Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Linux for 601-based PPC Macs?

Posted by Cliff on from the fruity-penguins dept.

jTepp... asks: "The company I work for is upgrading the majority of our systems, and migrating to Linux for most of the machines. I have a lab full of early PPC Macs that I now have been told to Migrate to Linux if possible, or scrap the entire room and start over. Since this would come directly out of my IT budget, and I need to use it for other projects, I'd rather keep the machines. The catch is that most of these units are powered by 601 chips, for which I'm having a difficult time finding a flavor of Linux that will support. I see support for older chips, and newer chips, but not the 601. Anyone know why? Or where I can find support?"

49 comments

  1. mklinux by Ranc0r · · Score: 4, Informative

    mklinux will work on almost all nubus macs.

    1. Re:mklinux by Phexro · · Score: 4, Insightful

      I can second this. I have MkLinux running on a PowerMac 7100/80. Not running fast, mind you, but running.

      I know that work has been done more recently to get Linux to run natively on NuBus hardware, but I haven't played with it. I'd recommend that you try that first.

    2. Re:mklinux by Knife_Edge · · Score: 1, Flamebait

      Really? I could never get it to work, and that was not from lack of trying. My advice to anyone trying to get linux running on a nubus machine is to give up and save yourself hours of trouble. I would be pleased to be refuted, but my opinion is that mklinux is mostly a dead project and there is not really much else out there for nubus. For me mklinux was nothing like YDL on non-nubus apple hardware.

    3. Re:mklinux by grammar+nazi · · Score: 4, Insightful
      I third this. I successfully ran MkLinux on a PowerMac 7100/80 from late 1996 (an early version) until just early 2001. Granted, that I only used the PowerPC as a fileserver the last few years, it never failed me.

      During the first 3-4 years, MkLinux was my XServer to Solaris workstations in my schools engineering building. I would even run Motif from the engineering building, displaying itself on X in my dorm.

      One impressive point is that enventually, when I gave the Mac away (Summer 2001), my friend noticed a few h4xx0red programs running in the background. Apparently, all of those years as a file server allowed somebody to hack in. I even reinstalled in the newer version of MkLinux 2000.

      The coolest thing about the Mac is that I still needed the Mac OS 7.6 to boot MkLinux. I was able to install the entire Mac OS 7.6 + CD reading extensions + MkLinux booter + SimpleText onto an 8 MB partition!

      --

      Keeping /. free of grammatical errors for ~5 years.
    4. Re:mklinux by 68k+geek · · Score: 0

      "I have MkLinux running on a PowerMac 7100/80". walking. you have it walking, not running.

  2. nubus-pmac project... by huberj · · Score: 3, Informative
    Perhaps these PPC Macs are supported by the nubus-pmac project?

    From the nubus-pmac site, the following machines are supported:

    • Apple Power Macintosh 6100, 7100, 8100 and compatibles
    • Apple PowerBook 1400, 2300, 5300
    • Apple Performa 5200, 6200, 6300
    The nice thing about this is they have kernel's with installers for Debian (woo!), YDL, and LinuxPPC. (and MkLinux...but you probably don't want that...)

    Good luck!

    1. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Knife_Edge · · Score: 2, Informative

      See my post above for my opinion on the near futility of this. I have tried the nubus-pmac stuff also, using a variety of different kernel configurations, and both YDL and mklinux. My success rate was a stunning zero percent with a couple of different machines, both 6100 compatibles. By failure I mean the machines never made it past the bootloader. Admittedly, these models did not use the 601 processor, but as pointed out below someplace the real problem is the wacky bus. I wish you good luck and success with this endeavor but I must offer this cautionary tale.

    2. Re:nubus-pmac project... by foniksonik · · Score: 1

      Excuse me, but I believe that PPCLinux and other PPC Linux distributions will ONLY RUN ON A PPC!!!!

      Is that clear? Trying to get an OS designed for the PPC architecture to run on an 860xx CPU is just ingnorance on your part. That's like trying to get OS 9 to run on x86 architecture!

      The only reason nubus is still relevant for the 601 PPC is because it was supported by the first year's production units. All the later CPU's supported PCI. It was a pretty big deal at the time cause there were lots of video and audio cards that only came as nubus.

      So to summarize. To my knowledge there is no Linux for 860xx motorola CPU's and only a certain selection of PPC 601s, the first generation, required nubus support.

      "The 7200 was the entry level second-generation Power Mac, the first group of Apple computers to use the PCI bus." -- courtesy of www.lowendmac.com

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    3. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Ridiculousness · · Score: 1
      ermm.. 860xx or 680xx???

      I admit I'm not a Mac nut, but I've never heard of the 86k arch.. only 68k. :)

      And that other guy said a 6100 wasn't a PPC? Well he got screwed by someone if they told him it was - though I've got one myself, and it *is* PPC 601... *shrug*

    4. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Chasing+Amy · · Score: 2

      The old PowerMacs *ARE* PPC Macs, so please stop having a cow about things of which you clearly are ignorant. They had PowerPC processors; they did not, however, use the PCI bus, they used a weird bus architechture called NuBus. And what is a "860xx CPU"? Oh, you mean "680xx CPU," which again is not what we're discussing here. 6100s and other low-end PowerMacs used PPC processors.

      --

      Chasing Amy
      (We all chase Amy...)
      "The more corrupt the state, the more numerous the laws"-Tacitus
    5. Re:nubus-pmac project... by BJH · · Score: 1

      Admittedly, these models did not use the 601 processor

      Then what the hell were they using? And what "6100 compatibles" were produced? The Mac clones didn't come out until well after the NuBus PowerMacs had been EOLed. Perhaps you would care to enlighten us?

    6. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      He's clearly a Mac User, and not that bright a Mac User. Have patience with him.

    7. Re:nubus-pmac project... by foniksonik · · Score: 2

      You're correct about the 86/68 thing... dislexic I suppose. Anyways.. this is the part I was flaming about:

      "My success rate was a stunning zero percent with a couple of different machines, both 6100 compatibles. By failure I mean the machines never made it past the bootloader. Admittedly, these models did not use the 601 processor,"

      If the models he/she tested did not use the 601 processor then they weren't PPC nor were they '6100 compatible' whatever that means. Point is that the info provided wasn't a relevant case study and I felt the need to point that out.

      NuBus wasn't 'wierd', it was current for the time. Nubus had a very healthy following for many years.

      Before PCI came along it was THE architecture for audio/video and nobody had any better.

      Now we have AGP... in a few years people will be saying how 'wierd' the PCI architecture was and that's why it's no longer supported by the new OSs. Same with SCSI for data transfer vs. ATA.

      --
      A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
    8. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Did you even read the post he responded to, moron? Go read it very carefully, assuming you can read.

    9. Re:nubus-pmac project... by fuerstma · · Score: 1

      Actually Radius made their 81/110, which from the model number you can tell is a clone of an 8100. Same motherboard, they slapped it in a nicer, stronger case, bigger PS, and a Radius Thunder Video Card (nice card for it's time).

      Additionally there were a couple independent companies (non-licensees) that were making 8100 clones (and I think they were selling like Quadra/Centris 650 clones too, I remember seeing them in the back of MacWorld many moons ago).

      So actually there are clones of the x100 series.

      --
      www.jackasscritics.com
    10. Re:nubus-pmac project... by BJH · · Score: 1


      I know about the Radius (my company had one - fastest machine available at the time, until Apple stomped all over it four months later with the PPC604 PMacs).

      However, I've never heard of a 6100 clone, or a x100 series compatible that didn't use the 601, for that matter.

      Would the original poster care to clarify exactly what they were babbling about?

    11. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Parsec · · Score: 1

      He probably meant a Power Computing, Umax or other Mac clone (was Sony the third?).

    12. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0
      If the models he/she tested did not use the 601 processor then they weren't PPC nor were they '6100 compatible' whatever that means.

      Probably they were clones, from the brief period when Apple licensed the architecture to a couple of other companies. Or, they could have shipped with a 601, but then been upgraded to a later processor.
    13. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Valdrax · · Score: 2

      Oh, for the love of God.

      By 6100-compatible, he probably meant clone machines. All clone machines were PowerPC machines since Apple did. If they were meant to be contemporaries of the 6100s, they were probably running 603 chips, which are the next generation of PPC chips, not "860XX" chips.

      Now Nubus was weird for the day. It was weird because it was pretty intelligent. Unlike PCI and ISA which had a bunch of IRQ issues, Nubus sorted out cards on its own without need for user intervention. This was a major reason for Apple deciding to use it back in the day. Unfortunately, by the time Apple switched away, Macs were the last machines using Nubus in a mainstream application for the past few years. That combined with its low bandwidth compared to PCI moved Apple to switch. (That and they'd been plagued with low-level errors since they switched to Nubus '90 when they switched from m68k to PPC chips.)

      All PowerMacs still have PCI slots and still support PCI video cards. My neighbor has 3 monitors attached to his system thanks to 2 PCI video cards. The only reason AGP wasn't supported before it first came in was that it hasn't been out and used in PCs for very long. PCI will still be around on Macs for a long time until a few years after something better comes out and becomes standard in the PC industry. (Hell, modern PowerMacs still don't use DDR SDRAM or RDRAM for main memory. They're still choking on PC133.)

      Incidentally, SCSI is still faster than IDE if you have multiple drives on the same chain as in a RAID for example. IDE/ATA has a huge command overhead compared to SCSI and inferior top speeds. You just don't notice the difference if you aren't really stressing it.

      --
      If it's for-profit but free, you're not the customer -- you're the product (e.g., the Slashdot Beta's "audience").
    14. Re:nubus-pmac project... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      You can run Linux on a 68k Mac (well, at least some of them anyway). I once installed it on a Quadra 660 AV. It was painfully slow, but it worked. For more info, check here.
      I suggest you to *READ* the post before you post your own, and NOT to post the subject that you DON'T KNOW. I don't think you actually read or understood anything here.

    15. Re:nubus-pmac project... by ksheff · · Score: 2, Informative

      FYI: Linux/m68k for Macintosh. FWIW, I have a se/30 running debian at home.

      --
      the good ground has been paved over by suicidal maniacs
    16. Re:nubus-pmac project... by UberLame · · Score: 1

      Ahh. A day to dream of. In a few years people will have come to agreement except a few lusers who want to know why that wierd ATA stuff isn't supported by new OSs.

      --
      I'm a loser baby, so why don't you kill me.
  3. you're asking the wrong question. by t · · Score: 2

    The 601 isn't very different from the 603/604/750/... and Motorola has the relevant docs. The problem is supporting the entire machine, as someone else pointed out, the bus on the motherboard is wacked. Hence the model numbers of the systems are necessary to determine what will run on it.

  4. Boy, do YOU need work on trolling... by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0, Offtopic

    Your insipid page-widening bug doesn't work, so the least you could do is post something readable. Who knows, it might actually be funny (probably more from your awful songwriting skills than the content of the songs).

  5. check here for more info by foniksonik · · Score: 2

    http://nubus.tuxppc.org/index.php

    --
    A fool throws a stone into a well and a thousand sages can not remove it.
  6. NetBSD by penguinboy · · Score: 1

    Do you absolutely need to be running Linux? Chances are NetBSD is Unix-y enough for most purposes, and it runs on absolutely everything.

    Supported 68k systems
    Supported PPC systems

    1. Re:NetBSD by benjamindees · · Score: 2, Informative

      from your link:
      PowerPC 601-based machines
      The PowerMac 7200 series machines and original 7500 machines are powered by a PowerPC 601 microprocessor. The rest of the chipset is essentially the same as the other early PCI PowerMacs. Right now, there is no PPC601 support in the kernel. Once someone adds this, these models should "just work".

      --
      "I assumed blithely that there were no elves out there in the darkness"
    2. Re:NetBSD by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Sadly I have yet to see a non-pci ppc mac that netbsd works on. Infact netbsd doesn't even support alot of the pci ppc macintoshes. Its just the macs I think. Your fscked if you want anything
      but linux on it. I tried. I failed. So I spent an afternoon or two updating mklinux after it was booting w/ a 2.4 kernel, and its pretty OK.

  7. It'll work (with a little work) by iankerickson · · Score: 5, Informative

    I used to admin a college lab of these macs -- about 80 6100/6x, some 7100s, and some much, much better 7600's and 7300's.
    When MkLinux was first announce on the net, I snagged an abandoned 7100/66 and a spare 2 gig IBM hard disk
    (Thanks, Carl!) and installed MkLinux as fast as the school's T1 could get it in the building. I had this idea
    I could use the 7100 running netatalk to liberate my side of the lab (the mac side) from our NT file server
    (which wasn't a such a bad server, but SFM had some killer bugs that the service packs hadn't fixed, and I
    wasn't in charge of applying fixes to the NT box). But when it became obvious I was going to have to spend
    every waking minute of my life tweaking this new toy to make sure it didn't crash during finals week or get
    hacked by one of the students (I was pretty new to UNIX at the time), I shut the 7100 down and tabled the
    project. In retrospect, I kind of wish I'd spend more time on it. But knowing what I know now (i.e. knowing
    now how much I didn't know back then), I'm glad I didn't do something stupid, like make every mac in the lab
    rely on the MkLinux box for some network service.

