Re: USIII/280R

[jnemeth%victoria.tc.ca@localhost (John Nemeth)]

On May 20,  6:01pm, johnny%gothiaso.com@localhost wrote:
} > On Dec 27, 2010, at 11:04 PM, John Nemeth wrote:
} >> On May 19,  6:44pm, john heasley wrote:
} >> }
} >> } I thought that 5.1 supported the USIII processor, but the cd fails
} >> to boot
} >>
} >>     No it doesn't.  There is some support in -current.  Don't know if
} >> it's considered to be stable or not yet though.
} >
} > Reasonably stable on at least Some Hardware(tm) - Blade 1000 and 2000
} > seem to work well, US-IIIi has problems in SMP ( works fine with only
} > one CPU online ), not sure about everything else.
} 
} On this note, is there any webpage or any documentation that has
} information about which ports really are production ready? I've not
} found anything, and I've looked.

     You can check the ports page for the particular ports that you're
interested in:  http://www.netbsd.org/ports/ .  For example, if you
look at http://www.netbsd.org/ports/sparc64/ it mentions UltraSPARC I,
II, IIi, and IIe, with no mention of UltraSPARC III, thus one could
conclude that the latter isn't currently supported.

} I also think it is a bit misleading to claim support for a ton of
} different platforms yet some are barely bootable. I've had bad

     Most of them work just fine.

} experiences on both sparc64 and pa-risc for example, and I would

     In my experience sparc64 works just fine.  I have no experience
with the pa-risc port.  I have both production and developement sparc64
running.  The production one has never had problems.  The developement
version occassionally has problems, but that's to be expected.

} consider neither to be on par with amd64 or i386 in terms or reliability
} (even though I've been pleasantly surprised with NetBSD 5 on a netra).

     From my experience, sparc64 is on par with amd64 and i386.

} Have something like the FreeBSD "Tier-system" [1] ever been considered
} for inclusion in the documentation, for example? I suppose it could be
} just ripped straight off, and each port maintainer could have his
} say on which port is ready for what.

     There has been talk about doing a tier system, but so far there
has been nothing definitive.

}-- End of excerpt from johnny%gothiaso.com@localhost