Please help: Latest Sunfire v20Z bios, etc.
in [Solaris]
|
Prev: Solaris-10 and flash-drives. Sun says: sometimes works, sometimes doesn't.
Next: Blade-100. Sun says "the (two) INTERNAL disks are limited to 20G each"
From: Chris Cox on 3 Aug 2010 17:59 On Mon, 2010-08-02 at 12:16 +0000, Gary Mills wrote: > In <i35fut$ho4$1(a)speranza.aioe.org> UnixUser <unixuser(a)nospam.com> writes: > > >Unfortunately, I am unable to download the latest BIOS, firmware. SP, > >and drivers from sun/oracle because I need a service contract. I > >purchased a sunfire v20z used (end of life system) on ebay ( pretty > >cheap), I wish to upgrade my very old bios, etc. I think it is robbery > >for oracle/sun to charge for bios updates, especially when other PC > >companies provide such things for free. > > They're made by Newisys. > BUT, just like other platforms, Sun puts their HW stamp all over everything rendering (often times) the generic firmware upgrades USELESS.
From: Chris Ridd on 4 Aug 2010 02:33 On 2010-08-03 22:58:06 +0100, Chris Cox said: > On Sun, 2010-08-01 at 21:01 -0700, UnixUser wrote: >> Unfortunately, I am unable to download the latest BIOS, firmware. SP, >> and drivers from sun/oracle because I need a service contract. I >> purchased a sunfire v20z used (end of life system) on ebay ( pretty >> cheap), I wish to upgrade my very old bios, etc. I think it is robbery >> for oracle/sun to charge for bios updates, especially when other PC >> companies provide such things for free. >> >> Hopefully, someone here can help by e-mailing the latest bios, etc to me. > > > I sort of hope somebody does send it to you... however, it would be > illegal to do so. > > I think Sunoracle has been a fiasco so far. Difficult to tell if it's > too late for Oracle to turn things around or not... but I'd certainly > support allowing the firmware downloads... and many other downloads as > well (it just makes sense). > > I feel sorry for the engineers at Sun. They (used to) tout their > openness and their contributions to free software, yet, now that Oracle > is in control, none of that is allowed or encouraged anymore. <http://www.oracle.com/technologies/linux/linux-tech-leadership-contributions.html> suggests that Oracle think highly of their ability to contribute to Linux open source projects. It is confusing that they say less about their own in-house open source projects. Their changes to the different OpenSolaris consolidations happen pretty much every day, judging from the Mercurial commit logs. > And remember, also from openoffice.org: > > The OpenOffice.org project is primarily sponsored by Oracle, which is > the primary contributor of code to the Project. > > What this means is that OpenOffice.org needs a NEW sponsor and possibly > more contributors, though I imagine many might be former Oracle > employees. So no-one's commenting on Illumos's work fixing ON? -- Chris
From: Bruce Esquibel on 4 Aug 2010 09:07 Chris Cox <chrisncoxn(a)endlessnow.com> wrote: >>From openoffice.org, you can read: > Can Sun ever take away the code? Maybe not but it's not going to stop them from acting like dickheads. Surprised this wasn't mentioned already... <http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Report-Oracle-shuts-down-PostgreSQL-test-servers-1047676.html> This whole thing with Sun and Solaris is going to turn into another SCO and Unixware fiasco. This whole "pay or no play" with the service contracts is just the first steps of stupidity from Oracle. I'll bet anything the Solaris path down the road will include making it a "base install" with things like nfs, zfs and other "built-in" parts being optional charge extra features or modules. You guys defending Oracle and this "just get a service contract" nonsense for security patches and bios updates, more power to you. Just make sure you have your tin cups and expressway exits staked out for panhandling. Once the beancounters at some of these Solaris/Sun shops start realizing the additonal costs, better have your penguin caps ready. -bruce bje(a)ripco.com
From: John D Groenveld on 4 Aug 2010 10:55 In article <i3bomq$nul$1(a)remote5bge0.ripco.com>, Bruce Esquibel <bje(a)ripco.com> wrote: >Surprised this wasn't mentioned already... > ><http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Report-Oracle-shuts-down-PostgreSQL-test-servers-1047676.html> Brett Winterford's article on Larry Ellison and company's end of support for Postgres is better: <URL:http://www.itnews.com.au/News/221051,oracle-shuts-down-open-source-test-servers.aspx> Are folks still able to buy Postgres support from Oracle? >This whole thing with Sun and Solaris is going to turn into another SCO and >Unixware fiasco. This whole "pay or no play" with the service contracts is >just the first steps of stupidity from Oracle. Larry Ellison bought a lot of great IP at a firesale price. Scott McNealy and Jonathan Schwartz said they would only use their IP landsharks for good, not evil. But what's Larry Ellison saying? And what if anything did his landsharks promise the US and EU taxmen? >I'll bet anything the Solaris path down the road will include making it a >"base install" with things like nfs, zfs and other "built-in" parts being >optional charge extra features or modules. That would fit with how Judith Sim and company's marketing wonks price their other products. >You guys defending Oracle and this "just get a service contract" nonsense >for security patches and bios updates, more power to you. Just make sure you >have your tin cups and expressway exits staked out for panhandling. Solaris patches and system firmware updates required a service contract or support subscription prior to the acquisition. >Once the beancounters at some of these Solaris/Sun shops start realizing the >additonal costs, better have your penguin caps ready. It certainly appears that Larry Ellison and company has found Ed Zander's business plan in an old file cabinet: shrink Solaris systems from a volume to a niche solution for all but the premier customers that Keith Block and company's salescritters can land. Once they land'em soakem like an IBM salescritter. That niche doesn't offer a lot of opportunities for independent developers or administrators. John groenveld(a)acm.org
From: Chris Cox on 4 Aug 2010 12:19
On Wed, 2010-08-04 at 07:33 +0100, Chris Ridd wrote: ..... > > <http://www.oracle.com/technologies/linux/linux-tech-leadership-contributions.html> > suggests that Oracle think highly of their ability to contribute to > Linux open source projects. Whaddya know!! Oracle says that Oracle is doing great with regards to their treatment of the free and open source community! :-) > > It is confusing that they say less about their own in-house open source > projects. Their changes to the different OpenSolaris consolidations > happen pretty much every day, judging from the Mercurial commit logs. > > > And remember, also from openoffice.org: > > > > The OpenOffice.org project is primarily sponsored by Oracle, which is > > the primary contributor of code to the Project. > > > > What this means is that OpenOffice.org needs a NEW sponsor and possibly > > more contributors, though I imagine many might be former Oracle > > employees. > > So no-one's commenting on Illumos's work fixing ON? Only to say .... EXACTLY... this is JUST another example where the community has been forced to slam the door on Sunoracle and go it alone. With that said, I FULLY believe in Illumos's ability to drink Oracle kool-aid and bow at their feet. Personally, I do not trust either one... but at least in spirit, Illumos makes sense... they just lack independent thought away from Sun (now Sunoracle). The following projects are at GREAT risk (and I cannot overemphasize RISK): 1. OpenOffice 2. OpenSolaris 3. MySQL 4. Btrfs 5. OCFS2 6. VirtualBox 7. ZFS 8. PostgreSQL (there's probably more) Larry's GOT to be loving this. He likes people that fear him. People were concerned about things like MySQL... people have been mislead... it's MUCH worse than their deepest fears. Oracle as a company needs to follow SCO.... time to move on.... |