Solaris. As part of my job heavily involves using Solaris its nice to use the OpenSolaris system to learn what I can in my spare time. I know there are many differences between Solaris and OpenSolaris, but the gap isn't as large as from Linux. That said, personally I think the icon theme in Gnome for OpenSolaris is pretty nice looking. Gnome has a very polished look in OpenSolaris. It would be a shame to see Oracle kill this project, I think OpenSolaris has a lot of potential. If anything, they should invest more in OpenSolaris. If I had a home server, I would definitely consider using it.
Using JFS:
$ time cp data test2
real 0m0.062s
user 0m0.000s
sys 0m0.040s
Anyone who likes Linux and wants to try OpenSolaris should give Nexenta a look. It's basically Ubuntu using the OpenSolaris kernel instead of Linux (so GNU/Solaris?). All the fun of Solaris, all the ease of apt. I can't find builds for anything except x86 though.
OpenSolaris looks polished in many areas, but I see Linux as ahead of it as a Desktop OS. I hope that Desktop Linux distributions (and Linux kernel hackers) take note of what OpenSolaris does right (easy snapshot support - sure Linux doesn't have ZFS, but it has LVM which appears to be able to do snapshots) and play a bit of catch-up. And who knows, maybe OpenSolaris will do the same and try to catch up to Linux.
You could say the same about Linux. Doesn't mean it's a bad idea to try it.
In fact, I quite like the fact that there are enterprise-grade features lying around my system, just in case I ever happen to need them. As long as they don't get in the way of day-to-day tasks, what's the harm?
(A good current example of this is ZFS. Although casual users won't have a use for this, I find ZFS's awesome filesystem-creation and pooling features to be a godsend for managing my central backup repository and media store. If I need more space, I add another drive, type a short line into the console, and the space is available instantly to use with my existing filesystems with full-redundancy built in. Removing an old/small/broken drive from the pool is just as easy.)
-- If you try to fail and succeed, which have you done? - Uli's moose
Isn't that what people have said about Linux?
Why try to hack it on to a desktop?
Who said anything about using it for a desktop?? I use OpenSolaris at home to run my NAS for one reason: ZFS. I strongly considered using BSD, but figured OpenSolaris was a better choice for my needs. So far I have had zero issues with it. It just sits in a room and quietly does what it was supposed to do. I am sure I would never try to use it for a desktop OS, but then again I'd never use Linux, BSD or Windows either. For that matter, why try and hack Linux on to a desktop??
I do not consider OpenSolaris future safe until we get a few forks. Now there is The OpenSolaris and it's future depends on just one (evil) corporation. If one GNU/Linux distribution dies a horrible death then it is of no importance since there are dozens of other BNU/Binux (with a B) distributions. If Bubuntu dies then that does not stop Bedora or Bentoo from carrying forward. I'll take a look at OpenSolaris when there's at minimum 3 variants of it being developed.
9/11: Never forget it was a false-flag operation
Well not exactly, Linux wasen't written with servers in mind, Solaris was, but anyway thats by-the-by now. Im not against Solaris, I think its great also, infact ive even been toying with the idea of putting it on my home server for the exact same reason you just stated regarding ZFS. I just think that at the moment, the only Open Source OS thats even nearly practical for typical day-to-day desktop use is Linux. OSS is pretty thinly spread as it is, I think as a community, we need to just concentrate on getting at least 1 OS totally practical for desktop use before we start peddeling others.
Having had a few EXT3 filesystems go tits up because they've been quietly borking themselves on a 24/7/365 server being able to do a weekly "zpool scrub" in a 4TB array without the downtime is a beautiful thing. Kernel CIFS with proper ACLs and integration with ZFS snapshots is pretty great as well. When btrfs is released and gets a few miles on it I may switch back. But for now my file server stays OpenSolaris.
This is not true. Most applications that run on Linux compile just as well on a variety of platforms. Gnome and KDE4 both have packages for FreeBSD for example. If you really want something simple and portable run Fluxbox or Openbox.
