HP3000-L Archives

February 1999, Week 2

HP3000-L@RAVEN.UTC.EDU

Options: Use Monospaced Font
Show Text Part by Default
Show All Mail Headers

Message: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Topic: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]
Author: [<< First] [< Prev] [Next >] [Last >>]

Print Reply
Subject:
From:
Nick Demos <[log in to unmask]>
Reply To:
Nick Demos <[log in to unmask]>
Date:
Thu, 11 Feb 1999 15:02:50 -0500
Content-Type:
text/plain
Parts/Attachments:
text/plain (59 lines)
Joe Geiser wrote:
>
> > On Tue, 9 Feb 1999 13:30:04 -0800, "Peter Chong Sr. Systems Analyst
> > (MRP/ERP)" <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> >
> > >========== I got weird question =================
> > >Any one know ???
> > >We currently have 979/100, If we add new processor in same BOX
> > >1. Is any way to allocate specific O/S like HP-UX to second
> > processor?
> > >2. Can we run 2 different OS (MPE, HP-UX) simultaneously and
> > share I/O ?
>
> Actually, for users of other operating systems, specifically certain IBM
> systems, this is not a weird question, as one can use one OS as the main OS,
> and "host" other operating systems.
>
> As a matter of an answer here though - only one or the other can run on a
> PA-RISC machine - MPE or HP-UX, but not both, and one cannot dual boot since
> there is a hard switch (in nvram, I believe) on the CPU board which
> indicates which OS is "expected".  This is what makes the difference between
> a 3000 and a 9000, not just the nameplate ;)
>
>Yes, Joe, but that it somewhat artificial.  HP does rthis so you CANNOT dual
boot.  If MPE and HP-UX did not check for this chip, you would be
able to
dual boot, provided you could solve the problem of WHERE you
booted from (I
don't know whether HP-UX and MPE use the same disk locations for
their startup)).
Of course, this solves only part of the problem.  If you have an
MPE system
and want to run a UNIX application, you probably want them
running at the
same time, i . e. some terminals running UNIX, others MPE.  See
my previous post
on the same subject.

It brings up an interesting point, though.  So far we have been
pushing HP
for a more integrated POSIX implementation.  MAYBE we should be
pushing HP
to run UNIX OVER MPE.  That to me is the ideal situation:

1.  Customer has an MPE system.
2.  Happy with it, but needs to run a UNIX application.
3.  UNIX application vendor says "Convert to MPE? NO".
4.  Customer runs it as UNIX application over MPE.
5.  Either customer finally converts it to MPE or
6.  Vendor sees so many running it this way that he
    decides to convert.

IMHO a UNIX over MPE should be doable.  It's the same
instruction set, after all.  Sure there are some not so
minor problems to be worked out, but I don't see any
show stoppers.

Nick D.

ATOM RSS1 RSS2