Re: Re: Re: Sparc32 systems and power consumption
Hi,
With the note that this is getting quite far from debian-sparc's purpose in
life :-) maybe after this note the conversation should move to the netbsd
sparc or openbsd sparc lists.
FreeBSD doesn't run on 32 bit sparcs, only 64 bit ones.
Both OpenBSD and NetBSD run on sun4m systems just fine, even including
the SS5/170. This system, btw, is quite fast for its power consumption.
NetBSD does SMP, OpenBSD does not. They both work fine on SuperSparcs,
SuperSparc IIs, and Hypersparcs.
With NetBSD it seems that pretty much any mix of CPUs that can get up to the
ok prompt will boot and run. Maybe not well, but will work.
NetBSD can cross build, so, if you have a faster system you can build NetBSD for sparcs on it quickly and then just run on the sparc. OpenBSD thinks crossbuilding
is evil and will not do it.
OpenBSD comes as a more complete system than NetBSD. NetBSD is really bare
bones as to what's out of the box. OTOH, NetBSD installs very fast.
The OpenBSD folks are very very concerned about security. Out of the box
it's likely to be the most secure.
cheers
bruce
----- Message d'origine -----
De: "Chris Andrew" <cjhandrew@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 27 Jul 2007 12:59:46 +0100
Sujet: Re: Re: Sparc32 systems and power consumption
À: "Bruce O'Neel" <linux@pckswarms.ch>
Cc: "Ludovic Courtès" <ludo@chbouib.org.>, debian-sparc@lists.debian.org
>Bruce,
>
>My knowledge of *BSD is slim (to say the least). I have a dual processor
>SS20, which distro would you recommend (Open/ Net/ Free), given that
>GNU/Linux support looks like it is on it's way out?
>
>Many thanks.
>
>Cheers,
>
>Chris.
>
>Many thanks,
>
>Chris.
>
>On 27/07/07, Bruce O'Neel <linux@pckswarms.ch> wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> I have recently run OpenBSD on number of Sparc32 systems and it runs fine.
>> No SMP though.
>>
>> Right now I have one SS20 running with a Dual 142 and a Dual 100, with
>> NetBSD
>> 3.1. It runs well.
>>
>> I also have another SS20 that until a few days ago was running either
>> Dual 180s, or a 180 and a 200. This was also under NetBSD 3.1. I've
>> switched
>> this to a 85mhz SuperSparc II and a 60mhz SuperSparc for testing, still
>> running
>> the same NetBSD 3.1
>>
>> The only change I've found to make things reliable is that you must
>> increase
>> NMBCLUSTERS. I've made mine to 4096 from 256. Otherwise a lot of input
>> net
>> traffic will hang the networking stack.
>> http://www.netbsd.org/docs/kernel/index.html#mclpool-limit
>>
>> cheers
>>
>> bruce
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> ----- Message d'origine -----
>> De: ludo@chbouib.org (Ludovic Courtès)
>> Date: Mon, 23 Jul 2007 16:50:31 +0200
>> Sujet: Re: Sparc32 systems and power consumption
>> À: "Bruce O'Neel" <linux@pckswarms.ch>
>> Cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org
>>
>> >Hi,
>> >
>> >"Bruce O'Neel" <linux@pckswarms.ch> writes:
>> >
>> >> As a result I've done some power measurements on them in order to find
>> the lowest
>> >> power system that will do what I need.
>> >
>> >Interesting!
>> >
>> >> SS20/Dual 100 hypersparc 75watts
>> >> SS20/180 Hypersparc 77watts
>> >> SS20/Dual 55 hypersparc 80watts
>> >
>> >[...]
>> >
>> >> SS20/133 hypersparc 85watts
>> >> SS20/200 hypersparc 90watts
>> >> SS20/Dual 90 hypersparc 90watts
>> >> SS20/Dual 142 hypersparc 115watts
>> >
>> >These are all ROSS RT62[56] modules, right?
>> >
>> >Can you tell us which version of NetBSD successfully runs with these
>> >configurations, especially the SMP ones? Does the latest NetBSD support
>> >some of these configurations?
>> >
>> >I vaguely remember reading reports saying that roughly no current OS
>> >(including Solaris) is able to handle them correctly, especially in SMP
>> >mode, so that would be an improvement.
>> >
>> >Thanks,
>> >Ludovic.
>> >
>> >
>> >--
>> >To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-sparc-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
>> >with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact
>> listmaster@lists.debian.org
>> >
>> >
>>
>>
>
Reply to: