OpenSolaris Dead?

[Schadenfroh]

It has been like 4 or 5 months since there has been an update (build 134). I know Oracle bought Sun, but things have been really quiet it seems on the OpenSolaris front. 2010.04 was supposed to have been released a long time ago, more disturbingly, no new builds in the developer / unstable repository since 134.

Did Oracle quietly kill OpenSolaris?

 

[VinDSL]

My understanding is...

There has been a big split with the open source community. They don't like how Oracle has handled OpenSolaris.

Oracle wants to make OpenSolaris more proprietary.

The community's response has been to start the illumos project.

Basically, OpenSolaris (et al) is in a state of chaos and open rebellion. Think civil war...

EDIT

Ran across a good article...

SOURCE: Illumos sporks OpenSolaris (The Register - U.K.)

Development on OpenSolaris has all but stopped, and the project has really stopped being a community at all. So Garrett D'Amore, a former Sun and Oracle software engineer who worked on Solaris for many years, decided to do something about it.[...]

 

[lxskllr]

What's OpenSolaris good for? Why would someone choose that over Linux or BSD?

 

[VinDSL]

What's OpenSolaris good for? Why would someone choose that over Linux or BSD?

Playing Bingo?!?!?

Oh, wait! That's Winders. :awe:

Well...

In the article (referenced above) it said that Sun was trying to copy the Linux model, and make Solaris run on as many platforms as possible. They were using OpenSolaris as a vehicle to that end.

SOURCE: Illumos sporks OpenSolaris (The Register - U.K.)

Sun's goal with OpenSolaris was to have as many free hands as possible coding as many drivers as possible and certifying OpenSolaris and then Solaris on as much machinery as possible.

This is a carbon copy of the approach the Linux community used to get Linux on the widest distribution of machines that the IT market has ever seen. (And probably will ever see.)

Apparently, that hasn't worked out too well, especially since Oracle took the reigns.

Linux will run on anything -- they're the hands-down winner, in this regard!

I multi-boot OpenSolaris on my lappy. It's okay. Looks/works like any other Gnome distro. But I didn't see any advantage to it, other than bragging rights.

 

[lxskllr]

See, that's what I was wondering. I don't know much about Solaris, but reinventing the wheel seems stupid to me. Does the world really need another Linux? I think it would be better to build on what already exists. That gives you more eyes looking at things, and a more cohesive community. I was thinking maybe Solaris had some kind of niche use, but it just looks like a stupid idea :^/

 

[VinDSL]

I think it would be better to build on what already exists. That gives you more eyes looking at things, and a more cohesive community.[...]

Yep!

Hence, Linus's Law:

Given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow, i.e. given a large enough beta-tester and co-developer base, almost every problem will be characterized quickly and the fix will be obvious to someone.

And, that's the Linux strategy Sun was copying...

 

[Schadenfroh]

Thanks for the replies, looks like OpenSolaris is fragmenting and thus will sink into oblivion.

what's opensolaris good for? Why would someone choose that over linux or bsd?

zfs, although BSD does support it.

 

[Gooberlx2]

zfs, although BSD does support it.

That's all I could think of too. A NAS with a ZFS filesystem. But as you mentioned BSD, and thus freeNAS, support ZFS too. For a nice and quick NAS setup, I would choose that over opensolaris.

In the end though, I'd guess Oracle is putting more effort in to BtrFS than ZFS anyway. Another reason to stick to Linux, imo.

 

[Nothinman]

Yea, there's a few things like ZFS and dtrace. But IMO those aren't worth the hassle of having to deal with Solaris...

 

[quikah]

See, that's what I was wondering. I don't know much about Solaris, but reinventing the wheel seems stupid to me. Does the world really need another Linux? I think it would be better to build on what already exists. That gives you more eyes looking at things, and a more cohesive community. I was thinking maybe Solaris had some kind of niche use, but it just looks like a stupid idea :^/

Solaris/SunOS was released ~1992 (1993 was first x86 release), about the same time Linux wrote the original Linux kernel. I don't see how you can claim it is reinventing the wheel. It just never really gained any traction in the x86 space.

 

[lxskllr]

Solaris/SunOS was released ~1992 (1993 was first x86 release), about the same time Linux wrote the original Linux kernel. I don't see how you can claim it is reinventing the wheel. It just never really gained any traction in the x86 space.

At what point do you say "you know guys, this really isn't working", and bail on the project? My estimate would be 2003 based on your dates. The computing world doesn't need a new incompatibility layer. An O/S that's virtually Linux other than a few points, and some iffy licensing isn't needed, and peoples energy would be better spent working on something people actually want to use.

 

[sourceninja]

Not to mention I'm sure at the time Linux proposed linux there were tons of people who didn't see the point in building a *nix like operating system with unix everywhere.

Solaris is very successful on sparc hardware, it just never took off in the x86 circle. I think it would have great potential if it was released in a gpl compatible license. That way it could really 'share' with the rest of the community. The current license it is released on is not really all that enticing for devs to spend time on who want to help the community as a whole.

 

[VinDSL]

I think it would have great potential if it was released in a gpl compatible license. That way it could really 'share' with the rest of the community.[...]

And... that may very well happen!

SOURCE: Illumos sporks OpenSolaris (The Register - U.K.)

D'Amore is currently in charge of Illumos as a benevolent dictator, and Nexenta is supporting his work on the project and kicking in some funds. A dozen developers have joined the effort so far, and D'Amore is soliciting corporate sponsorship of the effort.[...]

