Discussion:
snv_64a says 768MB RAM to play ?
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 16:59:45 UTC
Permalink
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]

I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.

I'm shocked.

Am I to understand that the x86 miniroot on there will fill up all of my
RAM and still need more? Gee. Time for a new machine I guess but this
one won't die and it runs Solaris 10 just fine.

So then, whats the minimal system spec that Solaris 11 is shooting for?

I'll guess 1GB RAM, 18GB of disk, 100Mb/sec ethernet and a 1GHz proc.

Dennis

[1] the AMD PCNet ethernet driver in Solaris is terrible. So I use
Masa Murayama's device driver which is solid as a rock.

bash-3.2$ modinfo | grep pcnet
125 f9e2d000 b244 203 1 ae (pcnet driver v2.2.0)
Bart Smaalders
2007-05-30 17:06:04 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
I'm shocked.
Am I to understand that the x86 miniroot on there will fill up all of my
RAM and still need more? Gee. Time for a new machine I guess but this
one won't die and it runs Solaris 10 just fine.
So then, whats the minimal system spec that Solaris 11 is shooting for?
I'll guess 1GB RAM, 18GB of disk, 100Mb/sec ethernet and a 1GHz proc.
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue to be the case.

I think you'll find the system to be quite usable w/ 512MB, but
heavy users will want more to prevent paging...

- Bart
--
Bart Smaalders Solaris Kernel Performance
barts-lB5hw85u1BmCoC5cIrPYFgC/***@public.gmane.org http://blogs.sun.com/barts
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 17:13:16 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bart Smaalders
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
I'm shocked.
Am I to understand that the x86 miniroot on there will fill up all of my
RAM and still need more? Gee. Time for a new machine I guess but this
one won't die and it runs Solaris 10 just fine.
So then, whats the minimal system spec that Solaris 11 is shooting for?
I'll guess 1GB RAM, 18GB of disk, 100Mb/sec ethernet and a 1GHz proc.
As has been repeatedly discussed here,
sorry, missed that .. the S/N ratio here can often be ... well you know.
Post by Bart Smaalders
the current memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue to be the case.
I think you'll find the system to be quite usable w/ 512MB, but
heavy users will want more to prevent paging...
About all this box does is run a browser and not much else anymore.
Oh, and software tests and some odd jobs. I was simply caught off guard and
perhaps I did the install wrong. I inserted the DVD, rebooted and walked
away. I figured that when I returnm I'll see the familiar locale selection
option screen. Not so.

Perhaps I'll take another look but I'll stay planted in my seat for the long
boring reboot process of this machine. Then I'll see what GRUB has to say.

Any plans to look at GRUB2 ? Just a question in passing.

Dennis
Dave Miner
2007-05-30 19:54:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Clarke
Post by Bart Smaalders
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
I'm shocked.
Am I to understand that the x86 miniroot on there will fill up all of my
RAM and still need more? Gee. Time for a new machine I guess but this
one won't die and it runs Solaris 10 just fine.
So then, whats the minimal system spec that Solaris 11 is shooting for?
I'll guess 1GB RAM, 18GB of disk, 100Mb/sec ethernet and a 1GHz proc.
As has been repeatedly discussed here,
sorry, missed that .. the S/N ratio here can often be ... well you know.
You could help that by having installation-related conversations on
install-discuss-***@public.gmane.org

Dave
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 20:06:01 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dave Miner
Post by Dennis Clarke
sorry, missed that .. the S/N ratio here can often be ... well you know.
You could help that by having installation-related conversations on
oops .. sorry .. away I go to the correct maillist :-\

dc
James Carlson
2007-05-30 17:14:35 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bart Smaalders
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue to be the case.
It's also true that it's an artifact of upgrading in the slow and
painful way. If you use LU, this isn't an issue.
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson-xsfywfwIY+***@public.gmane.org>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
UNIX admin
2007-05-30 19:33:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bart Smaalders
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current
memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of
its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue
to be the case.
I just can't believe Sun continues to push such a crappy technology like Java at all costs, no matter what.

Guys, Java is crap, admit it finally, come to terms with it, and lets bury that damn thing as one of the biggest flops in computer science.

I sure hope Caiman won't use Java.


This message posted from opensolaris.org
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 19:40:06 UTC
Permalink
Post by UNIX admin
Post by Bart Smaalders
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current
memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of
its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue
to be the case.
I just can't believe Sun continues to push such a crappy technology like
Java at all costs, no matter what.
uh .. dude ?

I have at least three textbooks here on Java programming in front of me and
I actually went back to University of Toronto for a semester to study Java
programming. Sort of a super fast way to learn this technology.

