On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Brian McCrary wrote:

> Hmmm, I wonder if anyone is interested in adding sun4m and VME support
> to OpenSolaris. Too bad Sun isn't releasing any code for their older
> releases that supported sun4c, etc. I'd like to put my old IPI drives
> to work again.

Yeah, but I guess a line has to be drawn somewhere.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, author of "Solaris Systems Programming"

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich

In article <Pine.SOL.4.58.0501271423310.855@zaphod>,
Rich Teer <rich.teer@rite-group.com> wrote:
>On Thu, 27 Jan 2005, Brian McCrary wrote:
>
>> Hmmm, I wonder if anyone is interested in adding sun4m and VME support
>> to OpenSolaris. Too bad Sun isn't releasing any code for their older
>> releases that supported sun4c, etc. I'd like to put my old IPI drives
>> to work again.
>
>Yeah, but I guess a line has to be drawn somewhere.

What we could check is if it would make sense to compile 32 bit Sparc binaries
from the current OpenSolaris sources. Do not expect all drivers to be available
for old architectures in case we succeed.

--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

thanks for the input... so, Sol9 is better than Sol7 or 8? I mean, for the
purpose of just running BIND, Sendmail, Apache and POPserver.

I mean, if i go the solaris avenue and not netbsd...

also, is it easier to get precompiled binaries for sol7, sol8 or sol9? i just
remember it was quite difficult to get gcc working well in my sol9 setup
before...

thanks!

rgds,

- ron

On Fri, 28 Jan 2005 00:36:08 +0000, Ronnie Corny wrote:

> thanks for the input... so, Sol9 is better than Sol7 or 8? I mean, for the
> purpose of just running BIND, Sendmail, Apache and POPserver.

There are many improvements in Solaris 9 relative to the earlier versions,
not the least of which is faster disk access with logging enabled.

> I mean, if i go the solaris avenue and not netbsd...

NetBSD is a pretty good OS except for the methods required to keep it
updated. Its SMP scalability is hardly in the class of Solaris and
besides you already stated:

"since it's dual proc, I don't think BSD is the answer"

> also, is it easier to get precompiled binaries for sol7, sol8 or sol9? i just
> remember it was quite difficult to get gcc working well in my sol9 setup
> before...

To install gcc all you had to do was download Sun's freeware packages, add
/opt/sfw/bin to your $PATH and '-L/opt/sfw/lib -R/opt/sfw/lib' to your
$LDFLAGS.

$ pkginfo | grep SFW
system SFWdb1 Berkeley DB - database library
system SFWgcc gcc - GNU Compiler Collection
system SFWgcmn gcmn - Common GNU package

In article <ctbvqf$2b5$1@news.cs.tu-berlin.de>,
Joerg Schilling <js@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
>from the current OpenSolaris sources. Do not expect all drivers to be available
>for old architectures in case we succeed.

Some of that hardware is supported by *BSD which might help an OpenSolaris
driver author.

John
groenveld@acm.org

I had an experience running Suse 7.3 on SS20 with 2 x 75 CPUs, and 512
MB of memory. But as far as I know this is last Suse for Sparc. Reading
from number of sources on Internet, I have figured out the the best
Solaris OS (in general manner, of course) would be Solaris 8.
Actually, that time Sun released a great hardware, much higher quality
than later.

In article <ctcgtt$6s2$1@neuromancer.cse.psu.edu>,
John D Groenveld <groenvel@cse.psu.edu> wrote:
>In article <ctbvqf$2b5$1@news.cs.tu-berlin.de>,
>Joerg Schilling <js@cs.tu-berlin.de> wrote:
>>from the current OpenSolaris sources. Do not expect all drivers to be available
>>for old architectures in case we succeed.
>
>Some of that hardware is supported by *BSD which might help an OpenSolaris
>driver author.

To be honest, it is of cource a lot more, like
MMU handling, CPU fault handling and similar. We need to check
whether we can convince Sun to give us the apropriate sources.
But this does not make sense before the first public OpenSolaris
release is out.

--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 14:52:49 -0600, Brian McCrary <bmccrary@shcircuit.com>
wrote:


> Hmmm, I wonder if anyone is interested in adding sun4m and VME support
> to OpenSolaris. Too bad Sun isn't releasing any code for their older
> releases that supported sun4c, etc. I'd like to put my old IPI drives
> to work again.

you can easyly get the Source of solaris 9 from Sun if you want..


--
All my spammers die in horrible pains!

In article <opsla7ogggu0ag4h@news.cis.dfn.de>,
Hans Surst <aboo2@pluto.kww.bauing.tu-darmstadt.de> wrote:

>> Hmmm, I wonder if anyone is interested in adding sun4m and VME support
>> to OpenSolaris. Too bad Sun isn't releasing any code for their older
>> releases that supported sun4c, etc. I'd like to put my old IPI drives
>> to work again.
>
>you can easyly get the Source of solaris 9 from Sun if you want..

But you cannot use it for OpenSolaris based projects

--
EMail:joerg@schily.isdn.cs.tu-berlin.de (home) Jörg Schilling D-13353 Berlin
js@cs.tu-berlin.de (uni) If you don't have iso-8859-1
schilling@fokus.fraunhofer.de (work) chars I am J"org Schilling
URL: http://www.fokus.fraunhofer.de/usr/schilling ftp://ftp.berlios.de/pub/schily

On Thu, 27 Jan 2005 alexzar@gmail.com wrote:

> Solaris OS (in general manner, of course) would be Solaris 8.

Not sure if I'd agree with that: S9 has some improvements over
S8 that makes it worthwhile. Improved disk performance via
the updtaed UFS logging is one example.

--
Rich Teer, SCNA, SCSA, author of "Solaris Systems Programming"

President,
Rite Online Inc.

Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-group.com/rich