public use of sparc server needed
Philip Brown
available, to an internet-accesible sparc running sol8, for purposes of
building packaged software?
"pseudo-public", in the sense of, if someone requests an account on it to
build packages, you are willing and able to give them one.
Nothing fancy is needed: Just "a sparc", that ideally has a few gigs of
disk space.
This machine would not be used for running special services or anything
like that (unless you'd like to make that available, which would be great
:-)
Just for people to log in and compile and pkgmk stuff
--
[Trim the no-bots from my address to reply to me by email!]
[ Do NOT email-CC me on posts. Pick one or the other.]
S.1618 http://thomas.loc.gov/cgi-bin/bdquery/z?d105:SN01618:@@@D
http://www.spamlaws.com/state/ca1.html
Dennis Clarke
>
> Is there anyone out there who is in a position to make pseudo-public access
> available, to an internet-accesible sparc running sol8, for purposes of
> building packaged software?
>
> "pseudo-public", in the sense of, if someone requests an account on it to
> build packages, you are willing and able to give them one.
>
> Nothing fancy is needed: Just "a sparc", that ideally has a few gigs of
> disk space.
>
> This machine would not be used for running special services or anything
> like that (unless you'd like to make that available, which would be great
> :-)
>
> Just for people to log in and compile and pkgmk stuff
Sure.
Give me some specs. Do we need a Sparc v8a or v9a system? I don't think that
I could allocate a US III 280R to this but maybe a small E3000 or E3500 with
dual 300MHz CPU's and a few gig of RAM. In the short term I have a system
ready to go that is a Ultra 1 170E with dual 9Gb mirrored disks. I have no
problem with access to such a system provided that a certain amount of
security can be in place. The Ultra 1 170E is built with Solaris 9 at the
moment but I can rebuild it with Solaris 8, mirrored and backed up nightly.
That sort of thing is no big deal. I have a cooled data center with several
hours of UPS power so 7x24 access should be no big deal. In any case let me
know more specifics and I can perhaps get the thing going this evening. For
the greater good and all that. :)
A concern that I have right away is security. I will probably need to build
another Checkpoint FW with a DMZ just for this system. I don't want
interlopers of any sort gaining access to my production DMZ or, God forbid,
internal network. This sort of thing takes time. When did you need to be up
and running? Will we need IPSEC and all that?
Dennis Clarke
dcl...@interlog.com
Rich Teer
> Sure.
Public kudos to Dennis for his generous offer. Now, if Sun could
be persuaded to donate to appropriate Forte 7 compiler licenses,
we'd be set!
> A concern that I have right away is security. I will probably need to build
Absolutely!
> another Checkpoint FW with a DMZ just for this system. I don't want
> interlopers of any sort gaining access to my production DMZ or, God forbid,
> internal network. This sort of thing takes time. When did you need to be up
> and running? Will we need IPSEC and all that?
I dunno if IPSEC would be required - but I'd recommend only
ssh logins be allowed.
As a further to suggestion, perhaps compiling the packages on
S7 would be a better idea? That way, sun4c and Voyager owners
can take advantage of this repository.
--
Rich Teer
President,
Rite Online Inc.
Voice: +1 (250) 979-1638
URL: http://www.rite-online.net
Philip Brown
>
>Public kudos to Dennis for his generous offer. Now, if Sun could
>be persuaded to donate to appropriate Forte 7 compiler licenses,
>we'd be set!
Yeah, that would be cool. Except we'd need a matching x86 box with forte
license :-)
>I dunno if IPSEC would be required - but I'd recommend only
>ssh logins be allowed.
Yeup.
>As a further to suggestion, perhaps compiling the packages on
>S7 would be a better idea? That way, sun4c and Voyager owners
>can take advantage of this repository.
Weell, I picked s8, because thats what my current limited efforts are
targetting.
There is a limited set of packages based around the CompanionCD stuff,
with mirror sites mentioned at
http://www.bolthole.com/solaris/companioncd.html
The target is to have complete parity between x86 and sparc.
Had to draw the line somewhere. Sol8 seemed a more reasonable line
than Sol9
Rev. Don Kool
Philip Brown wrote:
> Is there anyone out there who is in a position to make pseudo-public access
> available, to an internet-accesible sparc running sol8, for purposes of
> building packaged software?
>
> "pseudo-public", in the sense of, if someone requests an account on it to
> build packages, you are willing and able to give them one.
>
> Nothing fancy is needed: Just "a sparc", that ideally has a few gigs of
> disk space.
>
> This machine would not be used for running special services or anything
> like that (unless you'd like to make that available, which would be great
> :-)
>
> Just for people to log in and compile and pkgmk stuff
SUN had plenty of them. Contact their sales department. After all,
they aren't exactly busy these days.
Hope this helps,
Don
--
*************************** You a bounty hunter?
* Rev. Don McDonald, SCSA * Man's gotta earn a living.
* Baltimore, MD * Dying ain't much of a living, boy.
*************************** "Outlaw Josey Wales"
Dennis Clarke
>
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 22:39:39 GMT, ri...@rite-group.com wrote:
> >
> >Public kudos to Dennis for his generous offer. Now, if Sun could
> >be persuaded to donate to appropriate Forte 7 compiler licenses,
> >we'd be set!
>
> Yeah, that would be cool. Except we'd need a matching x86 box with forte
> license :-)
The x86 box can be arranged also but I have a Sparc centric shop here and have
not looked at anything in the intel world since Solaris 2.5.1 for Intel. I
have a 2GHz Pentium IV sitting here doing nothing. I guess I could get an
Intel motherboard and setup something. Maybe. Not really a priority for me.
>
> >I dunno if IPSEC would be required - but I'd recommend only
> >ssh logins be allowed.
>
> Yeup.
Fine. Rich can do the configuration of Sendmail, SSH and all the other
typical goodies. Maybe I'll grap a Sparc 5 or Sparc IPX to act as an NAT
firewall type of thing. Again, maybe.
>
> >As a further to suggestion, perhaps compiling the packages on
> >S7 would be a better idea? That way, sun4c and Voyager owners
> >can take advantage of this repository.
Setting up a Solaris 7 system is no big deal. That is if people don't mind a
SS20 as the system. I have a quad CPU Ross system here with 256MB of RAM in
it and dual 9Gb disks. I can install Sol7 in it and stick it in the rack. No
big deal there.
>
> Weell, I picked s8, because thats what my current limited efforts are
> targetting.
> There is a limited set of packages based around the CompanionCD stuff,
> with mirror sites mentioned at
>
> http://www.bolthole.com/solaris/companioncd.html
>
> The target is to have complete parity between x86 and sparc.
> Had to draw the line somewhere. Sol8 seemed a more reasonable line
> than Sol9
If anything will be done with Sol9 then we will need a US III system. I'm not
gonna bother with anything less than a true 64-bit system for Solaris 9. That
will be on the horizon somewhere I guess. Maybe an Ultra 2 will do.
I have a domain picked out for the systems. I'll use blastwave.com and .net,
.org etc etc.
Dennis
Philip Brown
>...
>If anything will be done with Sol9 then we will need a US III system. I'm not
>gonna bother with anything less than a true 64-bit system for Solaris 9. That
>will be on the horizon somewhere I guess. Maybe an Ultra 2 will do.
>
>I have a domain picked out for the systems. I'll use blastwave.com and .net,
>.org etc etc.
woohooo! This is great. Thanks, Dennis!
Dennis Clarke
>
> On Fri, 11 Oct 2002 21:08:21 -0400, dcl...@interlog.com wrote:
> >...
> >If anything will be done with Sol9 then we will need a US III system. I'm not
> >gonna bother with anything less than a true 64-bit system for Solaris 9. That
> >will be on the horizon somewhere I guess. Maybe an Ultra 2 will do.
> >
> >I have a domain picked out for the systems. I'll use blastwave.com and .net,
> >.org etc etc.
>
> woohooo! This is great. Thanks, Dennis!
No problem. The blastwave domain set has not ever been used for much so I
figure that now is a good time to deploy them. Also, further good news, I
guess, is that I have a system picked out for Solaris 8 for Intel. I went
into the inventory area and dug out an old IBM system that was kicking around
back there. It looks like something that was bought on a bulk order and left
as scrap. It is an IBM Netfinity Model 8659-22Y and it passes diagnostics on
boot. Looks like it has 512Mb of RAM and dual 400MHz Pentium II processors.
I think that will do fine for an Intel box. The chatter from the onboard
diagnostics is appended to this message. I also am interested in a Linux
system running Red Hat 6.2 on Sparc and maybe RedHat 8.0 on Intel but I will
need to look around to see if I can find a system for that. I now regret that
I gave away my WorkShop Compiler 5.0 license only a week ago because we could
probably use it now. I'll see if I can get a Forte license for the Sparc
based Solaris box and worry about the Intel and Linux stuff later.
The immediate problem that I have is that I have no media for Solaris 8 for
Intel. The only Intel edition that I have is a full license for 2.5.1
Server. That is a bit old for our purposes. I'll go to the Sun site and
download the ISO images I guess. I have an Adaptec CD burner here so I guess
I can install everything that way. I am way out of practice with Solaris for
intel but I guess that the approach is more or less the same. I'll try to get
another 9Gb disk for the IBM Netfinity so that it is mirrored. I refuse to
run anything that is not mirrored, especially when I have no idea about the
condition of the harddrive.
I guess I need to start thinking about a system for the Sol9 64-bit Sparc
world. There is a dream machine on eBay right now: a dual 750MHz 280R with
2Gb of RAM. If wishes were fishes.
Dennis
- - ---------- IBM Netfinity 5000 Model 8659-22Y ------------- - -
SYSTEM CONFIGURATION=====================================================
Operating System - DOS 7.0
CPU Type - 400 MHz Intel Pentium II
CPUID - "GenuineIntel", Family 6, Model 5, Step 2
- MMX available
Coprocessor Type - 686
Expansion Bus Type - ISA, PCI
ROM BIOS Date - 07/28/00 IBM
ROM BIOS Copyright - (C) COPYRIGHT IBM CORPORATION 1981, 1999 ALL RIGH
Additional ROM - C000[32kB] C800[20kB]
Base Memory - 586 kB
Expanded Memory - N/A
Extended Memory - 523249 kB
XMS Memory - 7104 kB (XMS 3.00, Driver 3.15) A20=ON
Serial Ports - 2 - COM1:3F8 COM2:2F8
Parallel Ports - 1 - LPT1:3BC
Video Adapter - VGA: S3 Incorporated. 86C775/86C785
Fixed Disk Drives - 9100 MB
Floppy Disk Drives - 1 - 1=3.5"/1.44M
Mouse - 2 Button PS/2 Mouse At IRQ 12, Driver V8.32
Joysticks - None
Sound Card - N/A
CAS Fax/Modem Card - N/A
Disk Compression - N/A
CD-ROM Driver Version - Driver Not Installed.
Disk Cache - N/A
Primary IDE Master - ATAPI: CD-ROM CDU701-F
Primary IDE Slave - No Drive
Secondary IDE Master - No Drive
Secondary IDE Slave - No Drive
SCSI - ASPI, Host Adapter: ADAPTEC AIC-78xx
Network - N/A
Power Management - Not available, or APM driver not loaded
Chipset Type - N/A
PCI DEVICE INFORMATION===================================================
PCI BIOS version: 2.10
Number of PCI buses: 2
PCI Card Information
Bus 0 Device 0 Function 0:
Device Class: 06H 00H (00H) Host Bridge
Vendor ID: 1166H Ross Computer Corp.
Device ID: 0007H (Revision 04H)
Interrupt: N/A
Bus 0 Device 0 Function 1:
Device Class: 06H 00H (00H) Host Bridge
Vendor ID: 1166H Ross Computer Corp.
Device ID: 0005H (Revision 02H)
Interrupt: N/A
Bus 0 Device 6 Function 0:
Device Class: 01H 00H (00H) SCSI Controller
Vendor ID: 9004H Adaptec Inc.
Device ID: 7895H (Revision 04H)
Interrupt: 11
Bus 0 Device 6 Function 1:
Device Class: 01H 00H (00H) SCSI Controller
Vendor ID: 9004H Adaptec Inc.
Device ID: 7895H (Revision 04H)
Interrupt: 15
Bus 0 Device 9 Function 0:
Device Class: 02H 00H (00H) Ethernet Controller
Vendor ID: 1022H AMD
Device ID: 2000H PCnet 79c97x Ethernet Controller
Revision: 33H
Interrupt: 10
Bus 0 Device 10 Function 0:
Device Class: 03H 00H (00H) VGA Compatible Video Card
Vendor ID: 5333H S3
Device ID: 8901H (Revision 16H)
Interrupt: 9
Bus 0 Device 15 Function 0:
Device Class: 06H 01H (00H) ISA Bridge
Vendor ID: 1166H Ross Computer Corp.
Device ID: 0200H (Revision 4DH)
Interrupt: N/A
Bus 0 Device 15 Function 1:
Device Class: 01H 01H (EAH) IDE Controller
Vendor ID: 1166H Ross Computer Corp.
Device ID: 0210H (Revision 4AH)
Interrupt: 14
Bus 0 Device 15 Function 2:
Device Class: 0CH 03H (10H) USB Controller
Vendor ID: 1166H Ross Computer Corp.
Device ID: 0220H (Revision 04H)
Interrupt: 10
SCSI DEVICES=============================================================
Using ASPI SCSI interface.
SCSI Bus 1:
ID LUN Type Maker Product Rev. Bus
-- --- ------------- -------- ---------------- ---- ------
7 - Host Adapter ADAPTEC AIC-78xx
SCSI Bus 2:
ID LUN Type Maker Product Rev. Bus
-- --- ------------- -------- ---------------- ---- ------
4 0 Disk Drive IBM-PCCO DGHS09Y !# 0420 SCSI-3
7 - Host Adapter ADAPTEC AIC-78xx
14 0 Processor SDR GEM200 2 SCSI-2
VGA INFORMATION==========================================================
Extended information for active VGA card:
S3 Graphics Adapter
VESA SuperVGA information for active VGA card:
VESA version : 2.0
VESA OEM name: S3 Incorporated. 86C775/86C785
Total Memory : 1024 kB
Supported VESA video modes for this VGA card:
Video Color Mode BIOS Screen Pla Char Win A Win B Win
Mode Burst Type Supt Size Colors nes Box Base Base Size
----- ----- ---- ---- --------- ------ --- ----- ----- ----- ------
109H Color Text YES 132x25 16 4 8x16 B800H N/A 32 kB
10AH Color Text YES 132x43 16 4 8x8 B800H N/A 32 kB
12EH Color Grap NO 320x200 256 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
10DH Color Grap NO 320x200 32 k 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
10EH Color Grap NO 320x200 64 k 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
10FH Color Grap NO 320x200 4 G 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
131H Color Grap NO 320x240 256 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
132H Color Grap NO 320x240 32 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
133H Color Grap NO 320x240 64 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
134H Color Grap NO 320x240 4 G 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
141H Color Grap NO 400x300 256 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
142H Color Grap NO 400x300 32 k 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
143H Color Grap NO 400x300 64 k 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
144H Color Grap NO 400x300 4 G 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
151H Color Grap NO 512x384 256 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
152H Color Grap NO 512x384 32 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
153H Color Grap NO 512x384 64 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
154H Color Grap NO 512x384 4 G 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
100H Color Grap NO 640x400 256 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
11CH Color Grap NO 640x400 32 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
