Page 1 of 2

Solaris source code

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 1:11 pm
by HUMA2000
Sun is going to open the solaris source code, so we can made a solaris subsystem for ROS using it, isn't it?

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 2:14 pm
by e7
imho is Solaris a UNIX-compatible system, and a UNIX/Linux-compatible subsystem for Windows is for example Cygwin

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:21 pm
by meij
You'd have to check the licence agreement, im pretty sure its god damn restrictive. Not to mention only DTrace has been released so far and honestly.. its Solaris... who cares ;].

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:27 pm
by HUMA2000
Just readed the new on Betanews. I think is going to be released during 2005, I hope the license will be aceptable, if not, always can use the code for inspiration );9
Solaris is a unix compatible with linux, so I think it could be a great subsystem.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 3:40 pm
by ma-games.de
Unix is always compatible with Linux.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 4:44 pm
by HUMA2000
not always, and one linux is not always compatible with another one, precompiled pakages for linux does not run on unix always, and for example fedora pakages not always run on a mandrake linux.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:31 pm
by Luemmel
The license is called CDDL http://www.sun.com/cddl/

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 5:32 pm
by BrandonTurner
ma-games.de wrote:Linuxis always compatible with Unix.
fix
HUMA2000 wrote:not always, and one linux is not always compatible with another one, precompiled pakages for linux does not run on unix always, and for example fedora pakages not always run on a mandrake linux.
you are talking about the gnu part of gnu/linux. rpms and such are not part of linux, they are part of the distro.

Posted: Wed Jan 26, 2005 6:18 pm
by HUMA2000
http://opensolaris.org/ -> The url of the opensolaris, license and info is here. The license is CDDL, based on the MPL.
From the license FAQ:
May I take portions of the OpenSolaris source code and use it in another code base?

Yes, you can use the OpenSolaris source code in other projects as long as you comply with the terms of the CDDL.

It appears to be less restrictive than I thinked, so maybe is usable the code...


BrandonTurner , I was talking abaout the end user face of linux, linix is not unix, so linux is not always unix compilant and compatible, and every linux distro make his modification to kernel, so not always is compatible to the other, anyway i always thinked that linux is not ready for and workstation enviorement, is great for servers and gurus, but not for a common user, remember my first linux installation at 98, I needed two days to get a semiusable sistem, and it was painfull slow on the xserver on my 486 33mhrz, and win95 run fast and was usable. Later i tryed on my p133 and linux become usable, but was a pain install any soft, now, is more easy install programs, but sometime the OS get crazy with dependencies, but is stable like a rock (I only get the system hanged two or three times)

I hope we can run the linux apps on a windows without need of cgywin. Colinux is a great option, but lacks more integration with the windows desktop and apps.

Unix is always compatible with Linux. Nop

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 5:49 am
by oiaohm
Unix is always compatible with Linux.

I will drop a hammer here.

Unix is not always compatible with linux. Sun and FreeBSD build a compad section to let linux binarys work. And linux has compad sections to let Unix stuff work. Internals is where everything goes pair shaped ie /dev and /proc directorys anything directly interfacing here with a UNIX version dependant thing will have to be build for linux and the same is true back the other way.

Note if you solve the dependances you can install Mandrake and Fedora parts on the same machine. I have done it I don't recommend it I have even done Fedora Mandrake Debian hybreads they are not nice but can be done. I really don't recommend it there is a lot of ln -s libxxx.installedversion.so libxxx.wantedversion.so Even in differnet paths and slightly different name yep you do need to know what is binary compad and what require X version installed. I was hoping one day to have a autosystem for doing this.

