Open Solaris Derivative Available 209
tezbobobo writes "Well, Open Solaris has only been available a matter of days and already there are new projects available. SchilliX is an OpenSolaris-based live CD and distribution that is intended to help people discover OpenSolaris. When installed on a hard drive, it also allows developers to develop and compile code in a pure OpenSolaris environment. More details are available on the author's blog."
Torrents (Score:5, Informative)
Torrents! [sun.com]
author is well known (Score:3, Informative)
And solaris has a kick-ass kernel, no doubt about that. Debian/SunOS is the ultimate Unix environment in my mind. One day it will become reality, or so I hope...
Re:whats the difference ? (Score:5, Informative)
Linux has a broader compatibility with x86 hardware
Solaris has by default a better permissions system
Linux is under the GNU GPL and thus a little freer than OpenSolaris
Solaris has far better NFS support , not that you would notice unless your running with allot of clients
Solaris is certified POSIX complient and linux is just pretty much POSIX compliant (mainly due to the cost of being declared posix compliant , and the rate the linux kernel evolves)
Those are some of many many many differences.
Re:whats the difference ? (Score:3, Informative)
>expect from such an operating system? (chown, ls,
Solaris is full-blooded SysV, Linux is a hodgepodge of SysV and BSD style Unix.
for the lazy (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (Score:3, Informative)
Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (Score:3, Informative)
Depends how you look at it.
Solaris 2 (2.7 became 7, 2.8 is 8, etc.) is based on the SunOS 5 kernel - which is SysV based.
However, Solaris 1 (also known as SunOS 4 and below - sun has a thing for changing names and version numbers) had a BSD derived kernel and userspace.
So there's a lot of BSD in Solaris 2 - they'd have been stupid to completely trash all the SunOS 4 code. Solaris 2 still runs a lot of SunOS code fine.
Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (Score:3, Informative)
Not true according to Sun you can use Solaris for free [sun.com] "As software business models are evolving Sun is taking an innovative lead role in making the Solaris 10 OS freely available for commercial use - and at zero cost." Though this does not extend to previous versions of Solaris like Solaris 9. Those you can only use for testing and development. RedHat doesn't even let you do that with RHEL. They only give you a 30 day trial license.
Re:echo OpenSolaris | sed s/O// | sed s/Solar// (Score:0, Informative)
echo "OpenSolaris" | sed -e 's/O//' -e 's/Solar//'
Learn UNIX first, mmmmkay?
And it's NOT FUNNY, BTW.
What will be funny is when Linux starts losing share to (Open)Solaris.
Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (Score:3, Informative)
Of course, then, "1993 Sun announced that SunOS, release 4.1.4, would be its last release of an operating system based on BSD. Sun saw the writing on the wall and moved to System V, release 4, which they named Solaris. System V, release 4 (SRV4) was a merger of System V and BSD, incorporating the important features found in SunOS." http://unixed.com/Resources/history_of_solaris.pd
So, then, uh, looks like BSD *is* in the Solaris Family Tree...
Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (Score:3, Informative)
This is a good writeup of Solaris 10 Security [securityfocus.com]. They pulled some things in from Trusted Solaris such as process rights management.
Re:When I choose ___ OS, it is because... (Score:3, Informative)
No you don't but the FSF recommends that you assign your copyright to them for GPL'd code. Sun is asking for joing ownership. You don't give up your copyright completely. When GPL v3 comes out, if Linus wants to upgrade to it he'll have to track down all the copyright holders to get their permission to relicense it. Didn't something like this already happen?
Re:Oh great, let the fun begin (Score:2, Informative)
After that, it fragmented to NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, Darwin, and lastly DragonflyBSD.
Re:whats the difference ? (Score:3, Informative)
Linux NFS is improving dramaticly, but still has some way to go. NFS on 2.4.20 is dog slow, on 2.6.10 using TCP/IP it's just noticably slow.
I use solaris on I/O intensive stuff (in my case the hardware I have is better for it too, which is the major difference) and linux for the CPU intensive stuff (fast intel/amd chips are cheap).
The funny thing is the stuff that really shows the difference in CPU is some badly written java programs, which run tolerably on a fast linux box but take more than 60 seconds to update drop down menus on a 4x400MHz Sun with lots of memory.
When you shift gigabyte of files about you really notice the speed difference.
Re:Is it worth it for the desktop user? (Score:3, Informative)
Also, at least on Sparc, Sun's X server doesn't appear to support a number of key features useful on the desktop, and Xorg doesn't run on Sparc Solaris due to missing kernel support. X86 might be better in this regard, though.
Also, for desktop use, Solaris only has a fraction of the drivers that Linux has.
Now maybe Solaris 10 is a bit better, but Solaris is much more optimized for the server than the desktop.