Re: Wireless PCI hardware

> >I want OpenBSD in hostap mode with PCI or PCIe ath / athn driver. > > Be aware that hostap mode is not particularly reliable, usable, or with > good peformance at the moment. What does at the moment mean? I've only just upgraded to 5.8 and I did notice whatsapp not being quite so snappy but

Re: Wireless PCI hardware

On 2015-11-27 08:48, Tati Chevron wrote: On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:08:37AM +0100, Alexander Salmin wrote: I want OpenBSD in hostap mode with PCI or PCIe ath / athn driver. Be aware that hostap mode is not particularly reliable, usable, or with good peformance at the moment. That's OK, my pu

Re: Wireless PCI hardware

On Fri, Nov 27, 2015 at 12:08:37AM +0100, Alexander Salmin wrote: I want OpenBSD in hostap mode with PCI or PCIe ath / athn driver. Be aware that hostap mode is not particularly reliable, usable, or with good peformance at the moment. - TP-Link TL-WN851ND Works on OpenBSD. -- Tati Chevron

Re: Wireless PCI hardware

Don't know about PCI but could get cardbus adaptor for d-link DWA-652 that works well for me or look up it's chip. What usb are you using as the ones i tried a while back weren't much good though there have been changes to the drivers since so probably worth trying again. http://www.ebay.co.uk/it

Re: Wireless PCI hardware

> I want OpenBSD in hostap mode with PCI or PCIe ath / athn driver. > > > If you recently bought a PCI or PCIe wireless card with atheros chipset > that works for OpenBSD, please report which name/model/manufacturer and > preferably ~buydate so we know if its recently or might been replaced by

Wireless PCI hardware

Hey friends, I want OpenBSD in hostap mode with PCI or PCIe ath / athn driver. I am not interested in USB Wifi which has recently been discussed on this list, already have a good usb wifi that works well for its purpose (thanks!). Instead I have been checking out the ath(4) and athn(4) driver

Intel I218-V NIC -- hardware initialization failed

Hi! I'm trying out a Lenovo E450, and the wired NIC gives me this error in dmesg: em0 at pci0 dev 25 function 0 "Intel I218-V" rev 0x04: msi em0: Hardware Initialization Failed em0: Unable to initialize the hardware I've read some shenanigans about the I217 in the archive

Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

possibility of using Cisco / Juniper for some of my requirements but obviously would like to use OpenBSD if possible because I've used it in the past and it includes everything that I need and best of all the documentation is excellent. I think you might be able to do 10Gbps of L2TP traffi

Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

On 27/10/15 19:24, Adam Thompson wrote: On 15-10-25 03:46 AM, Some Developer wrote: I'm just wondering what hardware spec I'd need push 20 gigabits of network traffic on an OpenBSD server? Short answer: It's not generally possible today, at least for your use case. Medium a

Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

Simply forwarding 10Gb/s is a tall order. Decapsulating 10Gb/s of l2tp I think is probably some way off. Doing all that plus logging full packets, nope. What do you actually need to log? Full packets? Flows? Sampled packets? Can the traffic be split up to multiple machines?

[OT] Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

On 15-10-27 02:53 PM, Martin Schröder wrote: And then there are SSDs. PCIE SSDs do up to 3000 MB/s write throughput. https://www-ssl.intel.com/content/www/us/en/solid-state-drives/solid-state-drives-dc-p3608-series.html And I'm sure there are tape libraries that can write that, too. :-) I disre

Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

On 27 October 2015 at 12:53, Martin Schröder wrote: > 2015-10-27 20:24 GMT+01:00 Adam Thompson : >> You talk about storing the data - *writing* data to disk at 10Gbps >> (sustained) is currently in the realm of high-energy physics, with >> multi-million-dollar budgets for the storage arrays. A 72

Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

On Sun, Oct 25, 2015 at 2:46 AM, Some Developer wrote: > I'm just wondering what hardware spec I'd need push 20 gigabits of network > traffic on an OpenBSD server? As someone else mentioned, this is likely not possible today. > The thing is I want to log all traffic on the

Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

2015-10-27 20:24 GMT+01:00 Adam Thompson : > You talk about storing the data - *writing* data to disk at 10Gbps > (sustained) is currently in the realm of high-energy physics, with > multi-million-dollar budgets for the storage arrays. A 7200rpm disk can And then there are SSDs. PCIE SSDs do up t

Re: What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

On 15-10-25 03:46 AM, Some Developer wrote: I'm just wondering what hardware spec I'd need push 20 gigabits of network traffic on an OpenBSD server? Short answer: It's not generally possible today, at least for your use case. Medium answer: Contact Esdenera Networks to

What hardware spec would I need to push 20 gigabit of network traffic on an OpenBSD server?

I'm just wondering what hardware spec I'd need push 20 gigabits of network traffic on an OpenBSD server? The planned configuration is to have 2 10GbE network adaptors and have a 10 gigabit incoming network connection and 10 gigabit outgoing network connection (incoming will be an L

Re: Which hardware to keep the level of trust ?

Hi J-F, Please look around a bit more for a micro-controller mailing list, these need security and quality much more than expected. Please also do bring the OpenBSD on these platforms and hope for the best ideas come back here too. Regards, A

Re: Which hardware to keep the level of trust ?

On Sun, Sep 27, 2015 at 4:49 PM, Jean-Francois Simon wrote: > If one had to find a hardware most difficult to compromize which one would > you take ? None. The hardware most difficult to compromise would be hardware with nothing on it to compromise. An acceptable second place would be ha

Re: Which hardware to keep the level of trust ?

Jean-Francois Simon wrote: > After having read infos about breaking into bios and other type of > attacks, has anyone info on which hardware best suits OpenBSD to avoid > unpleasanties ? > > I was thinking of PIC 32 Microchip but surely difficult to implement > an OS runni

Which hardware to keep the level of trust ?

Dear all, After having read infos about breaking into bios and other type of attacks, has anyone info on which hardware best suits OpenBSD to avoid unpleasanties ? I was thinking of PIC 32 Microchip but surely difficult to implement an OS running into it able to handle normal desktop

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

or get a cheap used Areca hardware RAID card of e-bay. Those > cards according to man pages have excellent support on OpenBSD (they are > true open hardware). Use one of inexpensive Celeron based motherboards > (you can get them under $50). I would be curious what OpenBSD gurus have &g

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

Op 20-09-15 om 11:23 schreef Mark Carroll: even to the level of Intel NUCs which look pretty good if their hardware is solid. I've recently installed an Intel NUC NUC5CPYH to be used as a quiet low power sftp file server. Support for the nic is recently added and the machine works pe

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

l. I try to avoid diversity in both hardware and software so, if I'm > spending a bit more anyway, perhaps I should even look out for a system > whose sibling could replace, for instance, the computer I use for > streaming TV. My fileserver needs would be modest -- I'm asking li

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

softraid or get a cheap used Areca hardware RAID card of e-bay. Those > cards according to man pages have excellent support on OpenBSD (they are > true open hardware). Use one of inexpensive Celeron based motherboards > (you can get them under $50). I would be curious what OpenBSD gurus

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

Many helpful replies so quickly, thank you. It looks like I should plan to spend more and stick with x86 if it's so much better supported. The mention of Mini-Box rang a bell as I used to have an M200 that worked well. I try to avoid diversity in both hardware and software so, if I'm

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

is seeing as I'm unlikely to get any more than "up to" 76Mbps from my ISP's fibre anyway, Effectively any hardware that still boots will work as a home router. A 500mhz Pentium III with 64mb ram can handle a 100mbps connection without breaking a sweat. Decide what yo

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

f buying non amd64 > hardware. I looked at the state of armv7 port. I vetted all PR claims > about Ubiquiti ERLite-3 and ended up buying this > > http://www.mini-box.com/Intel-D2500CCE-Mini-ITX-Motherboard > > as a router for my home network. (Don't worry the board is available an

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

Router and file server are two very different things. I recently went through similar process. Even though at work I use Atom servers (naturally running OpenBSD amd64 port) for all our core network infrastructure and services I entertain the idea of buying non amd64 hardware. I looked at the

