What version of Ethereal has Solaris 9 x86 Intel???

Anuyone knows???

From what I have found the top version for an intel machine is 0.9.0. Only sparc version is higher.
Lee

Similar Messages

Searching Oracle 8.1.7 Client for Solaris on x86/Intel

Hi all,
I need an Oracle client 8.1.7 running on a Sun Solaris on a Intel/x86 chipset (in VMware)
Exists there any location to download this client?
thanx for help!
Andreas
Salzburg, Austria

Are there plans to have a Solaris x86 version downloadable on OTN? I am making the OS decision for a new development server. I would like it to be Solaris x86 but if Oracle is a no-go on Solaris x86, I will have to use Linux or... hate to say it... M$

What is the difference between Solaris 10 x86 & SPARC?

Also, I'm trying to start my old PC which does work, but has no OS As soon as the power button is pressed, I get a black screen that reads ' DISK BOOT FAILURE, INSERT SYSTEM DISK AND PRESS ENTER'. Is this when I'm supposed to enter a disc with Solaris on it?
Edited by: AdvicePro on Jan 25, 2009 5:15 PM

Further to the other answers, you should go into your computers BIOS (usually by pressing either the delete, F1, F2 or F10 keys when the system is performing a memory test prior to disk detection) and set the system to boot from the CD first. This item is usually found in the advanced system settings of the BIOS.
Obviously, you will need to know what hardware you have.
Now, once you have done this, you can insert the CD into the CD drive and reboot the machine. If the system still does not recognise the disk, then it is probably because you didn't make a bootable CD (if you burned it yourself) or the CD drive is kaput.
Try burning disk 1 again (you are using a CD not a DVD right?) and try the above steps.
Oh, dynamic, we are using a PC not a SPARC system with an EEPROM...
Andy

Solaris 8 x86, intel 810E motherboard

hi,
does anyone know where i can find a driver for the intel 810E
motherboard (w/ built in AGP video)? this chipset is fairly
new (4-5 months), but it seems like it's going to replace all
of the midrange 440BX hardware.
all of the new midrange (US $1K-2K) compaq and dell systems use
this board, so SOMEBODY has to have a solaris x86 driver for it.
the new chipset (intel 82810) is very integrated, of course, and
the video section is evidently based around the i740 chipset.
any ideas? 'till then i'm stuck in 640x480 limbo. i'd put a HCL-
approved card in for now but for the fact that my new box (compaq
deskpro EN SFF [small form factor] 600Mhz P3) doesn't want to
disregard the built in video in favor an installed Matrox board.
thanks
jim
[email protected]

Ok, here is the process. the solaris version is 8, date is 7/01
I boot up with the install cd 1 of 2.
View image: 1
Booting up here
View image: 2
From here, I choose F4 Add Driver
View image: 3
I insert the DU diskette and choose continue
View image: 4
Driver loading up into memory
View image: 5
DU Diskette removed and hit continue (Also kept it in just in case, but with same negative results)
View image: 6
Driver appears to be loaded in memory, chose continue
View image: 7
System scan started
View image: 8
Scan complete, chose continue
View image: 9
Error, Missing primary disk. Chose continue
View image: 10
Boot device selection screen
View image: 11
If disk is chosen, ERROR Cannot mount, so CD ROM is chosen instead.
View image: 12
Installation starts
View image: 13
Interactive install chosen as per HP, hangs at this screen for about 20 min, then the server reboots and the process starts all over again.
View image: 14

HP ProLiant DL360 G4 Solaris 8 x86 Intel Install Problem

For some reason, solaris 8 does not see the disk, constantly get an error of No Disk, make sure its cabled and powered on. Right now , win 2003 server is installed and runs fine. Any ideas on how to get this working? It appears maybe a driver isnt installed.

