:
|
| Subject: Re: size of distributions (redux) - The button
Jim wrote:
We are running in an LPAR in production. Actually
soon to be TWO LPARS.
You
are not alone. We have a few unique issues running in
LPAR mode.
So I'm not going completely mad, after all! ;-)
=
Jim Sibley
Implementor of Linux on zSeries in the beautiful Silicon Valley
Computer are
The button is either system reset or IPL (clear). If
there's a way to convey that to the software, it would
be cool, but I doubt it.
If by system reset you mean recycling the LPAR, doesn't that generate the
SHUTDOWN signal? If so, then there is support for dealing with that (that's
what the VM
All my systems are built to run under VM or MVS w/o
change. I do have the extint module in so that I can
shut them down cleanly under VM, so that is not a
problem. [...]
However, if anyone uses the HMC reset button or IPL
button or activate/deactivate button on the HMC, the
LPAR Linuxes
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Jim Sibley wrote:
Tzafrir wrote:
Yes, if you insist on installing everything.
Thanks for the not very informative on shoe fits all
non-answer.
Of course I insist on installing everything because my
users are developers and they do ALL of the things
that you describe,
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Adam Thornton wrote:
On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 12:51, Jim Sibley wrote:
Of course I insist on installing everything because my
users are developers and they do ALL of the things
that you describe, including using the zLinux KDE as a
driver for an aix workstation and
On Thu, 4 Sep 2003, Jim Sibley wrote:
Thanks for the comment, Mark.
There certainly seems to a lot of people that are
making uninformed value judgments on this topic about
Surely the onus was on you to inform them, not whinge about what help
they were able to offer.
--
Cheers
John.
Join
Tzafrir wote:
Why not make the button cause a proper shutdown?
The button is either system reset or IPL (clear). If
there's a way to convey that to the software, it would
be cool, but I doubt it.
=
Jim Sibley
Implementor of Linux on zSeries in the beautiful Silicon Valley
Computer are
Jim,
Tzafrir wote:
Why not make the button cause a proper shutdown?
The button is either system reset or IPL (clear). If
there's a way to convey that to the software, it would
be cool, but I doubt it.
Jim,
Do you run your Linii under VM or LPAR?
Leland
Jim Sibley wrote:
The button is either system reset or IPL (clear). If
there's a way to convey that to the software, it would
be cool, but I doubt it.
When you pull the plug there is little left to do the recovery.
But we have the #CP SIGNAL SHUTDOWN to tell the Linux
virtual machine to get out.
All my systems are built to run under VM or MVS w/o
change. I do have the extint module in so that I can
shut them down cleanly under VM, so that is not a
problem. And I actually have code in boot.local and
halt.local that checks to see if it is VM or LPAR and
in each cases, takes different
However, if anyone uses the HMC reset button or IPL
button or activate/deactivate button on the HMC, the
LPAR Linuxes often are damaged.
You got me to wondering about the LPAR mode. If VM is able to postpone
the RESET or IPL, allowing it's guests to terminate properly, then shouldn't
Linux
On Monday, 09/08/2003 at 05:34 EST, Lucius, Leland
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
However, if anyone uses the HMC reset button or IPL
button or activate/deactivate button on the HMC, the
LPAR Linuxes often are damaged.
You got me to wondering about the LPAR mode. If VM is able to
postpone
the
[ unrelated to the original thread ]
On Fri, Sep 05, 2003 at 02:37:43PM -0700, Jim Sibley wrote:
Since we are a mixed OS shop, the operators are used
to punching the reset button for MVS; they try
this on Linux - MVS survives, Linux often does not!.
Either you can get ulcers trying to train
:
|
| Subject: Re: size of distributions (redux)
|
--|
Thanks
that any disclosure, copying, or
distribution of this transmission, or taking any action based on it, is
strictly prohibited.
-Original Message-
From: James Melin [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 12:49 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: size of distributions
The QDIO and QETH OCO issues were resolved. The only OCO bit left is the
3590 support, even the crypto stuff is open source.
-Original Message-
However, I suspect the OCO problem is what's holding
things up. The dasd susbsystem business is cutthroat
and keeping any advantage is of
.
-Original Message-
From: Ferguson, Neale [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Friday, September 05, 2003 1:34 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: size of distributions (redux)
The QDIO and QETH OCO issues were resolved. The only OCO bit
left is the
3590 support, even the crypto stuff
It's in the June 2003 stream on developerworks. The 2.6 kernel has it in
there too.
-Original Message-
I've heard that before, but I cannot seem to find anywhere to get the source
for the qeth modules.
To answer Tzafrir comments, because they certainly
have clarified my thoughts on the issue.
Think extreme Linux! Dozens of LPARs, hundreds of VM
EC over several VM machines, thousands of gigabytes of
data and mix in MVS because that's what pays the
bills.
This is a bit long, but, then again, its
Sorry for the shortened post just now. This is the
complete post:
I've been playing with several of the new
distributions and they have one thing in common - the
size of the /usr directory is growing rapidly. In
early distributions, you could contain a zLinux system
on one 3390-3 image. Now, its
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 09:31:52AM -0700, Jim Sibley wrote:
Sorry for the shortened post just now. This is the
complete post:
I've been playing with several of the new
distributions and they have one thing in common - the
size of the /usr directory is growing rapidly.
Yes, if you insist on
Tzafrir wrote:
Yes, if you insist on installing everything.
Thanks for the not very informative on shoe fits all
non-answer.
Of course I insist on installing everything because my
users are developers and they do ALL of the things
that you describe, including using the zLinux KDE as a
driver
On Thu, 2003-09-04 at 12:51, Jim Sibley wrote:
Of course I insist on installing everything because my
users are developers and they do ALL of the things
that you describe, including using the zLinux KDE as a
driver for an aix workstation and exploring and
modifying the source code for the
, September 04, 2003 12:32 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: size of distributions (redux)
Sorry for the shortened post just now. This is the
complete post:
I've been playing with several of the new
distributions and they have one thing in common - the
size of the /usr directory is growing
Thanks for the comment, Mark.
There certainly seems to a lot of people that are
making uninformed value judgments on this topic about
how I ought to run my systems rather that looking
for solutions.
As I understand it, you would advocate this:
/dev/dasda1 /
/dev/md0/usr
=
Jim
PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: size of distributions (redux)
Thanks for the comment, Mark.
There certainly seems to a lot of people that are
making uninformed value judgments on this topic about
how I ought to run my systems rather that looking
for solutions.
As I understand it, you would advocate
of distributions (redux)
Sorry for the shortened post just now. This is the
complete post:
I've been playing with several of the new
distributions and they have one thing in common - the
size of the /usr directory is growing rapidly. In
early distributions, you could contain a zLinux system
John McKown wrote:
What would you like, specifically?
I am trying to understand how to handle the large
distribution sizes with the small buckets I am given
to use. My users, being devlopers, can and will use
everything they can find on the distribution. Yet I
have to manage large DASD
On Thu, Sep 04, 2003 at 04:23:00PM -0700, Jim Sibley wrote:
John McKown wrote:
What would you like, specifically?
I am trying to understand how to handle the large
distribution sizes with the small buckets I am given
to use. My users, being devlopers, can and will use
everything they can
30 matches
Mail list logo
