From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by neteng.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id TAA22805; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:08:53 -0700 Return-Path: Received: (from majordomo@localhost) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) id TAA17776 for linux-list; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:08:29 -0700 Received: from yon.engr.sgi.com (yon.engr.sgi.com [150.166.61.32]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id TAA17769 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:08:27 -0700 Received: from cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (cthulhu.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.2]) by yon.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id TAA20628 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:08:15 -0700 Received: from sgi.sgi.com (sgi.engr.sgi.com [192.26.80.37]) by cthulhu.engr.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/960327.SGI.AUTOCF) via ESMTP id TAA17751 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:08:14 -0700 Received: from caipfs.rutgers.edu (caipfs.rutgers.edu [128.6.155.100]) by sgi.sgi.com (950413.SGI.8.6.12/970507) via ESMTP id TAA12593 for ; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 19:08:12 -0700 env-from (davem@caipfs.rutgers.edu) Received: from jenolan.caipgeneral (jenolan.rutgers.edu [128.6.111.5]) by caipfs.rutgers.edu (8.8.5/8.8.5) with SMTP id WAA08488; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:03:34 -0400 (EDT) Received: by jenolan.caipgeneral (SMI-8.6/SMI-SVR4) id WAA00413; Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:01:27 -0400 Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 22:01:27 -0400 Message-Id: <199706170201.WAA00413@jenolan.caipgeneral> From: "David S. Miller" To: ariel@sgi.com CC: ralf@mailhost.uni-koblenz.de, linux@yon.engr.sgi.com In-reply-to: <199706170106.SAA19946@yon.engr.sgi.com> (ariel@yon.engr.sgi.com) Subject: Re: Good news: no more begging for HW Sender: owner-linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com Precedence: bulk From: ariel@yon.engr.sgi.com (Ariel Faigon) Date: Mon, 16 Jun 1997 18:06:41 -0700 (PDT) I cannot promise anything since there may be some oversubscription to the service :-) I think the fairest way would be to publish all these requests on this forum and have the people who care (us) vote on who should get them. I certainly don't want to be the fascist person who decides who gets what. Before this gets out of control, I just want to express one sentiment of high caution. Although it may seem desirable to contribute most of the donation hardware to kernel level hackers, this can be a mistake in the making. At this stage in the game it is just as important to get userland/libc developers machines. Therefore I suggest that at least one person who knows GNU libc, binutils, _and_ gcc internals backwards and forwards be on the top of the donation list. If I were asked for such a candidate, I would recommend Richard Henderson (rth@stommel.tamu.edu) He has done the Alpha/Linux port, he designed an ELF standard for 64-bit Alpha from scratch with no existing standard available, he is doing the same exact thing for 64-bit SparcLinux at the moment as well. Not having a good libc/userland person in this port is why I lost half my summer last year and was not able to hack the kernel as much as I really would have liked to at all... ---------------------------------------------//// Yow! 11.26 MB/s remote host TCP bandwidth & //// 199 usec remote TCP latency over 100Mb/s //// ethernet. Beat that! //// -----------------------------------------////__________ o David S. Miller, davem@caip.rutgers.edu /_____________/ / // /_/ ><