11DH Color Grap NO 640x400 64 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
11EH Color Grap NO 640x400 4 G 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
101H Color Grap NO 640x480 256 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
110H Color Grap NO 640x480 32 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
111H Color Grap NO 640x480 64 k 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
12AH Color Grap NO 640x480 16 M 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
102H Color Grap YES 800x600 16 4 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
103H Color Grap NO 800x600 256 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
113H Color Grap NO 800x600 32 k 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
114H Color Grap NO 800x600 64 k 1 8x8 A000H N/A 64 kB
104H Color Grap NO 1024x768 16 4 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
105H Color Grap NO 1024x768 256 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
161H Color Grap NO 1152x864 256 1 8x16 A000H N/A 64 kB
Philip Brown
>back there. It looks like something that was bought on a bulk order and left
>as scrap. It is an IBM Netfinity Model 8659-22Y and it passes diagnostics on
>boot. Looks like it has 512Mb of RAM and dual 400MHz Pentium II processors.
>I think that will do fine for an Intel box.
Yeup. It'll chew up the ultra 2, thats for sure :-)
>I guess I need to start thinking about a system for the Sol9 64-bit Sparc
>world.
I dont think that will really be neccessary. You can compile 64bit binaries
on sol8 sparc just fine, and they will run on sol9.
The only oddball stuff, is things like lsof, and certain drivers.
lsof isnt a big deal - there are sparc binaries out there that can
be repacked. And if someone doesnt have their OWN sparc running sol9,
for drivers, then I dont think its a good idea for them to be packaging
them up for folks :-)
Shao Wu
> On Sat, 12 Oct 2002 18:12:21 -0400, dcl...@interlog.com wrote:
> >back there. It looks like something that was bought on a bulk order and left
> >as scrap. It is an IBM Netfinity Model 8659-22Y and it passes diagnostics on
> >boot. Looks like it has 512Mb of RAM and dual 400MHz Pentium II processors.
> >I think that will do fine for an Intel box.
>
> Yeup. It'll chew up the ultra 2, thats for sure :-)
>
> >I guess I need to start thinking about a system for the Sol9 64-bit Sparc
> >world.
>
> I dont think that will really be neccessary. You can compile 64bit binaries
> on sol8 sparc just fine, and they will run on sol9.
> The only oddball stuff, is things like lsof, and certain drivers.
> lsof isnt a big deal - there are sparc binaries out there that can
> be repacked. And if someone doesnt have their OWN sparc running sol9,
> for drivers, then I dont think its a good idea for them to be packaging
> them up for folks :-)
If it does not require a lot of time commitment, I'm perfectly
welling to compile such drivers for you. I have access to
both Solaris 8, and 9 with Forte 6.2, Workshop 5 and Workshop 4.2
compilers (Sparc platform only).
Shao.
Dennis Clarke
> If it does not require a lot of time commitment, I'm perfectly
> welling to compile such drivers for you. I have access to
> both Solaris 8, and 9 with Forte 6.2, Workshop 5 and Workshop 4.2
> compilers (Sparc platform only).
>
> Shao.
Well, driven by a noble desire to create something of value, I have searched
through my software piles and found the following dusty blue box :
Sun Developer Essentials
Enterprise Edition
Which includes the licenses for both the OS and the compiler sets, among other
things. The License certificate is in its original envelope unfettered by
human hands. That will cover off the need for a compiler license and Solaris
for Intel license. I'll handle the registration on Tuesday as Monday is a
holiday up here in Canada. I also brought in my copy of Solaris 9 but alas, I
have no decent system to install it on. :(
Dennis