I have every intention of writing a graphical installer tool in Java because
it does work just fine thank you.

are you trolling or what ?

because man, you know I don't work for Sun and I sure as hell will stand up
and say that Java was ( and still is ) one of the better technological
creations to come out of silicon valley. Ever. Remember the great "keep it
pure" commercials way back when? Well I still think that its possible to
write once and then run everywhere ... if done right.

man .. talk about laying an egg in public ... what are you thinking ?

Dennis
UNIX admin
2007-05-30 20:04:34 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Clarke
I have at least three textbooks here on Java
programming in front of me and
I actually went back to University of Toronto for a
semester to study Java
programming. Sort of a super fast way to learn this
technology.
Now there's a way to make oneself marketable in the "street corner programmer" business.
Post by Dennis Clarke
I have every intention of writing a graphical
installer tool in Java because
it does work just fine thank you.
are you trolling or what ?
No. Every sysadmin I've ever met, and every system engineer I've ever met for that matter, hates Java. "Developers" love it. It's the darling of "development".
Post by Dennis Clarke
because man, you know I don't work for Sun and I sure
as hell will stand up
and say that Java was ( and still is ) one of the
better technological
creations to come out of silicon valley. Ever.
Remember the great "keep it
ure" commercials way back when? Well I still think
that its possible to
write once and then run everywhere ... if done right.
man .. talk about laying an egg in public ... what
are you thinking ?
I'm thinking that Java failed to deliver on the promise of "write once, run anywhere". Java programs developed on Windows do not, up to this present day, work on Solaris; it's a revision dependency hell - for example, Java 1.6.whatever broke Azaureus; Legato NetWorker front end busts with Java 1.5.0 even though it says it should work and "to ignore the warning".

Java is SLOW. Look at the Tomcat JSP mess. The whole thing is a disgrace.

And the biggest winners, or sinners:

- Except with GCJ, Java can't be compiled to machine code, and even with GCJ, the process is complex

- Java is COMPLICATED even for the simplest of tasks

"public static void main" - was "papa Gosling" on LSD taking a "trip" when he was designing the syntax of the language?

Bonus: looky looky, Java needs TONS of RAM.

So, if that's me "laying an egg in public", yes, that's right, I'll stand up and be the first to say it publicly, and hopefully, someday I'll get the opportunity to say it right to Gosling's face:

Java sucks dead bunnies through a bent straw sideways!


This message posted from opensolaris.org
Brian Gupta
2007-05-30 21:16:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by UNIX admin
Now there's a way to make oneself marketable in the "street corner programmer" business.
Actually Java is the primary language used to teach object oriented
programming concepts today. (At the university level)
Post by UNIX admin
No. Every sysadmin I've ever met, and every system engineer I've ever met for that matter, hates Java. "Developers" love it. It's the darling of "development".
What in your mind distinguishes a system engineer from a system admin?
Also keep in mind that "developers" are the targeted consumers of
programming languages.
Post by UNIX admin
I'm thinking that Java failed to deliver on the promise of "write once, run anywhere". Java programs developed on Windows do not, up to this present day, work on Solaris; it's a revision dependency hell - for example, Java 1.6.whatever broke Azaureus; Legato NetWorker front end busts with Java 1.5.0 even though it says it should work and "to ignore the warning".
For the most part it did deliver. Can you name something that comes closer?
Post by UNIX admin
Java is SLOW. Look at the Tomcat JSP mess. The whole thing is a disgrace.
Please explain. From what I have experienced, the first time a piece
of code executes, it is slower. Once it has run once it seems to run
at native speed.
Post by UNIX admin
- Except with GCJ, Java can't be compiled to machine code, and even with GCJ, the process is complex
So what language are you in love with that is compiled?
Post by UNIX admin
- Java is COMPLICATED even for the simplest of tasks
Not to an experienced Java programmer. (The same thing could be said
about Solaris by a Windows user). What language do you prefer for
simple tasks? sh?
Post by UNIX admin
"public static void main" - was "papa Gosling" on LSD taking a "trip" when he was designing the syntax of the language?
Syntax was based on making a platform agnostic version of C++ with a
few added goodies like garbage collection.
Post by UNIX admin
Bonus: looky looky, Java needs TONS of RAM.
False statement.
Post by UNIX admin
Java sucks dead bunnies through a bent straw sideways!
Ok, what programming language do you use, that is so much better than Java.
Alan Burlison
2007-05-30 22:01:32 UTC
Permalink
UNIX admin wrote:

Other people have addressed the other issues you raised, I'll address
Post by UNIX admin
I'm thinking that Java failed to deliver on the promise of "write
once, run anywhere". Java programs developed on Windows do not, up to
this present day, work on Solaris;
That is incorrect. I've been working on a GUI app that runs unchanged on
both Windows *and* Solaris, and uses the native L&F on *both* platforms
with *no* code changes.
Post by UNIX admin
it's a revision dependency hell - for example, Java 1.6.whatever broke
Azaureus; Legato NetWorker front end busts with Java 1.5.0 even though
it says it should work and "to ignore the warning".
Azureus? Do you mean
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=6550813? How is a
bug in some external Windows DLL Java's fault?

