[Veritas-bu] v6.0 NOM on Solaris 10 x86
2006-03-23 15:07:08
Subject: |
[Veritas-bu] v6.0 NOM on Solaris 10 x86 |
From: |
pcd AT xinupro DOT com (Peter DrakeUnderkoffler) |
Date: |
Thu, 23 Mar 2006 15:07:08 -0500 |
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
The opposite would substantially cut into hardware sales at Sun....all business
all the time.
Peter DrakeUnderkoffler
Xinupro, LLC
617-834-2352
Mark.Donaldson AT cexp DOT com wrote:
> OK - here's the scoop - and the boss was wrong.
>
> Solaris x86 & Sparc are "Source compatible" not "binary compatible".
>
> Here's an InfoWorld verification:
> ===
> When it comes to app compatibility, Solaris isn't Java -- the binaries aren't
> portable between architectures (though they remain portable from earlier
> versions of Solaris on the same chip family, so you don't have to recompile a
> Solaris 2.6 app). However, on the small apps I tested, the source code was
> portable between 64-bit Sparc, 32-bit x86, and 64-bit x86. (InfoWorld, 4/2006)
> ===
>
> Sorry for the confusion.
>
> -M
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Donaldson, Mark - Broomfield, CO
> Sent: Thursday, March 23, 2006 12:16 PM
>
> Compatibility is the word from the bossman - no independant verification on
> my part. Maybe I better...
>
> -----Original Message-----
>
>
>>It's not on the supported list but Sun says Solaris 10 x86 is binary =
>>compatible with Solaris 10 Sparc.
>
>
> Where does it say that they're binary compatible?
>
> No version of Solaris x86 offers SPARC binary compatibility.
>
> Both are binary compatible with older releases on the same architecture,
> but not with each other.
>
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.4.1 (FreeBSD)
iD8DBQFEIv/sl+lekZRM55oRAj0PAJ9Qw6LAUsx8TYqAY9lUJqU+LgQfJwCeIW/F
C+cTOE5/3JjjSm+tP9hCegw=
=/dxE
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
|
|
|