Re: status of UltraPenguin?

Re: status of UltraPenguin?

[Jakub Jelinek]

> 
> Hello Jakub,
> 
> the UltraPenguin home page mentions -for some time already- the release
> of a final release (followup on 1.0.9) "soon".
> 
> Could you inform me about the status? Will it be on hold for a 2.2 kernel?

Ok, this is not the first question, so I'll answer to everybody.
I thought 1.1 will come soon after 1.0.9, but during the time we were
fighting little bugs in 1.0.9, redhat came with 5.1, so I have mistakenly
merged a few packages and the result is some broken things in the
distribution, me already not knowing which rpms have changed from stock
redhat and which not (and why).
So, I've started two days ago with boot images, which I'm merging from
current sparc rawhide with UP changes (and enhancing it, so it will finally
autoprobe all sbus SCSI/NET cards and stuff like that). After that's done,
I'll take a snapshot from rawhide as of a particular date and go one package
by one and create a new distribution based on merge of rawhide with 1.0.9.
I think I'm gonna to call that 1.0.10, then ask people to test it and
release 1.1 quickly.
A couple of things I want to have:
the compiler will be egcs-current (ie. later than 1.1b, as major SPARC
backend rewrite happened after 1.1b). The compiler will be 64/32bit, like
binutils, so we'll drop sparc64-linux-* compilers/binutils.
I want to ship both libstdc++ 2.8 and 2.9, our UP rpms will use 2.9, but you
should be able to install e.g. netscape which relies on 2.8.
If people help me, I'd like to maintain full binary compatibility with
redhat 4.2/sparc (the dynamic loader UP 1.0.9 should be just fine, just we
need to have more dynamic libraries).

The kernel corruption bug is gone, so once I finish merging boot images,
I'll put there new kernels and come out with tftp/floppy images for both to
be done 1.0.10 and 1.0.9. After 1.0.10 is on ftp, I plan do test CD-ROM
images (or even earlier), I have still not decided whether to put the whole
600M or whatever iso image on ftp, or put up some nice scripts somewhere, or
ask somebody to press a bunch of CDs...

Cheers,
    Jakub
___________________________________________________________________
Jakub Jelinek | jj@sunsite.mff.cuni.cz | http://sunsite.mff.cuni.cz
Administrator of SunSITE Czech Republic, MFF, Charles University
___________________________________________________________________
Ultralinux - first 64bit OS to take full power of the UltraSparc
Linux version 2.1.125 on a sparc64 machine (498.80 BogoMips).
___________________________________________________________________

Re: status of UltraPenguin?

[Brandon S. Allbery]

From: Jakub Jelinek <jj@sunsite.ms.mff.cuni.cz>
+-----
| Ok, this is not the first question, so I'll answer to everybody.
| I thought 1.1 will come soon after 1.0.9, but during the time we were
| fighting little bugs in 1.0.9, redhat came with 5.1, so I have mistakenly
| merged a few packages and the result is some broken things in the
| distribution, me already not knowing which rpms have changed from stock
| redhat and which not (and why).
+--->8

That's not your fault; Red Hat started releasing 5.1 security updates for 5.0
and didn't take any care to deal with compatibility.  The initscripts update
is a major problem, as the 5.1 initscripts package assumes the Red Hat 5.1
kernel identification convention (%{version}-%{release} to identify the
modules directory in /lib/modules, whereas 5.0's used only %{version}) ---
and everything seems to work fine unless you rebuild the kernel :-(  There
are other such incompatibilities in the 5.0 patches as well.  *grumble*

This stung us bad when I was mirroring the RH50 updates for ECE and also
building new kernels to support functionality we needed... while staying with
the 2.0.33 kernel, because 2.0.34 didn't work with the Linux AFS port then
available.

-- 
brandon s. allbery	[os/2][linux][solaris][japh]	 allbery@kf8nh.apk.net
system administrator	     [WAY too many hats]	   allbery@ece.cmu.edu
electrical and computer engineering
carnegie mellon university			   (bsa@kf8nh is still valid.)