And as for Legato, both our internal bug database and Gogle draw a
blank, do you have any more details?
--
Alan Burlison
--
UNIX admin
2007-05-30 22:23:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Burlison
Other people have addressed the other issues you
raised, I'll address
Post by UNIX admin
I'm thinking that Java failed to deliver on the
promise of "write
Post by UNIX admin
once, run anywhere". Java programs developed on
Windows do not, up to
Post by UNIX admin
this present day, work on Solaris;
That is incorrect. I've been working on a GUI app
that runs unchanged on
both Windows *and* Solaris, and uses the native L&F
on *both* platforms
with *no* code changes.
Don't you worry one bit - there's pah-lenty of Java stuff out there that doesn't work WITHOUT code changes.
Post by Alan Burlison
Post by UNIX admin
it's a revision dependency hell - for example,
Java 1.6.whatever broke
Post by UNIX admin
Azaureus; Legato NetWorker front end busts with
Java 1.5.0 even though
Post by UNIX admin
it says it should work and "to ignore the
warning".
Azureus? Do you mean
http://bugs.sun.com/bugdatabase/view_bug.do?bug_id=655
0813? How is a
bug in some external Windows DLL Java's fault?
"We encountered an unexpected error. Please try back again."

Powered by Java Server Pages, perhaps? Yeah, that's what I'm talking about.
It's a shame the thing has spread like a virus on millions of devices over the past ten years.

As for Azureus, all I know, as an end user, that one day a nice baloon popped up telling me to upgrade Java, which I did. After that, Azureus mysteriosly stopped working. It wasn't until I explicitly uninstalled the "latest and greatest" Java "upgrade" and explicitly installed 1.4.x that the thing started working again.

Now I don't care what caused it. All I care, as a dumb Windows user in that moment, that when the latest and "greatest" Java comes onto the system, my app stops working. Nice.
Post by Alan Burlison
And as for Legato, both our internal bug database and
Gogle draw a
blank, do you have any more details?
What do you need? Screenshots? Null pointer Exceptions? Explicitly pointing /usr/java to JDK 1.4.2 fixes the "problem", and NetWorker GUI fires up.

But anyway, be that as it may, I better shut up, I've got to watch my blood pressure.


This message posted from opensolaris.org
Alan Burlison
2007-05-30 22:43:19 UTC
Permalink
Post by UNIX admin
Don't you worry one bit - there's pah-lenty of Java stuff out there that doesn't work WITHOUT code changes.
So badly written Java apps are obviously the fault of Java, just like
drink-drivers are obviously all Ford's fault. How stupid of me.
Post by UNIX admin
Now I don't care what caused it. All I care, as a dumb Windows user in that moment, that when the latest and "greatest" Java comes onto the system, my app stops working. Nice.
That's just an unreasonable rant, and you know it. Please stop trolling.
Post by UNIX admin
But anyway, be that as it may, I better shut up, I've got to watch my blood pressure.
I think you need to go here: http://we.hates-software.com/ and stop
venting on opensolaris-discuss.
--
Alan Burlison
--
UNIX admin
2007-05-31 12:07:38 UTC
Permalink
Post by Alan Burlison
So badly written Java apps are obviously the fault of
Java, just like
drink-drivers are obviously all Ford's fault. How
stupid of me.
Sorry, but isn't the whole idea of Java to provide a language implementation that CAN NOT be made hardware specific, by means of the inherent language design? Write once and run anywhere, or?

If I can manage to write a piece of software in such a language that makes it run on one platform but not on others, then the language design has failed, in particular if that was one of the core issues it meant to solve and do away with.

But like I wrote before, I've said my peace, and everyone here knows how I feel about Java, and how much I love it. I'll STFU now.


This message posted from opensolaris.org
Alan Burlison
2007-05-31 12:12:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by UNIX admin
Post by Alan Burlison
So badly written Java apps are obviously the fault of
Java, just like
drink-drivers are obviously all Ford's fault. How
stupid of me.
Sorry, but isn't the whole idea of Java to provide a language implementation that CAN NOT be made hardware specific, by means of the inherent language design? Write once and run anywhere, or?
If I can manage to write a piece of software in such a language that makes it run on one platform but not on others, then the language design has failed, in particular if that was one of the core issues it meant to solve and do away with.
Java doesn't control the platform. If the platform is broken, so is
Java. And once stuff like JNI is involved, all bets are off.
--
Alan Burlison
--
Martin Bochnig
2007-05-30 21:02:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by UNIX admin
Post by Bart Smaalders
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current
memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of
its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue
to be the case.
I just can't believe Sun continues to push such a crappy technology like
Java at all costs, no matter what.
Guys, Java is crap, admit it finally, come to terms with it, and lets bury
that damn thing as one of the biggest flops in computer science.
Differentiate between language, platform (and then, especially, its implementation) and api.
Fluent in JAVA?
You may find, that the language itself is quite compact and has many similarities to C and C++.
The platform api makes things a bit more complex (and enriching).
That's what the javadoc created platform documentation is for, so there is no need to memorize the whole API syntax.
It looks difficult on the first two days, makes then more sense from day to day.

