Re: sparc64 bridging
----- Original Message -----
> Have you already tried these:
>
> http://www.phunnypharm.org/pub/for/sparc-folks/
> Ref:
>
http://lists.debian.org/debian-sparc/2004/debian-sparc-200402/msg00220.html
>
> What hardware are you running on that freebsd isn't compatible with?
> Seeing as how it doesn't, it'd be nice of you to post it to the freebsd
> list, so others know what's up.
Hi Dan,
Thanks for the pointers, I've just installed the bridge-utils-64 package and
I'm able to get somewhat further. But some funny things are happening;
plog0:/home/axel# brctl addbr br0
plog0:/home/axel# brctl addif br0 eth0
bridge br0 doesn't exist!
plog0:/home/axel# brctl show
bridge name bridge id STP enabled interfaces
plog0:/home/axel# brctl addbr br0
device br0 already exists; can't create bridge with the same name
plog0:/home/axel# brctl delbr br0
plog0:/home/axel#
Kind of 'it doesn't exist! -It does! it doesn't!' ;-)
(I guess this means compiling it myself with -g and do some debugging)
The machine in question is a netra x1. It has no floppy/cdrom so I have to
netboot it to install, with FreeBSD 5.2.1 I get a 'Fast Data MMU miss' every
time the loader tries to reallocate the kernel. I've already posted this to
relevant lists. We've got about 6 of these, all with 1gb mem, in our
basement doing nothing, I figured they'd do nice as a pop/mailhub cluster
(the remaining 5) and for firewalling (this one).
I've also tried OpenBSD, which in fact runs pretty fine on them. We do have
some enterprise 450 machines also which I can probably get my hands on (4way
smp las time I checked :-) OpenBSD doesn't have decent smp support, and my
experiences with NetBSD is somewhat dissapointing under heavy loads. So
that's why I'm trying debian now. (I really like the way things are handled
compared to the other distros available)
I don't like keeping a mix of more then 4 operating systems at our site, in
fact, I'm trying to bring it all down a bit to ease configuration and
migration.
We don't have that many people who can manage solaris decently (only 2) so
I'd be giving myself some extra work if we keep using that.. ;-)
Kind regards,
Axel Scheepers
Reply to: