headers
Jonathan Ewing | 1 Feb 2004 19:11
Picon

Ultra30 - Console via Creator Graphics 3, 13W3M adapter, PC VGA multi-synch monitor

I recently acquired a refurbished Ultra30 for the purpose of learning Solaris 
admin task and (mostly) to do self development with some commercial apps not 
available on Linux. My understanding is the Ultra30 should self-configure to 
use the frame buffer card as console if there is no serial terminal.  

I do not have a serial terminal hooked up; the multi-synch monitor reports no 
signal.

Can anyone advise me on the best approach to determine if I have a blown 
Creator Graphic 3 card, if 12W3m adapters just don't work with CG3. Is there 
some PROM setting that I should make via serial terminal to enable usage of 
the frame buffer for console? I do not have a serial terminal at hand.

Many thanks for sharing your experience and insights,

Jon Ewing    
jjewing_at_mindspring_dot_com
Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
Brenda J. Butler | 2 Feb 2004 21:22

extra network card in Sun Ultra 1: LANCE


I used to use a SparcStation 20 for a gateway, and had
obtained an extra NIC for it (LANCE) which worked fine.
Then the SparcStation 20 bit the dust, and I wanted to
directly connect my workstation, Sun Ultra 1 to the
DSL modem and use it as a gateway (just till the SparcStation
20 gets fixed).

I put the LANCE NIC in the Ultra 1, and it seems to be
detected at boot (Linux system).  However, packets going
across the eth1 interface get garbled.

The onboard HME can do 10/100, but is limited to 10 by my
hub.  I'm assuming the LANCE can only do 10, but that
shouldn't be a problem.

So, my question is, should I expect that the LANCE
card should work in the Ultra 1?  Maybe not, SparcStation
is 32 bits and Ultra 1 is 64 bits, even though both have
S-BUS.

And if the LANCE card should be expected to work in the
Ultra 1, I wonder what might be the problem?

When I set up the LANCE card in the Ultra to talk to
my local network, and have the laptop ping the ultra,
tcpdumps on both ends show that the laptop is sending
arp who-has, and the Ultra is picking up garbled packets.

Likewise when the ping goes from Ultra to laptop:  Ultra
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 1 comment |
headers
David Barber | 2 Feb 2004 21:32

TR Cards under Solaris 9 x86?

Has anybody had any success at getting Solaris 9 x86 to work with any
Token Ring cards?  If so, which card(s) were you able to get working?
I've had no success with several cards that DID work under Solaris 7 x86.

Thanks!

David
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Anthony Talltree | 3 Feb 2004 02:29

Re: debian (IPX *and* ultra1) as mailserver


> I have an Ultra1 at home and it's been relegated to firewall duties 
> because it's just all around too slow for me. I wouldn't think about 
> letting ~100 people use it for mail. For ~100 users You could probably 
> get better performance from an eMachine class x86 box running Debian. 
> But that's one of the great things about Debian, completely different 
> hardware and yet you have all the same software avaialble.

That's no different from SunOS5/Solaris 2.
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Paul Theodoropoulos | 3 Feb 2004 02:00
Favicon
Gravatar

Re: debian (IPX *and* ultra1) as mailserver

At 12:58 PM 1/31/2004, Jim Crilly wrote:
>I have an Ultra1 at home and it's been relegated to firewall duties 
>because it's just all around too slow for me. I wouldn't think about 
>letting ~100 people use it for mail. For ~100 users You could probably get 
>better performance from an eMachine class x86 box running Debian. But 
>that's one of the great things about Debian, completely different hardware 
>and yet you have all the same software avaialble.

different experience here. i have an ultra 2 200mhz/1GB ram in production 
providing email service for more than 6,000 mailboxes across about 200 
domains, running qmail, vpopmail, courier imap, and four webmail 
interfaces. and customer mailbox and attachment sizes top out at 100MB.

my customers love the service. i use it for my own mail. have never had a 
complaint about slowness or poor performance. load averages long term run 
about 2.0.

and this is all on solaris 9. so much for solaris being 'slow'.

i'd expect an ultra 1 - at what, 167mhz? - even under the most pessimistic 
estimates, to be able to handle several thousand users.

Paul Theodoropoulos
http://www.anastrophe.com
Permalink | Reply | 3 comments |
headers
der Mouse | 3 Feb 2004 02:29
Picon

Re: extra network card in Sun Ultra 1: LANCE

> So, my question is, should I expect that the LANCE card should work
> in the Ultra 1?

I would expect it to.

Personally, I'd be inclined to point the finger at Linux.  I'd suggest
trying some other OS (personally, I'd pick NetBSD; if you have SunOS or
Solaris around to try, that would be both better and worse for this
purpose[%]) long enough to see if the problems persist.

