/g/'s opinion on Solaris? Is Oracle a botnet?
Not curious about using it day-to-day.
I use it for most of my *nix systems, I enjoy it.
Oracle's a real piece of shit though, shitting all over hobbyists and putting everything aside from the base system behind a paywall, including even shit like drivers for hardware even Sun wasn't supporting at the time of the buyout.
>>54431812
Doesn't looks so fake to me, unless you were using a bit of sed; I don't care though because it looks purty cool.
>>54432013
Thanks senpai
It's a bit of a kludge, you have to manually enter in hard disk specs and the CPU model still since I can't figure out how to get the info yet and the uptime display keeps fucking up for whatever reason.
Solaris is dead.
When all your IRC circlejerklets full of wannabe ex-linuxsters actually fell for your shilling and started to use BSD, and you still need to be different and have even less software available
>>54433927
Nah, it's just been relegated into a tighter niche. Oracle's still going to run it into the ground eventually, but not now.
>>54433950
What fart apps or development tools do you need on a headless SPARC server that Oracle and OpenCSW don't already provide?
>>54431574
there's zero reason to use Oracle anything, and not just because they've managed to completely erase all the goodwill Sun had built up
>>54434059
apache, mysql, video drivers, raid drivers, drivers, printer drivers, samba, skype, modern web browsers, flash, steam, gimp, wine, media support, teamviewer, VNC, drivers
>>54434201
These are still all fart apps! Kiddo! Etc.
just kidding I'm replying to myself because that is what the inevitable reply from psuedo-server people are that everything they don't understand (everything after 199x) is "bad"
>>54434201
Many of these are in OpenCSW.
it's garbage and can't into 3d applications or anything useful for a 'workstation'
like if you wanted to use it as a pc type thing
great for servers tho, however useless for fun stuff.
i like it but it's shit @ porting
>>54434201
>apache, mysql, video drivers, raid drivers, drivers, printer drivers, samba, modern web browsers, VNC, drivers, flash, gimp
Solaris ships with most of those out of the box and what it doesn't OpenCSW picks up for, it also supports SPARC and x86 hardware just fine, the only issues I've ever run into with it is running 11 on a laptop where getting wifi set up was a little shoddy, but it wasn't a huge deal.
>skype, steam, wine
Why the fuck do you need these on a server or development workstation?
>>54434345
Oh, it's Justin. Shouldn't you be off trying to derail the Retro tech thread with non-sequiturs and irrelevant strawmen? Solaris isn't even old, they just fucking released 11.3 and a new round of SPARC servers a few months ago.
>>54434630
Wine works just fine tho
>>54434688
Didn't know Solaris even had it.
>>54434710
It's in OpenCSV
Do you know what the latest firefox version for solaris was? Some months ago mozilla only had an outdated version
>>54434739
Huh, I don't see it in the package lists, but it does indeed exist.
Firefox ESR 31 is the latest version I can find on the Mozilla FTP, at least for SPARC, but I think it's the same for x86 as well.
Never ran into any problems with it, other than the glacial Blade 150 I was running it on.
>>54434823
Apparently it's in SFE
http://sfe.opencsw.org/localhosts11/en/catalog.shtml
>>54434917
Nice, I never even knew that was a thing.
>>54433882
prtdiag -v | head -1 gives you model.
psrinfo -pv gives you the physical and logical processor breakdown.
>>54431574
Solaris 10 or earlier is a fine server OS.
Oracle has basically just left it rotting but made some changes in Solaris 11 that provide Linux like package management.
Oracle 10 introduced svcadm, which is both good and bad depending on how you look at service management. It's good in terms of how it's dependency reporting (for a failed service) is extremely clear, as well as directly pointing you to the correct error log. The downside is having to make changes to XML files if you're using a service in a non-standard or even slightly modified way.
That being said you can still fall back on /etc/init.d and dropping services into the required /etc/rc*.d
I work for a company that was a 100% Solaris shop up until about 3 years ago. Now we're closer to 20% Solaris.
Personally, x86_64 based systems, you're better off w/ Linux or BSD. If you HAVE a SPARC based system, Solaris is the way to go. My personal servers run Solaris 10 (T5120) or Debian Wheezy (X4170). My workstations run Debian Wheezy (except for one running Slackware).
>>54435776
Fuck, where I said "Oracle 10 introduced svcadm..." I meant Solaris 10.
I don't proof read well.
>>54435660
That looks useful, thanks.
I really need to work on it more, this is fucking disgusting.
I remember that I actually had it just showing the CPU as displayed by the system originally but Solaris IDs my UltraSPARC IIi as a IIe which kind of triggers me.
>>54435823
Well, the SunFire V100 shipped with both models (IIi and IIe).
Are you sure you got one with IIi?
>>54435904
I don't think the IIe clocked to 650 MHz, and everything I looked at about it said the 650 MHz models were IIi-based. Beats me.
>>54435823
Oh, nvm. Just noticed your line for freq. Based on the output in your leading image it looks like you'd have a IIi.
Strange that it reports incorrectly.
I'll see if I can remember where you can modify that in system... We've had to do so after patching older systems.
Everyone I know that had Solaris on the desktop/laptop jumped ship to Apple OS X.
I don't think they are missing anything by moving to apple on the desktop/FreeBSD on the server.
>>54435956
I appreciate that, if you dig it up I'll have to record it somewhere.
>>54435949
What does a prtconf -vb give you?
>>54436011name: SUNW,UltraAX-i2
model: SUNW,375-3015
banner-name: Sun Fire V100 (UltraSPARC-IIe 648MHz)
compatible: 'sun4u'
idprom: 01830003.ba5c480d.000003ba.5c480d82.00000000.00000000.00000000.00000000
openprom model: SUNW,4.0
openprom version: 'OBP 4.0.18 2002/05/23 18:22'
Same thing with Blade 100/150s too.
>>54436068
You might want to find where that banner-name string is located and fix it.
>>54436068
Sadly, I don't have the file we updated in any of my mail sync'ed to my work phone.
I'll have to check my archived stuff at work on Monday...
>>54436195
For the time being you could just pipe the output for your CPU to sed and replace IIe with IIi
Or leave it as is
>>54436195
>>54436209
Thanks man, I think I'll just have it use the CPU string in the banner for now.
I'm actually kind of confused now after reading the wiki pages, the Sun spec sheets clearly list the 650 MHz Fires/Blades as IIi based, but according to the rather spare wiki page https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/UltraSPARC_II#UltraSPARC_IIi the IIi was probably what they used in the Ultra 5/10 series, and these systems it seems actually are based on the IIe, or more specifically the IIe+.
>>54431574
>Is Oracle a botnet?
Yes, this is confirmed.
