Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Two Decades Late: Mainline Linux Kernel Getting Keyboard / Mouse Driver For SGI Octane

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • jibanes
    replied
    This is outstanding, I've been waiting a long time for this.
    Does anyone know which framebuffer will be supported, and if the XIO-PCI cage will be supported as well.
    I seem to remember the network adapter code is already in.
    Do you think debian 10 will be able to run on these (with a 5.5 kernel of course).

    Leave a comment:


  • mangoduck
    replied
    Got a second Octane under my desk right now that would love this. Yeah Linux isn't optimized for an Octane, but lay off, it just got keyboard support. OpenBSD got support in '04 and went on to support almost everything else SGI/MIPS too. Moreover, what serious geek ever said don't try? I don't see 200 lines as too much for the amount of people it helps, which is more than you think. This model is arguably the most common, rugged, and versatile, so it's a good pick.

    Leave a comment:


  • stiiixy
    replied
    And on a completly related note, to whomever mentioned 'Henry Ford museum' and 'start of the industrial revolution' in the same sentemce needs to go do some reading.

    All Ford did was make cars affordable for more people.

    Leave a comment:


  • torsionbar28
    replied
    Originally posted by glwillia View Post
    It's interesting, but I can't imagine why anyone would run Linux on one of these. People do use these (the SGI retrocomputing scene is very active, and MIPS/IRIX machines still command a fair bit of money), but the whole point is to run IRIX and vintage applications. If you just want a Linux machine you can do that a lot faster and cheaper buying a 10-year-old amd64 box.
    For sure, Linux on an SGI MIPS box is full on pointless. IRIX was very well optimized for the hardware while Linux is not even close. Also last time I looked, Linux doesn't support any of the SGI graphics hardware very well, and seeing as these SGI machines are made for visualization, and accelerated 3D specifically, it defeats the whole point of using this hardware.

    Leave a comment:


  • torsionbar28
    replied
    Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
    I have a broken Indy in the attic but even when they were modern they were fairly rare.
    Nonsense, when they were modern, you could see them used in various vendor demos at trade shows pretty regularly.

    Originally posted by kpedersen View Post
    They were almost as awkward to get hold of back then as a server-grade ARM board is today.
    Also nonsense, all you had to do was call SGI and order one. It was a single vendor solution. Not any harder than ordering a pizza. I worked for years servicing SGI equipment back in the 90's and early 2000's and I never once heard any of my customers have any trouble with procurement.
    Last edited by torsionbar28; 25 January 2020, 05:40 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • onicsis
    replied
    This code make sens only for retro computing, not for hardware of today. Unless someone trying to reverse engineering SGI Octane workstation. like in https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-NkXthbbA-M
    https://github.com/alfikpl/ao486, a 486 SX compatible equivalent.
    Last edited by onicsis; 25 January 2020, 04:01 PM.

    Leave a comment:


  • edwaleni
    replied
    Originally posted by starshipeleven View Post
    It was misleading bullshit and you know it.

    Wish I had all the money Shuttleworth pulled out of his ass and burned to keep Canonical alive for a decade of not making any profit at all

    How does this even matter with the original statement about multiarch support? (i.e. run 32bit applications on a 64bit OS)
    Why so caustic in your responses?

    So what, I see it different than you.

    Do you need to take a Linus like break for some anger management? You post like you are always pissed off. Whats up?

    Leave a comment:


  • ossuser
    replied
    Here a working Indigo2 with Impact graphics.
    Once in a while I start it, just to be amazed by the 3D presentation (Inventor) possibilities it has.
    Running Irix, and I wouldn't want it otherwise.

    Also, Linux has never been an option, something with the memory.

    Leave a comment:


  • boxie
    replied
    Originally posted by wizard69 View Post
    It kinda is.

    This is true. However why bloat the mainline kernel with this work? This might interest a dozen people worldwide ansd that is if they can even find one of these workstations.


    I’m not sure I see the point. I can go to the Henry Ford to look at machine from the dawn of the Industrial Age and maybe even see one in action. Such machinery is very visual and dramatically different than today’s hardware. Contrast this to a computer, an abstract box that differs little from recent hardware. Further what is there to watch if the computer is running?

    we need museums for our tech heritage but it is hard to see why a running computer makes a difference. This especially if the operating system is a recent Linux build. It is only an Otsne in name if it is running Linux.
    Ok, at this point I will want you to define what you think bloat is.

    this code will not be compiled for your x86 boxes, so there is 0 runtime penalty.

    If there is a maintainer for the platform, then the maintenance burden cannot be considered bloat.

    I do believe that this is entirely within the scope of the Linux kernel project (it runs on all the things) so - definitely not scope creep.

    I can definitely see the "it's not going to be useful to many people" argument, but maybe that's not the point. The author of these patches is building skills in bringing up a an architecture - skills that can translate over to other architectures and possibly better employment opportunities.

    In short, It doesn't hurt and we will all potentially benefit from it in the long run.

    Leave a comment:


  • starshipeleven
    replied
    Originally posted by edwaleni View Post
    It was a contrast of the relative worth of 20+ year old technologies.
    It was misleading bullshit and you know it.

    Wish I had a hobby with 32% Linux desktop market share that earns $110 million, clearing $6.2 million in profit.
    Wish I had all the money Shuttleworth pulled out of his ass and burned to keep Canonical alive for a decade of not making any profit at all

    Someone pinged me to tell me that the ISS is running Debian IA-32 in some of their racks
    How does this even matter with the original statement about multiarch support? (i.e. run 32bit applications on a 64bit OS)

    Leave a comment:

Working...
X