A lot of things are written in Java as well, which means you even have binary compatibility. Things written in Python and other scripting languages are also portable.
You miss my point. Thats user ready for US - me and you - who are interested in computers and are happy to take the time to learn all about it. Most people are too damn lazy (i refuse to accept stupid to be the case given personal experience, its pure laziness) to learn a new OS. Setup Ubuntu on a laptop, then show someone how to open Firefox and thats it; their sorted.
Thats really not the case for OpenSolaris; nowhere near it.
But anyway, Im on the side as you here, anything that gets more people off Windows, the better. Personally im a hypocrite in that as both my laptop and Desktop are running Windows 7 but those are the only computers I own which do. At the moment, I have such a huge number of Windows-only programs that its simply impractical to switch. But given good reason - whether that be a bad new mistake in windows or something new in linux - I wouldn't hesitate to.
That is why Linux is practical and others aren't. Most isn't good enough. Only ALL is satisfactory.
OpenSolaris is perfectly practical for the desktop, just maybe not EVERY desktop.
This really depends on what you want to do with your computer. If it's a gaming rig, neither OpenSolaris nor Linux will be perfect for that. If you're looking for maximum software compatibility within the Unix-y realm, Linux is your answer.
If your desktop is a part time file or mail server, OpenSolaris has some features you might like. ZFS and fault management are big ones in that. DTrace also goes way beyond what is available on Linux, that I am aware of. I heard DTrace is available on Linux now, although with varying levels of success.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
OpenSolaris 2009.06 has some excellent new desktop features,
TimeSlider which is similar to Apples Time Capsule
Image - GUI Package Mangement
AutoMagic - Network Configuration Wizards including wifi
Multimedia Codecs and Support
Improved OpenSolaris CIFS for interoprability with Windows networking.
I've been using it at home for a month or so and I'm enjoying it. I've also just gone to Windows 7 which I'm loving so its becoming a bit of a hard choice what I want to run on my notebook.
No. What gave you the idea? Linux always was a "everything" OS. From the smallest portable and embedded devices capable of 32 bit, to the biggest supercomputers on the world.
But I agree on the enterprise-grade features. We're professionals. Professional craftsmen wouldn't use tools from the local DIY store. They use tools like this: http://www.us.hilti.com/holus/modules/prcat/prca_main.jsp
Besides: I use ZFS on my small Linux server via FUSE, which unfortunately makes it a crazy resources hog, with using up 600 MB of RAM, and one of the two cores of hat thing. But the scrubbing — which I absolutely need — makes it worth it. I wonder how much resources it takes under OpenSolaris, and if a OpenSolaris virtual server, just for the ZFS, would make sense...
Any sufficiently advanced intelligence is indistinguishable from stupidity.
Seems to be the reason givem by a lot of people who are not moving away from Windows when they want to... "If Photoshop were available on Linux, I'd ditch Windows for good" seems to be a recurring theme.
considering Photoshops runs just fine under wine...
I was recently tasked with doing an inventory and repurposing of a stack of older Sun machines (Sunfire, Netra, etc).
What I discovered is that OpenSolaris won't even install on some of the models. Install from CD? Nope. Install remotely via a network install? Nope, and let me go on record as saying that the network install process is *absurdly* complex.
On the other hand, I popped a Debian CD in, and it installed beautifully once I booted into expert mode and loaded fdisk (parted blows when dealing with Sun tables).
That's right, Linux was easier to work with on these Sun servers than OpenSolaris. OSOL has some really cool features (ZFS and DTrace, for example), and I've mucked around in it on my x86 boxes before, but overall Linux is still easier to work with in my experience, even on Sun servers.
I always keep an OSOL VM in VirtualBox, but it doesn't see much use. I'd rather use Linux or BSD.
Then Linux fails too, by your own definition it can only run *most* windows programs (via hardware emulation or Wine).
