what is real different between solaris and opensolaris

[mfaridi]

what is real different between Solaris and OpenSolaris
in function and security can we find different between Solaris and OpenSolaris .

[richardpl]

Solaris and OpenSolaris is "the same as" StarOffice and OpenOffice

I hope you got the point.

[s2scott]

Over time, they're converging. That said, though,


opensolaris, as expressed in Project Indiana and released Monday as opensolaris 2008.05, is to be DESKTOP centric that just happens to have a server-grade kernel, stack, and kick-butt file system; and
solaris, also cost fee, remaining (foreseeably) a SERVER and HOST centric platform for Sun's big-ticket commercial wares.

The code base is converging, where...


The best stuff of [classic] solaris was out ported to opensolaris (e.g. SMP kernel, virtualization, ZFS, etc);
The good (and familiar) stuff from the open source community embraced (e.g. X.org, gnome, cups, etc.) in opensolaris; and
The best of embraced open source community stuff converged back.



/S

[s2scott]

I have just gotta mention ... opensolaris iSCSI connector (serving) and initiator (client) ... FREE IN THE BOX ... not just "yet another way to serve up storage!"

You folks have got just gotta sandbox a copy and go nuts with it!!!


64 and 32 bit;
Uses -- really uses -- your multi-cores like NO OTHER O/S going; big-lock s-o-l-v-e-d MP;
FLASH9 -- yes, NINE(9);
iSCSI (server and client);
ZFS (that works);
native virtualization (zones);
XEN dom(0) and dom(u) capable;
a blazing IP stack that can drive 1 and 10G Ethernet to saturation;
D-TRACE system debugger that's to die for;
plus, plus ...; as well as
the usual cast of stuff.

It's a young distro -- fresh as of Monday -- and to be sure it'll have teething issues, and they'll have to grow the available ports, but for us unix-not-linux types, it's s-w-e-e-t.

Somewhat bigger memory footprint then *BSD'ers may be used to but ... what'a feature set.

www.opensolaris.com (http://www.opensolaris.com) is for users/admins and "consumers."

www.opensolaris.org (http://www.opensolaris.org) is for dev's and "contributors."

[s2scott]

Oh, the developer edition (environment) is awesome!
/S

[18Googol2]

Did you use FreeBSD before? Any chance you can write a short comparision between OpenSolaris and FreeBSD?

I have just gotta mention ... opensolaris iSCSI connector (serving) and initiator (client) ... FREE IN THE BOX ... not just "yet another way to serve up storage!"

You folks have got just gotta sandbox a copy and go nuts with it!!!


64 and 32 bit;
Uses -- really uses -- your multi-cores like NO OTHER O/S going; big-lock s-o-l-v-e-d MP;
FLASH9 -- yes, NINE(9);
iSCSI (server and client);
ZFS (that works);
native virtualization (zones);
XEN dom(0) and dom(u) capable;
a blazing IP stack that can drive 1 and 10G Ethernet to saturation;
D-TRACE system debugger that's to die for;
plus, plus ...; as well as
the usual cast of stuff.

It's a young distro -- fresh as of Monday -- and to be sure it'll have teething issues, and they'll have to grow the available ports, but for us unix-not-linux types, it's s-w-e-e-t.

Somewhat bigger memory footprint then *BSD'ers may be used to but ... what'a feature set.

www.opensolaris.com (http://www.opensolaris.com) is for users/admins and "consumers."

www.opensolaris.org (http://www.opensolaris.org) is for dev's and "contributors."

[s2scott]

Did you use FreeBSD before? Any chance you can write a short comparison between OpenSolaris and FreeBSD?Sorry, in the BSD realm, I'm an openBSD'er.

[replaced]

Sorry, in the BSD realm, I'm an openBSD'er.

That's why an SMP kernel is so extra for you. :P

[s2scott]

That's why an SMP kernel is so extra for you. :PTrue, but solaris is nevertheless a stellar SMP. :)

[davidgurvich]

I currently have a machine with opensolaris and one with freebsd. The machine with opensolaris initially had freebsd installed but had multiple issues with networking and video but not the wireless. Opensolaris has no issues with networking and video but has no support for the wireless card at all. The laptop with freebsd installed is having issues with networking such that I am considering opensolaris, though otherwise everything works well.

There is more difficulty in upgrading and maintaining a system with opensolaris. Each non-trivial change requires multiple configuration files and more than one administration utility. I did an 'ls /usr/sbin |grep adm' and saw a large number of separate programs. A freebsd program that does some task might be separated into multiple programs on opensolaris. That allows for more fine-grained control than freebsd but has a steep learning curve. I've seen the method of upgrading change 3 times so far in opensolaris, currently trying to get to build 94 from 91 (not successful yet, method changed again).

I know others have said that zfs is awesome. They are correct. Upgrading the system is complex but, because of zfs, quite safe. Multiple images, multiple rollbacks, combine filesystems with all sorts of options, compression of individual directories, encryption, unions of all sorts. I haven't even begun to see all the possibilities.

Freebsd has the ports, nuff said. Nothing to compare with that on opensolaris. There is a graphical package manager that is currently barely useable in Indiana but the command line program works well. The number of packages available is less and may require installing alternate build environments(more complexity).

So on opensolaris there is flash9, solid networking, great filesystem, more fine-grained control. Freebsd has more (sometimes better) hardware support, the ports, less complexity, and is faster. Both systems have been more stable than Linux on the same machines.

Hope this helps

[s2scott]

Very nice synopsis of what was surely many, many hours of, lets say, sweat equity :-). Thanks!

/S

[DrJ]

The way I understand OpenSolaris to Solaris is that they are "testing" versus "commercial" releases akin to Fedora and Redhat. There is more to it, but new things are tested in OpenSolaris before they reach Solaris.