> >That should have everything one would need to install UltraPenguin-1.0
> >on high end Enterprise systems.  Much thanks to those who helped me
> >via the test images I've been putting up.
> 
> I have to wonder why anyone would put Linux on a $100000+ Sun ULTRA
> system. Especially since Linux isn't actually SMP. And Sun wouldn't
> support the combination...

Well, Linux *IS* SMP.  It even has fine grained locking in the kernel
(yes, since the very early days of the 2.1.x kernels, Linux has lost
his big-lock at kernel entry and kernel exit).

Second, on every benchmark done with Linux on the Ultra architecture,
Linux beats Solaris.  What is more interesting is that this is very
noticeable to users: on typical compilations (ie, recompile your libc,
emacs, gcc), Linux/Ultra finishes the compilation in half the time
(compared to Solaris 2.6).

So, if I were to buy an Enterprise system, I really would like to get
more cycles for my money, and Linux serves this purpose.

> I recently started a new job. One of the machines in my office is a P166
> PC loaded with Slackware from CDROM. I had trouble building common apps
> on it such as elm. It was apparently Linux 2.0.0.

Well, using the Linux Slackware distribution is equivalent to
comparing the BSD systems with what you had 4 years ago.  Taking a
license to exagerate I would say that comparing Linux Slackware with
current Linux state of the art is equivalent to comparing 386BSD and
NetBSD-current.

> And I certainly don't want an OS named after a oily, arctic bird that
> smells like dead fish. :-)

heh :-)

cheers,
Miguel.