[sword-devel] The Sword Project on OpenSolaris

Greg Hellings greg.hellings at gmail.com
Sat Oct 11 14:41:23 MST 2008

On Sat, Oct 11, 2008 at 9:38 AM, Karl Kleinpaste <karl at kleinpaste.org>wrote:

> "Greg Hellings" <greg.hellings at gmail.com> writes:
> > My guess is that the update to -0.98 came with the image-upgrade that I
> ran
> > from the command-line
> If you mean the directions for immediate update specified here...
> http://www.opensolaris.org/os/project/indiana/resources/rn3/#Update_Inst
> ...I did that as directed when I first booted, which is why I knew there
> was a problem with /etc/nsswitch.conf.

Ah, I see - that's not at all the steps I followed.  I found documentation
exceedingly difficult to locate.  The steps I followed were:
make entries in /etc/hosts for www.opensolaris.org and pkg.opensolaris.org
# pkg refresh --full
# pkg image-update -v (died with error telling me to update SUNWipkg)
# (issue the command here that the previous command asked for)
# pkg image-update -v
# reboot

It's possible that image-update is similar to dist-upgrade with Debian based
systems... but I'm not certain.

> > or from syncing against the repository.
> Is there some sense of "syncing" other than "start package manager and
> wait for it to display available packages"?  (That's a serious question.)

The gui Package Manager was broken upon initial install, so the command pkg
refresh --full from the command line did what I was looking for.  However,
since you updated the system with the commands from the above URL, clicking
the "Refresh" button will probably do the trick.  But if I'm actually
running some sort of beta 2008.11 version or whatever, then you might not
have the same packages as me, without doing the image-update step.

> You seem to have a very different view of what was installed than I do,
> yet all I did was install the 2008.05 ISO, do the initial update per
> above, and go looking for needed stuff in the package manager.  I cannot
> begin to understand why you have additional support that seems to be
> missing for me.

I might be in beta for the next upcoming release?  I'm not entirely
certain.  When I ran the image-update, it updated about 512 of the 527
packages, or something to that effect, I know that it was very nearly all of

> > I'm not completely certain - when you look in Package Manager, you can
> > see a list of files that come with a package. ...  So my only guess is
> > that either the information in Package Manager is wrong, or some
> > hidden dependency pulled it in.
> If the package manager is failing to properly identify files used in a
> package, then the authors of that package manager should give up and go
> home.
> Of course, as I mess around with this a bit more, I've just been pointed
> to pkgchk, whose man page provides the example "pkgchk -l -p /usr/bin/ls",
> for which it should "display package installation information"...and yet
> which produces empty output.  So maybe they should go home after all.

Ditto on that opinion and on getting null output from pkgchk.  However, I
have gotten somewhere with the pkg search xrender.pc command.  It appears
that xorg-headers is not the requisite package after all.  I suppose
installing xorg-headers must have pulled in xwinc, which is listed as the
package owning xrender.pc.  I'm not having any luck copying out of the VM
with openSolaris in it, but pkg search is listing SUNWxwinc-0.5.11-0.98 as
the owner of xrender.pc.

> If I can't get any farther than this pretty soon, I'll just give up on
> Solaris as yet another lost cause.  I get tired of pushing on really
> fundamental, basic, "just get the system going, ok?" kinds of questions
> that can't be answered.

For an operating system supposedly in its 11th version and sporting
approximately a 20-year history, openSolaris is pathetically impractical,
incapable and extremely frustrating.  To be flawed to the point of being
unable to update itself and unable to access DNS on default install point to
major issues with the entire system.  I wouldn't blame you at all for taking
your ball and going home at this point.  OpenSolaris also seems to bear
almost no resemblance to the commercial Solaris 10 that we're using at
school/work.  If I were Sun, I'd either get on the task of greatly improving
openSolaris or stop calling it by the same name as its flagship operating
system.  I would certainly never move to commercial Solaris if I thought
openSolaris represented the nature of the commercial product.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://www.crosswire.org/pipermail/sword-devel/attachments/20081011/8fb28d5c/attachment.html 

More information about the sword-devel mailing list