    So I know a little about what you're about to go through.

    First, you need a Linux distro that supports Nu-Bus, because those macs are not PCI based. MkLinux will work.
    NetBSD, amazingly, will not run on these macs. That should set off red flags in your head. You're venturing
    into unsupported hardware territory. Expect that some hardware won't work AT ALL. In preparation, read
    through the Linux docs for whatever distro you find that supports NuBus macs and write down all the hardware
    that is reported as unsupported, alpha, buggy, or problematic. If a component is unneeded (like serial ports,
    sound in general, or audio input)
    then just don't use it, and maybe look for a way to remove or disable that device in the kernel. You really
    only need support for video in X, the mouse in X, the keyboard (especially mapping keys), and ethernet.
    Forget about sound, and I wouldn't be surprised if the floppy drives only work for booting, but not once
    linux is up and running. Maybe you can pass that off as a security "feature".

    Second, you need to account for the fact that these macs are not fast. 6100's are barely quick enough to call
    "slow". The less software you install on these, the better. If it were me, I'd set them up as thin clients
    with X, a browser, telnet/ssh, maybe java, maybe a few helpers for the browser, and that's about it. Run
    everything else over X hosted off a better machine. If you have a few faster macs with a 604 or better yet
    a G3 or G4 (not a 603) consider reserving it as an X host for users to log into with XDM. Ideally, you'll
    want two or three machines for failover or a hot spare. If you have a
    more modern mac as an X host, you can run RedHat, NetBSD, SuSE, or even MacOS X (I suppose) on it, and the X
    clients can run software from it over the network. Just give the X host plenty of RAM, fast ethernet, and
    SCSI disks, and it should be fine. Also, the less software you install on the 6100 as a client, the fewer
    bugs you'll have to deal with where software XYZ doesn't run properly on the 601 due to some bug in the PPC
    targeting code of gcc.

    Third, you have to prepare for the unique "features" of the Macintosh platform that are going to get in your
    way. You'll need a boot-loader that runs from the MacOS because these macs lack OpenFirmware. PCI macs at
    least can boot other operating systems by finding a boot-loader on any HFS, IS0-9660, or FAT partition. Your
    macs will each need a bootable HFS (MacOS) partition with just enough MacOS to run the linux boot loader
    (usually an extension), with maybe some ResEdit hacks to keep users from bypassing linux on bootup. Once your
    users get into MacOS, all security is gone and they can do whatever they like, including erase or hack the linux
    partition (using ext2 utilities). I would use a tool like RevRDist for the Mac side, so you can master the HFS partition from any
    AppleShare server (or netatalk). Then use rdist or rsync on the linux side in the start up scripts to master the linux
    file system from a server. Use the Apple "Network Access Disk" to jumpstart the whole process from a bootable
    floppy. If some genius hacks the bootup sequence and reinstalls MacOS (which they will, because MacOS unlike
    Linux will let them do whatever they want without ever a "permission denied") you can remaster the whole mac
    just by rebooting from a read-only floppy and running RevRDist from the server share. You should also
    should figure out what you're going to do about mouse buttons. You probably only have 1 button mice. The X
    Window system likes 3 buttons. The standard workaround is option+1/2/3 to fake that mouse button with the
    keyboard. It will take less than 60 seconds of that to either fuck up your hands or just plain drive you
    crazy. Use xmodmap to remap buttons 1, 2, and 3 to some single keys, like /, *, and - on the number keypad
    or something. Or look at the price of 3 button ADB mice and multiply that by the number of macs you have...

    Basically, don't make it up as you go along and expect to get lucky. It's not going to happen. With a
    little thought and preparation, you should be able to automate everything and have maintenance-free LAN of
    semi-decent thin clients/X terminals that just happen to show a "happy mac" when they (rarely) boot up. And
    when you see how fast Linux runs on a 6100 compared to MacOS, you'll probably be smiling too.

    --
    Democracy. Whiskey. Sexy. Pick any two.
    1. Re:It'll work (with a little work) by SN74S181 · · Score: 0, Troll

      He's probably stuck, and it's because Apple released their half-closed MkLinux that he's stuck.

      Apple Computer really didn't want people crawling around in their hardware, reverse engineering it, figuring out all the warts and details. But that's what Linux kernal hackers do for fun.

      They figured "we will throw them a bone, we'll create a dead-end 'Linux' and call it MkLinux."

      As a result, they basically let all the air out of the efforts to roll support for Mac hardware into the regular Linux kernal, where it should be. So now there's all the orphaned hardware out there, nobody put the time into it to do it the right way (reverse engineering the hardware, like happened where necessary on x86) and MkLinux is basically a dead end branch.

      Thanks Apple.

    2. Re:It'll work (with a little work) by Parsec · · Score: 1

      Probably a good strategy on their part... sell more new machines with MOSX rather than having a bunch of ancient (and IMHO junk) machines still living on with Linux.

      Sorry digit numbered Mac fans, those were Apple's worst efforts. I won't use anything now that's pre-USB.

    3. Re:It'll work (with a little work) by ilbrec · · Score: 1

      Actually, based upon my experience (I installed on a couple of 6100s and a 7100 a year ago), you don't want to run X on NuBus based PowerMacs, as it is painfully slow. These machines come with built-in video chips that are not all that fast. So, running X on these machines will be extremely slow.
      Even with "newer" PowerMacs, often, people complains how slow they are, as X server isn't all that optimized on a PPC Linux in many cases (at least this was a common complain at one time).
      With NuBus PowerMacs, it will be very slow. I recommend it running without X, unless you absolutely have to.

    4. Re:It'll work (with a little work) by iankerickson · · Score: 2

      You might as well say, don't use any networking on these macs, because the builtin ethernet is so slow. It is -- that's true -- but without ethernet the machines are much, much less useful. You don't wan't X on these because it will run well. It will not. He'll probably be lucky to get 640x480 at 8-bit color. But with only the console, it limits the number of apps he can realistically offer users, unless he wants do code everything with cdialog, pilot, or ksh "select" menus.

      Because this is a _migration_ to linux, the users are going to know squat. He'll want X so he can offer apps that anyone who knows how to use a mouse can figure out (provided he puts in the preparation to configure the X resources and windows manager before hand so everything appears to be "just there").

      Also, console apps will remind people too much of DOS. It's a PR thing -- people will see it as a step back, not forward (even though, as you and I know, Linux is much better than DOS). If a decision-maker see these macs and makes the association with DOS, he could kill the whole project. I remember what it was like supporting VMS terminal apps, like PINE, EVE, NOTES, and LYNX. These are great programs, but too many people just don't get the idea. You'll lose hours and hours hand-holding people through console apps who could otherwise use a browser all day without ever bothering you for help.

      Without X, you might as well toss all these macs in the garbage and buy 100 dumb terminals from Boundless. You can buy them in bulk for $80 each, and they'll be alot less hassle to maintain then PPCs with a linux booter that depends on a working MacOS partition to boot up.

      --
      Democracy. Whiskey. Sexy. Pick any two.
  8. Yellow Dog Linux by BitGeek · · Score: 2

    YDL will install on some machines unsupported by more non-commercial distros. I'm in the process of getting it going on a 7300.

    I bet it will work on your machine too.

    --
    Yeah, and you guys panned the ipod too: http://apple.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=01/10/23/ 1816257
    1. Re:Yellow Dog Linux by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

      Bet you don't have a 601 CPU in there. the 601 is the deal-breaker on every OS except MacOS and mklinux

    2. Re:Yellow Dog Linux by joe52 · · Score: 1

      the 601 is the deal-breaker on every OS except MacOS and mklinux

      Not true. I used to run LunixPPC and later Yellowdog on a 7200 with its original 601 in it. As others have mentioned, it's not the chip, it's the machine that the chip is in. If you have a 7200 or 7500 you have plenty of options. If you have an older nubus mac with a 601 in it then your options are more limited.

      joe

  9. Not all 601's are NuBus by O · · Score: 1

    Linux runs fine on my 601-based 7200/75, and the 7500/100 also has a PPC601 processor. These are both PCI systems that will run normal Linux (as opposed to MKLinux) just fine.

    --

    1, 1, 2, 3, 5, 8, 13, 21 -- Mathematics is the Language of Nature.
  10. MkLinux mailing list by Goronguer · · Score: 2

    Apple hosts a mailing list for MkLinux. This will be your most useful source of information if you pursue the MkLinux route, as much of the information on the MkLinux website is out of date. The people on the list are very friendly and helpful with even the most absolute-newbie questions (and if your Linux experience is limited to the PC realm, you will have some newbie questions relating to Linux on Macs). There are searchable archives of the list as well. Good luck with your quest.

