29 Jun
2006
29 Jun
'06
12:57 p.m.
Solaris 9 is the last version to run on all 64-bit
Ultras; Solaris 10 is
very impressive from a networking and virtualization standpoint (plus
ZFS kicks some serious ass) and is what you should be running if at all
possible.
So where's your line between 9 and 10? I just moved from a U1 200E to a U10 333, and I
stuck with
5.9 because I was concerned about usability on the U10.
All other versions can hit the road for all I care
(unless
you need BSD SunOS 4.x for 1980s hardware).
4.1.1_U1 is definitely the one to use for Sun3, but I like 4.1.4 on
my IPX (Sun4c) as well. Never tried 2.5.1, but 2.6 was very slow.
29 Jun
29 Jun
2:33 p.m.
Solaris 9 seems to be where I'm going to run the stuff Ultra5 and under.
I may play with the Ultra5 with 10 -- but it runs quite nicely on the two
boxes I've got and Solaris 10 seemed to be a bit slower.
I'd love to try to get Solaris10 on my Ultra1E with the 170mhz cpu... just
to see if it runs.
I tried Solaris 9 and Solaris8 and Solaris 7 and I don't seem to see a speed
degradation on boxes with enough memory.
I think 10's a bit heavier.
4.1.4U1 works pretty well on Sparc2 class boxes and really nice on mine with
the SparcUp upgrades in 'em.
They all have at least 48mb of memory. 64 if possible.
BIll
On 6/29/06, Scott Quinn <compoobah at valleyimplants.com> wrote:
Solaris 9 is the last version to run on all
64-bit Ultras; Solaris 10 is
very impressive from a networking and virtualization standpoint (plus
ZFS kicks some serious ass) and is what you should be running if at all
possible.
So where's your line between 9 and 10? I just moved from a U1 200E to a
U10 333, and I stuck with
5.9 because I was concerned about usability on the U10.
All other versions can hit the road for all I care
(unless
you need BSD SunOS 4.x for 1980s hardware).
4.1.1_U1 is definitely the one to use for Sun3, but I like 4.1.4 on
my IPX (Sun4c) as well. Never tried 2.5.1, but 2.6 was very slow.
3:22 p.m.
Scott Quinn wrote:
I just inherited a U10 (400+?). I was planning on installing 8.
Is it wiser to move to something else? (I need 8 for Jaluna
cross-development but can keep that on my U1 if need be)
Solaris 9 is the last version to run on all
64-bit Ultras; Solaris 10 is
very impressive from a networking and virtualization standpoint (plus
ZFS kicks some serious ass) and is what you should be running if at all
possible.
So where's your line between 9 and 10? I just moved from a U1 200E to a U10 333, and
I stuck with
5.9 because I was concerned about usability on the U10. 
4:32 p.m.
Don Y wrote:
Scott Quinn wrote:
I just inherited a U10 (400+?). I was planning on installing 8.
Is it wiser to move to something else? (I need 8 for Jaluna
cross-development but can keep that on my U1 if need be)
Solaris 8 is a bit weird about installing IDE drives with the bigdisk
capacity command.
I had to do some finagleing with the format process to get anything
bigger than
8gb to be created.
I am running 9 with a 120gb (130 is the magic spot where the disk size
commands break).
My friend who is running 10 reported at the time he loaded it on a 5 (same
processor and motherboard as the 5) that it required no intervention
in the formatting, it just worked.
I plan to download and try to run 10 with the development stuff, sometime
this summer.
Solaris is much better than most OS's about multi booting. you can stop
the boot process and specify a different root partition and have both 8
and 10 on the same drive, or on separate drives. The firmware specifies
the target that gets booted, and you can change the eeprom under solaris
to specify which one to boot, then reboot to switch from one to the
other with a convenient script on both.
Jim
Solaris 9 is the last version to run on all
64-bit Ultras; Solaris
10 is very impressive from a networking and virtualization
standpoint (plus ZFS kicks some serious ass) and is what you should
be running if at all possible.
So where's your line between 9 and 10? I just moved from a U1 200E to
a U10 333, and I stuck with
5.9 because I was concerned about usability on the U10.
6:55 p.m.
jim stephens wrote:
Don Y wrote:
Ah, I forgot that the U10 is IDE. <shrug>
I just inherited a U10 (400+?). I was planning
on installing 8.
Is it wiser to move to something else? (I need 8 for Jaluna
cross-development but can keep that on my U1 if need be)
Solaris 8 is a bit weird about installing IDE drives with the bigdisk
capacity command. I had to do some finagleing with the format process to
get anything
bigger than 8gb to be created.
Ouch! I have an 18G in the U1 currently and don't recall any problems
getting it set up. Though I don't think any partition is larger than
8G on that machine.
I am running 9 with a 120gb (130 is the magic spot
where the disk size
commands break).
Ah, that won't be a problem for me. I dont like putting big drives
in any single machine. Level 0 backups just take too damn long
(even on a DLT). And, since I only *work* on a little stuff at
a time, I only need a few GB of sandbox to play in.
My friend who is running 10 reported at the time he
loaded it on a 5 (same
processor and motherboard as the 5) that it required no intervention
in the formatting, it just worked.
I plan to download and try to run 10 with the development stuff, sometime
this summer.
Solaris is much better than most OS's about multi booting. you can stop
the boot process and specify a different root partition and have both 8
and 10 on the same drive, or on separate drives. The firmware specifies
the target that gets booted, and you can change the eeprom under solaris
to specify which one to boot, then reboot to switch from one to the
other with a convenient script on both.
Yeah, I've taken the approach of just setting up different machines
to do different things. Easier for me to keep track of. And, easier
for me to repurpose machines as my needs change (which might want
to move hardware around etc)
Thanks!
10:02 p.m.
answers are interspersed to reply to different subjects. don't
know if that is correct or not according to other thread, but I
did trim out some I didn't reply to.
if this is too much Sun for the list, I'm available offline for sun
help too, worked for them and I like solaris, especially with $25
U5's on the market these days. (400+mhz no less)
jim
Don Y wrote:
only problem on IDE, U1 is SCSI. also when U1 came out it was rare to
have anything but raid with capacity over 4 gb / spindel, and when it was
superceded, SCSI was still only up to maybe 18gb. We used one at
Peer Protocols for Raid test suite development, and it was really fast
compared to the SS2's that I had dredged up to see if we wanted to
spend the $$ for a U1. Now my U5's and 10 are blindingly fast to
the point I dont care anymore.
2 120gb drives will fit on the U5 or U10 if need be. why use tape anymore.
I do backups even disk to disk with cpio anyway, then slice and dice and
use par2 to create check / ecc sets. way better than tape, sad to say
jim stephens wrote:
actually reduces the problem of finding enough capacity to keep 100gb of
solaris software I have to a single drive / machine now, instead of apile of
cd's, tapes, and hard to find SCSI drives. dont care about performance if
I only get 9gb / drive
Don Y wrote:
Ah, I forgot that the U10 is IDE. <shrug>
I just inherited a U10 (400+?). I was planning
on installing 8.
Is it wiser to move to something else? (I need 8 for Jaluna
cross-development but can keep that on my U1 if need be)
Solaris 8 is a bit weird about installing IDE drives with the bigdisk
capacity command. I had to do
some finagleing with the format process to get anything
bigger than 8gb to be created.
Ouch! I have an 18G in the U1 currently and don't recall any problems
getting it set up. Though I don't think any partition is larger than
8G on that machine.
I am running 9
with a 120gb (130 is the magic spot where the disk size
commands break).
Ah, that won't be a problem for me. I dont like putting big drives
in any single machine. Level 0 backups just take too damn long
(even on a DLT). And, since I only *work* on a little stuff at
a time, I only need a few GB of sandbox to play in.
30 Jun
30 Jun
5:58 p.m.
On 6/30/06, jim stephens <jwstephens at msm.umr.edu> wrote:
...I like solaris, especially with $25 U5's on the
market these days. (400+mhz no less)
Not that I'm surprised to see U5s down to $25, but what's a U30 go for
these days? I'm trying to balance machine value vs shipping costs.
If I found a U5 at home for $25, I'd probably retire my SS5 as my 24/7
Solaris box. I used to use a U5 every day for C/Perl development, c.
1999; was quite happy with it.
-ethan
2 Jul
2 Jul
7:19 a.m.
If I could find a good U5 -- or even better a U10 with a 400 mhz to replace
my 270
I'd jump on it.
I just put a Linksys ethernet card in the U5 and I'm debating making it a
firewall instead of my Linux box running IPCop.
Bill
On 6/30/06, Ethan Dicks <ethan.dicks at gmail.com> wrote:
On 6/30/06, jim stephens <jwstephens at msm.umr.edu> wrote:
...I like solaris, especially with $25 U5's
on the market these days.
(400+mhz no less)
Not that I'm surprised to see U5s down to $25, but what's a U30 go for
these days? I'm trying to balance machine value vs shipping costs.
If I found a U5 at home for $25, I'd probably retire my SS5 as my 24/7
Solaris box. I used to use a U5 every day for C/Perl development, c.
1999; was quite happy with it.
-ethan
30 Jun
30 Jun
6:13 a.m.
Don Y wrote:
Scott Quinn wrote:
I just inherited a U10 (400+?). I was planning on installing 8.
Is it wiser to move to something else? (I need 8 for Jaluna
cross-development but can keep that on my U1 if need be)
I have a friend who admins Sun servers for a living, and he swears on
v8 as the pinnacle of Sun development. v8 should run just fine on the
U10 if you have >256MB of RAM.
To sort of converge threads, I have a pair of QIC 1/4" tapes for an
Opus board. They're either for a Solaris host or for a SPARC Opus
board. I've never tried to read them, but they're the original Opus
setup tapes. If anyone thinks they'd be useful, hit me off-list.
Doc
Solaris 9 is the last version to run on all
64-bit Ultras; Solaris 10
is very impressive from a networking and virtualization standpoint
(plus ZFS kicks some serious ass) and is what you should be running
if at all possible.
So where's your line between 9 and 10? I just moved from a U1 200E to
a U10 333, and I stuck with
5.9 because I was concerned about usability on the U10.
10:17 a.m.
Doc Shipley wrote:
Don Y wrote:
I'll probably opt for that approach as it will let me keep
my Jaluna toolchain running (I'd have to figure out how to
rebuild it if I moved to 9/10)
I just inherited a U10 (400+?). I was planning
on installing 8.
Is it wiser to move to something else? (I need 8 for Jaluna
cross-development but can keep that on my U1 if need be)
I have a friend who admins Sun servers for a living, and he swears on
v8 as the pinnacle of Sun development. v8 should run just fine on the
U10 if you have >256MB of RAM. To sort of converge threads, I have a pair of QIC
1/4" tapes for an
Opus board. They're either for a Solaris host or for a SPARC Opus
board. I've never tried to read them, but they're the original Opus
setup tapes. If anyone thinks they'd be useful, hit me off-list.
Which Opus card? They made different ones (88K, 32K, etc.)
My software was delivered on (a boatload) of 5" floppies...
6515
days inactive
6518
days old
9 comments
6 participants
participants (6)
-
compoobah＠valleyimplants.com -
dgy＠DakotaCom.Net -
doc＠mdrconsult.com -
ethan.dicks＠gmail.com -
jwstephens＠msm.umr.edu -
pechter＠gmail.com