Solaris
Images are sometimes not shown due to bandwidth/network limitations. Refreshing the page usually helps.
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
You are currently reading a thread in /g/ - Technology
Why do none of you fags use Solaris? It's actual UNIX and it's mostly open source, especially Solaris 10.
>>54215009
>mostly open source
Therein lies the problem.
I use OpenIndiana on one of my servers.
>>54215026
Yeah but most of these fags install proprietary shit on Linux so I don't see the difference.
>>54215009
>Paying two billion dollars in licensing fees for a product that hasn't changed in 15 years
>>54215058
It has changed. Just read the wikipedia page.
>>54215009
But I do.
It's pretty alright, but unless the average home user surfing /g/ is;
>running SPARC gear
>wanting to learn more about it
>wanting to play with CDE
>wanting to play with a real honest-to-god SysV UNIX
>wanting to run it "just because"
They'd probably get just as much (and a little less headache) out of a *BSD
>>54215423
I have a ultra 5 but the nvram is dead.
>>54215449
Me too, just replaced the chip in one of them for like $4 from a chink ebay dealer.
They'll run without them though, you just have to boot it manually and reprogram a new ethernet address in every time you unplug it.
>>54215009
Actual Unix has only ever been a copyright and standard since the late 80's. Sun and ATT tried to shoehorn the industry with that SysV/ATT is the STANDARD marketing shit and it didn't fly. Thank god for the Single Unix Specification to trump that shitty SysV shit.
>>54215009
>open source
I don't give a fuck. I want free software, not open sourced software
>>54215423
Why don't you just install Solaris 11 on a modern computer?
>>54215009
Because everyone who used to run Solaris now runs MacOS. People who still run Solaris do so because they are DBA's in an Oracle shop and reek of curry.
because linux a shit
>>54215581
Other than the part where I'm also interested in the SPARC architecture and a new SPARC M7 or even an older T series box is in the mid thousands or more and puts out way too much heat to fit in my desk, I already run 11.3 on an X200 as well as in a VM on my main workstation.
Since my use case isn't performance-critical, it brings nothing to the table, and I spend most of my time just using them as X terminals to interact with this box.
Plus I don't really like 11.x as much, I find 10 a much nicer experience with CDE as well as the bundled StarOffice which runs way better than deprecated OO on 11.
>>54215672
I read a paper about Oracle making affordable SPARC chips for workstations. You should research them.
>>54215704
That actually sounds pretty interesting, anything to point me in the right direction? Oracle's site is god awful to navigate.
I've been wanting to shell out on a dual 1.6 Blade 2500 for a while while they're still cheap as all fuck and decent for everyday use. Something based on the newer, beefier tech they've got would be pretty interesting to work with however.
>>54215759
No. I think I was in Edge when I read it, and I broke Edge so it has no history. It doesn't quote a price or anything.
>>54215807
Guess I'll have to keep looking around.
I'm probably still a little too poorfag for it anyway, plus my use case with this hardware which is mostly experimentation, development/compilation, web surfing and "information processing" could more than likely be satisfied just fine by a blade 2500/ultra 45 + a low-power T-series rackmount, mid-2000s era shit is surprisingly virile if your use case isn't heavy on streaming media, I could even survive with a Blade 100 when I was test driving it.
>>54215807
>>54215908
Was it this? http://www.hotchips.org/wp-content/uploads/hc_archives/hc27/HC27.24-Monday-Epub/HC27.24.30-HP-Cloud-Comm-Epub/HC27.24.330-sonoma.Vinalk-oracle-v3.pdf
Even if it doesn't make it into a workstation (seems kind of iffy if the single-thread is as bad as the M7 seems to have from what I've read while I was looking for this) you'd at least probably see some inexpensive 1/2U systems out of it.
>>54215974
Yeah that's it. Sonoma.
>>54215009
>actual UNIX
I keep hearing this. Can someone explain the benefits of 'actual UNIX' over UNIX based?
