RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware - SCO

This is a discussion on RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware - SCO ; I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to a new VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest patches. But I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In order to use the full hardware ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 7 of 7

Thread: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware

  1. RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware

    I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to a new
    VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest patches. But
    I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In order to use
    the full hardware capabilities, do I need to do any license
    installation other than the basic server license and the developer
    license I'm using for the system? The Skunkware published version of
    'top' reports the 1 Gig of RAM accurately, and I haven't installed an
    SMP license yet.

  2. Re: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Nico Kadel-Garcia"
    Newsgroups: comp.unix.sco.misc
    To:
    Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 3:35 AM
    Subject: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware


    > I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to a new
    > VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest patches. But
    > I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In order to use
    > the full hardware capabilities, do I need to do any license
    > installation other than the basic server license and the developer
    > license I'm using for the system? The Skunkware published version of
    > 'top' reports the 1 Gig of RAM accurately, and I haven't installed an
    > SMP license yet.


    If you are ever going to use smp, then you should install smp immediately after base install (before rs506a / rs507a)
    Otherwise, you should reinstall just about every patch after you install smp, because many of the patches updated smp.
    The same is true for the native development system.
    Install order should be (today, for 5.0.7):
    1 base OS (using this updated iso image ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/openserver5/50...Jun05_1800.iso)
    2 smp
    3 devsys
    4 touch /tmp/gnutools.nocheck
    5 gnutools
    6 mp5
    7 oss672a
    8 oss674a
    9 wd_3.0

    and then whatever else may apply to your particular case from this list
    http://www.sco.com/support/update/do...sr507list.html
    Bearing in mind that any patch or driver whose date is earlier than that of mp5, has probably been included in and superceded by mp5.

    The gnutools oddness above is because mp5 includes gwxlibs, and gwxlibs slightly overlaps gnutools.
    The files that are in both gnutools and gwxlibs are much newer in gwxlibs, and so you want to install gnutools before gwxlibs. The touch command works around the problem that gnutools will complain that you need gwxlibs first. You _could_ install an older gwxlibs first, then gnutools, then the current gwxlibs, but there is no need.

    And today (this wasn't true when 5.0.7 first came out so many existing boxes won't have done this, and that wasn't a fault at the time) but today, you should always install smp, unlicensed, because starting with mp4 or mp5 you now get multi-core and hyperthreading support for free for a single cpu, but it needs smp to actually do it. So install smp, don't license it, then when mp5 gets installed it updates smp and makes it partially active. That is, if you have a single dual or quad core cpu, you get to use all the cores now, which used to require buying smp.

    I beleive this is only true for 5.0.7. (and 6.0.x and unixware but who cares about those?
    Well, except I see now there is samba 3.0.24 for osr6 and unixware only, and that is the first and only so-far version of samba on any sco product that is new enough to fully work with Vista.

    --
    Brian K. White brian@aljex.com http://www.myspace.com/KEYofR
    +++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
    filePro BBx Linux SCO FreeBSD #callahans Satriani Filk!


  3. Re: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware

    Brian K. White typed (on Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 07:27:13AM -0400):
    | From: "Nico Kadel-Garcia"
    | > I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to
    | > a new VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest
    | > patches. But I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In
    | > order to use the full hardware capabilities, do I need to do any
    | > license installation other than the basic server license and the
    | > developer license I'm using for the system? The Skunkware published
    | > version of 'top' reports the 1 Gig of RAM accurately, and I haven't
    | > installed an SMP license yet.
    |
    | If you are ever going to use smp, then you should install smp
    | immediately after base install (before rs506a / rs507a) Otherwise, you
    | should reinstall just about every patch after you install smp, because
    | many of the patches updated smp. The same is true for the native
    | development system. Install order should be (today, for 5.0.7):
    | 1 base OS (using this updated iso image ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/openserver5/50...Jun05_1800.iso)
    | 2 smp
    | 3 devsys
    | 4 touch /tmp/gnutools.nocheck
    | 5 gnutools
    | 6 mp5
    | 7 oss672a
    | 8 oss674a
    | 9 wd_3.0

    Why not just run patchck and let it do (most of) the work?

    --
    JP

  4. Re: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Jean-Pierre Radley"
    Newsgroups: comp.unix.sco.misc
    To:
    Sent: Thursday, April 10, 2008 12:27 PM
    Subject: Re: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware


    > Brian K. White typed (on Thu, Apr 10, 2008 at 07:27:13AM -0400):
    > | From: "Nico Kadel-Garcia"
    > | > I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to
    > | > a new VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest
    > | > patches. But I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In
    > | > order to use the full hardware capabilities, do I need to do any
    > | > license installation other than the basic server license and the
    > | > developer license I'm using for the system? The Skunkware published
    > | > version of 'top' reports the 1 Gig of RAM accurately, and I haven't
    > | > installed an SMP license yet.
    > |
    > | If you are ever going to use smp, then you should install smp
    > | immediately after base install (before rs506a / rs507a) Otherwise, you
    > | should reinstall just about every patch after you install smp, because
    > | many of the patches updated smp. The same is true for the native
    > | development system. Install order should be (today, for 5.0.7):
    > | 1 base OS (using this updated iso image ftp://ftp.sco.com/pub/openserver5/50...Jun05_1800.iso)
    > | 2 smp
    > | 3 devsys
    > | 4 touch /tmp/gnutools.nocheck
    > | 5 gnutools
    > | 6 mp5
    > | 7 oss672a
    > | 8 oss674a
    > | 9 wd_3.0
    >
    > Why not just run patchck and let it do (most of) the work?


