[H-GEN] Solaris 10 give away

Benjamin Carlyle benjamincarlyle at optusnet.com.au
Sun Jan 21 00:02:56 EST 2007


On Tue, 2007-01-16 at 08:54 +1100, McBofh wrote:
> Benjamin Carlyle wrote:
> > [ Humbug *General* list - semi-serious discussions about Humbug and     ]
> > [ Unix-related topics. Posts from non-subscribed addresses will vanish. ]
> > 
> > On Mon, 2007-01-15 at 22:12 +1100, McBofh wrote:
> >> Anthony Irwin wrote:
> >>> If anyone is interested in playing with Solaris 10 then it seems that 
> >>> Sun is giving away free install dvd's for a limited time.
> >>> http://www2.sun.de/dc/forms/reg_us_2211_391.jsp
>  >>
> >> As the resident Solaris know-it-all^Wzealot^W(knowledgeable person)
> >> of the group, feel free to ask me any questions you might have about
> >> Solaris and OpenSolaris.
> > 
> > Do you know much about the legal situation around solaris these days? It
> > seems that newer OS patches are only available to users with support
> > agreements. Only the older versions seem to be available on sunsolve.
> > Aren't these components free? Also, it appears illegal to distribute OS
> > patches... that patches must be obtained directly from Sun to be legal.
> > Do you know where Sun are heading with these kinds of restrictions, and
> > with their free "right to use" Solaris 10 Entitlement Document that must
> > be obtained in order to legally run Solaris 10?
> > 
> > I understand that there are proprietary parts of the operating system
> > that still need proection, but every time I hear about the legal side of
> > Solaris these days it makes me feel that I can't trust my understanding
> > of the legal framework it operates in.
> 
> Hi Ben,
> there are a few issues that you're conflating here, and
> it is my belief that your information is quite out of date.

Let me start by stating that I am not speaking on behalf of my employer,
and that while I have seen some of the periphery of what goes on to deal
with the way Solaris licensing works I have no detailed knowledge.
Anything I say may be somewhat or highly inaccurate. That said:

Quite possibly. I am bouncing off quotes like this:
"New code becomes available in OpenSolaris and is integrated and tested,
then there's a distribution, a commercial release version called
Solaris. Every three to five months, you'll see the next update to
Solaris. ZFS is in OpenSolaris and will be available in Solaris in the
spring of 2006." -
http://www.linuxworld.com.au/index.php/id;240784003;fp;4;fpid;4

"The Solaris OS is Sun's operating system distribution and is branded,
tested, maintained and supported as a Sun product. Future releases of
the Solaris OS will be built from the OpenSolaris source code, but will
still be supported in the same manner as current versions of the Solaris
OS. At any given time, there may be some software in either the
OpenSolaris project or the Solaris OS product that is not present in the
other." - http://www.opensolaris.org/os/about/

I read it as "solaris is a distribution of the free opensolaris
operating system with some components removed and some additional
components". It leaves me unclear about the trajectory is given that the
situation seems different on the ground. It looks more like solaris and
opensolaris are loosely-related parallel products, which is more similar
to what you are saying. Perhaps I am completely mistaken in my
interpretation.

Sun seem to be trying to get mileage out of the fact that open solaris
is free (as in speech) to promote the main solaris branch. They seem to
be trying to position Solaris as an alternative to linux as an operating
system that is viable in the long term, supported by a significant
community, and able to be used in environments where code inspection and
the ability for customers to understand and fix problems is important.

> Re patches and patch availability:
> Firstly, for as long as I can recall you've always been
> able to get kernel, security and device driver patches
> for free from sunsolve.
> Secondly, you can get these patches for free from sunsolve,
> using wget or Sun Update Connection. These require a Sun
> Online account.... which is free, not a marketing tool
> (unless *you* choose the appropriate radioboxes on registration)
> and pretty painless to get.

I can get older patches via that mechanism. Later versions of the same
patches seem to be only available through a support agreement on the
particular hosts to be patched. This information is borne of recent
experience, and is explained here:

"Today customers get access to Software Updates (Patches) via SunSolve
or ftp via an anonymous process. Some Software Updates (Patches) are
restricted and require a Sun Service Plan to gain access." -
http://sunsolve.sun.com/search/document.do?assetkey=1-9-83061-1

A patch may be available to fix your problem, but if you don't have a
support agreement you may have to a few extra months for the solution.
The "you" here is a cloudy issue, as I note below.

> Thirdly, yes it is illegal to re-distribute Sun's patches.
> This is part of Sun's IP protection and -as I understand it-
> pretty much required by copyright law - if you don't take
> steps to protect your copyrights, you lose them.

The patching model leaves suppliers the like one I work for who provide
packaged solutions of which the operating system in a funny situation.
We partner with other organisations in various parts of the world as
well as deliver systems to customers. So who needs to accept that
licence agreement and download those patches again? :) If nothing else,
it complicates our supply relationships.

> I hope the above information answers your questions. If not,
> please let me know and I will endeavour to get you better
> answers.

I don't begrudge Sun wanting to make a dollar, or even trying to get
mileage out of releasing opensolaris[1]. I acknowledge that my position
in the supply chain is not a usual one for Sun and that customers like
the one I work for aren't always going to be well accomodated for that
reason. However, suggestions that solaris is even kind of free because
opensolaris is free seem exaggerated. Crossing the wires between the two
products on any level would seem to run detrimental to both.

If we were offering a linux solution I feel we could be more confident
about who we distribute to and how. The customer interfaces seem clearer
from linux vendors. I also know that I can support and update a linux
machine myself, whereas the legal situation is more complicated with
Sun. I don't really want a maintenence agreement for the next ten years
because the hardware will be running in an embedded mode on a secure
network. Changing anything is not really an option.

However in ten years when I need to do some maitenance on this hardware,
will sun still be offering the same terms? Will sun still be prepared to
support this product? If not, will I have the rights I need to do it
myself? These are all questions that open source tend to solve, and
perhaps migrating to the opensolaris platform would help. If only there
was a vendor somewhere who could offer a distribution of opensolaris,
and support for it ;)

Benjamin.
[1] even if they have done so under an unknown and unpredictable license





More information about the General mailing list