Ok, here is the process. the solaris version is 8, date is 7/01
I boot up with the install cd 1 of 2.
View image: 1
Booting up here
View image: 2
From here, I choose F4 Add Driver
View image: 3
I insert the DU diskette and choose continue
View image: 4
Driver loading up into memory
View image: 5
DU Diskette removed and hit continue (Also kept it in just in case, but with same negative results)
View image: 6
Driver appears to be loaded in memory, chose continue
View image: 7
System scan started
View image: 8
Scan complete, chose continue
View image: 9
Error, Missing primary disk. Chose continue
View image: 10
Boot device selection screen
View image: 11
If disk is chosen, ERROR Cannot mount, so CD ROM is chosen instead.
View image: 12
Installation starts
View image: 13
Interactive install chosen as per HP, hangs at this screen for about 20 min, then the server reboots and the process starts all over again.
View image: 14

What version of Microsoft Office works on the Intel MacBook Pro?

Any info is appreciated.
Dual 1.42 Mac OS X (10.4.8)

Why on earth are people suggesting anything other
than Office? The original post asked which version
runs. Answer, as previously given, is X or 2004. On
an Intel chip there is absolutely no issue with
performance under Rosetta.
David. Your statement is incorrect. There is an issue with performance under Rosetta. It is clearly slower then it should run if it was a Universal Application. I feel it is important for anyone to understand that its performance is not up to speed of other programs. I amongst many users have problems with Office 2004. For the most part they are not problems that are life altering and require hours upon hours to create simple documents, but enough problems that make the overall experience rather unpleasant. You cannot generalize your performance of Office across all users, just as much as I cannot generalize that all users report problems.
Clearly there was a distinct question, but the VALUE of the answer cannot be appreciated without many helpful members giving their opinions (generally appreciated by most) as to "what works best" on the MacBook Pro.
You can chastise people for not answering the questions to a "T", but I think if you really want to scrutinize the ENTIRE thread you should really ask... "Why didn't the poster just google search, or search apple.com?" The answer is easily found there. There is no value in the answer "yes or no", the answer to the post comes from people putting their opinions and experience on the forum so that one can make an educated judgement about the product.
And just remember... it's not just the original poster that you're helping; other people read this too.

Version of awk in Solaris 10?

I have found that there are
/usr/bin/awk (hard linked with /bin/awk)
/usr/bin/nawk (hard linked with /bin/nawk)
/usr/bin/oawk (hard linked with /bin/oawk)
What are they?
I wanna ask what version of awk does Solaris 10 use?

/usr/bin/awk (hard linked with /bin/awk)
/usr/bin/oawk (hard linked with /bin/oawk)awk & oawk - equals (hardlinked), this is "old" awk man awk
/usr/bin/nawk (hard linked with /bin/nawk)
and /usr/xpg4/bin/awkxpg4 awk & nawk - nearly equals, this is "new" awk man nawk
I wanna ask what version of awk does Solaris 10 use?Solaris and you can use both. There are some "awk" language differences (http://www.gnu.org/software/gawk/manual/gawk.html#Language-History) and implementation constrains (such as input line length).
The precompiled gawk is avaiable from blastwave (http://www.blastwave.org/packages.php/gawk).
M.C>
PS1: If you need exact runtime/patch version, use what
/usr/bin/awk:
        SunOS 5.10 Generic January 2005
/usr/bin/nawk:
        SunOS 5.10 Generic January 2005
/usr/xpg4/bin/awk:
        SunOS 5.10 Generic 118816-01 May 2005PS2: If you need exact source version, you can download and unpack sources from http://opensolaris.org.
./usr/src/cmd/awk/...
./usr/src/cmd/awk_xpg4/ ...
./usr/src/cmd/oawk/...M.C>

How can i Install Liquid data 1.0 on Solaris 10(x86) Machine

Hi,
I have installed Weblogic 8.1 SP2 on a Solaris 10 x86 Intel Architecture platform. Now I am trying to have BEA Liquid Data for WebLogic 8.1 SP2 also installed on this machine. I couldnot find Liquid Data for WebLogic 8.1 SP2 for Solaris 10, although there seems to be one available for Sun Solaris (8,9,32 bit).
Q1) I understand these are for SPARC and not x86 IA platform is that correct?
When i try to use this above file version to install on Solaris 10 i get the following error.
./liquiddata812_solaris1.bin
Preparing to install...
Extracting the JRE from the installer archive...
Unpacking the JRE...
Extracting the installation resources from the installer archive...
Configuring the installer for this system's environment...
Launching installer...
./liquiddata812_solaris1.bin: /tmp/install.dir.1379/Solaris/resource/jre/bin/java: cannot execute
Q2) Is there a BEA Liquid Data for WebLogic 8.1 SP2 available that can be installed on Solaris (9 or 10) x86 IA.
Thanks
Sandesh

http://edocs/liquiddata/docs81/install/prep.html#1039271
It is not supported on Solaris running on Intel.
btw - AquaLogic DSP (aka LD8.5) is the current version. It is not supported on Solaris running on Intel, either.
- mike

