Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Domains

Domain: ultralinux.org

Stories and comments across the archive that link to ultralinux.org.

Comments · 22

  1. Re:Windows still important by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0 · on Wall Street Becoming a Linux Stronghold
    I refer you to the UltraLinux FAQ:

    15. I heard that UltraLinux is faster then SunOS/Solaris. Is this true ?
    Faster is a very relative term. UltraLinux takes a smaller amount of memory to start up, so for machines with a small amount of memory it will tend to seem faster. For most low level kernel functions UltraLinux is faster as you can see from these benchmark results:

    [benchmarks snipped]

    Also lm@neteng.engr.sgi.com (Larry McVoy) wrote:

            OK, I think I can handle this. Tell your friend that I used to work at SunSoft, in the kernel group, I did posix, ufs clustering, the sun source mgmt system, started 100baseT, architected the cluster product line (from which came vlans which I invented), etc. I think my credentials are probably enough to impress a sys admin :-)

    The main reasons that Linux is faster than commercial Unices:

            * the system call entry is a better design. All Unix systems other than Linux use the design done by Bell Labs 20 years ago and the Linux design is simply lighter - it approaches a procedure call in cost. The complaint is always that Linux can't possibly be supporting all the features, such as restartable system calls, if it is that fast. Those claims turn out to be false - Linux supports the same features, including security, as any commercial Unix. It's just designed better. And commercial Unices are starting to pick up the ideas.
            * Linux kernel hacks count instructions and cache misses and eliminate them. This is a biggy. When each "feature" is added into a kernel, people will do gross measurement to show that it made no difference. And each feature doesn't make a measurable difference - one or two more cache misses in a code path won't show up. But do that a 100 times and all the "features" taken together start to hurt. Linux is far ahead of the rest of the world, including NT, in that Linus and the other senior kernel folks do not kid themselves that a cache miss here and there doesn't matter. I frequently see the Linux development effort keep working at it until the feature they are working on can not go faster because it is running at hardware speeds - there is no more room for optimization. Contrast that with the commercial approach of "well, it didn't slow down for me" and you can start to see how things get out of hand. Kudos to Linus, David and Alan for being the smartest coders in this regard. I'd like to be that good.
            * Linux is a redesign. Many ideas have been rethought using current thinking. All other Unix implementations (exceptions are things like QNX - which also performs at Linux like speeds and has also been shown to be posix/xpg4 etc compliant) are basically the same under the covers. It isn't surprising that fresh minds can do better - one would hope that we have learned something in 20 years. And that's talking about Linux on SPARC, where Linux is mostly portable C and Solaris is using more asm optimizations. Compare this to x86 where the opposite is true.
  2. Re:Old news? by morgan_greywolf · · Score: 1 · on VMware May Violate Linux Copyrights

    ye, linux kernel is a big binary blog load by the BIOS, it can't run without BIOS, so that makes it a derived work. You wanna make a bet on that? I can point you to several instances of the Linux kernel that don't require a BIOS. In fact, even the x86 kernel will boot from EFI.
  3. Only the bravest, needs apply... by Dark+Coder · · Score: 2, Informative · on Linux Distributions for Embedded Development?
    WOW... Forget getting any handholding, this is uber-hacking time!

    1. You're gonna need multiple Linux flavors and versions from multiple sources that specialized in these platforms.

    2. To determine which versions of crosstool (compiler, linkers, debugger), check out The Matrix Guy (Dan Kegel), or more specifically THE MATRIX of workable gcc/g++/ld/gdb.
    3. To ease your pain of figuring out the "./configure" options, definitely checkout PTXDist. Menuconfig is similar to Linux 'make menuconfig'. PTXDist also help to build a root file system in a jiffy, which in my book, is a PLUS!

    My biggest sympathy goes out to you. If this is your first time, enjoy the additional hairs that will grow on your chest.
  4. Linux kernel better than Solaris kernel. by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 2, Interesting · on A Comparison of Solaris, Linux, and FreeBSD Kernel

    Interesting comparison between the Linux and Solaris kernels from someone who used to work SunSoft in the kernel group.

    http://www.ultralinux.org/faq.html#q_1_15

  5. UltraLinux: Linux for SPARC processors by screwthemoderators · · Score: 1 · on Sun Announces Its First Laptop

    http://www.ultralinux.org/ UltraLinux is the name given to the port of Linux to the SPARCTM family of processors most commonly found in SunTM workstations and clones. The port has been developed over the past few years and is currently very stable. It supports most workstations including the older 32bit SPARC processors and the newer 64bit UltraSPARC based workstations. and of course, It Runs BSD!

  6. Re:Linux / Sparc by shani · · Score: 1 · on Linux to Replace Solaris at Duke

    Solaris kicks Linux's arse on UltraSPARC hardware.

    Does it? I had a hard time finding benchmarks newer than 2000 or so. But then, I guess that's when Linux started being good enough for enterprise computing.

