Chris Mauritz wrote:
The 32bit PPC release is for the older G3/G4 macs, no? I've got a pile of unused G4 400-800mhz powermacs just sitting around
The ppc32 distro will work on any NewWorld G3, G4 based machine ( and 32bit ibm power, like the older rs6k's ) - it _also_ works fine on the MacMini and G4 Xserve's.
With some common sense tweaks, a G4 450Mhz is a very usable machine running CentOS4 in 386MB of ram. Much more usable than OSX Tiger.
how much of Ram do these machines have ? if its anything >=256 megs, you have very functional and usable desktop machines there.
Sounds like a plan, go for it - if you have any issues, feel free to drop a message here or come find us on #centos-ppc / #centos on irc.freenode.net
As for PPC64, has anyone done benchmarking between a ppc64 and OSX system on the same G5 hardware?
Linux wins hands down. I am sitting typing this out on a Dual G5 2ghz, and I find Linux to be much more responsive than OSX.
anandtech had a write-up recently where they compared OSX Server to Linux on the server side of things, iirc correctly - Linux came out on top. A bit of googling should dig up the exact article.
- K
Karanbir Singh mail-lists@karan.org wrote:
Linux wins hands down.
There are two major contributors to this:
1. Until just recently (GCC 4.x), the PPC64 GCC target was very poor. Apple leverages GCC 3.x in current MacOS releases.
2. The pre-emptive Mach microkernel adds overhead and context switching, although it has helped maintain portability (including to x86).
[ NOTE: Despite the insistance of Microsoft marketeers, the NT Hardware Abstraction Layer (HAL) is _not_ a microkernel, and it does _not_ pre-empt the NT kernel. If it did, NT would be much slower. ]
I am sitting typing this out on a Dual G5 2ghz, and I find Linux to be much more responsive than OSX.
Hmmm, "responsiveness" is not a complete test of performance. In fact, prior to the pre-empt patch, based on just "responsiveness," a single CPU Linux system would be near the bottom of the barrel.
Responsiveness v. throughput is always a game played -- typically between microkernels and monolithic kernels. Microkernels typically have better response time, monolithic kernels typically have better throughput. Microkernels make re-entry (kernel threading) easier, monolithic kernels make it more difficult. These are oversimplifications, but you get the jist.
Ironically enough, although the Mach component of MacOS X is a microkernel, you're running on the Darwin platform which is monolithic. Linux is a monolithic kernel with a couple of approaches to re-entry. I don't like the pre-empt patch, because it is a hack to take adavantage of Linus' ingenious ideal to allow 1 kernel entry per CPU to keep context switching down. That design is specific to the number of physical cores, and overall performance is hurt by the pre-empt patch.
In the near-future of dual-core designs, I hope the kernel goes back to 1 entry per CPU. It gives you adequate response time without hurting throughput because there is no additional context switching overhead -- each CPU has a single thread. Linus was a genious in coming up with that.
It dependend on the application. AnandTech actually made it a 2-parter, investigating more after the first run.
Part I: http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2436
Part II: http://www.anandtech.com/mac/showdoc.aspx?i=2520
One also needs to remember that Darwin/Cocoa is not a true, "clean" 64-bit platform.
Karanbir Singh wrote:
Cool. I believe all of them (about a dozen machines) have 512mb RAM.
Outstanding! Unfortunately, a few of our dual G5 machines have no choice but to use OSX since they are used as Final Cut Pro and Protools workstations.
Thanks for the information.
Cheers,
Chris Mauritz wrote:
excellent, grab a boot.iso from : http://beta.centos.org/centos/4.1beta/os/ppc/images/
and install the distro over the wire ( http://beta.centos.org/ as the server : path is /centos/4.1beta/os/ppc/ ). If you have a bunch of machines, it might make more sense to rsync a copy of the tree down to a machine on the local network first.
The ones that can - move to Linux, the ones that cant - well Apple makes it real easy to just drop another drive into the machine, and dualboot, for the times you dont need OSX!
Btw, it might be worth looking at MacOnLinux ( http://www.maconlinux.org/ ) - maybe some of the apps you need to run on Native OSX, might work there ? I've never used it myself, but people who have, say good things about it.
- K
-
Bryan J. Smith -
Chris Mauritz -
Karanbir Singh -
Petr Klíma