On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 04:37:50PM -0500, Phillip R. Jaenke wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Unless I'm severely mistaken, the userland for all lines of Power* CPUs
should be identical, minus a few hardware-related programs. The
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
But assembler for one powerpc should work on another. If it doesn't,
then it should be fixed. We have a working mpg123.
Indeed, but it won't work on an RS64 II, or a Power2.
Processor is not the issue. That
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 07:54:41PM -0500, Phillip R. Jaenke wrote:
I honestly cannot say I have seen a Linux system acting as a fileserver,
or a workgroup server of any sort, in the sense of handling user logins
and home directories, as well as applications.
I have. The trouble is that Samba
Phillip R. Jaenke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A bit of history first, as it is somewhat important. For those of you who
don't know; Linux runs on PowerPC's. Yes. It does. Now, what big names do
we know that have PowerPC based systems? Let's see. Apple. Amiga. UMax.
IBM RS/6000 (RISC System
On Mon, Feb 01, 1999 at 11:04:38AM -0800, Jim Pick wrote:
Phillip R. Jaenke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
A bit of history first, as it is somewhat important. For those of you who
don't know; Linux runs on PowerPC's. Yes. It does. Now, what big names do
we know that have PowerPC based
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Daniel Jacobowitz wrote:
Unless I'm severely mistaken, the userland for all lines of Power* CPUs
should be identical, minus a few hardware-related programs. The major
portion of the work is kernel; if you can get them to boot, we'll
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On 1 Feb 1999, Jim Pick wrote:
Wouldn't that make more sense as a subarchitecture of the PowerPC
port. I gather that the userspace component would be the same. You'd
just need work on the kernel and installation process. Or are the
instruction sets
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
On Mon, 1 Feb 1999, Edward John M. Brocklesby wrote:
Ok, so it has more features - why should it need a seperate distribution? If
you can add the i386 kernel code into the PowerPC, and only compile it in when
compiling a kernel for an RS/6000, that could go
Phillip R. Jaenke [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Kernel and hardware incompatibilities can lead to binary
incompatibilities.
Plus, IIRC, the current PowerPC distributions are all
compiled for UP. As I said, most RS/6000's are SMP.
You'd have a separate RS/6000 kernel which would be compiled
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hi there. Most of you probably don't know me. Don't worry about that; we
can save introductions for a more appropriate place (read; off the list,
private email.) Anyways, here I am, and I've got a proposal/idea that I'd
like to run by all you happy overtaxed
10 matches
Mail list logo
