Michelle Konzack wrote:
On the other side, I will leafe in short France and then i will have
NO access to Electricity except a bunch (~42) of photovoltaik panels
of 75W and a 4kW Bio-Fuel-Generator
A 1500Mhz Via C7 (x86 32 bits), a GiB of RAM, a pair of 2.5 hard
drives and a slim DVD-burner
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
Am 2007-07-24 16:16:18, schrieb Aurelien Jarno:
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
And then, there is definitivly a problem to get 32Bit Machines in
Strasbourg. All Computer-Stores aelling only those 64Bit CPU's.
Do you now those 64-bit CPU's are also able to run 32-bit
##
ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION
I am currently NOT in Strasbourg because I have the last
7 days of my military service and can not reply in short delays.
Am 2007-07-18 15:26:08, schrieb Chris Newport:
32 bit Sparc systems draw far LESS power than modern machines.
For example, the PSU in my SS10 is rated at 60 watts MAX.
In reality it sits there as a firewall drawing around 28 watts (measured).
I have six SS10 and one SS20 running here, and the
Am 2007-07-19 12:57:41, schrieb Austin Denyer:
When they say sitting there doing nothing what I think they mean is
sitting there at 2% load compared to working at 80% load. For
example, an old SS5 running as a firewall. Replacing it with a P4 would
gain you nothing but an increased power
##
ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION ATTENTION
I am currently NOT in Strasbourg because I have the last
7 days of my military service and can not reply in short delays.
Am 2007-07-19 20:10:01, schrieb andrew holway:
This is exactly the point I was trying to get across. Assuming your
not using vista there is no reason why you need more than one
computer. What are these old systems doing for you? a bit of dns?
Maybe some kind of webserver? mail?
I have all
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
Am 2007-07-19 12:57:41, schrieb Austin Denyer:
When they say sitting there doing nothing what I think they mean is
sitting there at 2% load compared to working at 80% load. For
example, an old SS5 running as a firewall. Replacing it with a P4 would
gain you
Michelle Konzack a écrit :
My three Sun Blade (32 CPUs, 64 GByte of memory, 96 HDDs) are consuming
over 4 kW/hour and they are located in Paris/France, Offenburg/Germany
and Basel/Swiss.
And those are located in the 5% of rich countries that are using far
more energy than the 95% of the
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 04:45:41PM +, Jordan Bettis wrote:
Also I think the production costs of a new machine are often far more
important than energy use.
FWIW
I decided to google to see if I could find stuff to back up this
claim. I found plenty:
andrew holway wrote:
I'm sure that this will be an unwelcome comment but I'm just wondering
why there is all this interest in this, and please excuse my naivety,
relativity ancient technology. Considering the commercial market is
moving very quickly away from 32bit arch and Debians obvious
andrew holway wrote:
Its only wasteful if they end up in a landfill. If they could be
recycled? Another important factor to consider is power consumption.
If you have several V8's (circa early 90's?) running I shudder think
how much juice they draw.
That is the true waste.
My Sparc
Steven Ringwald wrote:
andrew holway wrote:
I'm sure that this will be an unwelcome comment but I'm just wondering
why there is all this interest in this, and please excuse my naivety,
relativity ancient technology. Considering the commercial market is
moving very quickly away from 32bit arch
Jordan Bettis wrote:
Like Chris said, new machines generally draw a lot more power overall.
My Ultra 5 that I use as my desktop can draw 200W max, and probably
doesn't really draw much over 100W total. Compare that to a typical
modern PC desktop that has a 400W supply in it and probably draws
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
Jordan Bettis wrote:
Like Chris said, new machines generally draw a lot more power overall.
My Ultra 5 that I use as my desktop can draw 200W max, and probably
doesn't really draw much over 100W total. Compare that to a typical
modern PC desktop that has a 400W
Austin Denyer wrote:
Again, that's fine if you have more work for it to do. I would gain no
benefit by replacing my SS5 as it works just as well for the task in
hand as it did when it was new. A new machine would just be spinning
it's wheels 98% of the time, using more electricity, which in
This is exactly the point I was trying to get across. Assuming your
not using vista there is no reason why you need more than one
computer. What are these old systems doing for you? a bit of dns?
Maybe some kind of webserver? mail?
I have all these thing running in virtual environments on 1 PC
And a single point of failure?
