Bruce, You are right, that was getting off-topic. I take your point and won't mention other evil distro's, again :-).
Cheers, Chris. On 27/07/07, Bruce O'Neel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > Hi, > > With the note that this is getting quite far from debian-sparc's purpose > in > life :-) maybe after this note the conversation should move to the netbsd > sparc or openbsd sparc lists. > > FreeBSD doesn't run on 32 bit sparcs, only 64 bit ones. > > Both OpenBSD and NetBSD run on sun4m systems just fine, even including > the SS5/170. This system, btw, is quite fast for its power consumption. > > > NetBSD does SMP, OpenBSD does not. They both work fine on SuperSparcs, > SuperSparc IIs, and Hypersparcs. > > With NetBSD it seems that pretty much any mix of CPUs that can get up to > the > ok prompt will boot and run. Maybe not well, but will work. > > NetBSD can cross build, so, if you have a faster system you can build > NetBSD for sparcs on it quickly and then just run on the sparc. OpenBSD > thinks crossbuilding > is evil and will not do it. > > OpenBSD comes as a more complete system than NetBSD. NetBSD is really > bare > bones as to what's out of the box. OTOH, NetBSD installs very fast. > > The OpenBSD folks are very very concerned about security. Out of the box > it's likely to be the most secure. > > cheers > > bruce > > ----- Message d'origine ----- > De: "Chris Andrew" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:59:46 +0100 > Sujet: Re: Re: Sparc32 systems and power consumption > À: "Bruce O'Neel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > Cc: "Ludovic Courtès" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, > [email protected] > > >Bruce, > > > >My knowledge of *BSD is slim (to say the least). I have a dual processor > >SS20, which distro would you recommend (Open/ Net/ Free), given that > >GNU/Linux support looks like it is on it's way out? > > > >Many thanks. > > > >Cheers, > > > >Chris. > > > >Many thanks, > > > >Chris. > > > >On 27/07/07, Bruce O'Neel <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > >> > >> Hi, > >> > >> I have recently run OpenBSD on number of Sparc32 systems and it runs > fine. > >> No SMP though. > >> > >> Right now I have one SS20 running with a Dual 142 and a Dual 100, with > >> NetBSD > >> 3.1. It runs well. > >> > >> I also have another SS20 that until a few days ago was running either > >> Dual 180s, or a 180 and a 200. This was also under NetBSD 3.1. I've > >> switched > >> this to a 85mhz SuperSparc II and a 60mhz SuperSparc for testing, still > >> running > >> the same NetBSD 3.1 > >> > >> The only change I've found to make things reliable is that you must > >> increase > >> NMBCLUSTERS. I've made mine to 4096 from 256. Otherwise a lot of > input > >> net > >> traffic will hang the networking stack. > >> http://www.netbsd.org/docs/kernel/index.html#mclpool-limit > >> > >> cheers > >> > >> bruce > >> > >> > >> > >> > >> ----- Message d'origine ----- > >> De: [EMAIL PROTECTED] (Ludovic Courtès) > >> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:50:31 +0200 > >> Sujet: Re: Sparc32 systems and power consumption > >> À: "Bruce O'Neel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >> Cc: [email protected] > >> > >> >Hi, > >> > > >> >"Bruce O'Neel" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes: > >> > > >> >> As a result I've done some power measurements on them in order to > find > >> the lowest > >> >> power system that will do what I need. > >> > > >> >Interesting! > >> > > >> >> SS20/Dual 100 hypersparc 75watts > >> >> SS20/180 Hypersparc 77watts > >> >> SS20/Dual 55 hypersparc 80watts > >> > > >> >[...] > >> > > >> >> SS20/133 hypersparc 85watts > >> >> SS20/200 hypersparc 90watts > >> >> SS20/Dual 90 hypersparc 90watts > >> >> SS20/Dual 142 hypersparc 115watts > >> > > >> >These are all ROSS RT62[56] modules, right? > >> > > >> >Can you tell us which version of NetBSD successfully runs with these > >> >configurations, especially the SMP ones? Does the latest NetBSD > support > >> >some of these configurations? > >> > > >> >I vaguely remember reading reports saying that roughly no current OS > >> >(including Solaris) is able to handle them correctly, especially in > SMP > >> >mode, so that would be an improvement. > >> > > >> >Thanks, > >> >Ludovic. > >> > > >> > > >> >-- > >> >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > >> [EMAIL PROTECTED] > >> > > >> > > >> > >> > > >