Cloning from solaris 10 sparc to solaris 10 x86

Hi,
We would like to know if it is possible to clone from production instance solaris 10 sparc to test instance solaris 10 x86 (intel) in 11.5.10CU2.
And if yes or no is it possible in R12.1.2.
Thanks
Brice Guillard

Hi,
Is it possible to have the first node on solaris 10 x86 with the database and the other on solaris 10 sparc ?Not possible as this OS is not certified.
What happen with rapid clone if we clone the production instance full sparc to a test instance with solaris 10 x86 on the database and the application server on x86.Rapid Clone will not work on this target OS because it is not supported.
Regards,
Hussein

WRT54G...what version do I have?

I have a WRT54G which seems to work just fine but I'm trying to upgrade the firmware. On the Linksys website, it shows several different versions of WRT54G but I don't see any version numbers on my router. How does one find what version router he has?

I also have the wrt54g, and there is NO Version number on the bottom. Do I assume that I have version 1?

Installation problem sun solaris 9 x86 on intel

I am trying to install sun solaris 9 x86 intel platform edition on my home pc hp e-vectra, configuration is PIII 800 Mhz, 10 GB HDD, 128 MB Ram, 17" color monitor, but it giving me following error :-
BooT Panic: trap type e, error 0 at 117499
Cr0: 800000011, cr1: 4, cr3: 17e000
Eax: 0, ebx: 7e2c, ecx: 0 edx: 16e350
Es: fffffffe, edi: 17dfe0, ebp: 7e40, esp: 7e20
Entering boot debugger:
Please help me, how can I install sun solaris 9 x86 on my HP E-Vectra PC.
Kalpesh Mehta

I had similar problems several months ago. I suspect this happens when host pc does not have floppy drive(or bios somehow misreports it) as it was in my case. Solaris 8 seems to work fine in the same environment, so I keep using it for now. Possible workaround might be to use DCA from Solaris 8: Installation of Sol9 started just fine after I entered Sol8 DCA and asked it to boot from Sol9 CD.
Hope this problem will be fixed in subsequent Sol9 releases.
Victor

Networking changes between Solaris 10 x86 10/08 (u6) and previous versions?

Solaris Community:
We have a J2SE CORBA-based application (that uses the default Sun ORB) that has run without problems on Solaris 8, 9, and 10 on both SPARC and, more recently, X86 platforms. Upgrading our client side machine (X4100 M2 Opteron platform) from Solaris 10 x86 5/08 (u5) to Solaris 10 x86 10/08 (u6) has resulted in threading or socket contention issues that we have not experienced previously. Using Live Upgrade, we can quickly go back to the u5 install on the client machine .... and the problems go away .... going back to u6, however, and the problems begin to show almost immediately. Our Java code base is identical as is the version of the JDK (1.5.0_16), so it would appear that there must be an underlying change to socket, networking, or threading behavior between these two versions of Solaris.
Thus far, I've not been unable to find details of changes either in the networking support or the threading model that might explain this .... or course, I don't have great expertise in these areas.
I've tried to use 'ndd /dev/tcp SOME_PARAMETER' for all of the /dev/tcp parameters returned by 'ndd /dev/tcp \?' to try to see if there are underlying changes in the /dev/tcp parameters .... but have not found any differences between Solaris 10 u5 and u6.
Can anyone point me to resources that would discuss changes between Solaris 10 u5 or u6 that might explain the problems that we've encountered? Or, alternatively, other system parameters that I could check that might explain changes in either TCP socket or threading behavior?
Thanks for your input,
John

I have a vague memory of someone reporting something similar which turned out to be due to a solaris feature called tcp_fusion.
To check whether thats your problem or not try the following.
Add following line in the /etc/system file.
set ip:do_tcp_fusion = 0
Once the /etc/system file is updated, it will be necessary to restart the system before the workaround will take effect.