Having said all the delicate things about wanting a "collaborative and cooperative relationship" with Oracle for OpenSolaris development, D'Amore says that if the OpenSolaris community were abandoned or shut down by Oracle, "then this starts a big fork".

 

[sourceninja]

That is a huge ambitious project. I hope they can pull it off. I'm not a solaris fan, but I think the more competition the better.

 

[lxskllr]

That is a huge ambitious project. I hope they can pull it off. I'm not a solaris fan, but I think the more competition the better.

I disagree. Too much competition leads to a fractured infrastructure. An extremely small minority will buy into the Solaris scheme, and it'll just be a PITA for everyone involved. Instead of wasting time developing something no one needs, it would be better spent making existing products better.

 

[sourceninja]

That is why the license is so important. It doesn't matter where they do their work, they code can be an inspiration to others and ported over to those systems.

Even with a closed source it can still serve as inspiration. Apple 'invented' time machine and immediately people worked to recreate it in other systems. In fact, the first system that had a really workable 'time machine like' solution was open solaris.

Multiple open source choices also give more room for people to cut their teeth and grow up in the community. It also provides options for those worried about the future of a product. I'm happy knowing that I can run the services I require on anything as long as it's *nix.

If they do something well it will gain traction and other's will copy it. Win/Win situation. It's not like they are trying to re-invent the entire library of open source software. Gnome is gnome, apache is apache, etc. Not to mention the safety net of if something ever did happen to linux (say proof that there really is a ton of stolen code in it) we would still have two really workable solutions for *nix (solaris and bsd).

 

[lxskllr]

It depends on what the goals are. I don't think "something different" is a valid goal. There should be a shortcoming in the current choices, and a way to fix the shortcomings that can't be done with the current choices. Too many proprietary(defined as particular to an O/S, not license) choices reduces interoperability between systems, and locks users into a certain system they may have trouble breaking out of.

The 80s were the bad old days of computing, where there were a ton of different takes on the computer and O/S, with none of them able to talk to each other. For all the bitching people do about MS, they helped push PC technology by standardizing things around the IBM platform. Linux probably wouldn't be where it is without MS. It would be a hobbyist O/S people tinkered with in their living room, or confined to the server.

Point? Choice is good as long as there isn't too much choice. Also, the choices should be distinct from one another, and not just do the same thing differently. Something like Time Machine could be done within an existing distribution, or if there were no takers, it could be done as an offshoot distro. Creative thinking isn't confined only to the new. All it takes is someone to say "You what would be cool?", and running with it.

I don't think Linux is going anywhere any time soon. If there were questionable bits inside, they could be fairly easily changed. With it being open, I'd think the patent trolls would have already tried going after them.

 

[Nothinman]

Point? Choice is good as long as there isn't too much choice. Also, the choices should be distinct from one another, and not just do the same thing differently.

Except the exact opposite is true in virtually all other markets. Virtually all of the available cars, furniture, TVs, etc are the same except for some very minor differences. Hell a few years ago Mercury cars were the same as the Ford line, they really just had a different logo.

 

[lxskllr]

Except the exact opposite is true in virtually all other markets. Virtually all of the available cars, furniture, TVs, etc are the same except for some very minor differences. Hell a few years ago Mercury cars were the same as the Ford line, they really just had a different logo.

I think you made my point for me ;^)

 

[Nothinman]

I think you made my point for me ;^)

If you mean because of the recent economic problems and the car companies that were hurt by it, I don't think that applies. I really don't think you can blame it on an overabundance of competition.

 

[lxskllr]

If you mean because of the recent economic problems and the car companies that were hurt by it, I don't think that applies. I really don't think you can blame it on an overabundance of competition.

The car company isn't the best example. Those are more like Ubuntu vs Mint. Solaris vs Linux is like developing a new optical disc drive system that doesn't really do anything different than DVD, but won't play in the DVD players that everyone already has.

 

[Nothinman]

The car company isn't the best example. Those are more like Ubuntu vs Mint. Solaris vs Linux is like developing a new optical disc drive system that doesn't really do anything different than DVD, but won't play in the DVD players that everyone already has.

Like was tried with DivX and those HD audio discs that never went anywhere. Generally, just like DivX, those things die out on their own when no one buys them. Linux has already displaced pretty much all commercial unixes as the standard and relegated them to a few niches and legacy support instances.

If you want to talk about wasted, duplicate work take a look at NetBSD vs OpenBSD or FreeBSD vs DragonFlyBSD. I think Mint is a waste of time, but at least it's just a few packages and theme changes, those BSD projects are complete forks from the kernel up.

 

[lxskllr]

If you want to talk about wasted, duplicate work take a look at NetBSD vs OpenBSD or FreeBSD vs DragonFlyBSD. I think Mint is a waste of time, but at least it's just a few packages and theme changes, those BSD projects are complete forks from the kernel up.

I don't know much about BSD, but if they're all just duplicating functionality, I'd agree they're a waste of time also.

The different Linux distros aren't a problem because the underlying bits are still compatible. That's good choice. It gives the end user customization, while keeping compatibility.

 

[Nothinman]

I don't know much about BSD, but if they're all just duplicating functionality, I'd agree they're a waste of time also.

The different Linux distros aren't a problem because the underlying bits are still compatible. That's good choice. It gives the end user customization, while keeping compatibility.

Technically everything POSIX compatible is duplicating functionality.

 

[themisfit610]

Kernel CIFS + ZFS makes for a mean storage box. Look at NexentaStor!

I have 12TB powered by the community edition and it's utterly unstoppable was insanely easy to set up. Blows my old FreeNAS box out of the water, especially when it comes to out-of-the-box support for standard enterprise hardware.