Michael J. Ryan - tracker1.info
Lets see here, I use flash to:
/etc/hosts file can eliminate 95% of ads, and Adblock plus or noscript can eliminate all the others.
A) Use YouTube and a multitude of other video sites
B) Play Flash games
C) Use parts of Google Maps
D) View some sites with webmasters who sought fit to put the navigation in 100% Flash
Just setting up a decent
Taxation is legalized theft, no more, no less.
I'll throw in that Open Solaris has the best accessibility software for the blind, in Sun's Orca project. It works in Linux, but not as well as where it's developed... in Solaris. This is a key indicator of just how ready an OS is for the desktop, IMO.
Anyway, the whole Windows vs Linux flame war is pointless. Linux is the best OS ever developed for hackers, period. I couldn't be happier with it (unless it ran cool software like Orca stably). Windows is for Joe Sixpack who needs games and porn. Joe will always outnumber the hackers. It's ok. Just learn to live with it.
Celebrate failure, and then learn from it - Nolan Bushnell
Gnash can handle most Flash navigation, as well as YouTube. And you're aware that Flash wasn't available for 64 bit Linux users until recently right? Even now I think only an alpha release is available.
Horror. You actually iterate through a list of hundreds of blocked domains every time you do a domain lookup?
I wonder how much resources it takes under OpenSolaris, and if a OpenSolaris virtual server, just for the ZFS, would make sense...
ZFS will always try to take up as much RAM as it can for the ARC (Adaptive Replacement Cache).
While ZFS on FUSE probably works fine, it will always make me a bit scared. But kudos if it works for you!
P.S. I like your Hilti analogy. The average do-it-yourselfer does not (and has no need to) know who Hilti is or what kind of products they make. Those who need to know, do.
"Nature doesn't care how smart you are. You can still be wrong." - Richard Feynman
Dunno, I've found plenty of Linux-compatible porn.
Just maybe...
you're doing it wrong.
You can't legislate goodness. Let each to his own destiny, by will of his freely made choices.
One thing I thing the Linux community could take from OpenSolaris is its concentration on the approval and standardization of applications, so long as you stay on the OpenSolaris repositories. There is pretty much one tool for each job. That's it -- generally speaking of course.
It is exactly why the Linux community shun it (cannot find binaries of specific software). When I use a Linux based OS, I feel the ADD in me kick in; too many options. I cannot imagine I am alone.
Anyhow, I think OpenSolaris is rock solid and a powerful option for people to try. It may not have all the bells/whistles of Ubuntu, but it aids me in getting my work done very efficiently.
FWIW, I purchased the Fluendo codec pack, which made a huge impact on usability -- I need my tunes while working. Well worth the money IMO.
I've used that HOSTS file on Windows as well as Linux, to speed up browsing. Reading the HOSTS file might take me a couple minutes, but the computer does it in an instant or two. Why should I download all the trash the ad servers offer, when the content I want makes up only a fraction of the entire page? With limited bandwidth, HOSTS can make browsing a lot more enjoyable, as well as making a browser hijack somewhat less likely. Ever been Rick Rolled? Are you always aware of cross site scripting as your page loads? HOSTS is your friend, in more ways than one.
"Windows is like the faint smell of piss in a subway: it's there, and there's nothing you can do about it." - Charlie Br
If you're depending on a static blacklist of bad sites to protect yourself from bad scripts then you're doing it wrong.
Just don't run scripts without your explicit approval, require a click to enable flash/java objects, and use a secure browser (chromium, konqueror, probably kazehakase over firefox if you're in GTK+).
It's sort of true... Solaris isn't that snappy to begin with, but it doesn't get bogged down easily either. It says at a pretty consistent speed from my experience.
Amusingly, this hasn't really helped the hardware support much for Solaris, when you compare all the hardware Linux supports with it's unstable ABIs.
Which, is great if you're doing kernel development - it really is. But if you're not doing kernel development - Not much use in that.
Yes, like. Not using initd for daemons but using some assine svcadm thing that uses XML files for that pure basic Unix roo.. Wait what?
