3 ms·
It depends on your definition of active. As an open source project, it's definitely active. Is it as active as the actual Solaris codebase? No. But it has a
by binarycrusader 15y ago
It depends on your definition of active.
As an open source project, it's definitely active.
Is it as active as the actual Solaris codebase? No. But it has also significantly less developers working on it.
- piotrSikora 15y agoWell, it's active as in "not dead", but not as in "actively developed operating system". I'm aware of the difference in the number of developers, but you have to agree that there are hardly any user-visible changes since onnv_147.
- binarycrusader 15y agoUh, no, it is definitely an "actively developed operating system". As for user visible, actually, yes, changes made to dtrace recently for example. Sparse zones as another example, and so on. Remember that Solaris (and its derivatives, unlike Linux) is userland + kernel -- not just the kernel. So changes in userland count in my opinion when considering "actively developed operating system".
- piotrSikora 15y agoApparently our definitions vary a bit ;) > As for user visible, actually, yes, changes made to dtrace recently for example. > Sparse zones as another example, and so on. Those changes came from SmartOS/Joyent and were not made by the IllumOS developers. Don't get me wrong, I really appreciate their work, but I've already lost hope with IllumOS/OpenIndiana... Fortunately Joyent stepped in, so I hope that things will speed-up a bit now :)