And the other thing from last week, do you really believe a Ph.D. (in CS or Maths) istn't worth the paper it is written on???
And that those "are not educated in anything" ?

Interesting.
Sean McGrath - Sun Microsystems Ireland
2007-05-30 22:39:42 UTC
Permalink
UNIX admin stated:
< > Differentiate between language, platform (and then,
< > especially, its implementation) and api.
<
< Why?
<
< > Fluent in JAVA?
<
< Not any more. I was formally educated in it though. Java and Swing, threaded programming.
< That was years ago though, and not an experience I care to repeat.
<
< > And the other thing from last week, do you really
< > believe a Ph.D. (in CS or Maths) istn't worth the
< > paper it is written on???
<
< I believe Gosling was seriously TRIPPIN' when he came up with that stuff.
<

I believe Thompson and Ritchie were in a similar mood back in 69 (or so) 8-)
Space Travel...

<
< This message posted from opensolaris.org
< _______________________________________________
< opensolaris-discuss mailing list
< opensolaris-discuss-***@public.gmane.org
--
Sean.
.
ken mays
2007-05-31 12:12:12 UTC
Permalink
< > Fluent in JAVA?
<
< Not any more. I was formally educated in it though.
Java and Swing,
threaded programming.
< That was years ago though, and not an experience I
care to repeat.
<
< > And the other thing from last week, do you really
< > believe a Ph.D. (in CS or Maths) istn't worth the
< > paper it is written on???

Hehe.... having a Ph.D is CS/Math does mean you had
the formal research education (i.e. I hope) no matter
how you look at it - as long as it came from a
reputable school. ;o)

Java has its place like COBOL, Ada, or Tcl/Tk. Why
'bash' it??

As for the 768MB RAM thing with SXDE, let there be a
manual override to install it on <=256MB RAM machines
(i.e. Sun Blade 100 compatible) as well. I'd think
that is reasonable for many post-Y2000 home computers.


Just provide a stripped down configuration profile for
people who just want to provide a 'service' or use the
CLI for programming/sys admin tasks.

Ken Mays
EarthLink, Inc.






____________________________________________________________________________________Luggage? GPS? Comic books?
Check out fitting gifts for grads at Yahoo! Search
http://search.yahoo.com/search?fr=oni_on_mail&p=graduation+gifts&cs=bz
UNIX admin
2007-05-30 22:09:21 UTC
Permalink
Post by Martin Bochnig
Differentiate between language, platform (and then,
especially, its implementation) and api.
Why?
Post by Martin Bochnig
Fluent in JAVA?
Not any more. I was formally educated in it though. Java and Swing, threaded programming.
That was years ago though, and not an experience I care to repeat.
Post by Martin Bochnig
And the other thing from last week, do you really
believe a Ph.D. (in CS or Maths) istn't worth the
paper it is written on???
I believe Gosling was seriously TRIPPIN' when he came up with that stuff.


This message posted from opensolaris.org

Shawn Walker
2007-05-30 21:50:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by UNIX admin
Post by Bart Smaalders
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current
memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of
its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue
to be the case.
I just can't believe Sun continues to push such a crappy technology like Java at all costs, no matter what.
Guys, Java is crap, admit it finally, come to terms with it, and lets bury that damn thing as one of the biggest flops in computer science.
I sure hope Caiman won't use Java.
Please take your personal vendetta against X programming language
somewhere else. Thanks.
--
"Less is only more where more is no good." --Frank Lloyd Wright

Shawn Walker, Software and Systems Analyst
binarycrusader-***@public.gmane.org - http://binarycrusader.blogspot.com/
Calum Benson
2007-05-31 09:35:56 UTC
Permalink
Post by UNIX admin
I sure hope Caiman won't use Java.
It won't, but AIUI it was a perfectly feasible option and the choice was
fairly arbitrary in the end (the engineers assigned to it being
primarily C/GNOME rather than Java/Swing programmers, amongst other
things).

Cheeri,
Calum.
--
CALUM BENSON, Usability Engineer Sun Microsystems Ireland
mailto:calum.benson-xsfywfwIY+***@public.gmane.org GNOME Desktop Group
http://ie.sun.com +353 1 819 9771

Any opinions are personal and not necessarily those of Sun Microsystems
UNIX admin
2007-05-31 12:09:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Calum Benson
Post by UNIX admin
I sure hope Caiman won't use Java.
It won't, but AIUI it was a perfectly feasible option
and the choice was
fairly arbitrary in the end (the engineers assigned
to it being
primarily C/GNOME rather than Java/Swing programmers,
amongst other
things).
Great. Very happy to read that. We're very lucky.


