linus.linux.sgi.com

linus.linux.sgi.com

[Alex deVries]

Erg.  Linus.linux.sgi.com is dead.  Can someone at SGI take a look at
this?

- A

-- 
Alex deVries, puffin on LinuxNet.
http://www.engsoc.carleton.ca/~adevries/ .

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Bob Mende Pie]

> Erg.  Linus.linux.sgi.com is dead.  Can someone at SGI take a look at
> this?
> 
> - A

linus.linux.sgi.com is back up.   Here is the story of what is happening.

As some of you may know linus is a 150Mhz R4400 indy with a pair of dual
1.2g disks setup as a pair of software mirrored plexs.   These disks are in
a external enclosure that can not fit in a rack, and due to other
happenings in the area that linus sits in this has become an issue.   

Thus last thursday Dave Katinsky (The SA who runs the lab) aquireed a vault
with 4 2g diff scsi disks, and a 180Mhz R5000 challenge/S.  We swapped the
two internal disks into the new system and brought it up with the original
disks still on it.   It was running just fine.  Sometime after 1900 last
night, the system died with a hardware ECC error in the cache.   We swapped
the cpu from the old system (which was sitting there just in case a
disaster happened) into the new box.   It is back up again.   If anyone
notices problems with the system, please contact mende@engr.sgi.com and
dmk@engr.sgi.com.   

As for our plans for the disks.  I want to make a mirrored plex of 2x2x2g 
drives, but one of the 4 disks in this system is not working correctly.   I
am trying to find a way to ensure that /src is mirrored or start a process
to get it backed up (which cant be automated, and thus, IMHO, is not a good
idea).   We may be able to get a small rack of disks use instead of the one
with the bad disk or may get a replacment disk.   

More when I know it.

                    /Bob...                    mailto:mende@sgi.com
              http://reality.sgi.com/mende            KF6EID

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Alex deVries]

Bob/David:

Thanks for looking into this; this is much appreciated since I expect
there'll be quite a bit more traffic to the machine in the next little
bit.

It sounds to me like we are getting to the point of having a sane enough
system to actually run Linux for linus.linux.sgi.com.  Has anyone
considered this?

- Alex

-- 
Alex deVries, puffin on LinuxNet.
http://www.engsoc.carleton.ca/~adevries/ .


On Mon, 15 Jun 1998, Bob Mende Pie wrote:

> Date: Mon, 15 Jun 1998 11:02:40 -0700 (PDT)
> From: Bob Mende Pie <mende@piecomputer.engr.sgi.com>
> To: adevries@engsoc.carleton.ca
> Cc: linux@cthulhu.engr.sgi.com, dmk@engr.sgi.com
> Subject: Re: linus.linux.sgi.com
> 
> > Erg.  Linus.linux.sgi.com is dead.  Can someone at SGI take a look at
> > this?
> > 
> > - A
> 
> linus.linux.sgi.com is back up.   Here is the story of what is happening.
> 
> As some of you may know linus is a 150Mhz R4400 indy with a pair of dual
> 1.2g disks setup as a pair of software mirrored plexs.   These disks are in
> a external enclosure that can not fit in a rack, and due to other
> happenings in the area that linus sits in this has become an issue.   
> 
> Thus last thursday Dave Katinsky (The SA who runs the lab) aquireed a vault
> with 4 2g diff scsi disks, and a 180Mhz R5000 challenge/S.  We swapped the
> two internal disks into the new system and brought it up with the original
> disks still on it.   It was running just fine.  Sometime after 1900 last
> night, the system died with a hardware ECC error in the cache.   We swapped
> the cpu from the old system (which was sitting there just in case a
> disaster happened) into the new box.   It is back up again.   If anyone
> notices problems with the system, please contact mende@engr.sgi.com and
> dmk@engr.sgi.com.   
> 
> As for our plans for the disks.  I want to make a mirrored plex of 2x2x2g 
> drives, but one of the 4 disks in this system is not working correctly.   I
> am trying to find a way to ensure that /src is mirrored or start a process
> to get it backed up (which cant be automated, and thus, IMHO, is not a good
> idea).   We may be able to get a small rack of disks use instead of the one
> with the bad disk or may get a replacment disk.   
> 
> More when I know it.
> 
>                     /Bob...                    mailto:mende@sgi.com
>               http://reality.sgi.com/mende            KF6EID
> 

linus.linux.sgi.com

[Alex deVries]

I don't mean to seem like a bother, but what is the deal with
linus.linux.sgi.com? We really need that machine for development.  I think
it's been a week now.

