nubus Kernel in LinuxPPC 2000

nubus Kernel in LinuxPPC 2000

Post by Thiemo Kellne » Sat, 01 Jul 2000 04:00:00



Hi there,

I've noticed that there is kernel in the LinuxPPC 2000 distro called
something with nubus. What is it for? I always heard that only MkLinux
supports nubus PowerMac. Is this some experimental thing?

I'm just curious.

Thiemo

 
 
 

nubus Kernel in LinuxPPC 2000

Post by Christoph Wissi » Sat, 01 Jul 2000 04:00:00


: Hi there,

: I've noticed that there is kernel in the LinuxPPC 2000 distro called
: something with nubus. What is it for? I always heard that only MkLinux
: supports nubus PowerMac. Is this some experimental thing?

A developer named Takashi Oe has started to introduce Nubus into
LinuPPC. The only source I can quote is a german
mac-linux-news-ticker. You are posting from Swiss, so there is a chance
that this link is useful for you:

        http://www.macnews.de/_linuxmac/

Cheers,

        Christoph

 
 
 

nubus Kernel in LinuxPPC 2000

Post by Shella » Sat, 01 Jul 2000 04:00:00


-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1



> : Hi there,

> : I've noticed that there is kernel in the LinuxPPC 2000 distro called
> : something with nubus. What is it for? I always heard that only MkLinux
> : supports nubus PowerMac. Is this some experimental thing?

> A developer named Takashi Oe has started to introduce Nubus into
> LinuPPC. The only source I can quote is a german
> mac-linux-news-ticker. You are posting from Swiss, so there is a chance
> that this link is useful for you:

>    http://www.macnews.de/_linuxmac/

> Cheers,

>    Christoph

Takashi Oe recently posted to the MkLinux setup list that he'd ported
2.4 to nubus. Try

ftp://ppc.linux.or.jp/pub/users/toe/nubus-pmac/

where there is some information. Note: this was pretty buggy, with
many fairly essential bits missing (no external scsi hds, for example)
- - but very impressive, nonetheless. I had a couple of issues (due to
the external hd going awol) but pretty much all I had to do was
replace the Mach Kernel with his kernel.

Shellac

- --
Key fingerprint = FC31 23CA 3EBA E30D 2F20  D7EA 8C8F BB0A 49CA 5201
I use and endorse MkLinux, MacOS, GnuPG, Xemacs, Alpha (text processor)
wwwoffle, w3m, Gnus, VM, Leafnode, Cherry Coke, PG Tips.
They do not sponsor me. Despite endless requests.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.1 (GNU/Linux)
Comment: Processed by Mailcrypt 3.5.5 and Gnu Privacy Guard <http://www.gnupg.org/>

iD8DBQE5XPhZjI+7CknKUgERAjqMAKDXcTfpTxxFAo8p/5Xqeita+OEuQgCfTCTt
gRuOYvOiC0k0V47ZBj00O7k=
=R2hJ
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

 
 
 

nubus Kernel in LinuxPPC 2000

Post by Lampila Jann » Tue, 04 Jul 2000 04:00:00



> Hi there,
> I've noticed that there is kernel in the LinuxPPC 2000 distro called
> something with nubus. What is it for? I always heard that only MkLinux
> supports nubus PowerMac. Is this some experimental thing?
> I'm just curious.
> Thiemo

I've been using the 2.4.0-test2 kernel for a week now without a single
crash or problem. Its much faster that mklinux and much less of a memory
hog. The kernel has been ported on a 7100/80 so it might not be as stable
on the other x100 machines. Although it doesnt support ethernet or sound
support, yet, its worthwile to try out if you are just experimenting with
linux and not using it as the main OS on your mac yet.

Check out the README at: ftp://ppc.linux.or.jp/pub/users/toe/nubus-pmac

Janne

 
 
 

nubus Kernel in LinuxPPC 2000

Post by Mike Zula » Tue, 04 Jul 2000 04:00:00




> I've been using the 2.4.0-test2 kernel for a week now without a single
> crash or problem. Its much faster that mklinux and much less of a memory
> hog. The kernel has been ported on a 7100/80 so it might not be as stable
> on the other x100 machines. Although it doesnt support ethernet or sound
> support, yet, its worthwile to try out if you are just experimenting with
> linux and not using it as the main OS on your mac yet.

I tried it for a day or so, but without networking it wasn't much use
(yet).  I also didn't have any problems with bugs or crashes.  To me, the
video seemed a bit faster, but the memory and other speed comparisons
didn't seem too different.  It's probably just a matter of what you're
doing.

Mike

--
Mike Zulauf