[9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[ron minnich]

seems to run Plan 9 right out of the box. It's an rtl8139, the
graphics work, I am going to transplant the drives to it tomorrow and
see if it all continues to "just work". But the Plan 9 install CD
booted and ran just fine. Seems like a nice fast little machine for
Plan 9. Of course, Plan 9 has graphics up and running before the
delivered OS can get to the point of saying "what language do you
tawk" but that's to be expected.

Nice, I thought I was going to have to host plan 9 under a VM, but it
appears I can just run it.

I did have to make one improvement, however: I had to take a
screwdrive and slash it through the "touch this sticker and void your
warranty" stickers. Standards must, after all, be upheld.

Anybody want a "google desktop" cd :-)

ron

Re: [9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[John Barham]

> Seems like a nice fast little machine for Plan 9.

Dirt cheap too.  Even w/ Fry's specials it would be hard to put
together a comparable machine for that amount.

Given that it has VIA's C7 chip which has extra instructions for
crypto, including SHA1
(http://www.via.com.tw/en/initiatives/padlock/), it should make a nice
venti server--although you would probably need to upgrade the 80 GB
drive...  What would be involved in patching Plan 9's libsec to use
the C7's crypto instructions?

  John

Re: [9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[Pietro Gagliardi]

Strange, I looked at the manufacturer's website - not a mention of
Plan 9.

On Feb 1, 2008, at 12:47 AM, John Barham wrote:

>> Seems like a nice fast little machine for Plan 9.
>
> Dirt cheap too.  Even w/ Fry's specials it would be hard to put
> together a comparable machine for that amount.
>
> Given that it has VIA's C7 chip which has extra instructions for
> crypto, including SHA1
> (http://www.via.com.tw/en/initiatives/padlock/), it should make a nice
> venti server--although you would probably need to upgrade the 80 GB
> drive...  What would be involved in patching Plan 9's libsec to use
> the C7's crypto instructions?
>
>   John

Re: [9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[Charles Forsyth]

> What would be involved in patching Plan 9's libsec to use
> the C7's crypto instructions?

it didn't look too hard, but there's a bit of work to do in the kernel
to enable it (and enable sse for some instructions).
are there similar things on intel and amd? i haven't really kept up.
no doubt they all use different instructions and conventions so
we'll need an array of implementations.

Re: [9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[Charles Forsyth]

>> Seems like a nice fast little machine for Plan 9.
>
> Dirt cheap too.  ...

given its spec i was amused by the reviews that refer to it as `underpowered'
(although even Linux should be fine on that)

Re: [9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[mattmobile]

I've been using a passively cooled 500Mhz C7 in my EPIA 5000 for a few
years as a CPU/Auth see 9fans passim for how pleased I am with it

Re: [9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[erik quanstrom]

> Dirt cheap too.  Even w/ Fry's specials it would be hard to put
> together a comparable machine for that amount.
>
> Given that it has VIA's C7 chip which has extra instructions for
> crypto, including SHA1
> (http://www.via.com.tw/en/initiatives/padlock/), it should make a nice
> venti server--although you would probably need to upgrade the 80 GB
> drive...  What would be involved in patching Plan 9's libsec to use
> the C7's crypto instructions?

we have been getting similar machines for <$150.  they're sold
as thin clients with a gigabyte mainboard and case.  they pxe boot
but don't have power or room for a hard drive.  they work
very well, but i don't think they would make very nice venti
servers with only 10/100 ethernet, regardless of the processor.
a single disk would scare me, too.  i guess i'm just a paranoid
performance weenie.

- erik

Re: [9fans] The $200 walmart "gPC"

[ron minnich]

On Feb 1, 2008 3:41 AM, Charles Forsyth <forsyth@terzarima.net> wrote:

> no doubt they all use different instructions and conventions so
> we'll need an array of implementations.

oh yeah, they are all quite different.

Great fun, eh? And now there is a 64-bit via part.

ron