OpenBSD's Alpha Support In Trouble 76
Nimrangul writes "Hours ago Theo de Raadt put out a call for an Alpha CS20, because as of last night OpenBSD no longer has one. The CS20 that died was a build machine and without it further support for the Alpha platform would be nearly impossible. If you have a C320 or other 1U Alpha machine that you would be willing to donate to the project, please respond to the discussion on the misc mailing list."
Heh (Score:5, Informative)
I wish them luck, but this has to give pause to anyone who wants to place a heavy bet on the continued availability of OpenBSD/Alpha -- if it can get wiped out because they can't get a specific piece of legacy hardware to fit Theo's rack!
Re:Heh (Score:4, Informative)
Heck, looks like there is an exact same modeled unit for sale for the next 4 days [ebay.com] from the same people.
Temperature (Score:4, Interesting)
One of the build alphas is now dead.
I think Theo should also ask for aircon. I'm willing to help but 1U boxes tend to get hot, and I see no point in all chipping in for a new Alpha box to see it go pop again in 2 weeks time. Theo, tell us what went wrong and what you've done to fix it or what we can do to help you fix it. Then we can worry about replacing the hardware - otherwise I think it's probably just as well to ask for Alpha hardware and rackspace in a reliable colo as send the hardware back to the same place.
Re:Temperature (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Uh-oh. (Score:4, Informative)
the netbsd-alpha list is pretty busy. I unsubscribed when I sold my alphas because I didn't need the mail traffic.
Re:Uh-oh. (Score:2, Insightful)
OpenBSD would be another matter entirely. It actually sees some signifignat use ...
Re:Uh-oh. (Score:3, Insightful)
Just because we don't make such a song and dance over it doesn't mean we don't exist.
Re:Uh-oh. (Score:1)
I'm a big fan of the OpenBSD release songs (and OpenBSD itself is very nice), and it'd be great if NetBSD could offer something similar, but I don't really see it as a priority. I wouldn't really care if nobody ever heard of NetBSD, so long as it stayed as awesome as it is and I could keep using it.
Re:Uh-oh. (Score:3, Informative)
FYI, NetBSD is mostly hosted by ISC, which doesn't charge hosting fees. NetBSD also runs its own colocated servers for all important servers and services. And for the financial situation in general, NetBSD is a volunteer Open Source product with no commercial backing. As such there is some need for money (mostly for running the above-mentioned machines to provide decent service), but so far this was covered fine by donations. Of course this shouldn't keep back any meg
Re:Uh-oh. (Score:2)
Re:Uh-oh. (Score:3, Informative)
This is OpenBSD.
I did (Score:2)
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:4, Informative)
If you want to be sure something works properly you have to have the hardware it is supposed to be working on and test to see if it works on it.
NetBSD's setup does not actually make sure everything works, it makes sure it compiles under fake hardware.
That's how NetBSD's support for some platforms got so bad.
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:5, Interesting)
That last sentence is wrong!
Native compiling on a [slow] platform doesn't test that "everything works" for that platform, just that the native compiler generates some code on a given model. This is especially relevant for platforms with a diverse range of hardware, including Alpha.
Cross-compiling on a fast platform reduces the turn-around time for providing software to test on slower platforms. (Why wait a week for a build to compile when you cross-compile in an hour?). The NetBSD cross-build framework [netbsd.org] offers other benefits such as allowing build an entire OS release (including install media) without requiring root privileges or fancy OS support such as loopback disk drivers. More details in my BSDCon 03 talk [mewburn.net] and build.sh paper [mewburn.net].
Either build method does not remove the need for actually testing the resulting build on the variety of hardware available for a given platform. That is a separate and more important issue.
(Why do [AC] fanboys of some operating systems belittle functionality that their OS doesn't currently have, only to about-face and shout to the rooftops when they finally get it?)
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:4, Insightful)
The lack of actual compiling on your fringe hardware is why the support for it is so bad.
While it is true that it can be compiled faster on other hardware, that doesn't mean that the machine itself can compile it's own copy of the operating system.
If my machine cannot compile it's an operating system supposedly designed for it, there is a problem with the code and most likely how it works.
Cross compiling can be handy for speedy development, but not quality development. That's where the actual hardware comes in.
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:1)
"If my machine cannot compile an operating system supposedly designed for it..." and it compiles fine on a cross compiler... there's a bug in GCC. NetBSD doesn't write GCC, so therefore the NetBSD cross compile framework is at fault. Ah I see, your logic makes perfect sense!
By your logic no current operating system could exist since the code would have to be initially
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:2)
it generates a bunch of bits into files... the bits are the same AS LONG AS THE COMPILER IS THE SAME on all systems.
It doesn't run any of these bits so it doesn't NEED to have the build target hardware.
What you're saying is akin to saying a text file written in vi on one system won't be the same as writing a text file on a different arch system.
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:3, Interesting)
it generates a bunch of bits into files... the bits are the same AS LONG AS THE COMPILER IS THE SAME on all systems.