I rum Solaris 2.5.1 come at me bros
>>54216239
There is no such thing as UNIX based, it's either UNIX or it isn't. Unless you are referring to the Unix operating system itself.
>>54216181
Neat.
>>54216239
For the average /g/ user? About jack. The UNIX craze on /g/ is probably the same reason we're so obsessed with RISC even though its modern mainstream iterations like ARM are about as "reduced" as your mom's fat ass, it was the platform of choice for just about anything worth a shit in technical disciplines; supercomputers, mainframes, workstations and other cost-no-object multiuser iron. There used to be a time when Solaris was the only name in web serving and development, or IRIX in 3D and HPC.
Nowadays, the line is blurred, commodity PCs passed a baseline in the mid '00s and the dotcom bubble did the rest, now on the desktop It's mostly down to what you prefer and work best with. UNIX and GNU/Linux behave differently and they come with different tools, and in the case of UNIX, it's a much more mature set of tools.
Other than that, really what makes real SysV shit stand out anymore is their capabilities beyond just the kernel, in Solaris' case, for example, it's the security of the system, and features like Zones and ZFS.
Also, to get nitpicky:
>UNIX based
I can't think of such a platform that exists, GNU/Linux shares nothing in common with UNIX on a code or historical basis, it just acts similarly and complies with some of the same standards. As for anything else, typically if it's SysV or BSD based, it's still pretty much UNIX.
>>54216481
What box are you running? And what do you have on it?
I've been wanting to play with older versions of Solaris on some of my older Ultras and SPARCStations but it feels like without the hard-to-find proprietary software to run on them, I'm not going to get as much out of it since I don't have any special options in them like a SunPC that you need Solaris to take advantage of.
>>54216558
SysV was nothing but ATT wanting to create yet another standard, with the latest being SysVR4 and stop the Unix wars; it failed.
>>54216239
Actual Unix is only a standard and copyright. That's the way it's been since the 80's. Most standards have failed, but it finally ended in 1992 when Novell bought the Unix name and standards and gave it away to a consortium now known as the Opengroup. You won't see much difference at all since the Opengroup is really just an extension of POSIX. Some companies pay for that rubber stamp that say POSIX compliant (MacOS, Solaris, AIX and even a GNU/LINUX distro) but many don't (Modern BSDs and GNU/Linux). This is why the FreeBSD FAQ says it's Not Unix.
>>54216761
WE WUZ UNIX 'N' SHIEET
At the same time as pic related, the BSD guys had 4.2 > V buttons during the usenix conference.
>>54216761
I understand that, I'm just referring to SysV in particular since that's the basis of the majority of commercial Unices (I think? I don't really know about AIX or HP-UX in this regard)
>>54215449
yeah, its a pretty common issue after all this time - I modded mine to run on a button cell.
works fine - but just too power hungry to justify actually using it or the blade 1000s
>>54216984
Why are so many of you using old shitty computers with deprecated versions of Solaris on them? Build new shit and use new software.
>>54216994
Why?
And exactly what's "deprecated" about Solaris 10?
>>54216982
SysVR4 was the standard Solaris is, before that Sun workstations ran BSD based SunOS. I remember much gnashing of teeth when Sun transitioned from SunOS to Solaris, they had to extend support agreements for companies holding on to BSD.
>>54216994
since oracle bought sun I'm not in the least interested in the way things are going with Solaris.
If you do, more power to you - I get my jollies playing with arm stuff these days.
>>54217018
Well I guess Solaris 10 is still supported, but that box has got to be more than 10 years old.
>>54217036
What difference does it make if Oracle runs the show? Aren't ARM chips complete shit for servers?
>>54217021
My first real experience with a SPARC box was an SS20 with a later version of SunOS on it, don't remember too much of it though. All I remember is not really liking OLWM.
>>54217055
>but that box has got to be more than 10 years old.
So?
>>54215009
used it in at work few years ago.
storage and san stuff often use solaris.
took me a week to get used to it.
the stuff i had do to with was very good documented.
>>54217076
>So?
So it's crap? Build or buy a new one.
>>54217100
>So it's crap? Build or buy a new one.
modern /g/ right there ladies and gentleman.
>>54217076
OLWM was the Standard Sun/AT&T wanted, but they go their way with everything else in SysVR4 that they threw HP a bone and let the standard be CDE/Motif. Yeah, CDE didn't go over well either.
>>54217100
Again, why? The only thing I've ever truly been limited in with my own use of old sun gear is X forwarding a web browser, which I barely do anyway.
What kind of hardware do you think you need for a learning/hobby box? Do you see us crying about it?
>>54217120
I could imagine, I won't really hesitate to admit I liked CDE more from an aesthetic and "it's already here" perspective, though OLWM feels bulkier for some reason, probably because my first experience with it was the fucking DESQView/X version which was absolute trash on a PC VGA display.
>>54216558
>GNU/Linux shares nothing in common with UNIX on a code or historical basis
UNIX is a trademark and GNU/Linux is an operating system, of course they have nothing in common. That being said, Inspur K-UX is a UNIX certified GNU/Linux distro.
>>54216761
>Actual Unix is only a standard and copyright
Incorrect. Unix is the name of the historic operating system, UNIX is the trademark.
>>54216239
There is no benefit. People feel like a system that has some "legitimate" connection to the original unix is more impressive than common linux. It's like somebody whose distant relative was a bastard niece of the king of poland and they think it makes them special.
>>54217218
Yeah, that's the way the opengroup wants you to stylize it. good boy.
>>54217261
What's wrong with using the objectively correct names? It avoids unnecessary confusion between Unix the operating system and UNIX the trademark.
>>54217261
Here's the story behind the Unix/UNIX quandary from Ritchie himself.
http://www.unixica.com/html/unixunix.html
>>54217218
>>54217296
>>54217301
Autistic but interesting, you learn something new every day, I guess.
>>54217308
Unix and autism go hand in hand. I'm sure you know about Linux vs GNU/Linux.
>>54217100
>build (lol) or buy a new $15,000+ SPARC box
I'll get right on it chief, wouldn't want to risk not looking hip and trendy to my fellow anonymous "enthusiasts" -or even worse- let Larry miss out on an extra monthly yacht waxing.
>>54217100
I wish /v/ would go
>>54217388
15,000 and it still wont fit on your desk.
>>54217414
Oracle sells 1 and 2U servers, retard
>>54217436
That was my point retard.
>whats wrong with rack servers on a desk. hurrr
>>54217445
Oracle doesn't even sell desktops or workstations anymore nigger
>>54217436
>>54217480
>using a fucking rack server as a desktop workstation
>b-but I NEED BIG NUMBERS
/r/gaming go home
>>54217480
hurrrr. No shit, that's how I knew you'd have to get a server that wouldn't fit on a desk.
Are you this dumb?
>>54217506
>playing games on a sparc box
>>54217533
They actually have Linux binary compatibility layer. you might be able to install steam.
>>54217533
>nitpicking irrelevant details in order to defend your gamertard-tier consumerism
you heard me >>>/v/
*BSD is better for desktop.
>>54217553
I might be over-thinking this but they have Linux comparability zones, so you could run steam in a container.
>>54215026
>OpenIndiana
how viable would this be on a desktop? I see they're trying to make it usable with their hipster branch.
>>54215009
I'd love to... but I'm not a hipster.
>>54215009
I use it at work, that is enough.
>>54217533
Doom was offically ported to Solaris.
I used it before Oracle.
Then Oracle happened and fucked everything sun had built up.
I'm convinced that they only bought the company so they could destroy everything they worked for.
>>54221739
Seriously. Especially fuck them and their paywall on goddamn drivers, you have to scrounge around on FTPs and suck dick on forums just to use special hardware like a SunPCi or Crypto Acclerator
>>54216994
Why not both?