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

Consider PC Engines APU series for relative low cost, fanless, and runs amd64. Soekris are also popular, and a bit more expensive. Brian

Re: Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

On 2015-09-19, Mark Carroll wrote: > For instance, around the USD100 mark the Ubiquiti ERLite-3 looks > reasonable [...] Also, the SolidRun CuBox series looks more powerful Don't buy new non-x86 hardware unless you want to write code to improve OpenBSD's support for it. If you

Cheap hardware for router, perhaps fileserver?

not being able to use the hardware acceleration. How much of a cost that is seeing as I'm unlikely to get any more than "up to" 76Mbps from my ISP's fibre anyway, I don't know. Also, the SolidRun CuBox series looks more powerful for not much more money; perhaps even the earlier/che

Re: Faulty memory - not the hardware

Whoops! Forgot to say both ends are running XFCE4. *** NOTE *** Please DO NOT CC me. I subscribed to the list. Mail to the sender address that does not originate at the list server is tarpitted. The reply-to: address is provided for those who feel compelled to reply off list. Thankyou. Rod/ -

Faulty memory - not the hardware

About 18 months I set up two i386 boxes running 5.5. One is called HOME and the other is AWAY and they were set up with SSH confugured to allow AWAY to call HOME to get some data by using the home data to be seen at AWAY and to use AWAY to remotely modify data at HOME. It worked perfectly...

dmesg: OneRNG hardware RNG plugged into Soekris 5501

I've got one of the early units from , intended for providing input data to /dev/random. They currently have support for Linux via a simple command set to the device. (See the shell scripts in the tarball listed at .) I figured I'd plug this into

Re: Various ACPI problems on various IBM hardware

f OpenBSD on various systems (Dell, HP) for the first time i > need to install a firewall on IBM hardware so if we can help, i'm ready > to setup a lab for you. > I'll volunteer to help here. Please send a dmesg and screen capture of the panic, and acpidump if available. We ca

Re: Various ACPI problems on various IBM hardware

Frederic URBAN ircad.fr> writes: > We have some ACPI problems with various IBM server X. Since it's a very > early panic when kernel boot there is now access to ddb to print the > trace. You are prompted to press any key to reboot :) It has been > verified on IBM Server x3650 M1, M2 and M3. We

Various ACPI problems on various IBM hardware

ovide you a remote access to both oldest machines (a Server x3650 M1 and a Server x3650 M2) with serial cable to help you to fix this. We are big users of OpenBSD on various systems (Dell, HP) for the first time i need to install a firewall on IBM hardware so if we can help, i'm ready to s

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On 2015-07-27, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > We're hurtling towards the 5.8 release and, as usual, ports and > packages on non-x86 platforms are in dire shape. > > If you want to put your money where your mouth is, take a look at recent > build logs and start fixing some of those problems. > http:

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

We're hurtling towards the 5.8 release and, as usual, ports and packages on non-x86 platforms are in dire shape. If you want to put your money where your mouth is, take a look at recent build logs and start fixing some of those problems. http://build-failures.rhaalovely.net/ sparc64, powerpc, alph

[OT] Metric/SI prefixes (Was: Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification)

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 10:46:51PM BST, Karel Gardas wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Erling Westenvik > wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:09:58PM +0100, Raf Czlonka wrote: > >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:14:30AM BST, Karel Gardas wrote: > >> > >> > Following this: http://unixhq.com/

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

Well, yeah, I am a dreamer, but I don't think I'm all that delusional to think, for instance, that I could put some ARM hardware in a lunchbox, attach a keyboard, display, an ethernet cable, a sata disk, and a fan, boot up an OS, and run the typical office applications, image editors, musi

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

Hello again, As the OP I would say that I got the idea of "SPARC as a desktop". There were nice and insightdfull answers, so I thank you all. I have waited to see Nick Holland's answer, he is a real guru in such questions, but maybe he is busy for now. I can wait, no problem, but I think we can le

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Tue, 21 Jul 2015 23:18:40 +0200 Erling Westenvik wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:09:58PM +0100, Raf Czlonka wrote: > > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:14:30AM BST, Karel Gardas wrote: > > > > > Following this: http://unixhq.com/websgt/sunblade150.pdf -- it's 5.5 > > > bells (is that 55 dB?). >

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 11:18 PM, Erling Westenvik wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:09:58PM +0100, Raf Czlonka wrote: >> On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:14:30AM BST, Karel Gardas wrote: >> >> > Following this: http://unixhq.com/websgt/sunblade150.pdf -- it's 5.5 >> > bells (is that 55 dB?). >> >> Ye

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 04:09:58PM +0100, Raf Czlonka wrote: > On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:14:30AM BST, Karel Gardas wrote: > > > Following this: http://unixhq.com/websgt/sunblade150.pdf -- it's 5.5 > > bells (is that 55 dB?). > > Yes - it's a standard SI prefix[0]. However, 'bel'(B), *not* 'bell'

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 6:06 PM, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Coincidently, we yesterday lugged two M3000s into the hackroom here > at c2k15. When turned on, these make a hellish noise and you want > them in an insulated server room far away. Christian, this is really first hand experience I ne

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

Stephens Sent: Tuesday, July 21, 2015 2:31 PM To: na...@mips.inka.de Cc: misc@openbsd.org Subject: Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification On 21/07/2015 17:10, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > On 2015-07-21, Graham Stephens wrote: > >> These machines were not fast when new, but I will say th

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

I've probably run more non-x86 hardware than the mouth flappers here. (For one, I've had four different Alphas over the years.) Nowadays there are no alternatives to x86 in the desktop market. None. There are choices in the (big) server market and there are choices in the embedde

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On 2015-07-21, Graham Stephens wrote: > These machines were not fast when new, but I will say that if you do try > one of these you *need* the proper memory for them (IIRC, registered). You need the proper memory for _any_ machine. And you misremember. spdmem0 at iic0 addr 0x50: 512MB SDRAM

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On 2015-07-21, Karel Gardas wrote: > Does that mean that lying on desk, Sun Blade 150 is more noisy than > M3000? Coincidently, we yesterday lugged two M3000s into the hackroom here at c2k15. When turned on, these make a hellish noise and you want them in an insulated server room far away. The

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Tue, Jul 21, 2015 at 09:14:30AM BST, Karel Gardas wrote: > Following this: http://unixhq.com/websgt/sunblade150.pdf -- it's 5.5 > bells (is that 55 dB?). Yes - it's a standard SI prefix[0]. However, 'bel'(B), *not* 'bell', is not used very often and 'decibel'(dB) is the actual unit. [0] http:

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 6:14 PM, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > Let's cut through some of this crap. If you want a reasonably quiet > sparc64 designed to be put on a desk, your fastest choices are a > > Sun Blade 100 or > Sun Blade 150 (~20% faster) Following this: http://unixhq.com/websgt/su

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

2015-07-21 1:57 GMT+02:00 Joel Rees : > On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Christian Weisgerber > wrote: >> On 2015-07-17, BSD wrote: >> >>> As a new user, I find myself in the same position as the OP: very >>> interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of >>> information arou

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Sat, Jul 18, 2015 at 5:45 AM, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > On 2015-07-17, BSD wrote: > >> As a new user, I find myself in the same position as the OP: very >> interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of >> information around this topic. > > You're 15 years too late. x

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 09:09:56PM +0200, ludovic coues wrote: > 2015-07-19 17:03 GMT+02:00 John Long : > > > > OpenBSD mips64el runs oustandingly well on the Lemote boxes. See here: > > http://www.openbsd.org/loongson.html > > > > I don't think anybody will be happy with a Loongson as a desktop bo

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 05:59:17PM +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > On 2015-07-19, John Long wrote: > > > OpenBSD mips64el runs oustandingly well on the Lemote boxes. See here: > > http://www.openbsd.org/loongson.html > > Given that only about 2/3 of the ports tree can be built on loongson,

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 01:51:34PM -0400, Raul Miller wrote: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:03 AM, John Long wrote: > > Sun Fire servers are cheap to buy but not to run. A V210 is a 1U box and > > with dual 1.35 CPUs it is fast enough for desktop use. It's not something > > most people with families

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

Yeah, I misread that. Thanks, -- Raul On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 10:04 PM, Zeljko Jovanovic wrote: > On 19.07.2015. 19:51, Raul Miller wrote: > >> http://www.andovercg.com/datasheets/sun-fire-v210-server.pdf >> >> Suggests that we're talking 320 watts, and 7.3 db acoustic noise. >> >> http://www

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Mon, Jul 20, 2015 at 09:53:13AM +0100, Graham Stephens wrote: > Another thing to bear in mind is the pitch of the noise; I find that > loudish but low-frequency sound (like from 4-inch+ fans) isn't that > uncomfortable, but the whine from 1U 1 inch fans get unbearable > REALLY quickly. I agree

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

Let's cut through some of this crap. If you want a reasonably quiet sparc64 designed to be put on a desk, your fastest choices are a Sun Blade 100 or Sun Blade 150 (~20% faster) Of course these machines are 15+ years old and something like Pentium II speed. There are also Sun Blade [12]xxx

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

> On Jul 20, 2015, at 1:53 AM, Graham Stephens > wrote: > > On 19/07/2015 20:56, Karel Gardas wrote: >> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Raul Miller wrote: >>> On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:03 AM, John Long wrote: Sun Fire servers are cheap to buy but not to run. A V210 is a 1U box and

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On 19.07.2015. 19:51, Raul Miller wrote: http://www.andovercg.com/datasheets/sun-fire-v210-server.pdf Suggests that we're talking 320 watts, and 7.3 db acoustic noise. http://www.gcaudio.com/resources/howtos/loudness.html suggests that whispers are about 30 db. And, 320 watts is not too far fr

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

> Indeed. If you're a "my neighbour listens to heavy metal all day, whether > he wants to or not" kind of person, then these machines are for your home. Well, ny neighbours listen to heavy metal every day whether they want it or not, but I'd hate for a loud computer to impair that heavy metal expe

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 09:56:35PM +0200, Karel Gardas wrote: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Raul Miller wrote: > > Suggests that we're talking 320 watts, and 7.3 db acoustic noise. > > 320 watts should not be showstopper, but 7.3 db certainly is. I do > have T2000 which is ~62 dB(A) and this

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 7:51 PM, Raul Miller wrote: > On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:03 AM, John Long wrote: >> Sun Fire servers are cheap to buy but not to run. A V210 is a 1U box and >> with dual 1.35 CPUs it is fast enough for desktop use. It's not something >> most people with families or without

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

2015-07-19 17:03 GMT+02:00 John Long : > > OpenBSD mips64el runs oustandingly well on the Lemote boxes. See here: > http://www.openbsd.org/loongson.html > > I don't think anybody will be happy with a Loongson as a desktop box but > they do shine tiny servers. > > /jl Where could one acquire one of

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On 2015-07-19, John Long wrote: > OpenBSD mips64el runs oustandingly well on the Lemote boxes. See here: > http://www.openbsd.org/loongson.html Given that only about 2/3 of the ports tree can be built on loongson, I'm questioning this "outstandingly well". -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Sun, Jul 19, 2015 at 11:03 AM, John Long wrote: > Sun Fire servers are cheap to buy but not to run. A V210 is a 1U box and > with dual 1.35 CPUs it is fast enough for desktop use. It's not something > most people with families or without a flightline headset are going to want > sitting next to

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

So what are good mips or arm motherboards nowadays? I have an openbsd box at home I need to upgrade. Might as well take a look at non-x86 stuff, as long as they can take SATA... :)

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:15:14AM -0500, BSD wrote: > On Thu, 16 Jul 2015 21:09:30 +0300 > Mihai Popescu wrote: > > > Hello, > > > > I never used a SPARC machine but I recall there are some people on the > > list doing this. > > > > What are the minimum requirements for a "decent" SPARC machin

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

If I’m not mistaken the PS3 had a PPC as well. Many of the intel alternatives do a better job at math & calculations in my opinion while PPC & SPARC may need additional time to execute operations often there are fewer errors and the results are far more accurate. This quite obvious on the PS3.

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Fri, 17 Jul 2015 09:15:14 -0700, BSD wrote: The replies to the OP seem discouraging. If not Oracle, and not Fujitsu, then what? If not a sparc desktop, then what about a sparc router? A RISC anything?? You might be interested in Bunny's Novena project [1] [2] [1] http://www.mail-archive.co

Re: hardware to run OpenBSD - choose between Intel and AMD

> When it comes to choose a platform for OpenBSD http://www.openbsd.org/faq/faq3.html#SelectHW > from almost the same > performance range, Range can be defined by intended use, architecture, age, performance, maintenance, pricing. You may want to redefine your range for any of the other criteri

hardware to run OpenBSD - choose between Intel and AMD

Hello, When it comes to choose a platform for OpenBSD from almost the same performance range, what is better to take: AMD cpu + ATI video or Intel cpu + GMA video? I've read the misc and some people are biased towards AMD, if I'm not mistaken. Is there another advantage from OpenBSD point of view

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 11:29 PM, Jiri B wrote: > Generally yes but there's still POWER8 and OpenPOWER > group. They claim docs should be open and TYAN[1] has > a cheap server with POWER8. I would not bet on POWER8 on desktop, it's too big beast, rather on smaller ARMv8 which is already winning o

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

> On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 08:45:23PM +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > > On 2015-07-17, BSD wrote: > > > > > As a new user, I find myself in the same position as the OP: very > > > interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of > > > information around this topic. > > > >

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 08:45:23PM +, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > On 2015-07-17, BSD wrote: > > > As a new user, I find myself in the same position as the OP: very > > interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of > > information around this topic. > > You're 15 years

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

> On Jul 17, 2015, at 1:45 PM, Christian Weisgerber wrote: > > On 2015-07-17, BSD wrote: > >> As a new user, I find myself in the same position as the OP: very >> interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of >> information around this topic. > > You're 15 years too late.

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On 2015-07-17, BSD wrote: > As a new user, I find myself in the same position as the OP: very > interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of > information around this topic. You're 15 years too late. x86 has won. -- Christian "naddy" Weisgerber

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

n-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of > information around this topic. (Which tells me I'm on the right track) > > No operating system can protect itself from its own hardware. So how > does one protect one's family in these hostile and trying times and > what-

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

he OP: very interested in non-Intel products. But there seems to be a vacuum of information around this topic. (Which tells me I'm on the right track) No operating system can protect itself from its own hardware. So how does one protect one's family in these hostile and trying times and

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Fri, Jul 17, 2015 at 1:03 PM, Riccardo Mottola wrote: > The only non-intel machines that could be used as a desktop were PPC macs, > but even those suffer today. Do you have any experience with SPARC64 VI/VII? I'm curious since I've thought this is the only chip which can give some hope for th

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

l, newsgroup... even a decently fitted Ultra workstation could do. I used to have "non intel" hardware for everything, but today it is not feasible anymore. You just need an intel laptop for that convenience. Not only for the power, but also because Firefox & friends often show b

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

> > From: Maurice Janssen > Sent: Thu Jul 16 22:55:05 CEST 2015 > To: > Subject: Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification > > > On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:25:20PM +0200, Francois Pussault wrote: > >> What are the m

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 8:09 PM, Mihai Popescu wrote: > What are the minimum requirements for a "decent" SPARC machine? I mean > by that a machine who is able to run OpenBSD as a desktop. I am > currently use a Pentium 4 3.2GHz with 2 GB DDR and it barely meets my The problem is that Intel is re

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On Thu, Jul 16, 2015 at 08:25:20PM +0200, Francois Pussault wrote: >> What are the minimum requirements for a "decent" SPARC machine? I mean >> by that a machine who is able to run OpenBSD as a desktop. <...> >for cheaper price : >Maybe somme v4xx or v2xx should be a good choice for budget...like

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

On 2015-07-16 Thu 21:09 PM |, Mihai Popescu wrote: > > I never used a SPARC machine but I recall there are some people on the > list doing this. > Platform Specific Lists sp...@openbsd.org OpenBSD/sparc and OpenBSD/sparc64 ports http://www.openbsd.org/mail.html

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

h the > prices :-). I doubt any sparc hardware would fit. Not even a Sun Blade 2500.

Re: SPARC minimum hardware specification

> > From: Mihai Popescu > Sent: Thu Jul 16 20:09:30 CEST 2015 > To: > Subject: SPARC minimum hardware specification > > > Hello, > > I never used a SPARC machine but I recall there are some people on the > list doin

SPARC minimum hardware specification

Hello, I never used a SPARC machine but I recall there are some people on the list doing this. What are the minimum requirements for a "decent" SPARC machine? I mean by that a machine who is able to run OpenBSD as a desktop. I am currently use a Pentium 4 3.2GHz with 2 GB DDR and it barely meets

Re: hardware support

Checked my usb system on radeon hd 5700 machine and it works fine with 1920 x 1080. So i think i will swap video cards, cuz that computer uses windows anyway. 2015-02-25 12:54 GMT+03:00 Joseph Oficre : > Dem, fixed it, and x server started, but in 1024x768 mode. Trying to add > 1920x1200 mode via

Re: hardware support

Dem, fixed it, and x server started, but in 1024x768 mode. Trying to add 1920x1200 mode via gtf and xrandr, but no outputs found. Sreen-0, Sreen0, sreen0, monitor0 etc...what is the name of this device, cuz current xrandr show me "Screen 0". Its hdmi, if this information will be helpfull, Xorg.log

Re: hardware support

Joseph Oficre wrote: > I got this with VESA driver enabled: > [ 1011.000] (WW) checkDevMem: failed to open /dev/xf86 and /dev/mem > (Operation not permitted) > Check that you have set 'machdep.allowaperture=1' > in /etc/sysctl.conf and reboot your machine > refer t

Re: hardware support

I got this with VESA driver enabled: [ 1011.000] (WW) checkDevMem: failed to open /dev/xf86 and /dev/mem (Operation not permitted) Check that you have set 'machdep.allowaperture=1' in /etc/sysctl.conf and reboot your machine refer to xf86(4) for details [ 1011.000]

Re: hardware support

Joseph Oficre said: > PS: i've made live USB, booted, but first FAST check didnt give me any > results, just segfault on xorg -configure, need more time for it :c You have to write xorg.conf yourself. IIRC a Monitor section and modeline from gtf(1) would suffice. -- Dmitrij D. Czarkoff

Re: hardware support

On Sun, Feb 22, 2015 at 1:38 PM, Joseph Oficre wrote: > BTW, is there someone with nvidia gtx 650 card and some kind of 1920x1200 > resolution? Just to know im not alone in this cruel world.. > > PS: i've made live USB, booted, but first FAST check didnt give me any > results, just segfault on xor

Re: hardware support

MT+03:00 Joseph Oficre : > Yeah, i will try live USB to check it all, ty for response! > > 2015-02-22 12:57 GMT+03:00 Dmitrij D. Czarkoff : > >> Joseph Oficre said: >> > Hello, my friends. >> > Can someone tell me, is this hardware will work with OpenBSD

Re: hardware support

Yeah, i will try live USB to check it all, ty for response! 2015-02-22 12:57 GMT+03:00 Dmitrij D. Czarkoff : > Joseph Oficre said: > > Hello, my friends. > > Can someone tell me, is this hardware will work with OpenBSD 5.6 > [...] > > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller:

Re: hardware support

Joseph Oficre said: > Hello, my friends. > Can someone tell me, is this hardware will work with OpenBSD 5.6 [...] > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation GK107 [GeForce GTX > 650] (rev a1) AFAIK in vesa mode only. No hardware acceleration. > 01:00.1 Audio

Re: hardware support

On Feb 22 12:23:29, seran...@gmail.com wrote: > Interested of Nvidia videocard, I dont need some super 3d support, just > 1920x1200 resolution. > 01:00.0 VGA compatible controller: NVIDIA Corporation GK107 [GeForce GTX > 650] (rev a1) > 01:00.1 Audio device: NVIDIA Corporation GK107 HDMI Audio Cont

<    1   2   3   4   5   6   7   8   9   10   >