If SGI isn't going to be able to support that service, that's fine.  Could
you let us know so we can make other arrangements?

-- 
Alex deVries, puffin on LinuxNet.
I know exactly what I want in life.

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Eric Kimminau]

Alex deVries wrote:
> 
> I don't mean to seem like a bother, but what is the deal with
> linus.linux.sgi.com? We really need that machine for development.  I think
> it's been a week now.
> 
> If SGI isn't going to be able to support that service, that's fine.  Could
> you let us know so we can make other arrangements?
> 
> --
> Alex deVries, puffin on LinuxNet.
> I know exactly what I want in life.

Im probably poking my nose in where Im not needed but Im digging in to see if
I can find the problem. 

EAK.


-- 
---------1---------2---------3---------4---------5---------6---------7
Eric Kimminau        eak@detroit.sgi.com      Field Technical Support
       SGI 39001 W. 12 Mile Rd.  Farmington, MI 48331-2903
      Vox:(248)848-4455  Fax:(248)848-5600  VNET:6-327-4455  

              "I speak my mind and no one else's."
 "I am a bomb technician. If you see me running, try to keep up..."
                    http://support.sgi.com

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Richard Hartensveld]

Alex deVries wrote:

> I don't mean to seem like a bother, but what is the deal with
> linus.linux.sgi.com? We really need that machine for development.  I think
> it's been a week now.
>
> If SGI isn't going to be able to support that service, that's fine.  Could
> you let us know so we can make other arrangements?
>

I've got a challenge S connected to the internet on a 34mbit connection,
running the (somewhat modificated) hardhat distribution.

I am more then willing to host the linux/SGI pages on this machine, and put
the machine up
for development if people are intrested.

I don't know if the www.linux.sgi.com machine is ever going to get back up,
but if it isn't,
this is maybe a solution?

Greetz,

Richard

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Ariel Faigon]

Hi,

Looks like I need to give a status update on linus.linux.sgi.com.

First, let me tell you all that I'm really taken aback by this
situation.  I've seen postings on slashdot.org suggesting that
SGI has taken this machine down because it is in bed with
Microsoft etc. etc. and all kinds of negative speculation and
nonsense.  I was even contacted by the press on this (could
you believe that :-)  Let me make it very clear:

	1) No one at SGI has taken this service down and
	   guess what: we are going to bring it back up again.

	2) The machine itself is not down. The problem is in the
	   routing to the machine and from what I last heard,
	   it seems to be a hardware problem.

	3) I talked to people who can help fixing this and they
	   want to help, the only problem they have is that they
	   have other "real-work" priorities which is why it is
	   talking so long to fix it.

	4) The timing when this thing decided to break (close to the
	   announcement of the SGI Visual Workstation) is purely
	   coincidental.

	5) As far as many of us SGI'ers are concerned, SGI support
	   to Open Source and the Linux community will only grow
	   with time.   See for example Jeremy Allison's cool
	   Samba 2.0 announcement yesterday:

		http://lwn.net/daily/samba2.0.html

	   As some of you know, SGI now is the main founder of
	   the Samba project putting real big money and serious
	   (Origin server) hardware donations to help it grow,
	   improve, and kick butt.

Mirroring linus.linux.sgi.com is a good idea and once it is
back up I encourage more volunteers to step up and do it.

Thanks for your patience and support!

--
Peace, Ariel

:
:Alex deVries wrote:
:
:> I don't mean to seem like a bother, but what is the deal with
:> linus.linux.sgi.com? We really need that machine for development.  I think
:> it's been a week now.
:>
:> If SGI isn't going to be able to support that service, that's fine.  Could
:> you let us know so we can make other arrangements?
:>
:
:I've got a challenge S connected to the internet on a 34mbit connection,
:running the (somewhat modificated) hardhat distribution.
:
:I am more then willing to host the linux/SGI pages on this machine, and put
:the machine up
:for development if people are intrested.
:
:I don't know if the www.linux.sgi.com machine is ever going to get back up,
:but if it isn't,
:this is maybe a solution?
:
:Greetz,
:
:Richard
:
:


-- 
Peace, Ariel

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Ariel Faigon]

Hi,

Looks like I need to give a status update on linus.linux.sgi.com.

First, let me tell you all that I'm really taken aback by this
situation.  I've seen postings on slashdot.org suggesting that
SGI has taken this machine down because it is in bed with
Microsoft etc. etc. and all kinds of negative speculation and
nonsense.  I was even contacted by the press on this (could
you believe that :-)  Let me make it very clear:

	1) No one at SGI has taken this service down and
	   guess what: we are going to bring it back up again.

	2) The machine itself is not down. The problem is in the
	   routing to the machine and from what I last heard,
	   it seems to be a hardware problem.

	3) I talked to people who can help fixing this and they
	   want to help, the only problem they have is that they
	   have other "real-work" priorities which is why it is
	   talking so long to fix it.

	4) The timing when this thing decided to break (close to the
	   announcement of the SGI Visual Workstation) is purely
	   coincidental.

	5) As far as many of us SGI'ers are concerned, SGI support
	   to Open Source and the Linux community will only grow
	   with time.   See for example Jeremy Allison's cool
	   Samba 2.0 announcement yesterday:

		http://lwn.net/daily/samba2.0.html

	   As some of you know, SGI now is the main founder of
	   the Samba project putting real big money and serious
	   (Origin server) hardware donations to help it grow,
	   improve, and kick butt.

Mirroring linus.linux.sgi.com is a good idea and once it is
back up I encourage more volunteers to step up and do it.

Thanks for your patience and support!

--
Peace, Ariel

:
:Alex deVries wrote:
:
:> I don't mean to seem like a bother, but what is the deal with
:> linus.linux.sgi.com? We really need that machine for development.  I think
:> it's been a week now.
:>
:> If SGI isn't going to be able to support that service, that's fine.  Could
:> you let us know so we can make other arrangements?
:>
:
:I've got a challenge S connected to the internet on a 34mbit connection,
:running the (somewhat modificated) hardhat distribution.
:
:I am more then willing to host the linux/SGI pages on this machine, and put
:the machine up
:for development if people are intrested.
:
:I don't know if the www.linux.sgi.com machine is ever going to get back up,
:but if it isn't,
:this is maybe a solution?
:
:Greetz,
:
:Richard
:
:


-- 
Peace, Ariel

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Alan Cox]

> situation.  I've seen postings on slashdot.org suggesting that
> SGI has taken this machine down because it is in bed with
> Microsoft etc. etc. and all kinds of negative speculation and

Umm.. thats slashdot for you Im afraid. Proof that the IQ of a group
of people is frequently the sum of the lowest 10% of the members

Alan

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[ralf]

On Fri, Jan 15, 1999 at 11:09:53AM -0800, Ariel Faigon wrote:

> Looks like I need to give a status update on linus.linux.sgi.com.
> 
> First, let me tell you all that I'm really taken aback by this
> situation.  I've seen postings on slashdot.org suggesting that
> SGI has taken this machine down because it is in bed with
> Microsoft etc. etc. and all kinds of negative speculation and
> nonsense.  I was even contacted by the press on this (could
> you believe that :-)  Let me make it very clear:
> 
> 	1) No one at SGI has taken this service down and
> 	   guess what: we are going to bring it back up again.
> 
> 	2) The machine itself is not down. The problem is in the
> 	   routing to the machine and from what I last heard,
> 	   it seems to be a hardware problem.

The tracroute I just did looks like a) SGI's engineering pipe needs a
serious upgrade due to packet loss and b) there is a routing loop somewhere.
So if the router people can't fix it maybe moivng the machine to an address
which actually has a functional setup?

> 	4) The timing when this thing decided to break (close to the
> 	   announcement of the SGI Visual Workstation) is purely
> 	   coincidental.

Seconded.  SGI (and actually the whole industry) is _W_A_Y_ more OSS
friendly than /. rumors say.

Quite frankly, having to answer several private emails aobut this topic I'm
still surprised how much policital damage a stupid messed up route can
cause.

  Ralf

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[William J. Earl]

Alex deVries writes:
 > 
 > I don't mean to seem like a bother, but what is the deal with
 > linus.linux.sgi.com? We really need that machine for development.  I think
 > it's been a week now.

      I apologize for SGI for the long delay.  I just clarified to the
support people that it is indeed a critical resource, and they say it
should be back within two hours.  Some failed hardware (not,
apparently, on that machine itself) is being replaced.  For the longer
term, I will work on assuring more stable service.

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Miguel de Icaza]

> 	     As some of you know, SGI now is the main founder of
> 	     the Samba project putting real big money and serious
> 	     (Origin server) hardware donations to help it grow,
> 	     improve, and kick butt.

Wow.  Did the send one of those to the Samba team?

My god.  You impressed me.

Even if you did not send one, the Samba 2.0 announcement is extremely
interesting: Because there is no way other proprietary SMB file
serving protocol running on any sort of machine will be able to beat
the Origin-2000 serving files :-)

Miguel.

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[David S. Miller]

   From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
   Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:59:18 +0100

   Seconded.  SGI (and actually the whole industry) is _W_A_Y_ more
   OSS friendly than /. rumors say.

Although I am a supporter of SGI and I understand their friendlyness
to the community, I do have to state that the rumors and feelings are
unsurprising given that:

1) SGI has no UNIX story (yet) on their new hardware.
2) SGI has no binary compatability story on the new hardware for
   customers who have made an investment in their MIPS line.
   (Sun will be acquiring what SGI has (ability to execute x86
    binaries) in the very near future in their Sparc processors,
    without screwing their customers over the way SGI is at the
    moment... I can't say how they'll do it, but all I can say is
    that they are doing it the right way)

And todays announcement of how much of their MIPS investment stake
they are getting rid of, will only amplify how people feel about the
above.

So if SGI has some exciting news for us OSS people in the pipeline,
and they are just holding off for "the right time", I think this is a
miscalculated delay and will hurt them tremendously.  The sooner the
better, is anyone listening?

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Ariel Faigon]

David,

I delayed a lot reponding to this email and I would have
much preferred to talk to you about all this over lunch
rather than starting a mostly off-topic flame war on this list.
But since you've made your concerns public I just have to clarify
some misunderstandings before this gets out of control.

Regarding Sun: Sun is clearly very worried about the recent
Visual Workstations from SGI.  Their web site speaks volumes
about how worried they are. In fact, for two years, I haven't
heard Sun so much preoccupied with SGI as I've seen it last
week.   The binary compatibility FUD is ironic considering
that they have broken binary compatibility as well as source
compatibility so many times in their history (m68k -> SPARC
SPARC - x86, SunOs -> Solaris) believe me I know since I've
been a Sun customer and an ISV.  Not to mention their 64-bit
story which has been "in the making" for about 4 years now since
we had it in IRIX (including full binary support of both
32-bit and 64-bit apps on the same machine).   Enough about
Sun, OK.   The Unix story of the new workstations will be out
soon.  All I would ask is a bit of patience :-).

The MIPS announcement seems to be widely misunderstood as well
As you know, SGI divested of the _embedded_ part of MIPS last
year.  It was an excellent decision considering the 15% of
the divested company (previously an internal, pretty "invisible"
SGI asset) now has a market cap or $1.2 billion (that's almost
_half_ of the SGI market cap!) while SGI is still holding 85%
of the MIPS shares (worth about 3 times SGI itself...)

The MIPS embedded market is very different than the computer
systems market and while SGI is still developing future MIPS
high-end processors (the R12K, and the R14K), the standalone
MIPS company is focusing on Windows-CE, consumer electronics,
set top boxes, and the Nintendos' Sony PlayStations of the world.
The decision to divest of the remaining 85% of MIPS is explained
in the proxy for those interested in the nitty gritty, but what it
means basically is that SGI can use the money for stuff that is
more aligned with its core businesses, while MIPS will be less
tied by alien interests, to better pursue its low-end markets.

Lastly, you express the opinion that holding off good announcements
for "the right time" is not a good idea, and here (surprise!)
I have to fully agree with you.  So to your question "is anyone
listening" - you betcha.  Just wait till I'm the CEO :-)

So, are we meeting for lunch this week ?

-- 
Peace, Ariel

:
:   From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
:   Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:59:18 +0100
:
:   Seconded.  SGI (and actually the whole industry) is _W_A_Y_ more
:   OSS friendly than /. rumors say.
:
:Although I am a supporter of SGI and I understand their friendlyness
:to the community, I do have to state that the rumors and feelings are
:unsurprising given that:
:
:1) SGI has no UNIX story (yet) on their new hardware.
:2) SGI has no binary compatability story on the new hardware for
:   customers who have made an investment in their MIPS line.
:   (Sun will be acquiring what SGI has (ability to execute x86
:    binaries) in the very near future in their Sparc processors,
:    without screwing their customers over the way SGI is at the
:    moment... I can't say how they'll do it, but all I can say is
:    that they are doing it the right way)
:
:And todays announcement of how much of their MIPS investment stake
:they are getting rid of, will only amplify how people feel about the
:above.
:
:So if SGI has some exciting news for us OSS people in the pipeline,
:and they are just holding off for "the right time", I think this is a
:miscalculated delay and will hurt them tremendously.  The sooner the
:better, is anyone listening?
:
:Later,
:David S. Miller
:davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com
:

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Ariel Faigon]

David,

I delayed a lot reponding to this email and I would have
much preferred to talk to you about all this over lunch
rather than starting a mostly off-topic flame war on this list.
But since you've made your concerns public I just have to clarify
some misunderstandings before this gets out of control.

Regarding Sun: Sun is clearly very worried about the recent
Visual Workstations from SGI.  Their web site speaks volumes
about how worried they are. In fact, for two years, I haven't
heard Sun so much preoccupied with SGI as I've seen it last
week.   The binary compatibility FUD is ironic considering
that they have broken binary compatibility as well as source
compatibility so many times in their history (m68k -> SPARC
SPARC - x86, SunOs -> Solaris) believe me I know since I've
been a Sun customer and an ISV.  Not to mention their 64-bit
story which has been "in the making" for about 4 years now since
we had it in IRIX (including full binary support of both
32-bit and 64-bit apps on the same machine).   Enough about
Sun, OK.   The Unix story of the new workstations will be out
soon.  All I would ask is a bit of patience :-).

The MIPS announcement seems to be widely misunderstood as well
As you know, SGI divested of the _embedded_ part of MIPS last
year.  It was an excellent decision considering the 15% of
the divested company (previously an internal, pretty "invisible"
SGI asset) now has a market cap or $1.2 billion (that's almost
_half_ of the SGI market cap!) while SGI is still holding 85%
of the MIPS shares (worth about 3 times SGI itself...)

The MIPS embedded market is very different than the computer
systems market and while SGI is still developing future MIPS
high-end processors (the R12K, and the R14K), the standalone
MIPS company is focusing on Windows-CE, consumer electronics,
set top boxes, and the Nintendos' Sony PlayStations of the world.
The decision to divest of the remaining 85% of MIPS is explained
in the proxy for those interested in the nitty gritty, but what it
means basically is that SGI can use the money for stuff that is
more aligned with its core businesses, while MIPS will be less
tied by alien interests, to better pursue its low-end markets.

Lastly, you express the opinion that holding off good announcements
for "the right time" is not a good idea, and here (surprise!)
I have to fully agree with you.  So to your question "is anyone
listening" - you betcha.  Just wait till I'm the CEO :-)

So, are we meeting for lunch this week ?

-- 
Peace, Ariel

:
:   From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
:   Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:59:18 +0100
:
:   Seconded.  SGI (and actually the whole industry) is _W_A_Y_ more
:   OSS friendly than /. rumors say.
:
:Although I am a supporter of SGI and I understand their friendlyness
:to the community, I do have to state that the rumors and feelings are
:unsurprising given that:
:
:1) SGI has no UNIX story (yet) on their new hardware.
:2) SGI has no binary compatability story on the new hardware for
:   customers who have made an investment in their MIPS line.
:   (Sun will be acquiring what SGI has (ability to execute x86
:    binaries) in the very near future in their Sparc processors,
:    without screwing their customers over the way SGI is at the
:    moment... I can't say how they'll do it, but all I can say is
:    that they are doing it the right way)
:
:And todays announcement of how much of their MIPS investment stake
:they are getting rid of, will only amplify how people feel about the
:above.
:
:So if SGI has some exciting news for us OSS people in the pipeline,
:and they are just holding off for "the right time", I think this is a
:miscalculated delay and will hurt them tremendously.  The sooner the
:better, is anyone listening?
:
:Later,
:David S. Miller
:davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com
:

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Miguel de Icaza]

> The binary compatibility FUD is ironic considering
> that they have broken binary compatibility as well as source
> compatibility so many times in their history (m68k -> SPARC
> SPARC - x86, SunOs -> Solaris) believe me I know since I've
> been a Sun customer and an ISV.  

You forgot the breakage in the various Solaris 2.n->2.n+1

At least the 2.4->2.5 was painful for me

Miguel.

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Miguel de Icaza]

> The binary compatibility FUD is ironic considering
> that they have broken binary compatibility as well as source
> compatibility so many times in their history (m68k -> SPARC
> SPARC - x86, SunOs -> Solaris) believe me I know since I've
> been a Sun customer and an ISV.  

You forgot the breakage in the various Solaris 2.n->2.n+1

At least the 2.4->2.5 was painful for me

Miguel.

