RE: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS) - VMS

This is a discussion on RE: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS) - VMS ; > -----Original Message----- > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca] > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 6:57 PM > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com > Subject: Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS) > > healyzh@aracnet.com wrote: > > Why ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 13 of 13

Thread: RE: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

  1. RE: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)



    > -----Original Message-----
    > From: JF Mezei [mailto:jfmezei.spamnot@vaxination.ca]
    > Sent: Sunday, July 15, 2007 6:57 PM
    > To: Info-VAX@Mvb.Saic.Com
    > Subject: Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)
    >
    > healyzh@aracnet.com wrote:
    > > Why not? We have quite a few at work that were purchased

    > specifically to
    > > run Linux.

    >
    > How much software is available for Linux on that IA64 thing ? Wouldn't
    > running Linux on a non-mainstream platform make it harder to get all
    > the
    > software you want ?
    >
    > I can understand building a one specifc application, (such as
    > calculating PI to the infinity) which doesn't depend on a whole slew of
    > middleware, and thus would not really matter on which platform it is
    > built on.
    >
    > But when you build more modern applications, don't they mostly depend
    > on
    > a lot of middleware ? Do you have to build that middleware yourself
    > from
    > sources on that IA64 thing, or are there vendors such as RedHat, Suse
    > etc which do provide pre=built easy to install middleware for IA64 ?
    >
    > If you replace IA64 with Alpha, do the answers to the above questions
    > change ? What about Power ?
    >


    Theyh definitely change with Power and other systems. Linux (and UNIX) is
    fundamentally different from systems like OpenVMS in a subtle, but very
    telling way. It is quite simply, built to be portable using a portable
    language.

    (As an aside, "C", which is the "common tongue" of all Unix distributions,
    is basically portable PDP-11 assembler language. Even today, and despite
    what the C++ advocates say.

    Virtually anything you want to take the trouble to build is available out
    there for any Linux platform. Vendors sometimes do not realize that to
    support their product under Linux, they really need to port it to x86 32
    bit, x86 64 bit, Power, and so forth. Even though the port is usually easy
    and not a lot of trouble to do. It is amazing to watch a "knowledgeable"
    sales rep tell you with a straight face that "nobody" really uses Linux on
    anything but x86.

    The vast majority of our daily production work (at my day job!) runs under
    zLinux on a mainframe- you don't get much more incompatible with x86
    instructions than on a zSeries machine. Yet we have little or no trouble
    finding and getting the software we need anytime we need it. I did have a
    bit of a cussed time building a radius server because of processor
    differences, but it was only the work of 30 minutes or so to fix and build
    anyway.

    While I love Unix and Linux, this is exactly what I want to avoid porting to
    them; you have to support a plethora of different platforms, or else you
    have to release the code and let the users support themselves.

    OpenVMS is nice.

    -Paul


    > Or is the 8086 the only mainstream architecture for which the
    > applications are easily available and for the others, you need to build
    > the apps yourself ?
    >
    > Would it be fair to say that Linux on IA64 has a greater breath of
    > pre-built applications than Windows on IA64 ? or are they roughly the
    > same ?



  2. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    On 07/25/07 21:05, Paul Raulerson wrote:
    [snip]
    >
    > The vast majority of our daily production work (at my day job!) runs under
    > zLinux on a mainframe- you don't get much more incompatible with x86
    > instructions than on a zSeries machine. Yet we have little or no trouble
    > finding and getting the software we need anytime we need it. I did have a
    > bit of a cussed time building a radius server because of processor
    > differences, but it was only the work of 30 minutes or so to fix and build
    > anyway.
    >
    > While I love Unix and Linux, this is exactly what I want to avoid porting to
    > them; you have to support a plethora of different platforms, or else you
    > have to release the code and let the users support themselves.


    Debian. It's an extremely cross-platform distro.

    95% of all packages (and there are *lots* of them!) build on all
    platforms, from ARM to z/Series, including Alpha, SPARC, MIPS, x86,
    x86-64 & POWER/PPC.

    > OpenVMS is nice.


    COBOL is nicer. If it runs in AccuCOBOL, it runs in AccuCOBOL on
    any platform. Costs a lot, though...

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  3. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    Paul Raulerson wrote:
    > Virtually anything you want to take the trouble to build is available out
    > there for any Linux platform. Vendors sometimes do not realize that to
    > support their product under Linux, they really need to port it to x86 32
    > bit, x86 64 bit, Power, and so forth.


    But that is the crux of the equation. There is a growing number of
    commercial and/or shrinkwrapped applications on Linux. Are those truly
    available on the variety of platforms Linux runs on ?

    Does choosing to run Linux on a non-8086 platform really implies that
    you are accepting that you'll have to compile/build all your apps from
    source and that you may not have access to prebuilt shrinkwrapped software ?

  4. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    On 07/25/07 22:28, JF Mezei wrote:
    > Paul Raulerson wrote:
    >> Virtually anything you want to take the trouble to build is available out
    >> there for any Linux platform. Vendors sometimes do not realize that to
    >> support their product under Linux, they really need to port it to x86 32
    >> bit, x86 64 bit, Power, and so forth.