It doesn't run any of these bits so it doesn't NEED to have the build target hardware.
There was a recent thread [neohapsis.com] about cross compiling on OpenbSD misc@. Perhaps this one summarize it nicely :
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:2)
The SDK's for most consoles (and handhelds) are used with the compiler being on a different architecture then the targets. I'm not 100% sure but I don't think any console/handheld has a developer system of the same architecture as the target.
Now I know they compile different things then a computer, but the point is still valid.
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:3, Insightful)
Or is it a computer to you?
Re:Get the cross compiling from NetBSD (Score:2)
Wasn't even thinking of cel phones or pdas.
However, I am surprised they develop code for it on the actual system.
Thermostat-Initiated Shutdowns? (Score:4, Insightful)
Given the amount of equipment [openbsd.org] in Theo's server room and given the importance of this equipment to the project, why not construct a thermal shutdown device? How about a machine with a number of temperature probes around various points in the room, and when they all agree that the temperature is hot, they initiate shutdown+power-off procedures on the machines in the room? Now, I realize that some of the machines in the rack are older and may not have self-power-off abilities but it seems likely that enough of them could power down to make a difference.
Re:Offtopic: Keyboard in Theo's rack. (Score:5, Informative)
You can get one for 54.95 $ from Fentek Industries, Inc. 470 S. Main Street, Suite G, Post Office Box 2278, Cottonwood, Arizona, 86326 USA. Shipping and handeling extra of course, state taxes may apply, duty fees may apply, void in Quebec and Tennessee.
They actually have a few of them, check it out [fentek-ind.com]. And next time, use google for the words "mini keyboard".
Re:Offtopic: Keyboard in Theo's rack. (Score:2)
Re:Offtopic: Keyboard in Theo's rack. (Score:2)
Look at the base of the monitor -- white keyboard, fairly small.
Re:Offtopic: Keyboard in Theo's rack. (Score:2)
Re:Offtopic: Keyboard in Theo's rack. (Score:2)
Re:Offtopic: Keyboard in Theo's rack. (Score:2)
Re:Offtopic: Keyboard in Theo's rack. (Score:2)
I imagine you could get one off ebay pretty easily.
Re:Impossible (Score:2, Offtopic)
FreeBSD >=5 is meant to be able to compete, but I haven't heard many success stories personally. I imagine OpenBSD with its giant lock definitely wouldn't be able to compete in
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
IIRC, there was a lot of discussion about OpenBSD's filesystem a while back.
Moral of the story: OpenBSD's scheme *guarantees* reliability, data integrity at ALL times, whereas journalled ext3 doesn't (or something)....
You've missed the whole point of OpenBSD...
1) It's code is obsessively analysed for flaws, and is made to be absolutely as correct as possible
2) As a result of this, it is RELIABLE
3) As a result of this
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
My point is that a lot of servers do NOT need perfect OpenBSD-like security, they need realistic security against any reasona
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
The context I didn't realise your post was relating to was government stuff. Large NUMA/SSI/cluster setups. To which your sentiments are mostly justified.
However, I don't know about you, but I'm only doing less than 1000 lines of C++ refactored into ISO-C on my current project (long story). All the SLOC in apps that are used on a server... would number in the hojillions.
An admin simply doesn't have the time or pati
Re:Impossible (Score:2)
On a related note, DragonFly BSD is in the process of having its SMP bugs fixed, and afterwards will hopefully get wider testing on higher-e
Alpha (Score:2)
In its day alpha was the king of the hill, but in this day of dirt cheap ix86, is the alpha worth spending time on?
Sure if what you got works, dont toss it out.. But why beat it with a stick if its dead?
Re:Alpha (Score:1, Insightful)
Honestly, I think it better to try to keep a few operating systems running on the older architectures as something of a public service to people that are still made to use them.
Eventually the platforms may
Re:Alpha (Score:4, Informative)
Re:Alpha (Score:2, Insightful)
For a start Check ebay. Alpha is KING. You dont see 10 year old x86 machines selling for hundreds of dollars do you. Want to know why. Cause 10 year old X86 machines suck. For the price of 4 (absolutely striped to the core components) x86s you can get 1 alpha. That can take More CPUs, More Ram, More reliable hot swap frigging everything, Built with the kind of quality you see in an IBM model M keyboard (not a lexmark one
Vax, etc (Score:2)
But more often then not, price will win out. As i suggested..( or we wouldnt even be here talking about it )
Us PPC users are going to have to go thru the same thing soon im afraid. ( tho at least for a while we will still see those chips on servers and such )
Re:Vax, etc (Score:1)
the only glimmer of hope resides in IBM realy. They are pushing PPC based things everywhere. So it has some life out there
Re:Alpha (Score:2)
From what I understand the ONLY disadvantage of the Alpha is its power consumption.
From what I understand the disadvantages of the Itanium include power consumption and architecture.
I nearly bought an Alpha EV6 from E-Bay.
DEC engineers always impressed me.
I'm a BSD user but I have to say... (Score:1)
to bad he needs an 1u (Score:1)