Patrick Spinler wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Boyes wrote:
I, as a VM guy first, don't really see the big win over just using
mdisks, but I suppose since we have no dirmaint / directory/ vmsecure
bits it would allow most of the VM's management to occur from the
Linu
So, in theory, using another Source forge project and some Java code, VMLMAT
could be extended to do all the requisite VM bits, and keep that abstracted
from the end users as well.
It sort of moves away from the original intent / need we were trying to
solve with it, but that is the point of an Op
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 2:24 PM, Scott Rohling <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>wrote:
> The big win(s) are:
>
> - Linux support can decide how big filesystems are without having VM
> support adjust minidisk sizes for each filesystem.
And that was part of the idea of VMLMAT in the first place: Abstract the
L
: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Lx86
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Boyes wrote:
>> I, as a VM guy first, don't really see the big win over just using
>> mdisks, but I suppose since we have no dirmaint / directory/ vmsecure
>> bits it would all
Hi, Pat.
Patrick Spinler wrote:
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Patrick Spinler wrote:
David Boyes wrote:
Theoretically, that's what SMAPI is supposed to allow you to do. The API
is kinda ugly, but you can do all the directory munging and disk
manipulation from a Linux app.
??
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Patrick Spinler wrote:
> David Boyes wrote:
>
>> Theoretically, that's what SMAPI is supposed to allow you to do. The API
>> is kinda ugly, but you can do all the directory munging and disk
>> manipulation from a Linux app.
>
> I know we're using
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
David Boyes wrote:
>> I, as a VM guy first, don't really see the big win over just using
>> mdisks, but I suppose since we have no dirmaint / directory/ vmsecure
>> bits it would allow most of the VM's management to occur from the
>> Linux side of thin
.MARIST.EDU
Date: 10/22/2008 08:01 PM
Subject:
It requires A directory manager, but it doesn't have to be Dirmaint.
Regardless of brand, you'll need some kind of disk/Dir management
package to do any useful automation so I'm not too worried about
making it a prereq.
On Oct 22, 2008, at 5:54 PM, "James Tison" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
I,
Hi, Jim.
VSWSERVE will work very nicely with DIRMAINT, but it will also work with 3rd
party
directory manager products, such as VM:Secure from CA.
James Tison wrote:
I, as a VM guy first, don't really see the big win over just using
mdisks, but I suppose since we have no dirmaint / directory/
> > I, as a VM guy first, don't really see the big win over just using
> > mdisks, but I suppose since we have no dirmaint / directory/ vmsecure
> > bits it would allow most of the VM's management to occur from the
> > Linux side of things.
>
> Theoretically, that's what SMAPI is supposed to allow
> I, as a VM guy first, don't really see the big win over just using
> mdisks, but I suppose since we have no dirmaint / directory/ vmsecure
> bits it would allow most of the VM's management to occur from the
> Linux side of things.
Theoretically, that's what SMAPI is supposed to allow you to do.
The big win(s) are:
- Linux support can decide how big filesystems are without having VM
support adjust minidisk sizes for each filesystem.
- The space can be 'grown' by just adding another volume (minidisk) --
without LVM - all you can do is define a larger area - copy everything to it
- then d
Yes, that was how we were thinking to approch it since fdisk / hard
partition style slicing is so inflexible. As David pointed out ECKD
limits it to Three.
I, as a VM guy first, don't really see the big win over just using
mdisks, but I suppose since we have no dirmaint / directory/ vmsecure
bits
I like that PAM idea. I'll forward that over to Ron.
Steve Carl
Blog: on-being-open.blogspot.com
Sent from my iPhone
On Oct 22, 2008, at 11:59 AM, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Ron and I have been talking about some things he wants to add next:
Main
one
is the ability to support sin
Why not use LVM with one large minidisk and use logical volumes to
'partition'? That way you can use a single partition on the minidisk(s)
and divide it up as you like on Linux...
Scott Rohling
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 9:32 AM, Steve Carl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>
>
>
> Ron and I have been
> Ron and I have been talking about some things he wants to add next:
Main
> one
> is the ability to support single disk slices: Right now the product
uses
> separate mdisks per FS. easy enough in VM of course, but some coming
at it
> from a pure Linux background would like the various disk paritio
Steve Carl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://on-being-open.blogspot.com
Blog @ BMC: http://talk.bmc.com/blogs/blog-carl/steve-carl/
On Wed, Oct 22, 2008 at 9:18 AM, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > OK then, here goes:
>
> Very nicely done. Good example of how to do announcements on this l
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port
10/22/2008 10:40 AM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Lx86
> I apologize to anyone I may have offended with my lacking of etiquette
on
> this question.
There's no way you could have
> I apologize to anyone I may have offended with my lacking of etiquette
on
> this question.
There's no way you could have known, which is why I took the time to
tell you the expectations. We tend to try to let people choose whether
they want to pursue more information rather than let the marketin
> OK then, here goes:
Very nicely done. Good example of how to do announcements on this list.
I give it a 9.5. Nice tune, and you can dance to it. 8-)
>
> BMC (My employer) is doing a series of new, Open Source, source forge
> hosted, free-as-in-no-charge products, and I have the pleasure to
itten agreement
or government initiative expressly permitting the use of e-mail for such
purpose.
Steve Carl <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port
10/21/2008 03:03 PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Lx86
Point of list etiquette
OK then, here goes:
BMC (My employer) is doing a series of new, Open Source, source forge
hosted, free-as-in-no-charge products, and I have the pleasure to be
involved in one of them. It is called VMLMAT, and that is a snazzy,
marketing aware acronym for Virtual Machine / Linux Management and Ar
>>> On 10/21/2008 at 3:39 PM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, "Harder, Pieter"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Not being a vendor but a customer I agree in general with David's point of
> view. Though I imagine that people like Mark and Brad, being frequent helpers
> on this list without commercia
gards,
Pieter Harder
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
tel +31-73-6837133 / +31-6-47272537
-Oorspronkelijk bericht-
Van: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] Namens David Boyes
Verzonden: dinsdag 21 oktober 2008 21:11
Aan: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Onderwerp: Re: Lx86
> Point of list etiquet
> Point of list etiquette: If a commercial vendor offers a free, Open
Source
> solution, is it rude to talk about it here?
Can't speak for others, but the general rule I've tried to observe is to
mention the solution and provide a URL where people can find out more if
they want, or offer to take d
Point of list etiquette: If a commercial vendor offers a free, Open Source
solution, is it rude to talk about it here?
Steve Carl
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Blog: http://on-being-open.blogspot.com
Blog @ BMC: http://talk.bmc.com/blogs/blog-carl/steve-carl/
On Tue, Oct 21, 2008 at 11:26 AM, David Boyes <[
> So are you other vendors
> saying you have something that works or not. I am not talking windows
> servers- Linux servers.
With a few tolerated exceptions, discussions of commercial offerings
on-list is considered rude and is actively discouraged. Several people
invited you to discuss your r
In my organization the issue is not just CAN it run someplace, but will
it be supported by the vendor in that environment as well.
Harold Grovesteen
RPN01 wrote:
I think the problems are the vended products for which you cannot obtain
source, and for which the vendor is unable or unwilling to
I think the problems are the vended products for which you cannot obtain
source, and for which the vendor is unable or unwilling to create zSeries
binaries.
An Intel binary executor on p Series makes sense for this; you can move the
product and run it, with very little hassle. This would be a fine
I fail to see what z/OS has to do with any of the discussion at all. I
thought we were comparing to zLinux and the z/VM environment. zLinux is much
closer to Linux than AIX is... Because it IS Linux. It can run bare bones,
or using z/VM as a hipervisor, and z/OS doesn't have to be present at all.
55905 /( )\
-^^-^^
"In theory, theory and practice are the same, but
in practice, theory and practice are different."
On 10/18/08 7:07 AM, "Richard Gasiorowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I must be missing something. My original qu
Florian Bilek wrote:
I have successfully compiled QEMU on z/Series. I wanted to see what can be
done today in order to solve the urgent demand of having Windows programs on
z/Series.
QEMU runs here with Debian Linux under z/VM. I needed quickly the GCC in
version 3.4.x to compile the current v
Richard Gasiorowski wrote:
I must be missing something. My original question was does IBM have an
LX86 product for zLinux. The answer is no. So are you other vendors
saying you have something that works or not. I am not talking windows
servers- Linux servers. Personally I am surprsied that
On Sat, 18 Oct 2008, Richard Gasiorowski wrote:
> I must be missing something. My original question was does IBM have an
> LX86 product for zLinux. The answer is no. So are you other vendors
> saying you have something that works or not. I am not talking windows
> servers- L
On Sat, Oct 18, 2008 at 2:07 PM, Richard Gasiorowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I must be missing something. My original question was does IBM have an
> LX86 product for zLinux. The answer is no. So are you other vendors
> saying you have something that works or not. I am not
I must be missing something. My original question was does IBM have an
LX86 product for zLinux. The answer is no. So are you other vendors
saying you have something that works or not. I am not talking windows
servers- Linux servers. Personally I am surprsied that IBM presents
zLinux as a
> At present, one can use it on intellish hardware with LVM modules to
run
> fully virtualised guests.
It works on more than just Intel gear. It does a fair job on POWER and
SPARC as well, plus building reliably on 390. The 390 code could use a
little optimization, but it does work.
> From my P
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port On Behalf Of Florian Bilek
>
> [ snip ]
>
> With QEMU it is possible to run a copy of MS Windows Server 2003 on
> z/Series. Of course it is slow, at least on the z/990 I am using. The
> installation of Windows took about 8 hours but it worked
t; From: Linux on 390 Port on behalf of Richard Gasiorowski
> Sent: Thu 10/16/2008 10:02 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Lx86
>
> Question for someone @ IBM. Lx86 is a feature provided for on the p
> series whihc allows Linux binaries to execute on the p system without a
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port On Behalf Of John Summerfield
>
> Chase, John wrote:
> >> -Original Message-
> >>>
> Goodbye desktop hardware, remote maintenance, high power
> consumption, machine order lead time.
> >>> Hello obscene waste of CPU cycles
On 10/16/08 4:25 PM, "Scott Rohling" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Ok - I'm intrigued - you're running QEMU under Linux under z/VM? (and then
> some x86 OS under that?)
Tru64 5.1 for Alpha on OpenSolaris, at the moment. Remember that the Intel
stuff isn't quite done yet. That could change if appr
David Boyes wrote:
On 10/16/08 2:12 PM, "Richard Gasiorowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
Whats QEMU?
QEMU is a set of dynamic code generation tools that can take binaries for
one CPU architecture and run them on a different CPU architecture with some
additional processing to map system calls
Chase, John wrote:
-Original Message-
Goodbye desktop hardware, remote maintenance, high power
consumption, machine order lead time.
Hello obscene waste of CPU cycles
But the same can be said of running Windows on Intel as well!
A lot cheaper there
Did you check the p
On 10/16/08 2:12 PM, "Richard Gasiorowski" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whats QEMU?
QEMU is a set of dynamic code generation tools that can take binaries for
one CPU architecture and run them on a different CPU architecture with some
additional processing to map system calls and some other incide
t;
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port
10/16/2008 05:04 PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Lx86
On Thursday, 10/16/2008 at 02:19 EDT, Richard Gasiorowski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whats QEMU? And who is we're working on it. I have a
On Thursday, 10/16/2008 at 02:19 EDT, Richard Gasiorowski
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Whats QEMU? And who is we're working on it. I have a situation NOW
that
> can use this type of capability. What I find interesting is the total
> "Hush" from the IBM team on this topic.
What do you want IBM t
You are correct. System p is much different.
POWER has a bit in the page table entry which says "this page (bunch of
pages) is little-endian. Make sure register LOADs and STOREs work
appropriately in this address range". Lx86 depends on this architectural
feature, which z does not ha
Port
10/16/2008 04:26 PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Lx86
>>> On 10/16/2008 at 10:02 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>,
Richard
Gasiorowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Question for someone @ IBM. Lx86 is a
I dont know about QEMU my original question was targeted for our IBM reps
on this forum. Lx86 available for the system p allows x86 linux server
applications to execute on the system p without recompile or link. So
again when will this same feature be available for the system z. This
has
>>> On 10/16/2008 at 10:02 AM, in message
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>, Richard
Gasiorowski <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Question for someone @ IBM. Lx86 is a feature provided for on the p
> series whihc allows Linux binaries to execute on the p system without a
> recom
Ok - I'm intrigued - you're running QEMU under Linux under z/VM? (and then
some x86 OS under that?)
Scott Rohling
On Thu, Oct 16, 2008 at 10:47 AM, David Boyes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> You can partially do this now with QEMU. We're working on some extensions
> to improve the usability.
>
>
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Chase, John
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:12 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Lx86
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Linux on 390 Port On Behalf Of John McKown
> >
ssage-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Richard Gasiorowski
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 2:13 PM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Lx86
Dave,
Whats QEMU? And who is we're working on it. I have a situation NOW
that can use this type of capa
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port On Behalf Of John McKown
>
> On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, Little, Chris wrote:
>
> > -Original Message-
> > From: Linux on 390 Port [On Behalf Of Rich Smrcina
> >
> > > Goodbye desktop hardware, remote maintenance, high power
> > > consumptio
10/16/2008 02:25 PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Lx86
I thought that graphics, in general, was not a good use of the System Z
resources?.? Aren't you looking at putting a high CPU load task onto the
mainframe server, rather than farming it
different."
On 10/16/08 9:18 AM, "Rich Smrcina" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Richard Gasiorowski wrote:
>> Question for someone @ IBM. Lx86 is a feature provided for on the p
>> series whihc allows Linux binaries to execute on the p system without a
>&g
TED]>
Sent by: Linux on 390 Port
10/16/2008 12:47 PM
Please respond to
Linux on 390 Port
To
LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
cc
Subject
Re: Lx86
You can partially do this now with QEMU. We're working on some extensions
to improve the usability.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 3
On Thu, 16 Oct 2008, Little, Chris wrote:
> -Original Message-
> From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
> Rich Smrcina
> Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 9:19 AM
> To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
> Subject: Re: Lx86
>
> > Goodbye desktop h
You can partially do this now with QEMU. We're working on some extensions to
improve the usability.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port on behalf of Richard Gasiorowski
Sent: Thu 10/16/2008 10:02 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Lx86
Question for someone @ IBM.
-Original Message-
From: Linux on 390 Port [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of
Rich Smrcina
Sent: Thursday, October 16, 2008 9:19 AM
To: LINUX-390@VM.MARIST.EDU
Subject: Re: Lx86
> Goodbye desktop hardware, remote maintenance, high power
> consumption, machine order lead time.
Rich Smrcina wrote:
>
> Watch this space...
>
> In Q1 2009 Mantissa will deliver a system that permits unaltered Windows
> operating systems to run under z/VM. Using a desktop appliance running RDC,
> users will be able to connect to their virtual Windows images running in
> the
> VM environment. G
Richard Gasiorowski wrote:
Question for someone @ IBM. Lx86 is a feature provided for on the p
series whihc allows Linux binaries to execute on the p system without a
recompile.
Since IBM professes a philosophy of providing like platform capabilities.
the question is
When can we expect this
Question for someone @ IBM. Lx86 is a feature provided for on the p
series whihc allows Linux binaries to execute on the p system without a
recompile.
Since IBM professes a philosophy of providing like platform capabilities.
the question is
When can we expect this features functions available on
64 matches
Mail list logo
