RE: as/400 / linux / lpar -- MIDRANGE-L

× The internal search function is temporarily non-functional. The current search engine is no longer viable and we are researching alternatives.
As a stop gap measure, we are using Google's custom search engine service.
If you know of an easy to use, open source, search engine ... please contact support@midrange.com.

This is a multipart message in MIME format.
--
[ Picked text/plain from multipart/alternative ]
So I guess that if you have multiple processors then you should dedicate a
whole processor (or more) to Linux?  And thus have no need for 'Linux
Shared Processor'?

Rob Berendt
--
"They that can give up essential liberty to obtain a little temporary
safety deserve neither liberty nor safety."
Benjamin Franklin




"Andy Nolen-Parkhouse" <aparkhouse@attbi.com>
Sent by: midrange-l-admin@midrange.com
05/31/2002 03:57 AM
Please respond to midrange-l


        To:     <midrange-l@midrange.com>
        cc:
        Fax to:
        Subject:        RE: as/400 / linux / lpar


Rob,

I went back to the chart and looked; I was unable to find any
uni-processor models which were listed as supporting Linux but not
supporting 'Linux Shared Processor'.  As you imply in your note, it
would be a theoretical impossibility.

Regards,
Andy Nolen-Parkhouse

> Subject: RE: as/400 / linux / lpar
> What is the difference between being able to run Linux on a single
> processor and 'Linux Shared Processor'?  On the chart I see that some
> single processors support LPAR, and Linux but not 'Linux Shared
> Processor'.
>
> Rob Berendt

This mailing list archive is Copyright 1997-2025 by midrange.com and David Gibbs as a compilation work. Use of the archive is restricted to research of a business or technical nature. Any other uses are prohibited. Full details are available on our policy page. If you have questions about this, please contact [javascript protected email address].

Operating expenses for this site are earned using the Amazon Associate program and Google Adsense.