This message posted from opensolaris.org
Glenn Lagasse
2007-05-30 17:16:53 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
You can do text installations with less than 768MB. The gui install is
what requires the 768MB (which we're hoping to change with the Dwarf
Caiman new gui installer project).

Cheers,
--
Glenn Lagasse
Solaris Install
Sun Microsystems, Inc.
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 18:17:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Glenn Lagasse
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
You can do text installations with less than 768MB. The gui install is
what requires the 768MB (which we're hoping to change with the Dwarf
Caiman new gui installer project).
No problem. I figured that the good ol' serial console based text installer
will always work and so that's not an issue. Also, I feel that dragging
around seven year old hardware in the x86 world is gettting really silly.
Perfectly reasonable with Sparc but entirely "silly" with x86. So what I
need is a change of thinking as well as RAM.

What I'll do now is pull out the x86 miniroot and get that onto my
tftp/dhcp/nfs server to allow network based PXE boot and install.

Dennis
Moinak Ghosh
2007-05-30 18:28:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Glenn Lagasse
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
You can do text installations with less than 768MB. The gui install is
what requires the 768MB (which we're hoping to change with the Dwarf
Caiman new gui installer project).
Running the Netbeans and SUN Studio installers at first boot via a
transient
SMF service or via the JDS Postrun mechanism (with appropriate console
messages), instead of from the miniroot will bring down the miniroot size
requirements significantly in SXDE.

Regards,
Moinak.
Post by Glenn Lagasse
Cheers,
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 18:41:31 UTC
Permalink
Post by Moinak Ghosh
Post by Glenn Lagasse
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
You can do text installations with less than 768MB. The gui install is
what requires the 768MB (which we're hoping to change with the Dwarf
Caiman new gui installer project).
Running the Netbeans and SUN Studio installers at first boot via a
transient
SMF service or via the JDS Postrun mechanism (with appropriate console
messages), instead of from the miniroot will bring down the miniroot size
requirements significantly in SXDE.
Hello Moinak :

I am working my way through a few Sun blueprint docs and trying to put
together a small bootable CDROM prototype that will allow me to pkg-get
all of the rest of the regular SUNW packages as well as a pile of CSW
packages. I figure this sort of thing may work well as a simple and
portable installer tool. Booting the BeleniX LiveCD on the box is a
great way to get a full blown OS but what I need to do is trim all the
way back to just the basics.

Thus far I seem to be doing a fine job of doing PXE netboots with
multiple failures of varying degrees.

Feels like progress :-)

Dennis
Moinak Ghosh
2007-05-30 18:58:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Clarke
[...]
I am working my way through a few Sun blueprint docs and trying to put
together a small bootable CDROM prototype that will allow me to pkg-get
all of the rest of the regular SUNW packages as well as a pile of CSW
packages. I figure this sort of thing may work well as a simple and
portable installer tool. Booting the BeleniX LiveCD on the box is a
great way to get a full blown OS but what I need to do is trim all the
way back to just the basics.
This link should be of interest to you:

http://blogs.sun.com/szhou/entry/build_a_minimal_solaris_image

Regards,
Moinak.
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 19:07:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Moinak Ghosh
Post by Dennis Clarke
[...]
I am working my way through a few Sun blueprint docs and trying to put
together a small bootable CDROM prototype that will allow me to pkg-get
all of the rest of the regular SUNW packages as well as a pile of CSW
packages. I figure this sort of thing may work well as a simple and
portable installer tool. Booting the BeleniX LiveCD on the box is a
great way to get a full blown OS but what I need to do is trim all the
way back to just the basics.
http://blogs.sun.com/szhou/entry/build_a_minimal_solaris_image
That is a great link. Thank you Mr. Ghosh.

I have been reading my way through the docs from John Cecere in the Sun
Blueprints collection as well as reading up on JET. JET will allow me to
setup a fairly minimal number of packages in a machine via netboot but the
setup process is ... tricky.

Thanks for that link .. I'll give that a whirl and see if I can get basic
functionality going via a really really small CDROM.

Dennis
Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
2007-05-30 18:25:39 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Clarke
I was shocked to see that my old old trusty HP Kayak XU tower was finally
at a point where it can not install Solaris. I have run Solaris 8 and 9
and 10 on it for years and years. It has two DVD burners and three SCSI
controllers, terribly simple graphics and no sound. It just works.[1]
I burned the snv_64a DVD and discovered that the 512MB of RAM was no
longer reasonable for the installer.
I'm shocked.
Am I to understand that the x86 miniroot on there will fill up all of my
RAM and still need more? Gee. Time for a new machine I guess but this
one won't die and it runs Solaris 10 just fine.
So then, whats the minimal system spec that Solaris 11 is shooting for?
Solaris 11 still run in 256MB just fine, it's just the installer which
wants to copy X and Java to ramdisk which is costing so much.