    >
    > But that is the crux of the equation. There is a growing number of
    > commercial and/or shrinkwrapped applications on Linux. Are those truly
    > available on the variety of platforms Linux runs on ?


    Some are, some aren't.

    > Does choosing to run Linux on a non-8086 platform really implies that
    > you are accepting that you'll have to compile/build all your apps from


    ALL is a very big word.

    > source and that you may not have access to prebuilt shrinkwrapped
    > software ?


    Oracle 10g runs on a half-dozen Linux architectures. DB/2 probably
    runs on x86, x86-64 and, of course, POWER. Most ISVs, though, will
    only support the most popular architecure.

    But since you know that some VMS apps weren't ported from VAX to
    Alpha, and others weren't ported to IA64, and most software was
    ported to Solaris or The Borg Of Redmond, I'm gabberflasted that you
    would question this.

    --
    Ron Johnson, Jr.
    Jefferson LA USA

    Give a man a fish, and he eats for a day.
    Hit him with a fish, and he goes away for good!

  5. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    In article <943bb$46a81519$cef8887a$1204@TEKSAVVY.COM>, JF Mezei writes:
    >
    > But that is the crux of the equation. There is a growing number of
    > commercial and/or shrinkwrapped applications on Linux. Are those truly
    > available on the variety of platforms Linux runs on ?


    The last time I looked for a commercial product for a non-x86 Linux,
    all I found was a web page that said they support Linux. I needed
    PowerPC support.

    So I called thier contact number, left a message, and later got a
    message back directing me to thier web page.

    Based on that experience, I assumed they couldn't support my needs
    on any platform.


  6. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    On Thu, 26 Jul 2007 06:14:10 -0700, Bob Koehler
    wrote:

    > The last time I looked for a commercial product for a non-x86 Linux,
    > all I found was a web page that said they support Linux. I needed
    > PowerPC support.


    http://ibm.com/systems/vlp



    --
    PL/I for OpenVMS
    www.kednos.com

  7. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    JF Mezei wrote:
    > Paul Raulerson wrote:
    >> Virtually anything you want to take the trouble to build is available out
    >> there for any Linux platform. Vendors sometimes do not realize that to
    >> support their product under Linux, they really need to port it to x86 32
    >> bit, x86 64 bit, Power, and so forth.

    >
    > But that is the crux of the equation.


    Of what equation? If you

    > There is a growing number of
    > commercial and/or shrinkwrapped applications on Linux. Are those truly
    > available on the variety of platforms Linux runs on ?


    Support varies.

    > Does choosing to run Linux on a non-8086 platform really implies that
    > you are accepting that you'll have to compile/build all your apps from
    > source and that you may not have access to prebuilt shrinkwrapped
    > software ?


    Support varies.

    Nothing different from OpenVMS, here. Some vendors support a subset of
    the architectures and/or versions.

    Nothing different from Mac OS X here. Some vendors support a subset of
    the architectures and/or versions.

    Nothing different from Microsoft Windows here. Some vendors support a
    subset of the architectures and/or versions.

    Nothing different from HP-UX here. Some vendors...

    Nothing different from Solaris...

    In the Linux space, some vendors ship full source code. Some vendors
    ship encrypted (interpreted) code. Some vendors pick specific
    distributions and installation tools, and ship classic shrink-wrapped
    software. Some vendors have closed and open versions, and sell support
    and/or services and/or hosting and/or integration and/or connectors
    and/or management tools and/or advanced features. And some vendors
    ship the software for whatever platform the customer wants to pay for.

    When you shrink-wrap your mental picture, you only suffocate yourself.

    --
    www.HoffmanLabs.com
    Services for OpenVMS

  8. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    Just to keep this thread alive a little longer... I am trying to make
    a choice between buying:

    (a) An RX2660 Itanium server with 4GB RAM and a single dual core 1.4
    GHz processor or

    (b) an HP Proliant DL380 G5 housing two quad core Xeons at 2 Ghz with
    4GB RAM (thanks to their free processor/double memory offers).

    The Proliant server is quite a bit cheaper.

    I am a contract software consultant. I intend to use the box primarily
    as a development platform, although it will also act as a web-based
    server/applications server/access point.

    I'd like the option to be able to run OpenVMS, although I can't
    justify this in business terms at the time. Does anyone think there is
    a market out there for bringing Open Source programs to OpenVMS and
    supporting them? This might be a valid revenue stream...

    The questions I'd like to ask of your collective wisdom are:

    1. What performance difference can I expect between the two boxes
    (developing C/C++/Java applications).
    2. How much emphasis should I place between the tradeoff between a
    platform with less support (itanium) from ISVs under Linux but with
    OpenVMS capability and a standard Xeon server with full support from
    ISVs but no OpenVMS?
    3. If I run SuSE 10 ES on the Itanium, is this going to be a
    transparent experience compared with running SuSE 10.2 on x86?

    Thanks for the help. I'm looking for someone to convince me that
    buying the Itanium is a sensible move.

    Regards, Mark.


