[geeks] Linc is cool

[Brian Hechinger]

all i wanted to do was get the status of non IRIX operating systems on the 4d
platform and look what a can of worms i've opened!!  not attribution, you all
know what you said.

> Let me know how it goes.  A friend has a 4d box without any OS, and he'd
> be overjoyed to put linux on it, even if only by network boot and on the
> serial console.

well, i'll help get NetBSD running on it, i won't give Linux a second thought.

> I'm baffled as to why one would want to cripple a functional machine by
> putting linux on it. Put linux on a Silicon Graphics machine, and it
> might as well just be a peecee.

never said i was interested in getting linux on it.  NetBSD on the other hand,
now _that_ i would install on it.  that or IRIX.  i'd probably give Linux the
slip.

> And if you still need to ask why, then you might also want to ask why
> people put linux on Ultra machines.

this baffles me.  honestly, i don't think SunOS 5 truely deserves the name
Slowaris.  i think it runs FINE on my sparc20.  i think it runs like balls
on every Ultra machine i've ever run it on.  i think Solaris rocks.  keep in
mind this is coming from one of those BSD Bigots who refused to move off of
SunOS 4 for as long as was reasonable. (ok, a little bit longer than that)

> Well, Linux on UltraSPARC machines is only useful for, IMHO, getting lots of
> +"fun" apps on a serious box is record time. Solaris on a UltraSPARC hardware
> +(of suitable robustness - reasonable memory/HD space) is a fine performer.

NetBSD.  you get all the gagdetry of Linux and you still have a solid box. also,
i've never had too much trouble getting stuff to build on solaris.  except for
Gnapster that is.

> Linux on SPARC in general is a novelty - I wonder how many SPARC installations
> +of Linux opted for the "Everything" option when choosing the packages to
> install? A system based on an "everything" install is not, in my mind, destined
> +for a serious production application.

i've used Linux (on PC and SPARC, not _MY_ choice, i didn't have any say, other-
wise i think you would know what i would choose to run) in production.  even
in the "not-everything server configuration" i still don't think linux is
destined for a serious production application (to steal your words) and i think
now that all the dot-flops are done making a mess of everything that people
will realize how much of a "toy-OS" it really is.  fine on the desktop, 
pointless anywhere else.

i don't usually jump on the os advocacy war, but a linux outburst is in order.
i don't work with that linux weenie anymore so i don't have anyone to vent at.

also, all those + marks are where mutt had to wrap your email. please hit that
big key on the right marked "Return" a couple times every once in a while
please.  maybe 90% of the world uses "magic" email programs like Netscape,
Outlook, etc, but as a courtesy to those who inhabited this place before the
rest of you, please wrap at <80 since us old geezers like to cling to our
fixed font 80 column email clients.  we will use them till we die, neural
interfaces be damned.

> I might point out that the O2k that they had running linux had 256 R10k
> processors, and after running a number of FFT benchmarks, determined
> that it has equivilent performance to a similarly configured 32
> processor O2k running IRIX...

i think this says FAR more about IRIX than it does Linux.

***

ok, on a less war-like topic, i'd like to spend some time trying to get NetBSD
running on the 4d.  since i have two and a copy of IRIX 5.3 should i:

a) install IRIX on one and try to build a gcc IRIX->NetBSD crosscompiler

OR

b) try to get a NetBSD/pmax -> NetBSD/sgimips cross compiler going?

which do you folk think would give me less hassle?  either way the one 4d gets
IRIX on it, but i'm just wondering where i would get the best chance of actually
building a cross compiler that functions.

cheers,

-brian
-brian