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Eric Kimminau]

Im not an official spokes person by any stretch of anyones's imagination, but
the dream of IRIX binary compatability on an NT X86 architecture system is a
pipe dream. Sun gets away with it by running Solaris on X86. I seriously doubt
IRIX be ported to x86 any time in the near future, if ever.

Again, I'm not the guy who makes the decision. I don't work for the group that
makes the decision or has anything to do with helping make the decision.

As for "screwing their customers", ask Sun when they are going to support NT
on any of their systems. At least SGI is making it possible to start thinking
about doing UNIX environment kinds of tasks in the NT world rather than
snubbing their nose at the people who have made the business decision to
migrate to that environment.

As for "no UNIX story" on the 320 or 540 hardware, all I can say is that there
have been a lot of Linux rumors. Nothing substantiated.

HP uses Intel CPU's. Compaq now owns DEC. Who says SGI has to own the company
that makes the CPU's we put in our systems? 

For being an SGI supporter, this sure sounds like Sun FUD, IMHO.

EAK.


"David S. Miller" wrote:
> 
>    From: ralf@uni-koblenz.de
>    Date: Fri, 15 Jan 1999 22:59:18 +0100
> 
>    Seconded.  SGI (and actually the whole industry) is _W_A_Y_ more
>    OSS friendly than /. rumors say.
> 
> Although I am a supporter of SGI and I understand their friendlyness
> to the community, I do have to state that the rumors and feelings are
> unsurprising given that:
> 
> 1) SGI has no UNIX story (yet) on their new hardware.
> 2) SGI has no binary compatability story on the new hardware for
>    customers who have made an investment in their MIPS line.
>    (Sun will be acquiring what SGI has (ability to execute x86
>     binaries) in the very near future in their Sparc processors,
>     without screwing their customers over the way SGI is at the
>     moment... I can't say how they'll do it, but all I can say is
>     that they are doing it the right way)
> 
> And todays announcement of how much of their MIPS investment stake
> they are getting rid of, will only amplify how people feel about the
> above.
> 
> So if SGI has some exciting news for us OSS people in the pipeline,
> and they are just holding off for "the right time", I think this is a
> miscalculated delay and will hurt them tremendously.  The sooner the
> better, is anyone listening?
> 
> Later,
> David S. Miller
> davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com

-- 
---------1---------2---------3---------4---------5---------6---------7
Eric Kimminau        eak@detroit.sgi.com      Field Technical Support
       SGI 39001 W. 12 Mile Rd.  Farmington, MI 48331-2903
      Vox:(248)848-4455  Fax:(248)848-5600  VNET:6-327-4455  

              "I speak my mind and no one else's."
 "I am a bomb technician. If you see me running, try to keep up..."
                    http://support.sgi.com

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[David S. Miller]

   Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:40:30 -0500
   From: Eric Kimminau <eak@detroit.sgi.com>

   As for "screwing their customers", ask Sun when they are going to
   support NT on any of their systems.

Never, whats so wrong with that?  To quote their VP of desktops "One
more Linux user is one less NT user."  I think this makes their stance
on NT pretty obvious.  Also look at their position in the M$ trial.
They have things like WABI, which runs on Sparc right now, so if you
just need the M$ applications, you can run them.

   At least SGI is making it possible to start thinking about doing
   UNIX environment kinds of tasks in the NT world rather than
   snubbing their nose at the people who have made the business
   decision to migrate to that environment.

If everyone jumps off a bridge, should we follow right after them?

I think the problem is the direction of the thinking here.  Why do we
need to bring Unix to NT, if all users want is both environments and
the applications, then bring NT to Unix since we know Unix is better
(sic) and has fewer fallacies than NT does.

   As for "no UNIX story" on the 320 or 540 hardware, all I can say is
   that there have been a lot of Linux rumors. Nothing substantiated.

And here is the point I was trying to make, rumors aren't going to get
anywhere.  SGI is taking too long to commit if they do have something
in the pipeline, everything is up in the air, and the best this does
is either:

1) Give the rumors (right or wrong) more weight than an official
   statement, until such a statement is made.
2) Put question marks above the heads of everyone else.

   HP uses Intel CPU's. Compaq now owns DEC. Who says SGI has to own
   the company that makes the CPU's we put in our systems? 

I never said that.  All I said was that it would have been wiser to
give users a one SGI platform family migration scheme, ie. have a
family of MIPS machine that ran what the next generation machine would
(even if only at such a level to assure successful ports)...  It's
like the difference between:

1) A bomb is about to drop, assume the position.

and

2) A bomb is dropping in a month, here are the tools and resources to
   build a shelter for yourselves so you are prepared.

   For being an SGI supporter, this sure sounds like Sun FUD, IMHO.

I am a supporter, but this does not mean I need to close my eyes when
I believe very bad decisions are being made.  That would make me a
sheep.  I think SGI's stalling is a mistake, so I'm going to talk
about it.

When I was an intern at SGI, I told people things like this.  I'm very
outspoken, and I'll tell people when they make mistakes, and I'll also
make suggestions about future decisions when I am listened to about
such matters.

The "everyone else's shit stinks except mine" mentality has been the
source of failure behind a few engineering teams and companies out
there.  I think SGI is doing some cool stuff, the hardware looks
impressive.  I also think Sun is doing a lot of nice stuff too.  I
choose to learn from what both of them are doing, instead of being a
blind pundit for one or the other.

Later,
David S. Miller
davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[dmanddmer]

Personally, since SGI made the questionable decision to port to NT, I
wish they would commit to AMD's processors instead of Intels.  The K7 is
going to be a real screamer and at significantly lower prices than
Intel, always at least 25% less by company dictate.  Their floating
point has nearly caught up with Intel, too.
I also wish that SGI would put Irix or Linux with all the Irix tools on
the PC-based box.
Porting to NT alone is probably not enough to save the company.  It
didn't work for Intergraph.

BTW, how does the graphic performance on the VPC compare to, say,
Reality Engine or Infinite Reality?

David M.
 

David S. Miller wrote:
> 
>    Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:40:30 -0500
>    From: Eric Kimminau <eak@detroit.sgi.com>
> 
>    As for "screwing their customers", ask Sun when they are going to
>    support NT on any of their systems.
> 
> Never, whats so wrong with that?  To quote their VP of desktops "One
> more Linux user is one less NT user."  I think this makes their stance
> on NT pretty obvious.  Also look at their position in the M$ trial.
> They have things like WABI, which runs on Sparc right now, so if you
> just need the M$ applications, you can run them.
> 
>    At least SGI is making it possible to start thinking about doing
>    UNIX environment kinds of tasks in the NT world rather than
>    snubbing their nose at the people who have made the business
>    decision to migrate to that environment.
> 
> If everyone jumps off a bridge, should we follow right after them?
> 
> I think the problem is the direction of the thinking here.  Why do we
> need to bring Unix to NT, if all users want is both environments and
> the applications, then bring NT to Unix since we know Unix is better
> (sic) and has fewer fallacies than NT does.
> 
>    As for "no UNIX story" on the 320 or 540 hardware, all I can say is
>    that there have been a lot of Linux rumors. Nothing substantiated.
> 
> And here is the point I was trying to make, rumors aren't going to get
> anywhere.  SGI is taking too long to commit if they do have something
> in the pipeline, everything is up in the air, and the best this does
> is either:
> 
> 1) Give the rumors (right or wrong) more weight than an official
>    statement, until such a statement is made.
> 2) Put question marks above the heads of everyone else.
> 
>    HP uses Intel CPU's. Compaq now owns DEC. Who says SGI has to own
>    the company that makes the CPU's we put in our systems?
> 
> I never said that.  All I said was that it would have been wiser to
> give users a one SGI platform family migration scheme, ie. have a
> family of MIPS machine that ran what the next generation machine would
> (even if only at such a level to assure successful ports)...  It's
> like the difference between:
> 
> 1) A bomb is about to drop, assume the position.
> 
> and
> 
> 2) A bomb is dropping in a month, here are the tools and resources to
>    build a shelter for yourselves so you are prepared.
> 
>    For being an SGI supporter, this sure sounds like Sun FUD, IMHO.
> 
> I am a supporter, but this does not mean I need to close my eyes when
> I believe very bad decisions are being made.  That would make me a
> sheep.  I think SGI's stalling is a mistake, so I'm going to talk
> about it.
> 
> When I was an intern at SGI, I told people things like this.  I'm very
> outspoken, and I'll tell people when they make mistakes, and I'll also
> make suggestions about future decisions when I am listened to about
> such matters.
> 
> The "everyone else's shit stinks except mine" mentality has been the
> source of failure behind a few engineering teams and companies out
> there.  I think SGI is doing some cool stuff, the hardware looks
> impressive.  I also think Sun is doing a lot of nice stuff too.  I
> choose to learn from what both of them are doing, instead of being a
> blind pundit for one or the other.
> 
> Later,
> David S. Miller
> davem@dm.cobaltmicro.com

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[David Watters]

On Jan 18,  9:19pm, David S. Miller wrote:
> Subject: Re: linus.linux.sgi.com
>    Date: Mon, 18 Jan 1999 23:40:30 -0500
>    From: Eric Kimminau <eak@detroit.sgi.com>
>
>    As for "screwing their customers", ask Sun when they are going to
>    support NT on any of their systems.
>
> Never, whats so wrong with that?  To quote their VP of desktops "One
> more Linux user is one less NT user."  I think this makes their stance
> on NT pretty obvious.  Also look at their position in the M$ trial.
> They have things like WABI, which runs on Sparc right now, so if you
> just need the M$ applications, you can run them.
...
> I think the problem is the direction of the thinking here.  Why do we
> need to bring Unix to NT, if all users want is both environments and
> the applications, then bring NT to Unix since we know Unix is better
> (sic) and has fewer fallacies than NT does.


Everyone has to evaluate a situation from their own perspective.

Here is mine as an Engineer on the sales side of SGI:

1) SGI used to get 50%+ of its revenue from CAD/CAM.

2) All CAD/CAM apps have either gone NT as their primary platform or are
   finishing moving to NT as their primary platform.

3) I have been involved in losses that were soley because we didn't have
   an NT box, regardless of being nearly 60% faster than a 500MHz Alpha/NT
   box on a customer benchmark.

4) WABI is neat and we have a pretty good, custom tweaked version of
   SoftWindows95 but you can't run ProE, SDRC, CATIA, etc. under
   WABI.

So, for a $3-4B company to protect and win back a significant part of
its past business and to resume growth, SGI _HAD_ to build an NT box.
We all have to cope with that fact.

It sure would be nice for that _VERY SMALL_ group of users that want to
run UNIX on the 320/540 if there was a Linux port available soon.

The question I ask you is would SGI have been wiser and gained back
its share of what was once a $1B+ business in CAD/CAM if the 320/540 had
run Linux or IRIX out of the gate?

Would'n it be cool if all CAD/CAM apps went to Linux as their primary
platform and not NT?  The problem is that SGI can't spend billions of
dollars and put its market focus into a market (CAD on linux) that
doesn't exist.

Best regards,

David

(IRIX fan, MIPS fan, but above all SGI graphics fan)

-- 
David Watters         |                 Silicon*Graphics 
Systems Engineer      |                http://www.sgi.com/ 
Silicon Graphics, Inc.|    http://reality.sgi.com/davester/  (6/13/97) 
david.watters@sgi.com |  1.800.800.SGI1 (Sales) 1.800.800.4SGI (Support) 
DID 1.614.844.3820    |   http://www.nintendo.com/ (N64, the $130 SGI!) 

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[David Watters]

On Jan 19,  5:21am, dmanddmer wrote:
> Subject: Re: linus.linux.sgi.com
> Personally, since SGI made the questionable decision to port to NT, I
> wish they would commit to AMD's processors instead of Intels.

SGI couldn't.  SGI had to replace so much of the IA/440xx chipset that there
had to be a prettty big agreement with Intel covering a lot of issues,
machines, processors, and markets to allow SGI to, for example, implement
the frontside bus in their own chipset.  Don't forget all those Co'op
marketing dollars too. -dong ^dong -dong ^^dong

> Porting to NT alone is probably not enough to save the company.  It
> didn't work for Intergraph.

Yeah, but Intergraph is lame so they had that working against them too. :)


-- 
David Watters         |                 Silicon*Graphics 
Systems Engineer      |                http://www.sgi.com/ 
Silicon Graphics, Inc.|    http://reality.sgi.com/davester/  (6/13/97) 
david.watters@sgi.com |  1.800.800.SGI1 (Sales) 1.800.800.4SGI (Support) 
DID 1.614.844.3820    |   http://www.nintendo.com/ (N64, the $130 SGI!) 

Re: linus.linux.sgi.com

[Alex deVries]

Do you think we could go back to talking about Linux on SGI instead of
having arguments comparing Sun and SGIs business strategies?

- Alex

-- 
Alex deVries, puffin on LinuxNet.
I know exactly what I want in life.

linus.linux.sgi.com

[ralf]

I've moved some files around in order to make space for the Intel
stuff which I expect sooner or later to be placed there.  Mirror
sites will have to fix the mirror config files.

  Ralf

linus.linux.sgi.com

[Ulf Carlsson]

Hi,

What happend to linus, he seems to be dead. He doesn't reply on pings anymore.

Is it the router once again?

- Ulf