  9. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 07:51:27 -0700, urbancamo
    wrote:

    > Just to keep this thread alive a little longer... I am trying to make
    > a choice between buying:
    >
    > (a) An RX2660 Itanium server with 4GB RAM and a single dual core 1.4
    > GHz processor or
    >
    > (b) an HP Proliant DL380 G5 housing two quad core Xeons at 2 Ghz with
    > 4GB RAM (thanks to their free processor/double memory offers).


    I would go with the latter (or a Dell, they have better service) with two
    NICs
    run a VAX emulator install VMS 7.3 on the emulator, buy a cheap alpha
    cluster it
    and you have all bases covered. Run WASD on the Alpha an advertise its IP
    run
    Linux on non-routable IP.

    If you are primarily running Linux it makes no sense to buy an Itanium.

    I saw on de.comp.os.vms that some guy even installed YellowDog on Sony
    Playstation.

    >
    > The Proliant server is quite a bit cheaper.
    >
    > I am a contract software consultant. I intend to use the box primarily
    > as a development platform, although it will also act as a web-based
    > server/applications server/access point.
    >
    > I'd like the option to be able to run OpenVMS, although I can't
    > justify this in business terms at the time. Does anyone think there is
    > a market out there for bringing Open Source programs to OpenVMS and
    > supporting them? This might be a valid revenue stream...


    I might pay a couple of C's for latest version of (X)emacs:-)
    >
    > The questions I'd like to ask of your collective wisdom are:
    >
    > 1. What performance difference can I expect between the two boxes
    > (developing C/C++/Java applications).
    > 2. How much emphasis should I place between the tradeoff between a
    > platform with less support (itanium) from ISVs under Linux but with
    > OpenVMS capability and a standard Xeon server with full support from
    > ISVs but no OpenVMS?
    > 3. If I run SuSE 10 ES on the Itanium, is this going to be a
    > transparent experience compared with running SuSE 10.2 on x86?
    >
    > Thanks for the help. I'm looking for someone to convince me that
    > buying the Itanium is a sensible move.
    >
    > Regards, Mark.
    >




    --
    PL/I for OpenVMS
    www.kednos.com

  10. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    Tom Linden wrote:
    > On Mon, 06 Aug 2007 07:51:27 -0700, urbancamo
    > wrote:


    > > I'd like the option to be able to run OpenVMS, although I can't
    > > justify this in business terms at the time. Does anyone think there is
    > > a market out there for bringing Open Source programs to OpenVMS and
    > > supporting them? This might be a valid revenue stream...


    > I might pay a couple of C's for latest version of (X)emacs:-)


    Does this mean that it is time to setup a "Bounty" fund like a couple of the
    obscure Open Source OS's have (AROS is one of the big ones doing this, and I
    think the BeOS clone). If I understand how it works correctly, basically
    people chip in money towards a bounty, then when the pot gets big enough
    someone accepts the assignment, then if they succeed within the aloted time
    they get the money.

    I'd be interested in the latest version of *xemacs* running on OpenVMS. I'm
    not that fond of plain emacs, for that matter, I'm not that fond of xemacs,
    but I spend a *lot* of time using it to write software.

    Zane


  11. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    healyzh@aracnet.com schrieb:
    > Tom Linden wrote:
    >
    >>I might pay a couple of C's for latest version of (X)emacs:-)

    >
    > I'd be interested in the latest version of *xemacs* running on OpenVMS. I'm
    > not that fond of plain emacs, for that matter, I'm not that fond of xemacs,
    > but I spend a *lot* of time using it to write software.
    >


    not that I want to start an advocacy thread on favourite editors,
    but one might consider "nedit" as a replacement for *emacs,
    much lower footprint last time I checked and possibly also available for
    VMS.


  12. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    In article ,
    Michael Kraemer wrote:

    > healyzh@aracnet.com schrieb:
    > > Tom Linden wrote:
    > >
    > >>I might pay a couple of C's for latest version of (X)emacs:-)

    > >
    > > I'd be interested in the latest version of *xemacs* running on OpenVMS. I'm
    > > not that fond of plain emacs, for that matter, I'm not that fond of xemacs,
    > > but I spend a *lot* of time using it to write software.
    > >

    >
    > not that I want to start an advocacy thread on favourite editors,
    > but one might consider "nedit" as a replacement for *emacs,
    > much lower footprint last time I checked and possibly also available for
    > VMS.


    Is this version of nedit OK?

    http://h71000.www7.hp.com/freeware/freeware70/NEDIT_Z/

    --
    Paul Sture

    Sue's OpenVMS bookmarks:
    http://eisner.encompasserve.org/~stu...bookmarks.html

  13. Re: Linux (was Re: How many people here use Itanium w VMS)

    Michael Kraemer wrote:
    > not that I want to start an advocacy thread on favourite editors,
    > but one might consider "nedit" as a replacement for *emacs,
    > much lower footprint last time I checked and possibly also available for
    > VMS.


    Actually I'm already using nedit on VMS. However, given the choice, I'd use
    xemacs if I could. This isn't to say that I like (x)emacs, but it does have
    some advantages.

    Zane


+ Reply to Thread