Date: Wed, 17 Dec 1997 10:45:01 -0500 (EST) From: "Robert S. Sciuk" <rob@ControlQ.com> To: Jason Evans <jasone@canonware.com> Cc: freebsd-sparc@FreeBSD.ORG Subject: Re: Freeloading FreeBSD for Free -- NOT! Message-ID: <Pine.UW2.3.96.971217103543.2479F-100000@fatlady.controlq.com> In-Reply-To: <Pine.BSF.3.96.971216145708.7374S-100000@paladio>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Tue, 16 Dec 1997, Jason Evans wrote: ... my stuff deleted ... > Sun is in the process of doing exactly what you propose. They currently > have a MB/CPU with PCI (and a number of other things) for about $2900. > This is a bit spendy still. The next board they put out in the next few > months will be much faster, and it will cost almost $1000 less. This > upcoming board will AFAIK have a comparable price/performance to P6-based > boards. As for SMP, that's still spendy, but don't expect it to stay that > way forever. Great! > > As for Sun involvement in this project, there are two things to point out: > > 1) This project was started by a Sun employee (me), so claiming Sun > shouldn't be involved is a bit strange. =) Actually, if I understand your > statement, you're saying that Sun would be stupid to put effort into > porting FreeBSD without offering an affordable system to run it on. Yes, > that would be silly, but they're providing the goods. > Jason, I made no such claims. In fact, I appreciate more than I can reasonably express what such a corporate commitment means to this project in the long run. I am _THRILLED_ to hear that they might be offering board level prodcuts that can be plied by s/w developers such as myself. Moreover, I have NEVER referred to SMCC, SME, SunSoft or any of its affiliates, partners or clients as `stupid' -- Microsoft on the other hand ... well let's not go there 8-). > 2) Sun must necessarily focus on ways to make money. That means selling > new processors. Such is the way of a free economy. It happens in this > case that people stand to benefit in a major way (i.e. FreeBSD for the > UltraSPARC). True -- as long as their motives are not mistaken for a pure altruistic betterment of planet kinda' thingy. My concerns were more along the lines of -- if they do pull the plug will this effort die on the vine ... and I believe that your comments below address my concern -- thanks. > > Even if I weren't working for Sun, chances are that I would limit my > initial efforts to the UltraSPARC, and perhaps the sun4m, just to keep the > project scope reasonable. Porting to the UltraSPARC is the hard part. If > people want to run FreeBSD on the sun4c, they will have lots to work with, > between the UltraSPARC port and what has been done for NetBSD and OpenBSD. > > I should also mention that Ian Logan is planning to put some serious > effort into making sun4m work under FreeBSD. That doesn't take care of > your IPX, but it does cover most machines still commonly used today. ... more of my comments deleted ... > > > I have contemplated scenarios where Sun might pull the plug. There are > certain risks, but you running FreeBSD on an IPX is hardly one of them. =) > ... relevent comments excised ... Thanks Jason ... my concerns are alleviated. Cheers, rss -=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=- Robert S. Sciuk 1032 Howard Rd. Ph:905 632-2466 Control-Q Research Burlington, Ont. Canada Fx:905 632-7417 rob@ControlQ.com L7R 3X5 http://www.ControlQ.com
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.UW2.3.96.971217103543.2479F-100000>