  11. Debian? by mwr · · Score: 1

    According to this page, the PowerMac 7200 (a 601-based PCI Mac) should work fine.

    It's the "universal operating system", at least for the Linux side of things. 11 architectures are scheduled to be supported in the upcoming release.

  12. Depends on which model (pci/nu-bus) by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0

    If you macs have pci busses then it should be fairly straight forward. However some early 601 based macs use nu-bus. These don't have such good linux ppc support. Look at the model numbers for help.

    MKlinux is a mach based linux which worked on older macs. I'm not sure much is being done with it right now though.

    Try and see if the commercial (yellow dog, suse) provide out of the box support for the hardware.

    I got it runing on a 7200, which is a little quirky because of the video (I boot macos then boot linuxppc and it works, booting straight into linux doesn't work.)

  13. do you really need it to run lunix by type40 · · Score: 1

    If the lab is just being used for web surfing and writing papers, just load OS 8.1 (not 8.5 or 8.6, sure as hell not 9, because there all to slow on a 601) as the system, use iCab or mozilla for the web, and top it all off with the last version of Office.
    I've loaded MKlunix on to my old 6100/60 (Issic), I found that it worked better as a Mac (and still works better as a Mac being used by my cousin at collage for, you guessed it, writing papers and web surfing).
    Loading lunix will also require you yo make sure that the harddrives have been upgraded to the 1.5 to 2.0 GB range that's what MKlunix likes. The stock harddrives run about 300 to 500 MB. Check how much RAM their sporting, if they have less than 24 MB (two 8 MB SIMMS, and 8 MB on the motherboard) just walk away. If they have less than 24 MB you will have to run Virtual Memory (bad) and System 7.5 (worse)(you could run 8.0 or 8.1 but you wouldn't want to with out at least 40 MB RAM).

    long story short, if you can get away with keeping Mac OS on them do it. It will save you many headaches. If you need something that only lunix can provide, put the lab up for sale on ebay.

    but if you feel that you must run lunix, surf over to www.lowendmac.com. They will be able help you to do what ever you need to get them running.

    --
    "You can see I know very little about pimp policy." George McGovern.
  14. performance by green+pizza · · Score: 2

    Second, you need to account for the fact that these macs are not fast. 6100's are barely quick enough to call "slow".

    I ran MkLinux on a few 6100 (60 and 66 MHz PPC 601) and 8100 (80, 100, and 110 MHz 601) machines several years ago. Totally unaccelerated X11 was a pain at times, but overall performance was fine... more than enough for a general use screw-around box, especially with lightweight applications. You're not going to want to run GNOME or KDE, but if you want a decent box to learn basic linux/un*x, X11, and networking, it'll suit you fine.
    As an NFS, web (NCSA HTTPd and later, Apache), bind, and sendmail server, our 6100/60 worked like a charm, and was significantly faster than our Pentium 133 box running NT 3.5 and several commercial daemons.
    For light graphical and non graphical tasks, a PPC 601 is more than fast enough. There are still many servers still in use running on that CPU, and much slower CPUs as well. NeXTstations and NeXTcubes (Motorola 68030 and 68040 CPUs) running NEXTSTEP/OPENSTEP as well as 68030/68040 Macs running A/UX are still common in academia for moderate-use servers in situations where their existing setup "just works". Granted, if such machines were to start grinding on PHP or complex perl scripts, the load average alone would cause a buffer overflow...
    Note that if you want to use the on-board ethernet of the 6100/7100/8100 machines, you'll need an AAUI->RJ45 transceiver... a little $15 dongle to convert Apple AUI to the more common RJ45. Ditto for Apple's 68040-based Centris and Quadra machines.

  15. Linux on old Macs by wayward_son · · Score: 1

    It's not the processor that's the problem, it's the motherboard. If you have a 7200 or 7500, you can run any version of Linux you want. They are PCI motherboards. If you have a 61xx, 7100, or 8100, good luck. These are nubus machines and are not supported by Linux/PPC (although MKLinux does support them and there is the nubus-pmac project) The 52xx/53xx/62xx/63xx (except the 6360) have a similar problem even though they are 603 machines.

  16. Slashdot as Google by bill_mcgonigle · · Score: 1

    All the answers you seek shall be revealed

    --
    My God, it's Full of Source!
    OUTSIDE_IP=$(dig +short my.ip @outsideip.net)
  17. WTF is Lunix by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 0


    Well? LUNIX THIS LUNIX THAT

    I don't get it. Is it an OS like linux?

    You probably are a nigger