On 19/07/07, andrew holway [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
This is exactly the point I was trying to get across. Assuming your
not using vista there is no reason why you need more than one
computer. What are these old systems doing for you? a bit of dns?
Maybe some kind
andrew holway wrote:
This is exactly the point I was trying to get across. Assuming your
not using vista there is no reason why you need more than one
computer. What are these old systems doing for you? a bit of dns?
Maybe some kind of webserver? mail?
I have all these thing running in
Nope, laptops can virtualize too :-), tho you right. keeping systems
robust is a heavy consideration.
All I'm suggesting is that the environmental impact of the power
consumption of all the bits of hardware at the home and office should
be considered.
There is a lot of needless waste.
Andy
On
--Andrew == andrew holway [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Andrew is this hobbyism?
i guess it could be classed as such.
personally, i have several SPARC8 machines which continue to work
exactly as they did when new. they were adequate for their purpose
then, and continue to be so now. i'd prefer
Its only wasteful if they end up in a landfill. If they could be
recycled? Another important factor to consider is power consumption.
If you have several V8's (circa early 90's?) running I shudder think
how much juice they draw.
That is the true waste.
Ask yourself, what is the carbon footprint
andrew holway wrote:
Its only wasteful if they end up in a landfill. If they could be
recycled? Another important factor to consider is power consumption.
If you have several V8's (circa early 90's?) running I shudder think
how much juice they draw.
32 bit Sparc systems draw far LESS power
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 03:00:28PM +0100, andrew holway wrote:
Its only wasteful if they end up in a landfill. If they could be
recycled? Another important factor to consider is power consumption.
If you have several V8's (circa early 90's?) running I shudder think
how much juice they draw.
On Mon, Jul 16, 2007 at 10:34:03AM +0100, Chris Newport wrote:
Why does a Linux distribution need the latest bleeding edge kernel ?
With no new hardware to support it should be easy to put together a
distribution with the last known good kernel and the latest applications.
Unfortunately parts
I'm sure that this will be an unwelcome comment but I'm just wondering
why there is all this interest in this, and please excuse my naivety,
relativity ancient technology. Considering the commercial market is
moving very quickly away from 32bit arch and Debians obvious interest
in remaining a
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 01:27:56AM +0100, andrew holway wrote:
I'm sure that this will be an unwelcome comment but I'm just wondering
why there is all this interest in this, and please excuse my naivety,
relativity ancient technology. Considering the commercial market is
moving very quickly
On 18/07/07, Josip Rodin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Wed, Jul 18, 2007 at 01:27:56AM +0100, andrew holway wrote:
I'm sure that this will be an unwelcome comment but I'm just wondering
why there is all this interest in this, and please excuse my naivety,
relativity ancient technology.
Maybe its the maintanance of older technologies that gives Debian and
the other Linux/GNU distributions out there their inherent value.
I'm quite new to open source so please excuse my comments. I'm still
to fully comprehend the philosophy and the technology.
Its quite far removed from anything
andrew holway wrote:
just thinkin, I don't think a sparc32 chip has been released in more
than 12 years. Surely these cannot be energy efficient machines ;)
And LEON processor ? A sparc V8 that can be written in a FPGA ? It runs
with Linux. Berkeley university has a work in progress on a
On Sun, Jul 15, 2007 at 07:39:31PM -0400, Robert Reif wrote:
just thinkin, I don't think a sparc32 chip has been released in more
than 12 years. Surely these cannot be energy efficient machines ;)
Aren't the Sun Rays which are still shipping using microSparc IIep chips?
The clients
I think that this seems like a very sensible way forward. The idea of
letting Sparc64 evolve without worrying about sparc (32) is a good one. I
think having a specific sparc (32) port is the way forward.
Thanks,
Chris.
On 16/07/07, David Arnold [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
--Steven == Steven
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
andrew holway wrote:
just thinkin, I don't think a sparc32 chip has been released in more
than 12 years. Surely these cannot be energy efficient machines ;)
And LEON processor ? A sparc V8 that can be written in a FPGA ? It
runs with Linux. Berkeley university has
Chris Newport wrote:
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
andrew holway wrote:
just thinkin, I don't think a sparc32 chip has been released in more
than 12 years. Surely these cannot be energy efficient machines ;)
And LEON processor ? A sparc V8 that can be written in a FPGA ? It
runs with Linux.