    I did find something in the UltraLinux FAQ:

    http://www.ultralinux.org/faq.html#q_1_10

  7. Re:RTFM by Juanvaldes · · Score: 4, Informative · on THG Linux Migration, Part Two

    well there is Google Linux and tons of Linux Faq's
    Let me say I know the frustration, this weekend I finally got a linux distro to like our PC's hardware and actually work. While a massive centralized faq would be nice I know it will never happen and so I use what is available to me. This is one of the downsides to a discentralized system, there is no one place to look and lots of reinventing the wheel is done.

  8. Re:Damn by sbszine · · Score: 1 · on Solaris 9 For Dummies
    And I just kicked Solaris off my Ultra5 yesterday :D

    Hey, me too! I inherited one from work and am using it as a Perl / web development box. A dual boot Solaris / Linux machine also makes a very good practice box for sysadmin newbies.

    Some useful links for anyone wanting to whack Linux on an Ultra:
  9. Sun needs a transition plan by Skapare · · Score: 2 · on Sun To Sell Linux PCs

    Sun needs a transition plan to make migration from the low end Linux/x86 based desktops and servers to their Solaris/Sparc based high end workstations and enterprise servers. Otherwise they will not be able to bring as much sales up to the higher tier. There are two ways to do this. One is to run Solaris on x86 hardware as the middle tier. The other is to run Linux on Sparc hardware as the middle tier. One of these approaches leaves Sun subject to the whims of another CPU maker, which has it's own plans for 64-bit domination. The other leaves Sun subject to the whims of a huge open source software community and a few choices in Linux distributions (such as Debian, Mandrake, and SuSE) as well as FreeBSD, NetBSD, and OpenBSD. Which way do you think would be better for Sun?

  10. Re:The big news is by ericman31 · · Score: 4, Informative · on The Return Of Solaris 9 For x86

    Sun Microsystems announced the Sun LX50 today at LinuxWorld. They also are again shipping Solaris 8 for x86, the cost is $45 for the CD or $20 to download the CD image. They have not yet released Solaris 9 for x86 for general availability, as far as I can tell.

    The LX50 is intended for edge computing. For example as a web or proxy server. It runs "Sun Linux 5.0", although I can't find out much about what that distro is. It appears to be based on the UltraLinux distro.

    Since Solaris 8 for x86 was one of the fastest and most stable UNIX releases for Intel platforms I would venture to guess that the 9 release will be also. The usual problem will be the lack of ISV applications for the product. Although numerous open source packages will be available, making it a great web server or email server.

  11. Re:Question: by shamino0 · · Score: 1 · on Benjamin Herrenschmidt On PPC/Linux, Apple and OSS
    I would just like to add that I don't see the point either. Why bother buying Mac hardware if you don't want to run MacOS?

    If you want non-Intel box to use exclusively for running UNIX apps, you'd be better off with something like a Sun Blade 100. A 500MHz UltraSPARC system that costs less than most decent Macs and PCs. And it comes with UNIX (Solaris) factory-installed. If you really don't like Solaris, you can install Linux for SPARC on it.

  12. Re:Good For Sun by __aahlyu4518 · · Score: 1 · on Sun's Zippy New Chips

    Ok I'll bite...

    UltraLinux

  13. SPARC/Linux status... by uzi · · Score: 2 · on Is Linux Losing Its SPARC?
    The rumors of it's death have been greatly exaggerated. I work on SPARC/Linux stuff in my spare time... just one of a very few people that do. Some things are lagging (32-bit sparc support in the 2.4 kernel, for example), but plenty of new development is in the works.

    As an example, over the last weeks or so, support for the new $1k Sun Blade 100 machine has come to fruition. Already, it performs better than any Ultra5 or Ultra10 running Linux (yay commodity hardware) and is cheaper as well. (This is not an endorsement for running out and buying one for SPARC/Linux... yet... it still needs a lot of work, but it on it's way).

    Though admittedly much of the work being done to get Linux working on the SB100 (and the similar AX1105 and Netra X1 products) with hardware loaned by Sun, one thing that's a tad annoying is the lack of support from Sun... when compared to other vendors with a unique hardware platform. Compaq, IBM, SGI, HP, Intel, etc... they're all more into it than Sun is... I think that maybe only Apple is less enthusiastic about Linux running on their hardware (but then you have IBM to pick up the PPC slack).

    Work on a 64-bit compiler to have a 64-bit userspace, glibc support, etc. is going well from what I know. Some people are playing with it and working on it. Hopefully this can become a reality once gcc 3.0 hits the net.

    Also, you seem to completely count out SuSE... their 7.1 release is quite good, and has everything you'll need or want. I personally run Debian, which I'm quite happy with. If you have a thing for Slackware, it's maintainer (Dave Cantrell) is still actively working on it despite the recent layoff there.

    Finally, there are several excellent resources for SPARC/Linux stuff out there... there's the UltraLinux page and all the mailing lists listed there. On OPN (Open Projects Network... if you're into IRC), you can find a #SPARC channel, where I'm sometimes around to answer questions. I hope this helps quell your concern... we definitely can use more people banging on things, 32-bit and 64-bit alike, but it's definitely not dead.

  14. Debian on Sparc by gorgon · · Score: 1 · on Is Linux Losing Its SPARC?

    Debian on Sparc works well. Of course there are issues in unstable and testing, but that is to be expected. And in general there isn't as much support for the Sparc port by third parties as for x86, but the Sparc port is in pretty good shape. For more general Sparc Port info take a look at the Ultra Linux site.

    --
    I hope we shall crush in its birth the aristocracy of our monied corporations ...

  15. Probably by Ekman · · Score: 2 · on PC Hardware On A SPARC?
    At the hardware level, PCI compliant is PCI compliant. If a Sun box has a PCI bus then you can plug any PCI card into it. The trick is getting drivers. If you're running Solaris, this means that you're pretty much stuck with PCI cards that say they're for a Sun. I have not seen a lot of PCI video cards marketed to PC users that include Solaris drivers.

    Things are cheerier if you run Linux. According to the faq a PCI card will generally work in the UltraSparc version if it works in the i386 version. But that isn't a guarantee. Sometimes a driver writer makes assumptions about the underlying platform that don't hold for other platforms.

    You'll probably find that the biggest problem isn't individual PCI cards, but rather getting Linux to run on the thing at all. Although at under $1k this shouldn't be a problem for too long--assuming the Blade architecture is close to other UltraSparc machines, anyway.

    It would also be worth looking at NetBSD's UltraSparc port.

  16. Google? by Finni · · Score: 1 · on Linux On Solbourne?
    Solbourne Shack - first result searching Google for Solbourne.

    Operating systems.

    The relevant snipping :

    What about Other Operating Systems?

    Issues

    There's some issues that need to be addressed.

    KBus

    Obviously, this is ground-level work.

    KAP Processor

    The IDT's KAP processor is a derivative processor that has a lot of Mask Level bug workarounds in OS/MP.

    Linux

    No Support that i know of. You can obtain more information from the S/Linux FAQ

    OpenBSD

    No Support that i know of. You can obtain more information from the OpenBSD SPARC support list

    The OpenBSD changes page lists KBus work as being added, but i see nothing else.

    OpenBSD 2.2 released (Dec 4, 1997) Addition of 'kbus' port for the Solbourne Series5 sparc-based machines. , 1997) Addition of 'kbus' port for the Solbourne Series5 sparc-based machines.

  17. Re:Well.. Solaris is better on Sparc.. by spankenstein · · Score: 4 · on Red Hat Abandons Sparc

    From ultralinux.org...

    Faster is a very relative term. UltraLinux takes a smaller amount of memory to start up, so for machines with a small amount of memory it will tend to seem faster. For most low level kernel functions UltraLinux is faster as you can see from these benchmark results...

    Here is the link....

    Really people... This took 5 seconds to find. Don't make up stuff as you go please.

  18. Re:Yay! Will it squeeze into an ancient IPC? by T-Punkt · · Score: 1 · on SuSE Announces Linux Version For SPARC

    In fact NetBSD or OpenBSD would be a better choice for an IPC - Linux still has problems with the sun4c-MMU. See the Ultralinux or NetBSD FAQ or Redhat's Ha rdware compatibility list.

  19. Re:Goody by technos · · Score: 2 · on SuSE Announces Linux Version For SPARC

    Visit http://www.ultralinux.org/faq.html for details about what hardware the Sparc 32/64 kernels will and will not run on..

    Oh, and it will run on an IPX, and supports the full range of normal IPX hardware.

  20. OK - glad to hear it! Here's another one... by ch-chuck · · Score: 2 · on C Faces Java In Performance Tests

    would love to get my hands on Smart Firmware - Imagine switching on your PC, having it boot FORTH from ROM, ala Sun workstations. Sweet. Demo for Linux available.

  21. Re:Solaris Binaries. by Nonanonymous_User · · Score: 2 · on Linux-Mandrake Available For UltraSPARC

    The FAQ on http://www.ultralinux.org gives a lot of info about Linux on SPARC and UltraSPARC hardware. SunOS emulation is provided through the iBCS2 package and there have been people to run the SunOS Netscape through this. You still need Solaris libraries for the programs to work, but that shouldn't be a problem.

  22. Re:missing the point by Analog · · Score: 2 · on CNet Article On 2.4 Kernel
    "Linux is a redesign. Many ideas have been rethought using current thinking...It isn't surprising that fresh minds can do better - one would hope that we have learned something in 20 years." - Larry McVoy, former systems architect for Sun and SGI
    Full quote here

    You were saying?