Solaris 10 x86 Version

So, when is Adobe going to get their heads out of their collective ***** and release FM for Unix again (Solaris and Mac)? I grew up with FM under Unix (way back to version 2). The Solaris sparc 5.5 version is way out-of-date.
There are several of us here at work that would rather use the Solaris x86 version, as our primary computer is Solaris 10 x86.
As pointed out by others in other discussions, Adobe has mishandled FrameMaker after purchasing it.
IMHO, Adobe has managed to screw up not only FM, but other core products.

I have a pc with cdrom and a netra T1 without cdrom.
Wondering if I can use solaris x86 pc to jumpstart
netra T1(sparc). I heard linux can jumpstart solaris
sparc.You can. The only problem is that it is difficult to read the information from the SPARC CD set (due to the differences in x86 and SPARC UFS filesystems).
If you have the SPARC DVD (or even just the DVD .iso), then it's easier. The same information is replicated so that it is easier to copy onto x86.
Since you only have CD drives, I'd recommend copying the DVD image to the machine, then using lofiadm to mount it up.
Once mounted, it's the same thing as on SPARC, just run the setup_install_server and add_install_client stuff.
Darren

Release date for commercial version of Solaris 10 (x86)?

Hi
Does anybody know when the commercial version of Solaris 10 (x86) will be released.
This is rather urgent as the Oracle certification depends on this release date.
thanks

It's already released. (~ Feb 1st, 2005).
http://www.sun.com/software/solaris/get.jsp
(And it seems you can order Solaris 10 media kit now).That's what I thought but there seems to be a difference. According to the Oracle forums support for Solaris 10 will only happen once Sun announces the general availibility of the commercial version of Solaris 10 x86 (which aparrently hasn't happened yet), and that that date depends on Sun.

How do I tell what version (update / release level) of version 6 has been applied to my system?

Question
How do I tell what version (update / release level) of version 6 has been applied to my system? I have applied several different release levels to version 6 of FF but all the about feature tells me is Version 6.0. no version! This seems to be a change in the way updates are handled. Is that a bending because of the speed of which you're pushing out updates and new releases?
contact me if you need something more
''deleted email address''

@cchur <br />
Nope, I never used Chrome, but I did try Chromium on my Windows desktop PC for a few months last year. I got tired of the Google updater. exe running all the time and Google's method of doing updates, so it's gone. I do have Chromium on my Linux EeePC since last summer, but Ubuntu handles all updates and gives the user the capability to accept or deny, any or all updates - much more to my liking, similar to the way Mozilla does it. I don't like software developers forcing to update until I am ready to proceed.
There's a lot more about this new Fast Release system, than just the lack of visible version numbers, that I don't like. The Nightly, Aurora, Beta, & Release sequence is dumb with the way it changes the version numbers. I prefer installing (for instance) what will become version 7 and have that installation progress thru the 4 stages, instead. Now it's like Nightly going from 7 to 8, Aurora going from 6 to 7, and Beta doing - hell, I won't know if it becomes a Release or if it just dies and I will have to install the Release version myself. ''Quite honestly I don't care, because I don't think this new "system" is going to last too long without major modifications. Too damn many users are so pissed off, that when Firefox starts losing large numbers of users, Chrome keeps growing and eventually passes Firefox in number of users and market share of usage - Mozilla will wake up and see the "light" and change back to the way things used to be done, to a certain extent.''
I also dislike the UI changes in 4/5/6/7 enough that I am still using Firefox 3.6 for almost everything and Firefox 2.0.0.20 for the rest. I have been setting my toolbars up almost like Mozilla did for Firefox 4, since Firefox '''0.7''' in 2003 and I haven't come up with a workable combination of mods and extensions to configure Firefox to look and work the way I have been doing for almost 8 years now.

What version of Ethereal has Solaris 9 x86 Intel???

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for