Re: Which Sparc is best?
On Tue, 23 Jul 2002 21:17:41 -0400, Steve Pacenka wrote:
> On Tue, 2002-07-23 at 18:46, Craig Morehouse wrote:
>> I'm new to Debian, but am going to be buying 30 workstations for a new
>> operation, and I'd like to use Sun hardware running 3.0 Woody.
>>
>> Question, which Sun box has proven to be REALLY good and solid with
>> Debian? Are the Ultra 2's better than Ultra 5's or 10's, or vice versa?
>> Should I build a bunch os SS20's with 4 cpus, or should I get the
>> latest Blade?
>>
>> We're going to be using these machines for Typesetting and Editing,
>> primarily. Being able to configure for wide variety of languages is BIG
>> plus. We'll need GIMP and XFig graphics, and lots of XEmacs
>> configurations.
>>
>> If you don't think that Sun is the right platform for these things,
>> please say so. I have access to all architectures, basically. I'd like
>> to be using Sun/Sony monitors and the Sun keyboards are ideal for these
>> uses, particularly the older 5 versions.
>>
>> Cost is not particularly an object (Though I am not going to buy Ultra
>> 80's for this), but reliability definitely is.
>
> Craig,
>
> First, it would be interesting to know why at this scale and "cost not
> particularly an object" you aren't using Solaris with proprietary
> application software, instead of doing Linux and free apps.
Dear Steve;
The reason is that we are a Private Operating Foundation, a 501(C)(3)
that will be giving sizable amounts of its proceeds back to the Open
Source community. We will be using nothing but Open Source software
anywhere in the operation. After 22 years in IT and software
development, take my word that we can do what we want and need to do
this way.
We will not use Solaris because it is not pure Open Source.
> May I suggest that you also post your question on the Debian i386 and
> ppc lists, if you haven't already?
Thank you, but I wanted to hear specifically from Debian/Sparc users. I
have installed Red Hat on Sparc systems 40 or 50 times, but never got a
Debian slink release years ago to recognize my hardware correctly. Since then, I
haven't tried Debian/Sparc, using mainly Intel and PowerPC machines with Mandrake
or Yellow Dog. I have built Intel boxes since 1988 and I have seen the
insides of virtually every Mac ever made. I know what they do and do not
do. One reason I'd like to use Sun boxes is for their engineering
solidity. Also, the Sun Type 5 keyboard is absolutely ideal for Emacs
users.
I'm familiar with the Sun proms, and one reason I am not inclined to
use Apple's Power machines is the number of instances of their Open
Firmware doing undocumented things. I was asking, if you'd read my
questions a little more carefully, about which series of Sun boxes work
and install reliably than others with current versions of Debian.
"Question, which Sun box has proven to be REALLY good and solid with Debian? Are
the Ultra 2's better than Ultra 5's or 10's, or vice versa? Should I
build a bunch os SS20's with 4 cpus, or should I get the latest Blade?"
The questions were really about Prom problems, bus failures,
Framebuffer weirdnesses, etc., the kind of things that makes installs
such fun. Would an Ultra2 with SCSI disks be a better choice than an
Ultra 10 with IDE, and so on. I want to hear what people's experiences
have been, and which series of Sun machines (if any) install reliably and
make top-notch Debian boxes.
Your cited applications are generic
> enough to run on a wide variety of hardware. i386, SPARC (32 bit), and
> PowerPC (32 bit) are the most widely used and tested Linux ports. I've
> installed Woody in the last couple of months on all three platforms
> (replacing Potato or RedHat 7.x). Woodied SPARC and i386 have been
> solid; as were the RedHatted and Potatoed installations before them. A
> Woodied PowerMac 7300 has had a couple of lockups but perhaps that is a
> hardware problem or maybe I should be using kernel 2.2 instead of 2.4.
>
That's the kind of thing I have found repeatedly with Macs. and a 7300
is a relatively old one. (An Old World machine.) Some of the New World
machines are really pains in the butt, particularly in their Partitioning
requirements. This is a factor for me because I don't want any instances
of any Closed Source OS in the shop, not even on a boot partition. This
can make putting Linux on Macs pretty hairy.
Remember this is coming from someone who has sold $10 million worth of
Macs, and has owned 30 of them. I also have three NeXT's, and I have
owned an entire truckload of Sun equipment which I refurbished and sold.
Right now I'm looking at a Sun 21" monitor running on a Dell Optiplex. I
know the various families of hardware. What I don't know is how well they
are performing under Woody. Does this help you understand the questions?
> Regarding SMP (in SPARC 20 example), what among your applications would
> take advantage of more than one processor? Are there non-interactive
> processes that can be backgrounded while working on foreground GUI
> things?
>
> Gimp is the most interesting application. UI performance could be
> limited by either disk throughput (imagining large 24-bit 1200 dpi
> images of digitized photos spilling to swap on disk) or on-screen
>
[snipping graphics comments. I have ten years of Photoshop background and
have generated 700 megabyte 3D images]
Maybe the XFree86 driver for
> UltraSPARC Creator framebuffers is accelerated ...
>
Thanks. Hoped to find out which FB's ARE accelerated and give good
performance.
> Good luck at research and implementation.
>
> -- SP
I appreciate the reply.
CAM
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-request@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
Reply to: