Compile on a Linux-only Mainframe

AustinSaltLick writes: "Open Source projects can now compile their code on the first compiler farm in the open source community that runs on an IBM eServer zSeries server. The zSeries is the world's first dedicated Linux mainframe server. This article explains how project administrators can request access for their team."

Comments

Can't make it work

[Anonymous Coward]

linux.c
linux.c(1) : fatal error C1083: Cannot open include file: 'windows.h': No such file or directory


What did I do wrong?

Please,

[ThatComputerGuy]

before anybody else brings it up, let's NOT imagine a you-know-what of these..

Re:Please,

[SpaceLifeForm]

I can't imagine what you were referring to, but imagine a Sysplex cluster of these.

Re:Please,

[Anonymous Coward]

I don't know.
But I can you imagine a MOSIX cluster of these.

Re:Please,

[Anonymous Coward]

Do you mean a MOSIX cluster?

Number One

[Anonymous Coward]

1-- Why ?
2-- Is your application so huge that you need a mainframe ?
3-- How much of the mainframe sources you have available ?
4-- If it is going to behave like my desktop PC, no thanks.
5-- Will it compile, are all the libraries ported ?
6-- Is compiling enough ?

Re:Number One

[NeonSpirit]

1-- Because :-)

2-- It would be very difficult to imagine an applicaion that can take the resources of even a small mainframe. However this is designed for running in a partitioned environment. In this way you can have 100's if not 1000's of Linux images running on the same machine.

3-- The resorces are allocated to a virtual machine/partition the same as in other mainframe operating systems. One interesting point is that you do not want to allocate large ammounts of memory per partition as this is then fenced off. If the Linux image pages, it does so first to an area of common memory, making more efficient use of resources.

4-- You have all the mainfframe hardware resliance, however if the OS or app is flakey, there is no way to prevent if failing. However it should not affect any other partitions, Linux or otherwise.

5-- One of the reasons IBM is making it open to developers is to get all libraries etc. ported and tested.

6-- Thats a judgement each individual/organisation will have to make on thier own.

Re:Number One

[TheLink]

1- More good choices.
2- The mainframe is to run many servers running the apps. Then again would be interesting to see how far Postgresql can scale on a mainframe...
3- How much of the PC BIOS sources do you have available anyway?
4- I hope it would have more IO. The network interconnect between virtual servers should hopefully be fast.
5- D'oh, sign up and see.
6- See 5

Re:Number One

[Anonymous Coward]

1-- Off what, I guess you mean everytime I buy a mainframe, I can run Linux. Yep... soon I will get one

2-- What do you mean scale ? It is a virtual machine, it will scale depending on its programming and the resources given to it. You surely donot need a mainframe for it.

3-- Who's talking about PC BIOS sources ? I am talking about memory, cpu and storage resources.

4-- Ok, so if I donot want to compile but want to connect to the next machine, it will be fast. So what ? Do you think they will give you 100 virtual machines ? What will you do ? Compile linux kernel under a min ? And after all compile is an incremental process so you hardly need a mainframe once you compile all the sources...

5-- Sign up ... no thanks if IBM wants to back Linux, let him allocate sources of its own. Human source is the most expensive one. I'd rather work on Linux on my pc, rather than try to compile it on a mainframe...

6-- See 5

Do it yourself

[ksheff]

Why not do what Moshe Bar did and run Linux S/390 on a PC using Hercules? Sure the IBM site certainly has more resources, but if it's to just periodically recompile/test a few programs, it may not be too bad to do it on your own hardware. I suppose it could also be a good reason if you are developing a closed source program and are paranoid about having the source on another company's site.