OpenBSD Journal

OpenBSD Itanium port in the works

Contributed by deanna on from the movin on up dept.

David Gwynne (dlg@) writes:

im getting to the point where there's no challenge left in writing device drivers, i want to move onto something new. so after i finish making the pile of controllers on my desk work, the thing i'd like to do the most is port openbsd to a new architecture, specifically itanium.

to do that work though i'd need an itanium to hack on. if itanium support is something you would like to see happen then i'd appreciate some help getting a system.

Diana Eichert started the bidding at 100USD, and a handful of commmunity members have already joined in. If you're interested in helping, email dlg@ or deraadt@, or go straight to the donations page. Thanks!

(Comments are closed)


Comments
  1. By Motley Fool (MotleyFool) motleyfool@dieselrepower.org on

    I can't write, so all I'll say is YEA! This shows the community can work if we try.

  2. By anarcap (205.239.196.6) on

    I kicked in $100 last night...

  3. By Anonymous Coward (200.142.128.16) on

    Interested in any specific gear?
    HP Integrity RX series ?
    Fujitsu PrimeQuest series?

    they are quite (not to say HUGE) expensive...

    Comments
    1. By Motley Fool (MotleyFool) on

      > Interested in any specific gear?
      > HP Integrity RX series ?
      > Fujitsu PrimeQuest series?
      >
      > they are quite (not to say HUGE) expensive...

      Here's a good list of Itanium 2 systems from the FreeBSD ia64 webpage.

      some are expensive, some are not.

  4. By Anonymous Coward (83.250.170.233) on

    I thought OpenBSD project got Itanium box some years back in Europe - what is the status of that?

    Comments
    1. By Motley Fool (MotleyFool) on

      > I thought OpenBSD project got Itanium box some years back in Europe - what is the status of that?

      You sure you're not remembering the effort to get G5 powerpc Macs?

      Comments
      1. By Anonymous Coward (205.209.188.60) on

        > > I thought OpenBSD project got Itanium box some years back in Europe - what is the status of that?
        >
        > You sure you're not remembering the effort to get G5 powerpc Macs?

        -Nope, but I know a lot about the deal from 2004 that I am referring to.

        Anyways, good that this plea went through.

  5. By David Gwynne (dlg) dlg@openbsd.org on

    It looks like we have enough to go ahead and get a machine. Thanks everyone :)

    Now I just have to find a machine...

    Comments
    1. By anarcap (74.15.65.111) on

      > It looks like we have enough to go ahead and get a machine. Thanks everyone :) >

      Yay!! Glad to hear it. Not that I have any use for an Itanic port, but like Diana said, you deserve to work on something fun after all the mucking around you've done with drivers.

      Marius

      Comments
      1. By jsa (76.7.170.9) on

        I'm very excited about this port and wish that I were in a financial situation where I could have helped.

        I priced an Itanium back before the Itanium2 and the low end was about $15,000 USD at the time. This was about $10,000 more than I had anticipated. The architecture has always struck me as being simply too far ahead of its time, both in terms of features and in Intel's ability to fabricate them. When I heard the price tag on the Itanic back then, I tossed my money into an AMD x86.

        (The amd64 wasn't around yet either.)

  6. By Anonymous Coward (200.142.128.16) on

    How is EFI bootcode planned? Is it an "open-standard" ?

  7. By Anonymous Coward (85.178.95.50) on

    Please don`t getme wrong but isn`t SMP or other parts of OpenBSD challange enought?!

    I mean.. seriously: Who needs another propably poor supported Architecture?! :(
    Don`t get me wrong.. it`s ok it you like to port OpenBSD! Absolutly.. but isn`t the SMP implementation or other Parts more crucical?! And thus would help ALL architectures...

    I just remember the CATS Architecture and some others wich whehre dropped.
    So I asked myself why Itatnoum would be a porting Target?!
    Seriously: Nobody who owns a Itanium wanna run OpenBSD (because of the SMP implementation partly....). At least the scientists I do know wont run it there because of.. yeah... performence. :(

    Comments
    1. By Shane J Pearson (59.167.252.29) on

      > Please don`t getme wrong but isn`t SMP or other parts of OpenBSD challange enought?!
      >
      > I mean.. seriously: Who needs another propably poor supported Architecture?! :(
      > Don`t get me wrong.. it`s ok it you like to port OpenBSD! Absolutly.. but isn`t the SMP implementation or other Parts more crucical?! And thus would help ALL architectures...

      David has an itch, which I am certain that when he finishes scratching, will be something wonderful. Then a bunch of people will benefit from HIS work. Since he is willing to make the benefit of his skills and hard work free, I think he should be given the respect to be left to do what HE wants without complaint. Be grateful.

      I wish I was cashed up enough at the moment to have been able to donate to this.

      And speaking of performance, who knows? This might make the Worlds best firewall perform faster than it ever has. And don't forget, different architectures can lead to discovering ways to increase security and performance.

      If SMP is your itch, but you (like me) don't have the skills to scratch effectively, then at least be happy with what you do end up getting for free.

Latest Articles

Credits

Copyright © - Daniel Hartmeier. All rights reserved. Articles and comments are copyright their respective authors, submission implies license to publish on this web site. Contents of the archive prior to as well as images and HTML templates were copied from the fabulous original deadly.org with Jose's and Jim's kind permission. This journal runs as CGI with httpd(8) on OpenBSD, the source code is BSD licensed. undeadly \Un*dead"ly\, a. Not subject to death; immortal. [Obs.]