[%] Better because if anyone can be presumed to know how to build a
    driver for Sun hardware, it would be Sun; worse because in my
    experience, at least,, when something goes wrong, NetBSD is usually
    better than Sun OSes at telling you _what_ went wrong.

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse <at> rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Phillip Tong | 3 Feb 2004 10:39
Picon

Re: Ultra30 - Console via Creator Graphics 3, 13W3M adapter, PC VGA multi-synch monitor

Jonathan Ewing wrote:
> My understanding is the Ultra30 should self-configure to use the
> frame buffer card as console if there is no serial terminal.

Actually, this would be the other way around - if there is no frame 
buffer card *and* keyboard connected, it will use a serial terminal (off 
the first serial port).

> I do not have a serial terminal hooked up; the multi-synch monitor 
> reports no signal.
> 
> Can anyone advise me on the best approach to determine if I have a 
> blown Creator Graphic 3 card, if 12W3m adapters just don't work with 
> CG3. Is there some PROM setting that I should make via serial 
> terminal to enable usage of the frame buffer for console? I do not 
> have a serial terminal at hand.

To get the monitor to show anything, you also need a Sun keyboard 
connected. If you have one connected and nothing shows then it's time to 
start checking things (like monitor refresh rates - you do need a fairly 
high spec monitor by default - make sure it can show 1280x1024x76Hz or 
you'll have to run a config utility - ffbconfig in Solaris - to change 
the resolution).

But if all you want is a terminal to see the console, another machine 
(Sun or PC) with a null-modem cable and terminal emulation software 
(HyperTerminal on Windows, for example) will do. Just set the viewing 
terminal to 9600 baud, 8 bit, no parity, 1 stop bit.

> Many thanks for sharing your experience and insights,
(Continue reading)

Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Sandwich Maker | 3 Feb 2004 02:19
Picon

Re: Ultra30 - Console via Creator Graphics 3, 13W3M adapter, PC VGA multi-synch monitor

"From: Jonathan Ewing <jjewing <at> mindspring.com>
"
"I recently acquired a refurbished Ultra30 for the purpose of learning Solaris 
"admin task and (mostly) to do self development with some commercial apps not 
"available on Linux. My understanding is the Ultra30 should self-configure to 
"use the frame buffer card as console if there is no serial terminal.  
"
"I do not have a serial terminal hooked up; the multi-synch monitor reports no 
"signal.
"
"Can anyone advise me on the best approach to determine if I have a blown 
"Creator Graphic 3 card, if 12W3m adapters just don't work with CG3. Is there 
"some PROM setting that I should make via serial terminal to enable usage of 
"the frame buffer for console? I do not have a serial terminal at hand.
"
"Many thanks for sharing your experience and insights,

1. have you done a boot -r?
2. no kbd = no screen.  console output will default to serial port.
3. some vga mons aren't happy with 13w3-hd15 adapters.  sonys work.
   they are more flexible in accepting sync inputs.
4. you may have to edit the Xsun file to tell it you have a new type fb.
5. have you seen the faqs at sunhelp.org?  lotsa good reading...
________________________________________________________________________
Andrew Hay                                  the genius nature
internet rambler                            is to see what all have seen
adh <at> an.bradford.ma.us                       and think what none thought
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
Mike Pepe | 4 Feb 2004 01:01
Favicon

Gigabit ether PCI card options

Hi all,

Does anyone know for certain of any PCI based third pary PC-type gigabit
(copper based) NICs?

I was looking at the Intel PRO/1000 but I think it only supports Solaris
Intel. I need something that works on a SPARC box.

Thanks!
Permalink | Reply | 0 comments |
headers
der Mouse | 4 Feb 2004 01:46
Picon

Re: debian (IPX *and* ultra1) as mailserver

> different experience here. i have an ultra 2 200mhz/1GB ram [...]

> [I] have never had a complaint about slowness or poor performance.
> load averages long term run about 2.0.

> and this is all on solaris 9.  so much for solaris being 'slow'.

Actually, since you've given little hint of the load it's under, that
doesn't really say anything (you give domain and user counts, but
without knowing how much mail &c they get, those numbers border on
meaningless; I can host fifty thousand mailboxes on a Sun-3/60, if the
aggregate total message load is about ten a day).  The load average
(the only hint of the real load) may or may not mean anything; I've
seen machines feel normal with load averages over 60, and I've seen
machines be unusably sluggish with no load to speak of (though the
latter probably counts as cheating).  Sure, Solaris 9 will act snappy
if you give it a grossly overmuscled machine and nothing much to do.
(A gig of RAM?  Most of my machines have about that much _disk_!)

/~\ The ASCII				der Mouse
\ / Ribbon Campaign
 X  Against HTML	       mouse <at> rodents.montreal.qc.ca
/ \ Email!	     7D C8 61 52 5D E7 2D 39  4E F1 31 3E E8 B3 27 4B
Permalink | Reply | 2 comments |

Gmane