Re: stability on a sparcstation 5 170mhz
On Mon, 10 Feb 2003, Dave Paton wrote:
> On 2/10/03 at 3:23 PM, Peter Jones <pjones@redhat.com> wrote:
>
> > On 10 Feb 2003, andy bezella wrote:
>
> <mucho snippola>
>
> > The box isn't going to be stable without a lot of involved kernel work
> > that nobody quite understands, and nobody really has time to do. You're
> > pretty much 100% screwed.
>
> So I guess a guy like me with one of the freak dual hypersparc 170s is up the
> creek without a boat?
No, ss5/170 is a turbosparc; the hypersparc is an entirely different
beast, and it's not in a sparcstation 5 ever.
We're *only* talking about the sparcstation 5/170, not any other ss5 and
not any other 170MHz cpu. Just TurboSPARC.
--
Peter
What we need is either less corruption, or more chances to
participate in it.
Reply to: