Re: Alpha has gone to its reward
Hi Bob! Bob Tracy schrieb am Sa. 2. Juli 2022 um 05:14: > We had a horrific electrical storm on the 28th, and a lightning strike > took out my home air-conditioning units, my cable modem, my Wifi router, > a 16-port switch, my Ooma Telo, my main computer, my printer, and... my > PWS-433au :-(. Oh dear… I hope only „hardware“ is affected and you and your family are fine! > The Alpha isn't worth repairing, and I'm not going to go to the trouble > of replacing it. I had my fun with it, and frankly, it lasted far longer > in 24x7x365 use than I had any right to expect. > Indeed, that beast really lived way longer than one would have expected. Bottom line: After more years than I care to remember, I'm out of the > race. Will continue to lurk and help where/when I can, but I won't be > doing any actual testing or debugging on Alpha. Sincere thanks to the > experts hanging out here who have helped me through many a rough spot > with the Alpha platform. Completely understandable and I wanted to express my gratitude to you and all the hard work you did over the decades! > Stay safe, Oliver >
Re: Need Help with Alpha hardware
Hi! I have no PS. But would some DS10 help you? Of course... It's a question how to ship it to you... :-/ -of (mobile) Am 09.02.2014 um 10:36 schrieb Alexey Chupahin alexey_chupa...@mail.ru: Hello all! My first Alpha DECpc AXP-150 ( DEC 2000 model 300 ) power supply is broken. Please so much, look into your basket, may be you can find this power supply... I pay it of course. waiting for help, -- Alexey Chupahin -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/zarafa.52f74f9f.5e30.75aa52e31e0ae...@okocim.linux-kernel.at
RE: Advancing Debian Alpha Porting
Hi! I have some machines and if you want to have them - feel free to write me an e-mail. Pickup in Austria... -of -Original Message- From: Bill MacAllister [mailto:w...@stanford.edu] Sent: Thursday, April 14, 2011 3:43 PM To: Michael Cree; debian-alpha@lists.debian.org; robert.gar...@ieeda.net; c...@ekkaia.net; bary...@smp.if.uj.edu.pl; aloi...@debian.org Subject: Re: Advancing Debian Alpha Porting --On Thursday, April 14, 2011 08:48:10 PM +1200 Michael Cree mc...@orcon.net.nz wrote: Debian Alpha People, You may have noted the removal of the Alpha port from the Debian autobuilder network. Packages are no longer being built for the unstable distribution. Hopefully you have seen the promising message from Aurelien [1] that it is likely that the Alpha port of Debian can be accommodated in debian-ports in the next couple of weeks or so. To enable that we need to start organising ourselves. As no-one else has stepped up I am sending out this message but I have to admit I have limited knowledge of the Debian process of porting and packaging. I suspect we may be all on a step learning curve. Has anyone heard from Arthur Loiret? It would be nice to get an actual Debian Developer on board. I have experience building debian packages that we use internally here at Stanford. I can help with basic packaging. The debian-ports server is a wanna-build server. It maintains a database of built and needs to be built packages and manages the allocation of building to buildds. I believe debian-ports also hosts the accessible apt package repository. It appears we are to provide the Alpha buildds. We need at least two for redundancy but if older hardware is used then we may need three or four. Craig, Witold, Robert, are you all able to offer a machine to be a buildd? I don't think I can---I have an XP1000 that is my main computer that I use, and two PWS600au, but they are a bit slow. I have several AlphaServer 1200s and DecServer 5000s that are idle right now. I can probably only bring two onto the net, but I am happy to do that. Who is prepared to assist in the checking of built package logs, uploading successful builds, and reporting build failures? Hopefully we can get three or four of us so that it lightens the load and enables package builds to continue when someone is unavailable. I volunteer for some of this load --- but I won't be able to attend to it every day. It will be more likely twice a week. I can also help with looking the the build logs. There are some other things we have to sort out to have a fully working Alpha autobuilder network but the above is a start. Thanks for your efforts and let me know what I can do to help. Bill Cheers Michael. [1] http://lists.debian.org/debian-alpha/2011/04/msg00018.html -- Bill MacAllister Infrastructure Delivery Group, Stanford University -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/687DD637EB53BA91C80A4D3E@[10.0.0.32] -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/vmime.4da700c0.73cc.89c4b394d0e8...@okocim.linux-kernel.at
