Daniel Carosone | 5 May 04:19 2003
Picon

Visualize B2000 (PA-8500) status?


I'm scrounging around a customer site looking for spare machines to run various
things on.  One of the nicer-looking ones is a HP B2000 Visualize machine.

I find some hints that there may be partial support of this machine in the
source tree (looking at GENERIC and machdep.c).  What's the status of the port
for this machine?

I guess it's somewhere between "non-existent" and "marginal"?

Even if it's not ready to run things on, I can still access the machine to test
stuff, if that's of use?

--
Dan. (not subscribed to port-hp700, please cc: replies to me here)

Michael Wolfson | 9 May 00:24 2003

hp700 part of next release?

Howdy,

I was just wondering if there's any chance hp700 will make it into the next
major release of NetBSD.  If so, I could start piecing together INSTALL
notes.

Thanks,
  -- MW

Perry E. Metzger | 10 May 02:23 2003

Re: hp700 part of next release?


Michael Wolfson <michael <at> nosflow.com> writes:
> I was just wondering if there's any chance hp700 will make it into the next
> major release of NetBSD.

It is usually the case that all ports that successfully build etc. are
included in a release.

--

-- 
Perry E. Metzger		perry <at> piermont.com

Michael Wolfson | 10 May 02:33 2003

Re: hp700 part of next release?

At 8:23 PM -0400 5/9/03, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

:)Michael Wolfson <michael <at> nosflow.com> writes:
:)> I was just wondering if there's any chance hp700 will make it into the next
:)> major release of NetBSD.
:)
:)It is usually the case that all ports that successfully build etc. are
:)included in a release.

Yes, but does hp700 successfully build?  releng.netbsd.org doesn't
autobuild it, and there hasn't been a snapshot since 20020706-1.6D.

I'm just trying to get a feel for whether it'll be ready enough that it's
worth spending my time to document the install procedure.

  -- MW

Perry E. Metzger | 10 May 02:36 2003

Re: hp700 part of next release?


Michael Wolfson <michael <at> nosflow.com> writes:
> At 8:23 PM -0400 5/9/03, Perry E. Metzger wrote:
> 
> :)Michael Wolfson <michael <at> nosflow.com> writes:
> :)> I was just wondering if there's any chance hp700 will make it into the next
> :)> major release of NetBSD.
> :)
> :)It is usually the case that all ports that successfully build etc. are
> :)included in a release.
> 
> Yes, but does hp700 successfully build?

Try it and see? build.sh makes it pretty easy if you have a spare box
of almost any architecture...

.pm

Michael Wolfson | 10 May 02:40 2003

Re: hp700 part of next release?

At 8:36 PM -0400 5/9/03, Perry E. Metzger wrote:

:)> Yes, but does hp700 successfully build?
:)
:)Try it and see? build.sh makes it pretty easy if you have a spare box
:)of almost any architecture...

In theory that's a good solution, but given my 28.8 internet connection and
not owning any HDs > 4.5 GB means it's a *lot* easier for me to ask for
someone who's familiar with hp700 code to give me a straight "yes" or "no"
answer.

  -- MW

Izumi Tsutsui | 10 May 04:33 2003
Picon

Re: hp700 part of next release?

In article <87el37mycp.fsf <at> snark.piermont.com>
perry <at> piermont.com wrote:

> > Yes, but does hp700 successfully build?
> 
> Try it and see? build.sh makes it pretty easy if you have a spare box
> of almost any architecture...

(1) Current toolchain does not support hppa--netbsdelf.
    (binutils-2.13.2.1 supports it, but even gcc-3.3_branch doesn't yet)
(2) Current hp700 is broken since SA merge. (lack of mcontext.h etc.)

There are a log of work for hp700 to catch up current MI changes,
but I don't know if anyone is working to fix them.
---
Izumi Tsutsui
tsutsui <at> ceres.dti.ne.jp

Michael Wolfson | 10 May 06:48 2003

Re: hp700 part of next release?

At 11:33 AM +0900 5/10/03, Izumi Tsutsui wrote:

:)(1) Current toolchain does not support hppa--netbsdelf.
:)    (binutils-2.13.2.1 supports it, but even gcc-3.3_branch doesn't yet)
:)(2) Current hp700 is broken since SA merge. (lack of mcontext.h etc.)
:)
:)There are a log of work for hp700 to catch up current MI changes,
:)but I don't know if anyone is working to fix them.

Sounds grim.  Disappointing, but thanks for the status update.  I'll hold
off for now.

  -- MW

Izumi Tsutsui | 10 May 11:05 2003
Picon

Re: hp700 part of next release?

In article <v03130302bae234c1fa89 <at> [10.0.1.2]>
michael <at> nosflow.com wrote:

> :)There are a log of work for hp700 to catch up current MI changes,
> :)but I don't know if anyone is working to fix them.
> 
> Sounds grim.  Disappointing, but thanks for the status update.  I'll hold
> off for now.

Just FYI:

(1) There is working cross toolchain for i386:
ftp://ftp.netbsd.org/pub/NetBSD/misc/fredette/hp700/cross-hppa-netbsd-1.1.0.1.tgz
    (you can use it by pkg_add(1) on i386)

    arch/stand/mkboot can compile on i386 as a host tool (fixed by chuq),
    so I think you can still try pre-SA (prior 1.6P) kernel.

(2) I tried to fix gcc-3.3_branch but it stuck. (non-working patch attached)
    Maybe we should not use dbxelf.h and elfos.h, but not sure.

(3) Diskless NetBSD How-to for hp700 is quite enough:
http://www.netbsd.org/Documentation/network/netboot/intro.hp700.html

    For some newer machines (like 712/60) requires dhcpd patch:
http://mail-index.netbsd.org/port-hp700/2002/03/04/0000.html
    but I don't know it is fixed the recent dhcp in -current.

(4) When I checked osiop(4) and oosiop(4) on hp700 (with 1.6P sources),
    it seems there are some pmap/vm bugs. I've filed one of them
(Continue reading)

Jochen Kunz | 10 May 19:11 2003
Picon

Re: hp700 part of next release?

On 2003.05.09 19:33 Izumi Tsutsui wrote:

> There are a log of work for hp700 to catch up current MI changes,
> but I don't know if anyone is working to fix them.
Well, when I get that PowerStack II port done, I have free resources 
for hp700 hacking and several hp700 machines (715/33, 715/100xc, 
712/60, 720, E55, B132L) to work on. Unfortunately I am not a 
tool-chain guru, so I can not fix the tool-chain problems.

No tool-chain => no hacking.

No, the i386 => hppa X-tool-chain is no solution. I have several 
(Ultra)SPARC, Alpha, PowerPC, VAX, sgimips, ... machines that I can 
use, but no PeeCee. My one and only i386 machine is an old 80386 MCA 
box and I am not willing to bother with any PeeCee hardware. Every time 
I touch a PeeCee, my hands are full of shitt.
--

-- 

tschüß,
           Jochen

Homepage: http://www.unixag-kl.fh-kl.de/~jkunz


Gmane