[rescue] SGI Indigo2 & IRIX 6.5
256 at scud.ca
256 at scud.ca
Sun Nov 30 10:12:19 CST 2008
Good read. With sgi toast. Sun heading that way perhaps what's left for unix hacks. All recent work has demanded linux. Poor me. A.
Sent from my BlackBerry. wireless device
From: Robert Darlington <rdarlington at gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 30 Nov 2008 08:01:59
To: The Rescue List<rescue at sunhelp.org>
Subject: Re: [rescue] SGI Indigo2 & IRIX 6.5
Thank you. As a former admin of Blue Mountain (biggest baddest SGI cluster
ever built), I have to say you brought a tear to my eye. Granted, it was
because I was laughing at the short list of problems with Linux!
On Sun, Nov 30, 2008 at 3:01 AM, Jonathan C. Patschke <jp at celestrion.net>wrote:
> On Sun, 30 Nov 2008, Patrick Finnegan wrote:
> Anyone thinking of running a common, hackish, OS instead of the
>>> amazingly wonderful, snappy, well-optimized and all-around cool
>> Yeah, why would anyone want to run Irix instead of Linux?
> Superior native hardware support, better interactive performance, an X
> server that actually works (with hardware-acceleration), one
> well-integrated journaled FS with GRIO instead of 20-something
> bag-on-the-side filesystems with patented "LOL, WTF, whenever" IO
> scheduling, context-sensitive help facilities that are actually relevant,
> accurate man pages, support for possibly the best optimizing compiler ever
> written, ONE snappy interactive desktop environment instead of eleventy
> competing ones that share neither config data nor system resources very
> well, solid System V and UNIX 95 API support, and I/O throughput Linux
> could only dream of?
> Plenty of performance-enhancing features that other OSes are just
> -finally- starting to implement were in IRIX years ago; "quickstarting"
> comes to mind. OS X does it, and I seem to recall that AIX does it in v6.
> Whatever the current ld.so that Linux uses might finally have support for
> it; who knows?
> Irix on a vintage SGI deserves to be drawn and quartered.
>> Oh, wait, you're trying to say that_Irix_ isn't the "hack".
> One could ask for no better example of "more is less" than your typical
> Linux distribution. Want 17 different print-queue managers? There you
> go! Want -one- that does what you need and is well-supported by the
> entire rest of the system? Well, err....you can't have -everything-, but
> there's probably a tarball of shell scripts on some web forum that will
> fake out your system into printing consistently using an unholy toolchain
> made of ghostscript, netpbm, groff, and transfig.
> Linux will always be a hack. It's always been one, and it used to be
> content with being a hack. Nowadays, it goes around in a sandwich board
> reading "I am not a hack" passing out business cards saying "Linux, like
> Windows, only better!" on one side and "2005^W2006^W2007^W2008^W2009 will
> be the year of Linux on the desktop!" on the back.
> It's really quite sad, because, as hacks go, it's a good one. But, don't
> try to confuse it with a coherent operating system product.
> Jonathan Patschke < "There is great satisfaction in building good tools
> Elgin, TX > for other people to use."
> USA < --Freeman Dyson
> rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
rescue list - http://www.sunhelp.org/mailman/listinfo/rescue
More information about the rescue