RE: Advancing Debian Alpha Porting
I have some machines and if you want to have them - feel free to write me an e-mail. Pickup in Austria... LOL. I do hope to be in Germany in the fall for LDAPCon. Think I can bring them back to the states as carry on luggage? Well. I guess that's only an option for people in Europe - of course... -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/vmime.4da74909.1bde.143f093f36780...@okocim.linux-kernel.at
RE: Advancing Debian Alpha Porting
I have some machines and if you want to have them - feel free to write me an e-mail. Pickup in Austria... LOL. I do hope to be in Germany in the fall for LDAPCon. Think I can bring them back to the states as carry on luggage? Well. I guess that's only an option for people in Europe - of course... -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/vmime.4da74909.1bd7.143f093f36780...@okocim.linux-kernel.at
Re: alpha and hppa removal from unstable/experimental
Am 01.04.2011 23:16, schrieb Matt Turner: As mentioned in the recent ftp-team meeting minutes, we're planning to remove alpha and hppa from unstable. They were removed from testing before the squeeze release and there's no sign that they will be release architectures for wheezy. As such, we're planning to remove them from unstable and experimental in the next few days. buildd support for unstable and experimental will also be ended at that time, but will obviously continue for lenny updates / security builds. Before we remove the architectures, archives will be taken for anyone who wants to take a copy of the dump to use elsewhere. These dumps will be made available on request. BTW. I retired from the Fedora Alpha Team this week. Some of you might have noticed... I have plenty of hardware to give away. AS1000, 2xAS1000A, 2xAS4100. Some storage enclosures. Storage. Lots of adapters. Lots of harddisks... Lots of memory - might or might not work... If you are interested in picking up some stuff in/near Vienna, PLMK. -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4d964b5b.4090...@linux-kernel.at
Re: icedtea6 build failures on alpha and armel using gcj
Am 27.02.2010 17:49, schrieb Matthias Klose: are/classes:openjdk/jdk/src/solaris/classes:openjdk/langtools/src/share/classes:openjdk/corba/src/share/classes:/home/doko/openjdk/openjdk-6-6b18~pre1/build/generated' \ -classpath /usr/lib/jvm/java-gcj/jre/lib/rt.jar \ -bootclasspath \'\' @rt-source-file For alpha, have you built with -mieee? And ARCH_DATA_MODEL=64 I remember at least these two things driving me crazy... -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org Archive: http://lists.debian.org/4b8a8101.8050...@linux-kernel.at
Re: Two Digitalserver 7305 Rawhide
Am 11.02.2010 18:57, schrieb Pelzi71: Hello, my company is closed and there are two Digital Server 7305 (rawhide) I could keep from thrash.. I want to donate the server to the debian alpha-port thanking you for the support for so many years. There are - 640 MB RAM - a 21164 Alpha Procs (533 Mhz) - about 20 GB SCSI HDD's - 3 NIC's (DE500, 3Com and a combined scsi nic card) at each device. There is also a RA3000 (Raid Array) used as shared storage for failover clustering. I did install debian etch and lenny on it, but I think I have to clean th machines before give them out. Only the transport has to be organized and payed. They have to be picked up in germany 36404 zip code, in the next 3 weeks. That's Vacha? In case nobody can take them... I might be willing to pick it up :-) Pictures would be great! -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
AW: Re: build failure on alpha for 0.7.0.100
See https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=464760
-of
- Ursprüngliche Nachricht -
Von: Michael Biebl bi...@debian.org
Gesendet: Mittwoch, 08. April 2009 22:59
An: Dan Williams d...@redhat.com
Cc: al...@buildd.debian.org; debian-alpha@lists.debian.org
Betreff: Re: build failure on alpha for 0.7.0.100
Dan Williams wrote:
On Wed, 2009-04-08 at 16:20 +0200, Michael Biebl wrote:
Hi Dan,
I'm having build failures of NM 0.7.0.100 on alpha [1] where 0.7.0.99 was
building fine.
Any ideas, where the problem is?