    Because it's new and I haven't seen any history of people using it with no problems and I myself have only used it exactly twice, only once on 5.0.7, and that's not enough for me to go recommending someone else use it.

    Besides, patchck is not going to do steps 1 through 5 above. I have no way of guessing whether it would actually do all the right things if say, you added smp after all the above, would it really fix up everything as if you had installed in the right order? would it really get the gnutools/gwxlibs stuff right? (not that that particulr issue is very critial) Maybe but I would not say it intil I saw it, muliple times. The one time I used it it was essentially at a point where I already had 1 through 4 plus mp4 installed, and it correctly added some patches and updated a couple drivers and I think udk. Thats fine but that's easy at that point. No tricky rolling back or detecting the need to roll back, or patching up as if you'd rolled back and reinstalled.

    Thats why not. Or at least why I can't say to as if I know it's a good answer.
    I would allow that it's probably fine to run it after doing steps 1 through 5, or 1 through 6 yourself and let patchck take it the rest of the way, and keep it up to date from then on. Primarily because it prompts you with what it's planning to do so it's easy to opt out before it does anything that doesn't smell right.

    --
    Brian K. White brian@aljex.com http://www.myspace.com/KEYofR
    +++++[>+++[>+++++>+++++++<<-]<-]>>+.>.+++++.+++++++.-.[>+<---]>++.
    filePro BBx Linux SCO FreeBSD #callahans Satriani Filk!


  5. Re: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware

    On Apr 10, 12:35 am, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
    > I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to a new
    > VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest patches. But
    > I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In order to use
    > the full hardware capabilities, do I need to do any license
    > installation other than the basic server license and the developer
    > license I'm using for the system? The Skunkware published version of
    > 'top' reports the 1 Gig of RAM accurately, and I haven't installed an
    > SMP license yet.


    You're probably configuring VMware to present a single virtual CPU
    (regardless of the number of CPUs present in the hardware layer). If
    so you wouldn't need SMP for performance.

    Whether you need an SMP license "in the drawer" for legal reasons is
    something I can't speak to. A lot of old licenses take some
    interpretation when run in virtual environments.

    Ray Robert
    Three Star Software


  6. Re: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware

    On 10 Apr, 09:35, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
    > I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to a new
    > VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest patches. But
    > I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In order to use
    > the full hardware capabilities, do I need to do any license
    > installation other than the basic server license and the developer
    > license I'm using for the system? The Skunkware published version of
    > 'top' reports the 1 Gig of RAM accurately, and I haven't installed an
    > SMP license yet.


    Nico,

    It would be useful if you could say, when posting, what verison of SCO
    Operating
    System you are using.

    Guessing from past postings, I assume you are using a very old
    obsolete
    version of OpenServer 5. If this is the case then:

    1) OpenServer 5 only supports up to 4 Gb of memory. You would need
    to upgrade to OpenServer 6 to take advantage of memory above 4 Gb

    2) OpenServer 5 requires a license for each additional physical CPU
    that
    is available to it. My assumption would be that VMware presents CPUs
    as
    physical rather than logical devices to the guest OS so you would
    need
    a CPU(also called SMP) license for each additional CPU.

    OpenServer 6 no longer requries licenses for additonal physical CPUs.
    Please see:

    http://www.sco.com/support/update/do...se.php?rid=319

    for details.

    Hope this helps.

    John


  7. Re: RAM/CPU licensing for SCO OpenServer under VMware

    ThreeStar wrote:
    > On Apr 10, 12:35 am, Nico Kadel-Garcia wrote:
    >> I'm trying to shift a systemm from an old hardware platform to a new
    >> VMware installation, all clean and shiny with the latest patches. But
    >> I'm remember some old comments about SCO licensses. In order to use
    >> the full hardware capabilities, do I need to do any license
    >> installation other than the basic server license and the developer
    >> license I'm using for the system? The Skunkware published version of
    >> 'top' reports the 1 Gig of RAM accurately, and I haven't installed an
    >> SMP license yet.

    >
    > You're probably configuring VMware to present a single virtual CPU
    > (regardless of the number of CPUs present in the hardware layer). If
    > so you wouldn't need SMP for performance.
    >
    > Whether you need an SMP license "in the drawer" for legal reasons is
    > something I can't speak to. A lot of old licenses take some
    > interpretation when run in virtual environments.
    >
    > Ray Robert
    > Three Star Software
    >


    Well, I hadn't turned on a second CPU in VMware *yet*. The old physical
    hardware I liberated the license from was reporting 256 Meg of RAM no matter
    how much I put in, but that could have been the hardware. (And a Linux install
    on it doesn't show that problem) So I was looking for heads-up notices on
    licensing issues and booby traps.

    Brian's notices on SMP license installations was very interesting.

+ Reply to Thread