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 12:27 pm
by mf
*sigh*

Why does EVERY os-related news-item have to be MILKED down to pruneyness about how "it could be useful for reactos" ? You guys seriously have TOO MUCH time on your hands. Go grab a learn C book and come back in 6 months if you're so insisting on wasting your time with ReactOS. Or if you really want to just keep your overall technical knowledge at ZERO, go do something that you're good at. And I mean GOOD at. Think out an idea, and put down some solid material. Like documentation. Or FAQs. Or a startup sound for all I care. Whatever's your field of expertise. Don't have a field of expertise? Make one. Too lazy to do so? STFU, GTFO, and silently wait for ReactOS-v1.0. Knowing the buttons in MSPAINT is not a field of expertise, btw. So spare your energy on that one, and learn Photoshop or Paint Shop Pro first. The latter of which is free to evaluate, and costs only $90 if you're serious about it. Being a "fan", doesn't mean you have to "contribute", if you can't. But please research (yes kids, that means READING) a little before venting every little brainfart you have here on the forum. It's getting quite annoying.
Start here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Kernel_(computer_science)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Single_UNIX_Specification
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unix
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/CP/M
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Windows_NT

While it's "nice to dream", ReactOS is not ready for massive subsystem adoption. The first likely subsystem (apart from Win32) to properly work is either DOS or (co)Linux, depending on how much difficulties are encountered, and how many developers are willing to throw themselves on it. Before that, it's useless to talk about; by the time ReactOS is ready for such things, your discussion, and these threads will (hopefully) be long forgotten. Again, if you must insist on staying in magic dreamland, be sure to read up (see wikipedia links above) on what is technically feasible and relevant. A solaris subsystem
(hey wait, isn't that supposed to run on Sun SPARC systems ? I totally forgot how SPARC is totally different from x86.
Why porting OSes to ReactOS subsystems should be AVOIDED at ALL costs when the platform of said OS is not x86:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Central_processing_unit
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Emulator
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/IBM_PC_compatible)
Where was I. Oh yeah. A solaris subsystem is NOT relevant to port to ReactOS as subsystem, not even if you consider the x86 version. Who the hell wants to run Solaris x86 binary applications (which specifically need to be compiled, I don't think you can find much apps that are not available in source code form, which are meant to run on Solaris x86) on a Windows clone ? The answer might surface somewhere in the far future. Keep checking.

Now before some people start feeling targeted, the people I'm directing this post at are the ones that start and post in threads like this:
Solaris source code (this thread)
other oses windows compatible
MoprhOS shell (Ambience) released under GPL
win9x kernel
What's wrong with Calmira?
Software install
These are the types of useless discussion I'm talking about. Most other threads at least have some type of useful thinking going on, so don't feel offended too easily.

That will be all.

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 10:27 pm
by uniQ
mf wrote:Why does EVERY os-related news-item have to be MILKED down to pruneyness about how "it could be useful for reactos" ?
This is a (the) ReactOS forum, what exactly do you expect?

-uniQ

Posted: Fri Jan 28, 2005 11:55 pm
by mf
uniQ wrote:This is a (the) ReactOS forum, what exactly do you expect?
-uniQ
I expect you to think?

Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2005 12:28 am
by PolyVector
@mf
The more people who are interested in ReactOS, the better, because word-of-mouth is how open-source projects thrive... Bashing people isn't exactly productive...
The first thing you should have learned as an all powerfull kung foo master is that 99.9% of your userbase knows nothing (That may just be the purpose of a user-friendly ui).

Go ahead and denigrate everyone who doesn't understand the fundimentals of different architectures, but in doing so you're making yourself every bit as useless as the people who you insult... And it appears that you have just as much time on your hands.... :roll:

Seeing as this is the "General Discussion" forum, I think you need to get off your soapbox and squeeze a stress ball...

Posted: Sat Jan 29, 2005 1:15 am
by mf
Simple: don't reach too high. If you don't know OS fundamentals, don't discuss them. It saves others the time and effort to explain to you, for the 100th time, that <insert OSS project here> is not feasible for inclusion in ReactOS. And yes, I also have way too much free time. Know what I invest it in? Thinking about and making a full-fledged icon set. I could use some help. I'm having a "writers' block" on the perspectives. I'm sure you guys know more about perspectives than about Solaris. Which again illustrates my point in the rant above.