There's an open bug somewhere to use tcsetattr(3) and such instead of
the raw ioctls, with the explicit reason that the ioctls are busted on
Alpha? Seemed odd. In any case, can you see
what /usr/include/bits/termios.h has in it for you? I've got:
#define NCCS 32
struct termios
{
tcflag_t c_iflag; /* input mode flags */
tcflag_t c_oflag; /* output mode flags */
tcflag_t c_cflag; /* control mode flags */
tcflag_t c_lflag; /* local mode flags */
cc_t c_line; /* line discipline */
cc_t c_cc[NCCS]; /* control characters */
...
of course we care about NCCS there on alpha. I'd think it's a bug in
the headers then that if Alpha doesn't support any more than 4 entries
there (VTIME and
[Die ursprüngliche Nachricht wird nicht vollständig eingefügt.]
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org
with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: squeeze and the future of the alpha port, redux
Steve Langasek wrote: [ ... ] not to mention the serious problems of the port's viability implied by things like the lack of Java support gcj and openjdk work fine in Fedora. AFAIK, Gentoo also has Java for Alpha. So it shouldn't be to hard to get it running on Debian! and the general absence of a porter community. Well. Gentoo is still porting and Fedora (esp. Jay and /me) also. [ ... ] I'd like to mention; *I* often saw patches that helped me solve (Alpha) problems on Fedora. So. If there's no Debian Alpha port, my (Fedora Alpha) 'work' will get harder :-) Of course not if the Debian Alpha folks switch to Fedora... :-P -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Access to developer machine
Manuel Prinz schrieb: [ Please CC me in replies. I'm not subscribed. ] Dear Alpha porters, in order to track down the issue that prevents Open MPI from building on Alpha (bug #510845), I'd like to request access to machine where I can work on the issue. I tried to get some information on this but still have some questions which I hope you can answer: 1. The box available for developers is albeniz, right? 2. Since this is the first time I request to use such a service, is there any documentation on how to work on the machine? (Like use chroot X.) 3. Is it possible to install libtool from experimental? It is required by upstream in case the build system needs to be touched. Thanks in advance for your time and support! Best regards Manuel Do you require Debian/Alpha, or would Fedora/Alpha also be fine? (Sorry, Debianers :-)) -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: Access to developer machine
Manuel Prinz schrieb: Hello Uwe! Am Dienstag, den 03.02.2009, 21:05 +0100 schrieb Uwe Schindler: You can get access to my alpha (Alphastation 500), too. It is running debian testing. I could also install libtool from experimental. That would be really great! I'd prefer that to Oliver's offer since it's easier to rule out possible distro-specific issues. Oliver, thanks a lot for your offer nevertheless! I'm quite overwhelmed by the all support I get here! Thank you all! :) That's fine for me. Le me know the patch you (might) produce, so I can check on Fedora/Alpha :-) If you like... -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: The State of Alpha Linux
Julien Cristau wrote: On Thu, 2009-01-08 at 11:32 -0500, Matt Turner wrote: No, I don't think this is the problem at all. jcristau, the developer who told me he didn't care, has at least one alpha. I used to have (remote) access to an alpha. I don't anymore (other than Debian's port machine). If you *need* access to a machine, let me know. -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: The State of Alpha Linux
Steve Langasek wrote: On Thu, Jan 08, 2009 at 02:23:39PM +0100, Oliver Falk wrote: Matt Turner wrote: The State of Alpha Linux We're all subscribed to this list because we use a dying platform. You think it's dying? :-P Well, at least the Debian alpha port is not likely to continue past the upcoming lenny release; see http://lists.debian.org/debian-alpha/2008/08/msg4.html ff. Yes, yes... I was joking. Of course. We all don't know if there will be any distribution for Alpha in 3 years. But I try to continue my work with Fedora/Alpha as good as I can. If the machines go south, I'm not really willing to replace it with new ones, except someone has some machines to give away... And the hardware itself is EOLed. So even if you think it's not dying, it's not exactly a living port either. :) Yes. The h/w is no longer produced... [ ... ] I don't speak for other Debian Alpha folks here, though; perhaps there are still some around willing to do the work necessary to keep alpha going. It might be wise to still support a base OS, without the X gimmicks... -of -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-alpha-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of unsubscribe. Trouble? Contact listmas...@lists.debian.org
Re: The State of Alpha Linux