Chris Newport wrote:
And LEON processor ? A sparc V8 that can be written in a FPGA ? It
runs with Linux. Berkeley university has a work in progress on a super
computer that uses sparc32 too.
Why does a Linux distribution need the latest bleeding edge kernel ?
With no new hardware to
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Berkeley university has a work in progress on a super computer that uses
sparc32 too.
Interesting- do have a URL for that?
--
Mark Morgan Lloyd
markMLl .AT. telemetry.co .DOT. uk
[Opinions above are the author's, not those of his employers or colleagues]
--
To
Mark Morgan Lloyd wrote:
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Berkeley university has a work in progress on a super computer that
uses sparc32 too.
Interesting- do have a URL for that?
No. Only this mail :
I have a feeling that the broken sparc32 SMP is related to
the CPU-specific SMP code,
BERTRAND Joël wrote:
Berkeley university has a work in progress on a super computer that
uses sparc32 too.
Interesting- do have a URL for that?
No. Only this mail :
I have a feeling that the broken sparc32 SMP is related to
the CPU-specific SMP code, rather than the whole sparc32
My own experience with sun4d and (late) 2.4 suggests that some
versions of gcc might work better than others, but I don't have
methodical notes.
Sun4d SMP has never worked. I spent many hours trying to figure out
why, and never managed to achieve a stable system. In the end I
concluded that
On Sunday 15 July 2007 03:53, Austin Denyer wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:57 -0700, Steven Ringwald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I, for one, will be sorry to see it go, as I actively use my SS10's
and 20's. Anyone know of any other Linux distros out there that
support the Sparc32 architecture, or
I love it for my dual processor SS20. Is there another linux distro I can
use?
On 15/07/07, Ozz Austin Denyer [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:57 -0700, Steven Ringwald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Jurij Smakov wrote:
If there
Frans Pop wrote:
On Sunday 15 July 2007 03:53, Austin Denyer wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:57 -0700, Steven Ringwald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I, for one, will be sorry to see it go, as I actively use my SS10's
and 20's. Anyone know of any other Linux distros out there that
support the Sparc32
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 14:18:00 +0200, Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 15 July 2007 03:53, Austin Denyer wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:57 -0700, Steven Ringwald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I, for one, will be sorry to see it go, as I
Austin (Ozz) Denyer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun, 15 Jul 2007 14:18:00 +0200, Frans Pop [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Sunday 15 July 2007 03:53, Austin Denyer wrote:
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:57 -0700, Steven Ringwald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I, for one, will be sorry
just thinkin, I don't think a sparc32 chip has been released in more
than 12 years. Surely these cannot be energy efficient machines ;)
Andrew
moonet.co.uk
On 15/07/07, Hamish Greig [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Austin (Ozz) Denyer wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sun,
andrew holway wrote:
just thinkin, I don't think a sparc32 chip has been released in more
than 12 years. Surely these cannot be energy efficient machines ;)
Andrew
moonet.co.uk
Aren't the Sun Rays which are still shipping using microSparc IIep chips?
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL
Hi Steven and Denyer,
We are *also* sad to see sparc32 go, but these kinds of messages are only
a repeat of similar reactions on earlier threads.
What we need to sparc32 alive - not only in Debian, but in Linux in
general - is not people who are sad, but people who are willing to invest
--Steven == Steven Ringwald [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Steven I joined the sparc32 list with the intention of
Steven contributing. My surprise, and disappointment, is because
Steven the first message that I saw regarding the architecture is
Steven that it is going to be retired.
i'm not
Hi,
First of all, I would like to apologize for falling out of the loop
for almost 4 months. My move and settling-in period took quite a
bit longer than I expected. In the meantime there was no further
progress on the decision about continued sparc32 support, so I would
like to address it as
Jurij Smakov wrote:
If there are no last-minute objections, I would like to make an
official announcement on d-d-a that Debian is dropping support
for sparc32 for lenny within the next couple of days.
I, for one, will be sorry to see it go, as I actively use my SS10's and
20's. Anyone know
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
On Sat, 14 Jul 2007 18:08:57 -0700, Steven Ringwald [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
Jurij Smakov wrote:
If there are no last-minute objections, I would like to make an
official announcement on d-d-a that Debian is dropping support
for sparc32 for
51 matches
Mail list logo
