Re: compiling kernel for Sun4c on a Sun4m ??
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE- Hash: SHA1 A long time ago, in a galaxy far, far way, someone said... > Hi, > > I'm wondering if it's possible (and hopefully not too hard ;) ) to compile > a kernel for my Sun4c IPX box on a Sun4m SparcSystem ? > I tried just now using 2.4.0-test11, but it won't boot ;( > > I'm wondering if it's something i'm doing wrong, or that it's just not > really that simple ;) You shouldn't have any trouble compiling a sun4c kernel on a sun4m system - - it's kinda like compiling a kernel for a 486 on an Athlon. A bigger problem, though, is that the 2.4.0-testx really doesn't boot on sun4c systems (well, it doesn't boot on my IPX - I haven't tried it on any sun4m systems) - it fails to detect the SCSI controller and hence can't find the root FS :( If you can find a way to make it work I would like to know. - -- - -- Phil Brutsche [EMAIL PROTECTED] GPG fingerprint: 9BF9 D84C 37D0 4FA7 1F2D 7E5E FD94 D264 50DE 1CFC GPG key id: 50DE1CFC GPG public key: http://tux.creighton.edu/~pbrutsch/gpg-public-key.asc -BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE- Version: GnuPG v1.0.4 (GNU/Linux) Comment: For info see http://www.gnupg.org iD8DBQE6JZZ9/ZTSZFDeHPwRApCxAJ456Wx6s9rHM+WQJYJ1g8uHZP4g2QCfXxcC +zHrp26Rk6aB3ZUfzNRA17s= =Z7s4 -END PGP SIGNATURE-
Re: compiling kernel for Sun4c on a Sun4m ??
On Wed, 29 Nov 2000, Joshua Uziel wrote: > * Taco IJsselmuiden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001129 13:55]: > > I'm wondering if it's possible (and hopefully not too hard ;) ) to > > compile a kernel for my Sun4c IPX box on a Sun4m SparcSystem ? I > > tried just now using 2.4.0-test11, but it won't boot ;( > > > > I'm wondering if it's something i'm doing wrong, or that it's just not > > really that simple ;) > > It should be that simple... they use the same compiler and everything. > Be sure, first off, that you're using the latest kernel from > vger.samba.org ... sun4c booting was fixed around version > 2.4.0-test11-pre1 (in CVS, but I don't know about the mainline). Also, > a lot of blind changes occured for sun4c-specific stuff in the meantime, > so there is probably a lot of brokenness anyways. > > Also, "it won't boot" isn't descriptive enough... I intend on playing > with my SS2 soon, so I'll be seeing for myself... > I've got a SS5 running 2.4.0-test11. I strongly recommend anyone else with an SS5 to do so as well ... it seems to have fixed up a lot (but not all) of the problems I've been having with the SCSI driver. With the 2.2.17 kernel in potato I couldn't put more then one disk on the chain without causing kernel death, and I used to get read errors from the CD drive that have disappeared with the latest kernel. PS! In the passed I've used an old IPX to compile up a 2.2.something kernel for a JavaStation, which is also sun4m, and that worked fine. Enjoy! Matt Lowry ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) I don't suffer from insanity. Actually, I quite enjoy it.
Re: compiling kernel for Sun4c on a Sun4m ??
* Taco IJsselmuiden <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [001129 13:55]: > I'm wondering if it's possible (and hopefully not too hard ;) ) to > compile a kernel for my Sun4c IPX box on a Sun4m SparcSystem ? I > tried just now using 2.4.0-test11, but it won't boot ;( > > I'm wondering if it's something i'm doing wrong, or that it's just not > really that simple ;) It should be that simple... they use the same compiler and everything. Be sure, first off, that you're using the latest kernel from vger.samba.org ... sun4c booting was fixed around version 2.4.0-test11-pre1 (in CVS, but I don't know about the mainline). Also, a lot of blind changes occured for sun4c-specific stuff in the meantime, so there is probably a lot of brokenness anyways. Also, "it won't boot" isn't descriptive enough... I intend on playing with my SS2 soon, so I'll be seeing for myself...
compiling kernel for Sun4c on a Sun4m ??
Hi, I'm wondering if it's possible (and hopefully not too hard ;) ) to compile a kernel for my Sun4c IPX box on a Sun4m SparcSystem ? I tried just now using 2.4.0-test11, but it won't boot ;( I'm wondering if it's something i'm doing wrong, or that it's just not really that simple ;) Greetz, Taco. --- "I was only 75 years old when I met her and I was still a kid" -- Duncan McLeod
Re: Full duplex setting on Ultra 2
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 03:39:07PM -0500, Chapman, Matt wrote: > Hi, > > Just wondering how to force the Full Duplex setting of the ethernet card on > a Sun Sparc Ultra 2. man ethtool -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Full duplex setting on Ultra 2
Hi, Just wondering how to force the Full Duplex setting of the ethernet card on a Sun Sparc Ultra 2. -matt -- Matt Chapman [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.duhnet.net
Re: nfs mount problem
On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 04:27:38PM +0100, Cristian Constantin wrote: > Hi! > > after an upgrade to woody i cannot mount nfs exported filesystems... > > uname -a > Linux 2.2.16 #1 Fri Jun 23 18:57:35 CEST 2000 sparc64 unknown > (i have also tried with 2.2.1 and 2.2.17) > > ii mount 2.10p-1.0 Tools for mounting and manipulating filesyst > ii libc6 2.1.97-1 GNU C Library: Shared libraries and Timezone > > Nov 27 11:44:46 last message repeated 3 times > Nov 27 11:44:46 kernel: RPC: TCP connect failed (22). > Nov 27 11:44:46 kernel: NFS: cannot create RPC transport. > Nov 27 11:44:46 kernel: NFS: mount program didn't pass remote address! > Nov 27 11:46:35 kernel: mount forgot to set AF_INET in udp sendmsg. Fix it > ! > Nov 27 11:46:35 kernel: RPC: sendmsg returned error 22 > Nov 27 11:46:45 kernel: nfs: server hosts > Nov 27 11:46:45 kernel: not responding, still trying > Nov 27 11:46:45 kernel: RPC: sendmsg returned error 22 > > i'd guess that libc is broken... :-( anyone any idea?? > Cristian: got util-linux-2.10q and compiled mount. i don't know why but umount fails to compile: /tmp/cctXQkIw.s: Assembler messages: /tmp/cctXQkIw.s:19: Error: Architecture mismatch on "movcc". /tmp/cctXQkIw.s:19: (Requires v9|v9a|v9b; requested architecture is sparclite.) make: *** [umount.o] Error 1 anyway now this new mount (mount-2.10q) works with 2.2.18pre21 for mounting nfs filesystems. mount-2.10p DOES NOT work for mounting nfs file systems. at least in my config, net and so on... bye now! cristian
Re: problems with ip commands
On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 02:57:08PM -0500, Ben Collins wrote: > On Tue, Nov 28, 2000 at 04:24:03PM +0100, Cristian Constantin wrote: > > hi! > > > > any idea why: > > > > ip tunnel add EEE mode ipip remote 192.168.178.52 local 192.168.137.157 > > ioctl: Invalid argument > > > > on a sparc debian woody? > > > > uname -a > > Linux 2.2.16 #1 Fri Jun 23 18:57:35 CEST 2000 sparc64 unknown > > Some of the sit and ipv6 ioctl's do not have translations available yet or > were incorrect. Try the 2.2.18pre kernels (the Debian built ones are available > now). DaveM recently added most of these (after 2.2.17, IIRC). > Cristian: upgraded to 2.2.18 uname -a Linux 2.2.18pre21 #1 Wed Nov 29 17:14:39 CET 2000 sparc64 unknown but... ip tunnel add EEE mode ipip remote 192.168.178.15 ioctl: Invalid argument but, magic: mount nfs seems to work now... (I've compiled a newer one which with 2.2.17 didn't work...) pls. see my mail about nfs mount if you're interested... bye now! cristian
Re: Hardware question (urgent)
> Ich I'm not completely wrong there is Debian GNU/Solaris, Debian GNU/HPUX > and Debian GNU/Win32 - which is *REALLY* great (I mean all of them are > great). http://marcus.debian.net/pub/debian/debian-solaris-sparc/ It's very old, but it works (dpkg and dselect). This was when apt was very young, so it's not there yet. I don't support it anymore, and don't have the time or ability (access to Solaris) even if I wanted to. Ben -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: Silo
On Wed, Nov 29, 2000 at 02:07:34PM +0100, Dario Rossi wrote: > On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Ben Collins wrote: > > BC>> other=1 > BC>> label=solaris > BC>> read-only > BC> > BC>SILO doesn't know what to do with this. The silo.conf(5) manpage shows you > BC>how this is done. More than likely, when you installed Linux, the old > BC>boot-block for Solaris was saved as /boot/old.b. So try this: > BC> > BC>other=1 > BC>label=solaris > BC>bootblock=/boot/old.b > > Well the problem is that i installed linux first, then installed Solaris. > Then booted from linux cd, mounted all partitions with the installation > prog, and i chrooted linux / directory. > Finally ran silo. Ok, then read the silo.conf manpage. -- ---===-=-==-=---==-=-- / Ben Collins -- ...on that fantastic voyage... -- Debian GNU/Linux \ ` [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] ' `---=--===-=-=-=-===-==---=--=---'
Re: Silo
Have you checked the boot environment? I have an Ultra 10 with two disks. One with Solaris the other witn Linux installed. I start the Linux at first and from SILO I can choose the system I want to use. If you press STOP-A then you get the system prompt. printenv boot-device gives disk1 (Linux disk) printenv boot-file gives: /platform/sun4u/kernel/sparcv9/unix which is a 64bit Solaris kernel on the Solaris disk. in the platform directory you can find the kernel which you need depending on your system e.g. Ultra 10, or something else. (Solaris) You can change this parameters with setenv. After you made the changes type go or boot. Gabor X-Envelope-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Date: Wed, 29 Nov 2000 14:07:34 +0100 (CET) From: Dario Rossi <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> cc: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=US-ASCII Resent-From: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org X-Mailing-List: archive/latest/5315 X-Loop: debian-sparc@lists.debian.org Precedence: list Resent-Sender: [EMAIL PROTECTED] On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Ben Collins wrote: BC>> other=1 BC>> label=solaris BC>> read-only BC> BC>SILO doesn't know what to do with this. The silo.conf(5) manpage shows you BC>how this is done. More than likely, when you installed Linux, the old BC>boot-block for Solaris was saved as /boot/old.b. So try this: BC> BC>other=1 BC>label=solaris BC>bootblock=/boot/old.b Well the problem is that i installed linux first, then installed Solaris. Then booted from linux cd, mounted all partitions with the installation prog, and i chrooted linux / directory. Finally ran silo. Dario -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: Silo
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Ben Collins wrote: BC>> other=1 BC>> label=solaris BC>> read-only BC> BC>SILO doesn't know what to do with this. The silo.conf(5) manpage shows you BC>how this is done. More than likely, when you installed Linux, the old BC>boot-block for Solaris was saved as /boot/old.b. So try this: BC> BC>other=1 BC>label=solaris BC>bootblock=/boot/old.b Well the problem is that i installed linux first, then installed Solaris. Then booted from linux cd, mounted all partitions with the installation prog, and i chrooted linux / directory. Finally ran silo. Dario
x font server (xfs-xtt)
hi again, i have installed the Xsun as xserver and i want to use a network wide true-type font server (xfs-xtt). but the doc tells me that i don't need any configuration for Xsun. so how can i tell Xsun that it have to ask for the fonts on an other server?? the only thing that X tells me is that the font folders doesn't exist. on an intel box i can give the font server over the /etc/X11/XF86Config file. but on sparc??? thanks in advance for any help. regards, alias m.nine.six.
Re: Hardware question (urgent)
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > if i had the choice, i'd go for the HW RAID. SW RAID is certainly possible, > and it's cheap. but when you look at the administrative overhead, it's just > not worth it. The salesman told us about the advantage of software RAID if (and only if as he wanted to make us believe) you are using Solaris. You could finetune buffers and blocksizes and gain performance for certain applications. On the other hand I don't believe that I would find the time to do this finetuning ... > i guess that they offered you a T3. this is a decent piece of > HW, and it's supported by linux. and you can always run LVM on top of the > HW RAID for partitioning. No. From his (German!) offer: SG-XARY150A-72G StorEdge A1000 - 4x 18.2GB/10k UPM USCSI Harddisks - 1x HW_RAID Controller with 24MB Cache - 2x Power supply - 2x Differential SCSI to Host Port - RAID Manager V6.22 for Solaris It was priced 32.670 DM. (For comparison the price for the E250 was 48.550 DM.) > that's true. apt-get for solaris would be _great_. anyone up to create > Debian GNU/Solaris? some binary only packages for the base and assorted > tools, the rest freeware tools. and all bound together by apt-get. > ISAGN. Ich I'm not completely wrong there is Debian GNU/Solaris, Debian GNU/HPUX and Debian GNU/Win32 - which is *REALLY* great (I mean all of them are great). Kind regards Andreas.
Re: Hardware question (urgent)
On Tue, 28 Nov 2000, Karl Hammar wrote: > Yes it is "like" lilo (I have not used grub), and there are no menu. > How do you select from a menu without any key press, is grub mouse based? Sorry, the menu comes up without pressing any key. After this I have to select from a list of systems using the keyboard of course. Mouse would be pure nonsense. Kind regards Andreas.