Hi Matt! Matt Turner wrote: [ ... ] We're all subscribed to this list because we use a dying platform. You think it's dying? :-P We do what we can to keep it going, but in recent months the State of Alpha Linux has been deteriorating at an accelerated rate. Let me outline some issues facing us today: 1.We have no glibc/Alpha maintainer [1] What can we do here? Who can take over this job. What skills are required to take over the job? How much time does one have to spend to do the job? If someone would volunteer, whom does he or she have to contact? I mailed glibc's libc-ports mailing list recently about this. http://sources.redhat.com/ml/libc-ports/2009-01/msg2.html Gentoo's Mike Frysinger was the only one to respond. For me it's fine to have it in ports, if that only means it's not actively tested. I can understand it will then not hold up a release. It's up to *us* to take over the job of testing and fixing. That's fine. But Mike also stated, that he doesn't know who is going to merge the patches... But this is the most important part! If you think there's a chance you might be able to take over the job, I encourage you to mail libc-ports, as I don't know the answers myself. As I said, since I don't know what skills one must have, I'm not sure if I might be able to take over the job. But I'm willing to try, of course. 2.Kernel development for Alpha is comatose I do see some commits from time to time... Well, not much enhancements of course... But there would be a few things that should be ported from x86 to alpha... 3.We can't run modern X.Org [2] At the moment. I guess it's just a fair bit of work and then we would be able to run modern xorg. It's actually just one non-trivial bug (we hope). Kernel bug 10839. Also, see http://alphalinux.org/wiki/index.php/Bugs_to_watch It depends on what we want. If we just want a fallback method in libpciaccess, I think it shouldn't be too much work - for someone who knows how to do it... I've read that a fallback method would be unacceptable slow. That might be true, but would give us at least the chance to *have* it. A more robust and faster method - of course - would be appreciated, but that actually seems to be the non-trivial thing... To make things worse, for such a small group of users, we're much too segregated and disorganized. For instance, how many (of the only four) Gentoo/Alpha maintainers are subscribed to this list? Debian/Alpha? I don't know if any other Alpha distribution maintainer is subscribed here, but I do include debian-alpha m/l now and klausman (I think he's one of the Gentoo Alpha maintainers). Yes, klausmann subscribed to this list after I told him to recently. :) Great :-) How many realized we were without a glibc maintainer? That we can't use X.Org 7.4? I can say, I did. If this trend continues, we will completely first lose X.Org support. AFAIK, Ivan works on this, isn't he? Well, he has in the past. According to marc.info, after a 6 month absence on LKML, he sent a message yesterday. This absence also coincides with the time he stopped responding to kernel bug 10893. I guess he has a real job as well :-) I even had an X.Org developer tell me he didn't care [about Alpha support] when I pinged him about an Alpha bug he had originally filed [3]! What is the problem for the developers? They don't have alphas they can access? We can help in this case. No, I don't think this is the problem at all. jcristau, the developer who told me he didn't care, has at least one alpha. OK. None of the top tier X.Org developers seem to care at all about alpha. David Airlie told me he thought some of the problems we'd experience on Alpha with kernel modesetting would be very similar to problems on the Itanium, which he has to support. So he would be willing to put a little bit of effort into supporting Alpha, since the heavy lifting would already be done for Itanium. Oh yes... Lot of Itanium work helped me already :-) We'll later lose glibc support. As it stands now, Alpha isn't even in the main tree [4]. I'm not sure what version Debian ships, but Gentoo is 3 versions behind at 2.6.1. Newer than that and the test suite causes a hard lock [5]. How much longer is it going to be before 2.6 is incompatible with the latest version and we begin to lose the ability to use other modern software? 2.9 runs fine and I'm trying to keep up 2 date with trunk to find bugs as early as possible and patch it so it works. Also I'm using Gentoo and Debian patches and post bugs in glibc bugzilla. So from my perspective glibc is not a problem. gcc (as of 4.3.x) isn't a problem as well. From time to time there are build problems, but normally easy to fix and I 'zilla them... The real problem is that nothing is going to get better in regards to glibc, it's only going to get worse as long as we have no upstream support. That's correct, it's not going to get any better... Unfortunately, some
Re: The State of Alpha Linux
Hi Matt! Matt Turner wrote: The State of Alpha Linux We're all subscribed to this list because we use a dying platform. You think it's dying? :-P We do what we can to keep it going, but in recent months the State of Alpha Linux has been deteriorating at an accelerated rate. Let me outline some issues facing us today: 1.We have no glibc/Alpha maintainer [1] What can we do here? Who can take over this job. What skills are required to take over the job? How much time does one have to spend to do the job? If someone would volunteer, whom does he or she have to contact? 2.Kernel development for Alpha is comatose I do see some commits from time to time... Well, not much enhancements of course... But there would be a few things that should be ported from x86 to alpha... 3.We can't run modern X.Org [2] At the moment. I guess it's just a fair bit of work and then we would be able to run modern xorg. To make things worse, for such a small group of users, we're much too segregated and disorganized. For instance, how many (of the only four) Gentoo/Alpha maintainers are subscribed to this list? Debian/Alpha? I don't know if any other Alpha distribution maintainer is subscribed here, but I do include debian-alpha m/l now and klausman (I think he's one of the Gentoo Alpha maintainers). How many realized we were without a glibc maintainer? That we can't use X.Org 7.4? I can say, I did. If this trend continues, we will completely first lose X.Org support. AFAIK, Ivan works on this, isn't he? I even had an X.Org developer tell me he didn't care [about Alpha support] when I pinged him about an Alpha bug he had originally filed [3]! What is the problem for the developers? They don't have alphas they can access? We can help in this case. We'll later lose glibc support. As it stands now, Alpha isn't even in the main tree [4]. I'm not sure what version Debian ships, but Gentoo is 3 versions behind at 2.6.1. Newer than that and the test suite causes a hard lock [5]. How much longer is it going to be before 2.6 is incompatible with the latest version and we begin to lose the ability to use other modern software? 2.9 runs fine and I'm trying to keep up 2 date with trunk to find bugs as early as possible and patch it so it works. Also I'm using Gentoo and Debian patches and post bugs in glibc bugzilla. So from my perspective glibc is not a problem. gcc (as of 4.3.x) isn't a problem as well. From time to time there are build problems, but normally easy to fix and I 'zilla them... While we may never lose kernel support, it will certainly begin to lag behind other platforms more and more. We do already lag behind; Eg. uptrace/ptrace, Execshield (only as dummy functions at the moment). I don't know the current state of selinux, but it might be horrible... I don't use selinux, so I don't worry to much... Bugs begin to take longer and longer to be fixed [6]. Release candidate kernels as late in the cycle as rc-8 of the 2.6.28 series fail to compile on Alpha [7]. This is definitely a worrying sign. Right. Time to worry. Fedora Alpha is currently at 2.6.26.3. I've never tried anything newer than that yet... It is certainly expected that as a platform ages, it slowly loses its users and developers. In 1999, many average users knew or we're interested in learning Alpha assembly language, were interested in support for Alpha among Free Software, and were interested in programming for the platform. Obviously this cannot be the case today. We don't expect that it should. Right. But for some mysterious reasons, Alphas are still very expensive and if you put one on ebay, you will sell it. We, the ones who do wish to see our platform live on, even if only a little longer, should focus on fixing what we can and maintaining what we already have. Sure! I'm trying to be as transparent in my work as I can. 'zilla every little bug. Have packages in koji, ... Try to keep modified packages with tagged with AXP and add appropriate changelog entry... I hope this already helped other people out there... But I don't know. Whether Fedora adds Alpha as a Second Tier Architecture is trivial in comparison to these issues. We should focus on making sure we have working software for Fedora/Alpha before we consider how to properly market it. Right. But at this point I must say. It's hard for me/us to keep patches locally. I can not send in a bugzilla report for everything and wait for the maintainers to actually DO it... I don't know what a good solution for this would be? We, the small band of Alpha users, need to work together. We have the same problems, why should we work separately on them? We should not and we should have a central point to discuss problems... This list would be fine - at least for me. Can we ask all kind of Alpha maintainers (eg. kernel, gcc, xorg, ... ) to subscribe to this list? In order to facilitate better communication among