I come from a unixish background and I have to say, the way Solaris just kind of stunted in growth the past decade in the userland itself. As an example, take the system utilities. Compared to GNU is getting pathetic. GNU's toolchain doesn't exactly have that many changes over the years, but when Solaris lacks features like compression in tar, less defined regular expressions in grep, crontab not supporting options like */2, @reboot etc. It makes it look quite backwards.
On top of that, the reliance on starting giant java runtimes to just display simple configuration utilities that take forever to load for this reason just seems a bit assine.
This is really no different from the BSDs, the different Solaris-based distributions.
That said, unlike older Unix admins, I have a tendency to actually learn the reason why things are done differently. I find the philosophies of different Unix, BSD, Linux systems quite fascinating.
You know -- if I wanted to promote Solaris, I'd discuss the less known features like containers or zones and just to what extent they can be used, setup to do etc.
Change is certain; progress is not obligatory.
I'm a hacker that needs games and porn, you insensitive clod!
Why don't they just run flash in a virtualized Linux box if they want to run it in *BSD? Sure, it's a bit of a hack, but any OS that can't show a kitten playing guitar is not, in my opinion, feature complete.
I too verify that porn runs fine on Linux.
o hai
But then the WWW came along and the only OSes up to the task were Unix based or Unix like. And, "Windows" certainly never was a "server OS", but it's good for spreadsheets, so in certain types of people's minds "It's a Server OS".
Thanks for the info (I'm all of 24yo and was almost a toddler when the current-gen *nix OS were born, so yeah) - but
Unix was conceived as an interactive environment for programming, and is sill the only OS worth using for a programmer
I appreciate your courage, you'd have been taken apart by the dotnet lovers in that other article (and maybe by those who still think Basic in any form is a programming language and not a "what not to do" guide)
TimeSlider which is similar to Apples Time Capsule
I think you mean Time Machine (Time Capsule is Apple's NAS product). Saying TimeSlider is similar to Time Machine is doing TimeSlider a gross injustice. Time Slider works how Time Machine should. It uses the ZFS O(1) snapshot feature, making it very cheap to use and very robust. Time Machine creates a tree of hard links, which are not created atomically. The fact that it works at all is impressive, but it's very fragile. From an end-user perspective they are similar, but TimeSlider is a much cleaner implementation.
I'm not sure if it made it into the main OpenSolaris tree, but Nexenta also uses ZFS snapshots for package management with a wrapper around apt. When you do an update, it snapshots the system first, so if something went wrong (e.g. one package didn't update cleanly, or had regressions) you can revert trivially. Once you're happy, you can discard the snapshot. This is really great for testing experimental code; you can install the development version and revert it trivially if it broke anything.
I am TheRaven on Soylent News
Well not exactly, Linux wasen't written with servers in mind.
Yes it was.
Interested in open source engine management for your Subaru?
Why do you think anybody complaining about GPL compatibility must be a FSF drone?
There's lots of good software out there under the GPL, including the Linux kernel. Much of it is designed to be hacked and put together with other things. In its various incarnations, it's probably the most popular of the Free Software/Open Source licenses (second being the BSD-style licenses - and anything compatible with the GPL is compatible with those).
This means that a GPL-compatible program is more versatile than a non-GPL-compatible one. It's not because of any inherent virtue of the GPL (that's another argument entirely), but because of what's available. It also means that some people are deep into GPL software, for whatever reason, and find it difficult to use system software that's incompatible.
There aren't as many people who are Microsoft fanatics, at least proportionately, but somebody who won't consider software if it doesn't run well on MS Windows isn't necessarily a mini-Ballmer.
"When you have eliminated the unacceptable, whatever is left, however improbable, must be the truthiness" - Holmes
how long did it take you to copy a 17 meg file from one folder to another?
this is one of my all time favorites, the fact that people below responded with timing makes it ever sweeter. I am in your debt.
fak3r.com