Swift, I would really like to see a build on current version of AIX 7.2 since IBM has said they will support it for the next decade, HPUX I can take or leave if you can manage, but i would also prefer that to be 11.31. As for compilers, I would just go for the safe option for now, gcc, it will be easier to debug any issues with that and then you could move on to the daring stuff. This isn't my project, but when it comes to platform support, I ask myself 3 questions: 1. Is it still updated? 2. Will it cause bitrot/ifdef hell/ is it standards compliant? 3. Will someone maintain it and verify it works?
So i dont have anything against, say, unixware being readded, but it should be Xinuos's most recent 2018 edition, not something ancient. Thank you for your time, -Chase ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ Original Message ‐‐‐‐‐‐‐ On Tuesday, February 2, 2021 4:52 PM, Swift Griggs <swiftgri...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Tue, 2 Feb 2021, Chase via cdesktopenv-devel wrote: > > > Personally, I think that your time would be used better if you helped us > > test and fix any issues with the AIX and HPUX port. > > I have access to POWER hardware but only Power7 and older stuff (I have > some POWER6 and RS/6000 PPC hardware too). However, I have the full suite > of AIX available. I could try a test build. Do you know if it'd require > gcc or xlC? I might also be able to host a POWER box for us to use online. > It would probably make sense to use something old like 4.3, 5.1, 5.3, or > 6.1. Binary compatibility would insure it'd run on 7.x and you'd still > cover most of the hobbyists who are on 6.1 and earlier. Just my $0.02. Let > me know your thoughts, Chase. > > > These haven't been tested in possibly decades and at least for the HPUX > > port, I have strongly considered just removing it from the repo > > I support HPUX (and pretty much all the legacy Unixen) and on both > platforms (PA-RISC and Itanium). I don't know if you know this, but fairly > recently Qemu has been able to run HPUX (PA-RISC / HP9000 only). I think I > have images for 10.20 and 11.11 both (and I can share them or host them). > I could probably create one for 11.31, (HP9k) also, if it doesn't crash > the emulator. I know 11.11 runs great and it has binary compat with newer > versions also. > > The problem is that getting a good compiler on HPUX is difficult. Only gcc > is really an option because the HP C compiler is licensed-only and I know > of no way around that (gcc for PA-RISC ISA is no-bueno, too - very slow > but might work, it'd probably be gcc295 or gcc3). HPE still occasionally > sells a copy, and it's one of the few things I haven't collected a license > for over the years. If anyone else can help here, let me know. > > I would be happy to setup an emulated HP box on a static IP so we could > give it shot. I could pull it down and try to get a build going then get > you guys involved if that would help? > > > it's death date is 2025 > > That is EOL for 11iv3, which came out in 2010 or 2011. They've just kept > issuing patches for it. I can't believe it's even gone this long, but HP > was a hot mess and HPE is probably going to be even worse. Time will tell. > > > and even the linux kernel guys have orphaned support for itanium, i.e. > > That's okay. Linux never figured out EPIC. If you install Linux on an > Itanium, make sure to put a layer of paint on the room you are in so you > can entertain yourself by watching it dry before the install finishes. > It's not just bad, it's downright awful. SGI had to load their Altix > machines to the hilt with CPU just to get any type of decent performance > out of them. Maybe the EPIC ISA is "epic" for someone, but Linux ain't > that someone (I hear it's good for OpenVMS shrug ... ok-cool.). HPUX > runs pretty mediocre on it, but it's not the > oh-my-gosh-this-thing-is-so-slow-it-is-broken experience you have with > Linux. I would advise anyone interested to not waste their time. > > > the only architecture it will run on after March of this year (HP9000 is > > slated for EOL then). > > Since the initial burns on Itanium from Intel themselves and then Oracle, > even HP(E) has been a bit gunshy about the Itanium. I don't have any > numbers to prove it, but I suspect many of the last 12 years they have > sold more HP9000 hardware than Integrity hardware based on the "Itanic". > They definitely seem to have sold more HP9k Superdomes than I2 Superdomes, > all total. > > I've fiddled with Unix boxes since around '92 and the other thing I'd > point out is that all the nice workstation hardware is HP9000, with most > of the Integrity stuff being server-based. Of course, that was the > zeitgeist of the times, real hardware Unix workstations were pretty well a > losing proposition by 2003 when the Itanium was "ready". > > However, as a hobbyist, I can tell you that the HP9000 systems are much > more appealing and cool to the little guy than any Itanium server junk. If > anyone is going to update CDE on a HPUX box, it'll probably be a cute old > Visualize system or a 735 workstation, not a loud nasty RX server slab. > > Let me/us-on-the-list know if there is some hardware/OS platform that's > hard for you to test. I can at least try to find a match for you. I would, > of course, volunteer it for free as long as makes sense. I know we've > talked about some of this before, but the more specific you can be, the > more I'm likely to be able to help. > > I'm a C coder, but I'm weaker than you guys and I don't have the time to > dig in and do much dev, but sysadmin & network stuff is easy for me. > > -Swift > > cdesktopenv-devel mailing list > cdesktopenv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdesktopenv-devel _______________________________________________ cdesktopenv-devel mailing list cdesktopenv-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/cdesktopenv-devel