Use "vanilla install" without graphics and it should be fine.

Casper
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 18:32:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
Post by Dennis Clarke
Am I to understand that the x86 miniroot on there will fill up all of my
RAM and still need more? Gee. Time for a new machine I guess but this
one won't die and it runs Solaris 10 just fine.
So then, whats the minimal system spec that Solaris 11 is shooting for?
Solaris 11 still run in 256MB just fine, it's just the installer which
wants to copy X and Java to ramdisk which is costing so much.
Use "vanilla install" without graphics and it should be fine.
I'm going to set my grub menu thus and then PXE boot :

default=0
timeout=30
serial --unit=0 --speed=9600
terminal --timeout=15 serial console
title OpenSolaris snv_64a ttya
kernel (nd)/boot/platform/i86pc/kernel/unix -v -B
install_media=172.31.254.249:/mnt,console=ttya
module (nd)/boot/x86.miniroot

title OpenSolaris snv_64a DVD ttya
kernel (nd)/boot/platform/i86pc/kernel/unix -v -B
install_media=cdrom,console=ttya
module (nd)/boot/x86.miniroot

I think that the installer will still fail even in text mode.

Nothing like a test to prove that however.

Dennis
Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
2007-05-30 18:44:22 UTC
Permalink
Post by Dennis Clarke
I think that the installer will still fail even in text mode.
512MB will work.

Even 256MB works but requires a shrunk miniroot (I generally make one which
is only 64MB in size as opposed to the standard 170MB; the latter gives
precious little room on a 256MB system)

Casper
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 18:53:03 UTC
Permalink
Post by Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
Post by Dennis Clarke
I think that the installer will still fail even in text mode.
512MB will work.
Even 256MB works but requires a shrunk miniroot (I generally make one which
is only 64MB in size as opposed to the standard 170MB; the latter gives
precious little room on a 256MB system)
64MB ? perfect :-) The smaller the better as that would transfer over the
internet ( WAN boot ) in fairly decent time on a decent connection.

For the sake of a fairly silly test I'll PXE boot to a 256 MB appliance box
I have here :


........................................... Booting 'OpenSolaris snv_64a
DVD tt
ya'

kernel (nd)/boot/platform/i86pc/kernel/unix -v -B install_media=cdrom,console=t
tya
[Multiboot-elf, <0xc00000:0xd614:0x0>, <0x400000:0xab81c:0x0>, <0x800000:0x9
da7:0x3bda5>, shtab=0xc0e3c0, entry=0xc00000]
module (nd)/boot/x86.miniroot

Error 28: Selected item cannot fit into memory

Press any key to continue...


yep .. that was silly.

I will now switch over to 1GB in that box and then try again.

Dennis
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 19:17:58 UTC
Permalink
Post by Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
Post by Dennis Clarke
I think that the installer will still fail even in text mode.
512MB will work.
Even 256MB works but requires a shrunk miniroot (I generally make one which
is only 64MB in size as opposed to the standard 170MB; the latter gives
precious little room on a 256MB system)
Casper
something seems to hang even with 1GB of RAM. Looks like I had
better select option 3 ( Solaris Interactive Text ) and then see
what happens.

