The only support for Solaris requested of us involves supporting a particularly ancient variant of the damned thing because it has so many vulnerabilities (and quite a few people still use it, unpatched, because it was otherwise solid) that they want to teach people how to hack into it. And why you should upgrade it, or maybe migrate to some other tools that can stay up to date if Solaris won't.
I wonder how well that works within a virtualized environment. Hmm...
Well, that's the kind of blinkered, Philistine pig-ignorance I've come to expect from you non-creative garbage...
Snoracle has their own Linux distribution, but it's really just a clone of Red Hat.
I've gotta say though, nslcd (aka nss-pam-ldapd) is freaking awesome. Joining a Linux machine to an Active Directory domain used to be a gigantic pain in the ass. Winbind was a piece of garbage, had too many dependencies, and had a habit of just not staying working. nslcd ties the name service switch directly to LDAP, no shims, no gimmicks. It also works with *any* LDAP server, not just AD.
When you have hundreds of servers it's nice to be able to log in with your LDAP credentials instead of having to go into the password vault to fetch the root password.
How badly does it consume bandwidth, doyouknow?
I'd expect if it's using those underlying protocols, it's probably fairly trim.
Oh.... and I wonder if you can record it to an mp4 or something. That'd be super-useful.
I haven't tried using it from anywhere other than my own well-endowed home network yet. I'll report back next week when I'm sitting in an airport using a tethered phone and we'll see. I think it's still going to be pretty good.
And yes, there is a screen recording module available. :)
For my needs, that screen recording thing, if I can route the recording to a server elsewhere, would be amazingly useful.
I've set up a guacamole server/client that shows a proof of concept. It works very, very smoothly... far more smoothly than what we're doing at the moment through our vendor.
That, alone, makes me want to use this. Add to it recording features, and it's all the better... I may play with that tomorrow.
It's a tad frustrating, though, that I couldn't get the same familiar desktop in linux as the console's desktop (meaning, as if a CRT were connected to the VM, if that were possible). That's a bit of a shame, and might be a problem for certain distributions (Security Onion, Kali, etc). I dunno... maybe I can work around that somehow.
Illumos has a lot of promise to keep the Solaris spirit alive, while being flexible. I personally use SmartOS for a hypervisor OS and it works wonders.
It would be easier if Guacamole could natively speak X11 and XDMCP. Although Guacamole has been designed to be extended in this way, no one has written this protocol yet.
If that is what this is.
Ignore the above comment, somehow that comment ended up in this room. I blame the chickens.
Well, I get the impression Solaris, at least in times past, was super-reliable.
Does it remain as reliable today as it was?
I used xrdp, and managed to get the gnome desktop working with it.
I did get it working with Unity on Ubuntu, amusingly, but not without consequences.... couldn't log out of the session in any way, short of killing the right process.
Not that I like Unity. I mention this as yet another reason for anyone to dislike Unity.
I found xrdp worked really, really well, for keeping a uniform experience across the different machines that I had set up (Windows & Linux).
I want to try out some of the other features... ssh sessions, and desktop recording in particular.
Does anybody really know? ;)
Yes, it's still reliable. The issue isn't that Solaris is no longer reliable; it is that Linux has closed the gap. Nevertheless, die-hard Solaris admins will almost always tell you that Linux is strictly a desktop operating system. But if they were to look at the horizon instead of at their glass of kool-aid they would be able to see the end of their career.
I look around our data centers and I don't see anyone deploying Snoracle machines for new workloads. If I happen to see one and there's an admin nearby, they always say the same thing: "that's for our old [so-and-so legacy application] ... it'll be gone soon." The same holds true for H/PUX or AIX systems. No one wants to bother with the expense and specialized skillsets required to run these machines unless they have legacy workloads to support.
The bottom line here is that the "unix wars" of yore did come to an end, there was a definite winner, and it was Linux.