Solaris support?

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
BIS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Solaris support?

BIS
Hey, guys -

Should the pre-built JOGL jars for Solaris in the ver. 2.3.1 jogamp-all-platforms distribution package work with Solaris 5.1? I have a custom signed set of jars hosted on my server, including those for non-sparc processors running Solaris. I have a report that it isn't working on a machine running Solaris 5.1.  (It is working on Windows, Fedora, OSX, etc.) Is that to be expected? And where can I find documentation describing the Solaris versions that are supported?

Thanks for your time -


Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Solaris support?

Sven Gothel
Administrator
On 06/11/2015 07:13 PM, BIS [via jogamp] wrote:
> Hey, guys -
>
> Should the pre-built JOGL jars for Solaris in the ver. 2.3.1
> jogamp-all-platforms distribution package work with Solaris 5.1? I have a
> custom signed set of jars hosted on my server, including those for non-sparc
> processors running Solaris. I have a report that it isn't working on a machine
> running Solaris 5.1.  (It is working on Windows, Fedora, OSX, etc.) Is that to
> be expected? And where can I find documentation describing the Solaris
> versions that are supported?

Our build server produces 32- and 64bit binaries
for i386 and amd64 OpenIndiana running on the illumus kernel.

http://openindiana.org/
http://www.illumos.org/

> uname -a
SunOS jogamp04 5.11 oi_151a8 i86pc i386 i86pc Solaris

IMHO they should work on Solaris 5.1 .. hmm.

Maybe you can be more specific how it fails to work,
i.e. by trying to run the version-info:

<http://jogamp.org/wiki/index.php/Jogamp_Versioning_and_Releases#Runtime_Debug_Logs>

Please test w/ latest release 2.3.1
<http://jogamp.org/wiki/index.php/Release_2.3.1>

>
> Thanks for your time -

Thank you.

~Sven



signature.asc (828 bytes) Download Attachment
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Solaris support?

Sven Gothel
Administrator
In reply to this post by BIS
On 06/11/2015 11:55 PM, Sven Gothel wrote:

> On 06/11/2015 07:13 PM, BIS [via jogamp] wrote:
>> Hey, guys -
>>
>> Should the pre-built JOGL jars for Solaris in the ver. 2.3.1
>> jogamp-all-platforms distribution package work with Solaris 5.1? I have a
>> custom signed set of jars hosted on my server, including those for non-sparc
>> processors running Solaris. I have a report that it isn't working on a machine
>> running Solaris 5.1.  (It is working on Windows, Fedora, OSX, etc.) Is that to
>> be expected? And where can I find documentation describing the Solaris
>> versions that are supported?
>
> Our build server produces 32- and 64bit binaries
> for i386 and amd64 OpenIndiana running on the illumus kernel.
In case you like to have binaries for other architectures
pls follow our HowToBuild guide and make sure
all the Xorg developer packages for mentioned
extensions are installed. Pls use the GCC compiler,
since we have not tested compilation w/ SunStudio for years.

<http://jogamp.org/jogl/doc/HowToBuild.html>

Note: The OpenSolaris section is outdated, see my prev. post.

~Sven



signature.asc (828 bytes) Download Attachment
BIS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Solaris support?

BIS
Hi, Sven -


Thanks for the response.

Yeah, I don't think I want to embark on a whole custom build project just yet. I don't even know what version of the JRE is running on the box in question (but I'm willing to bet it's way out of date). I just wanted to know, generally speaking, if 2.3.1 was compatible with Solaris 5.1.

The machine in question is part of an instrumentation package, and I wouldn't want the programmer to try and update the JRE just for my little project.  And he shouldn't, and probably wouldn't. Some of the instrumentation software is Java-based. He was good enough to try a little experiment, and I'll let it go at that.

But thanks again for the response.
BIS
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Solaris support?

BIS
I think I may have identified the trouble - the machine in question is running JRE 5u10.