$ tip hardwire
connected

module /platform/i86pc/kernel/unix: text at [0xfe800000, 0xfe8ab81b] data at
0xfec00000
module /kernel/genunix: text at [0xfe8ab820, 0xfe9f174f] data at 0xfec4a780
SunOS Release 5.11 Version snv_64a 32-bit
Copyright 1983-2007 Sun Microsystems, Inc. All rights reserved.
Use is subject to license terms.
features:
1007eff<cpuid,sse2,sse,sep,pat,cx8,pae,mmx,cmov,de,pge,mtrr,msr,tsc,lgpg>
Using default device instance data
cpu0: initialized cpu module 'cpu.generic'
mem = 981500K (0x3be7f000)
root nexus = i86pc
pseudo0 at root
pseudo0 is /pseudo
scsi_vhci0 at root
scsi_vhci0 is /scsi_vhci
isa0 at root
ramdisk0 at root
ramdisk0 is /ramdisk
SMBIOS v2.3 loaded (902 bytes)pseudo-device: dld0
dld0 is /pseudo/***@0
pci0 at root: space 0 offset 0
pci0 is /***@0,0
Ethernet address = 0:30:18:b0:29:b6
PCI-device: pci16f3,***@9, gani0
gani0 is /***@0,0/pci16f3,***@9
PCI-device: pci16f3,***@b, gani1
gani1 is /***@0,0/pci16f3,***@b
PCI-device: pci1106,***@1, pci_pci0
pci_pci0 is /***@0,0/pci1106,***@1
ISA-device: asy0
asy0 is /isa/***@1,3f8
/***@0,0/pci1106,***@10,4 (ehci0): Unable to take control from BIOS.
Failure is ignored.
PCI-device: pci1106,***@10,4, ehci0
ehci0 is /***@0,0/pci1106,***@10,4
PCI-device: pci1106,***@10, uhci0
uhci0 is /***@0,0/pci1106,***@10
PCI-device: pci1106,***@10,1, uhci1
uhci1 is /***@0,0/pci1106,***@10,1
PCI-device: pci1106,***@10,2, uhci2
uhci2 is /***@0,0/pci1106,***@10,2
PCI-device: pci1106,***@10,3, uhci3
uhci3 is /***@0,0/pci1106,***@10,3
cpu0: x86 (CentaurHauls 6A9 family 6 model 10 step 9 clock 1200 MHz)
cpu0: VIA Esther processor 1200MHz
pseudo-device: tzmon0
tzmon0 is /pseudo/***@0
Configuring /dev
pseudo-device: devinfo0
devinfo0 is /pseudo/***@0
xsvc0 at root: space 0 offset 0
xsvc0 is /***@0,0
pseudo-device: pseudo1
pseudo1 is /pseudo/***@1
PCI-device: pci16f3,***@11,5, audiovia823x0
audiovia823x0 is /***@0,0/pci16f3,***@11,5
IDE device at targ 0, lun 0 lastlun 0x0
model ST340014A
ATA/ATAPI-6 supported, majver 0x7e minver 0x1b
ata_set_feature: (0x66,0x0) failed
ATAPI device at targ 1, lun 0 lastlun 0x0
model SAMSUNG CDRW/DVD SM-352N
PCI-device: ***@0, ata2
ata2 is /***@0,0/pci-***@f,1/***@0
UltraDMA mode 2 selected
UltraDMA mode 2 selected
UltraDMA mode 2 selected
pseudo-device: fssnap0
fssnap0 is /pseudo/***@0
pseudo-device: ramdisk1024
ramdisk1024 is /pseudo/***@1024
pseudo-device: winlock0
winlock0 is /pseudo/***@0
pseudo-device: fcp0
fcp0 is /pseudo/***@0
sd0 at ata2: target 1 lun 0
sd0 is /***@0,0/pci-***@f,1/***@0/***@1,0
pseudo-device: fcsm0
fcsm0 is /pseudo/***@0
pseudo-device: llc10
llc10 is /pseudo/***@0
pseudo-device: lofi0
lofi0 is /pseudo/***@0
pseudo-device: pool0
pool0 is /pseudo/***@0
pseudo-device: power0
power0 is /pseudo/***@0
pseudo-device: zfs0
zfs0 is /pseudo/***@0
cmdk0 at ata2 target 0 lun 0
cmdk0 is /***@0,0/pci-***@f,1/***@0/***@0,0
-
1. Solaris Interactive (default)
2. Custom JumpStart
3. Solaris Interactive Text (Desktop session)
4. Solaris Interactive Text (Console session)
5. Apply driver updates
6. Single user shell

Enter the number of your choice.
Selected: 1

Solaris Interactive

Using install cd in /dev/dsk/c0t1d0p0
Setting up Java. Please wait...

that would be the last thing I saw from the console.

Thus far option 3 looks the same :

cmdk0 at ata2 target 0 lun 0
cmdk0 is /***@0,0/pci-***@f,1/***@0/***@0,0
-
1. Solaris Interactive (default)
2. Custom JumpStart
3. Solaris Interactive Text (Desktop session)
4. Solaris Interactive Text (Console session)
5. Apply driver updates
6. Single user shell

Enter the number of your choice.
Selected: 3

Solaris Interactive Text (Desktop session)

Using install cd in /dev/dsk/c0t1d0p0
Setting up Java. Please wait...


oh well ... this machine does run snv_55b really well. I'll keep
hacking away at it.

Dennis
Nicolas Linkert
2007-05-30 21:06:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
Solaris 11 still run in 256MB just fine, it's just
the installer which
wants to copy X and Java to ramdisk which is costing
so much.
X ok - but why Java??? I never quite understood that ...
Post by Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
Use "vanilla install" without graphics and it should
be fine.
What do you mean? Is this an install option?


This message posted from opensolaris.org
Dennis Clarke
2007-05-30 21:26:26 UTC
Permalink
Post by Nicolas Linkert
Post by Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
Solaris 11 still run in 256MB just fine, it's just
the installer which
wants to copy X and Java to ramdisk which is costing
so much.
X ok - but why Java??? I never quite understood that ...
Post by Casper.Dik-UdXhSnd/
Use "vanilla install" without graphics and it should
be fine.
What do you mean? Is this an install option?
1. Solaris Interactive (default)
2. Custom JumpStart
3. Solaris Interactive Text (Desktop session)
4. Solaris Interactive Text (Console session)
5. Apply driver updates
6. Single user shell

Enter the number of your choice.
Selected: 4

Dennis
Andrew Pattison
2007-05-30 22:02:07 UTC
Permalink
The first option on the post-boot menu (Solaris Express Developer Edition) requires 768MB of memory. All other options only require 512MB of memory. Choose one of those options, and you should be good to go.

Cheers

Andrew.


This message posted from opensolaris.org
MC
2007-05-30 22:29:50 UTC
Permalink
Post by Bart Smaalders
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current
memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of
its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue
to be the case.
"This will not continue to be the case" :) So I like to believe that Sun isn't pushing Java for the sake of Java anymore.


This message posted from opensolaris.org
James Carlson
2007-05-31 14:00:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by MC
Post by Bart Smaalders
As has been repeatedly discussed here, the current
memory requirements
of the developer release installer are an artifact of
its hurried
implementation (eg 2 jvms). This will not continue
to be the case.
"This will not continue to be the case" :) So I like to believe that Sun isn't pushing Java for the sake of Java anymore.
I don't know that we ever did that.

However, if you really want to make a difference here, the right way
to go about this is by setting requirements for the project. "Must
boot within X seconds and install within Y minutes on reference
platform Z" would likely be a decent sort of requirement.

So long as a project in question is able to meet its requirements, why
should any user really care what language was used to implement it?

And if some particular language won't cut it due to an inability to
meet requirements, then that makes the choice clear, and doesn't force
us to resort to name-calling and other such unproductive activity.

In other words, "language W sucks" is not just unprofessional, it's
also pointless.
--
James Carlson, Solaris Networking <james.d.carlson-xsfywfwIY+***@public.gmane.org>
Sun Microsystems / 1 Network Drive 71.232W Vox +1 781 442 2084
MS UBUR02-212 / Burlington MA 01803-2757 42.496N Fax +1 781 442 1677
Girts Zeltins
2007-05-31 05:49:41 UTC
Permalink
Hello,

Yes, this is bad thing and one of biggest Sun Microsystems mistakes. I already talk about lot of mistakes in Solaris recently and I want to say:
Sun Microsystems will lose lots of Solaris users if they will use Java in installation system and in graphical desktop. There is no need any Java marketing in Solaris.

There are lots of people which are using old computers and Sun Microsystems must provide possibility to allow to use Solaris on old computers with little memory!

Solaris must be as NetBSD!!!!!!!!!!!!


Kind Regards,
Girts Zeltins


This message posted from opensolaris.org
Lukas Oboril
2007-05-31 07:13:22 UTC
Permalink
Hi,
Post by Girts Zeltins
Hello,
Sun Microsystems will lose lots of Solaris users if they will use Java in installation system and in graphical desktop. There is no need any Java marketing in Solaris.
Question is : Why *not* use Java ? I don't have problem with this.
Post by Girts Zeltins
There are lots of people which are using old computers and Sun Microsystems must provide possibility to allow to use Solaris on old computers with little memory!
if you have an old computer you can use an old operatig system. I have
ultra-5, then use solaris 2.5.1 (i have most of latest software
compiled on this machine. Apache 2, PHP4.4.7, subversion, gcc, OpenSSH
etc ... without any problems.) Uptime is over 470 days !

My second workstation is Ultrasparc 20 M2 with AMD opteron with
Solaris 10 (11/06)

I have not any problems.
Post by Girts Zeltins
Solaris must be as NetBSD!!!!!!!!!!!!
Definitely *not* !!!!
Post by Girts Zeltins
Kind Regards,
Girts Zeltins
Best reagards
--
Lukas Oboril

When dealing with people, let us remember we are not dealing with
creatures of logic. We are dealing with creatures of emotions,
creatures bristling with prejudices and motivated by pride and vanity.
Dale Carnegie
Ian Collins
2007-05-31 07:32:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Girts Zeltins
Hello,
Sun Microsystems will lose lots of Solaris users if they will use Java in installation system and in graphical desktop. There is no need any Java marketing in Solaris.
Rather than simply whinging, why not check out what is going on in the
install community? I think you would be pleasantly surprised by some of
the early demos of the new Java free installer.

Ian
Alan Coopersmith
2007-05-31 15:27:24 UTC
Permalink
Post by Girts Zeltins
Hello,
Sun Microsystems will lose lots of Solaris users if they will use Java in installation system and in graphical desktop. There is no need any Java marketing in Solaris.
You're far too late for that - the Solaris installer has been
written in Java since Solaris 8 or so, and the Solaris desktop
contained Java components even longer. While the installer
is moving off Java, there will still be Java bits in the desktop.
--
-Alan Coopersmith- alan.coopersmith-xsfywfwIY+***@public.gmane.org
Sun Microsystems, Inc. - X Window System Engineering
Loading...