Need to buy a 32/64 bit HPUX machine

[Jim Balson]

HI, I am new to HP/UX and would like to buy a used HP/UX dual
processor PA-RISC machine but I need some things clarified/confirmed before
I jump right in.

What I need to do is port my software to HP/UX and provide 32 bit
and a 64 bit versions of my product. So I'll need a HW/SW configuration that
will allow me to compile and run both 32 and 64 bit binaries.

From reading the FAQ, I see that the Visualize J2240 workstations will
support both 32 and 64 bit versions of HP/UX. It looks like this is the type
of machine I need right? They can be had on ebay for a few hundred $.

And about HP/UX, is someone is releasing a new product on HP/UX
should I support both HPUX-10 and HPUX-11 or is HP-UX-11 enough?


Much apprecieated.
Jim


--
-----------------------
Jim
balson AT comcast DOT net

[nissan350z]

http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/hp_unix.html
http://www.openpa.net
http://hwdb.parisc-linux.org/
will allow me to compile and run both 32 and 64 bit binaries. From reading the FAQ, I see that the Visualize J2240 workstations will
Too old. Look for a C240 (inexpensive and 64bits), B2000, C3000 or better a
J5000 (dual CPU) or a nice J5600.

You can find right now on ebay a J5000 for just 650 dollars.
Note that some hp software product like npar and vpar can be installed only
on some servers, not workstations.
And about HP/UX, is someone is releasing a new product on HP/UX should I support both HPUX-10 and HPUX-11 or is HP-UX-11 enough?
Do someone still developing something new for win95 ?
10.20 and 11.00 are no more sold by HP.
10.20 HP support is discontinued. 11.00 will follow in 1 or 2 years.
11i v1 is the right choice for PA-RISC. See STK at HP ITRC.
http://devrsrc1.external.hp.com/STK/hpux_faq.html

Alain.

[nissan350z]

HP STK FAQ:
Q: what is the support strategy for releases prior to 11.x?
A: All HP-UX 9.x releases were obsoleted in December 1998. HP-UX 10.01 and
10.10 have been removed from sale, but are still supported until June 2003.
To benefit from the improved functionality and performance of later
versions, you should upgrade to HP-UX 10.20, and if possible to 11.0 or 11i.
HP-UX 10.20 is available for purchase until June 2002, and will be supported
until June 2003. HP-UX 10.30 was obsoleted June 1999; users of HP-UX 10.30
should upgrade to either 11.0 or 11i as soon as possible. 10.20 and 11.00 are no more sold by HP.
Correction: 11.00 yes.

[nissan350z]

See also support matrix:
http://www.hp.com/workstations/risc/standard/operating/support_matrix/update
..html

[Alan Johnson]

Alain wrote: HP STK FAQ: Q: what is the support strategy for releases prior to 11.x? A: All HP-UX 9.x releases were obsoleted in December 1998. HP-UX 10.01 and 10.10 have been removed from sale, but are still supported until June 2003. To benefit from the improved functionality and performance of later versions, you should upgrade to HP-UX 10.20, and if possible to 11.0 or 11i. HP-UX 10.20 is available for purchase until June 2002, and will be supported until June 2003. HP-UX 10.30 was obsoleted June 1999; users of HP-UX 10.30 should upgrade to either 11.0 or 11i as soon as possible.10.20 and 11.00 are no more sold by HP. Correction: 11.00 yes.
I just went through this with HP about the versions, here is the
"official" word;

www.software.hp.com/RELEASES-MEDIA/history/slide2.html which currently says:
Version Introduced Discontinued Obsoleted
9.04 11/93 10/31/97 12/31/98
10.01 7/95 10/31/00 6/30/03
10.10 2/96 06/30/99 6/30/03
10.20 8/96 06/30/02 6/30/03
10.30 8/97 05/31/98 5/31/99
11.00 11/97 02/29/04 12/31/06
11i 6/00 TBD TBD
hp-UX 11i Ver 1.5 *1 6/01 12/1/02 6/30/03
hp-UX 11i Ver 1.6 *1 6/02 TBD *2 TBD *3
*1 For hp-UX Itanium systems only
*2 Projected to be 6 months after release of hp-UX 11i Version 2
*3 Projected to be 2 years after discontinuance of hp-UX 11i Version 1.6

The correlation between hp-UX release names and release identifiers is
given below.
B.11.11 hp-UX 11i
B.11.11 hp-UX 11i June 2001
B.11.11 hp-UX 11i September 2001
B.11.11 hp-UX 11i December 2001
B.11.20 hp-UX 11i Version 1.5
B.11.22 hp-UX 11i Version 1.6
B.11.23 hp-UX 11i Version 2

Special Note:
11i V1.5 runs on Itanium, while v1.6 runs on both Itanium and Itanium2
Definitions:
TBD To Be Determined
Introduced Date of product introduction, not necessarily the date
of first
customer shipments
Discontinued Removed from Corporate Price List (CPL), no longer orderable
Obsoleted Product support no longer available from hp

[Ken Green]

Alain wrote:
http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/hp_unix.html http://www.openpa.net http://hwdb.parisc-linux.org/ will allow me to compile and run both 32 and 64 bit binaries. From reading the FAQ, I see that the Visualize J2240 workstations will Too old. Look for a C240 (inexpensive and 64bits),

Isn't a J2240 a two processor equivelent of a C240?
B2000, C3000 or better a J5000 (dual CPU) or a nice J5600.

These are 64bit only systems under HP-UX 11
You can find right now on ebay a J5000 for just 650 dollars. Note that some hp software product like npar and vpar can be installed only on some servers, not workstations.

Both nPar & vPar rely on hardware not currently offered in any 700,
In the case of nPars you need a cell based system, with vPars I guess
it's just a question of drivers.


Cheers

Ken

[Jim Balson]

In comp.sys.hp.hpux Alain <ota1998@hotmail.com> wrote: http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/hp_unix.html http://www.openpa.net http://hwdb.parisc-linux.org/
will allow me to compile and run both 32 and 64 bit binaries. From reading the FAQ, I see that the Visualize J2240 workstations will Too old. Look for a C240 (inexpensive and 64bits), B2000, C3000 or better a J5000 (dual CPU) or a nice J5600.

This is why I opted to ask here before buying. I went through
this with an SGI box as well. What I thought I could buy to develop and
run 32 and 64 bit binaries was not really what I wanted.

So I need to learn how to read the FAQ and HP/UX descriptions then,
because I could swear that both said a J2240 is a capable machine to use
to develop and run both 32 and 64 bit binaries.

SO, why is a J2240 too old to support both the development and
execution of 32 and 64 bit binaries? The FAQ seems to indicate that a J2240
is capable to develop and run both 32 and 64 binaries.

From the FAQ:

===== BEGIN FAQ SNIPPET =====

Subject: 5.5.2 How do I determine if a system supports a 32 and/or a
64-bit kernel?
Added: 09/13/01

From the command-line
=====================
$ getconf HW_CPU_SUPP_BITS
32 ---> system supports only 32-bit
32/64 ---> system supports both 32 and 64-bit
64 ---> system supports only 64-bit

From SAM
========
1) goto Performance Monitors -> System Properties -> Processor
2) check Kernel Width Support: value

The following summarizes the 11.00 implementations supported on HP9000
Servers:

32-bit only
===========
* A-Class: A180/180C
* D-Class: D200/x10 (only w/ XSW 9806+)
Dx20/x30/x50/x60
* E-Class: all
* F/G/H/I-Class: all
* K-Class: K100/200/x10/x20
* T-Class: T500/520

32/64-bit
=========
* D-Class: Dx70/x80/D390
(Dx70/Dx80 supports 64-bit only w/ Firmware rev. 38.30+)
(D390 supports 64-bit only w/ Firmware rev. 38.31+)
(Dx70/x80/D390 require XSW 9808+ to run 64-bit)
and provide NO support for any EISA cards!)
* K-Class: Kx50/x60/x60EG/460XP/x70/x80
* R-Class: all
* T-Class: T600
* Enterprise Parallel Servers: all

64-bit Only
===========
* A-Class: A400/500
* L-Class: all
* N-Class: all
* V-Class: all

The following summarizes the 11.00 implementations supported on HP9000
Workstations:

32-bit Only
===========
* B-class: B132L/160L
* C-class: C100/110/160/160L/180/180-XP/200/240/360/3000/3600
* J-Class: J200/210/210XC
* 700-Series: 712, 715/64, 715/80, 715/100, 715/100XC, 725/100, 743,
744

32/64-bit
=========
* B-Class: B132L+/180L/1000 (only w/ XSW 9808+)
* C-Class: C200/240/160/180/180XP (only w/ XSW 9808+)
* J-Class: J280/282/2240 (only w/ XSW 9808+)


===== END FAQ SNIPPET =====



And I also found some HPUX documentation that pretty much seems to
indicate that a J2240 can be used to develop and run 32 and 64 bit binaries
at the following URL:

http://docs.hp.com/hpux/onlinedocs/5187-1827/5187-1827.html

So, can I NOT use a J2240 for this purpose?

And let me clarify that I need a dual processor machine that I
can use to develop and run 32 bit (with 32 bit pointers) and 64 bit
binaries that utilize 64 bit pointers in them.

(The reason why I feel I must explicity state 32/64 bit
pointers is because SGI actually sells machines that are 64 bit in
nature but can only utilize 32 bit pointers in them.)


Any clarifications are greatly apprecieated.



Thanks, Jim


You can find right now on ebay a J5000 for just 650 dollars. Note that some hp software product like npar and vpar can be installed only on some servers, not workstations.
And about HP/UX, is someone is releasing a new product on HP/UX should I support both HPUX-10 and HPUX-11 or is HP-UX-11 enough? Do someone still developing something new for win95 ? 10.20 and 11.00 are no more sold by HP. 10.20 HP support is discontinued. 11.00 will follow in 1 or 2 years. 11i v1 is the right choice for PA-RISC. See STK at HP ITRC. http://devrsrc1.external.hp.com/STK/hpux_faq.html
Alain.



--
-----------------------
Jim
balson AT comcast DOT net

[Benjamin Gawert]

Jim Balson wrote:
SO, why is a J2240 too old to support both the development and execution of 32 and 64 bit binaries? The FAQ seems to indicate that a J2240 is capable to develop and run both 32 and 64 binaries.

It's of course not too old, I had J2240 myself until I sold it a few month
ago. It's a great and very solid machine. Of course the two PA-8200 CPU's at
236MHz don't do any miracles but they are much faster than a Dual R10k SGI
Octane...

For developing purposes, any machine in the range of a C240/J2240 should be
enough. But depending on the apps You write You might think about the use of
developing for 32Bit today...

Benjamin

[Mikko Nahkola]

In article <DMQZa.121701$Ho3.15849@sccrnsc03>, Jim Balson wrote: In comp.sys.hp.hpux Alain <ota1998@hotmail.com> wrote: http://www.unixnerd.demon.co.uk/hp_unix.html http://www.openpa.net http://hwdb.parisc-linux.org/ will allow me to compile and run both 32 and 64 bit binaries. From reading the FAQ, I see that the Visualize J2240 workstations will Too old. Look for a C240 (inexpensive and 64bits), B2000, C3000 or better a J5000 (dual CPU) or a nice J5600.
This is why I opted to ask here before buying. I went through this with an SGI box as well. What I thought I could buy to develop and run 32 and 64 bit binaries was not really what I wanted.

Oh, the J2240 _can_ do both, it's just much slower than the others
listed, and might be significantly more expensive than a C240, the C
being single-processor...

Other than that, it's just fine.
So I need to learn how to read the FAQ and HP/UX descriptions then, because I could swear that both said a J2240 is a capable machine to use to develop and run both 32 and 64 bit binaries. SO, why is a J2240 too old to support both the development and execution of 32 and 64 bit binaries? The FAQ seems to indicate that a J2240 is capable to develop and run both 32 and 64 binaries.

I understand that they meant that a J2240 isn't considered a "capable
machine" anymore nowadays. It is, however, "capable of running" both 32
and 64 bit binaries, just fine if a bit slowly...
So, can I NOT use a J2240 for this purpose?

AFAIK you can. Haven't tested myself but I can't see why not, it's just
slower than the newer systems.
And let me clarify that I need a dual processor machine that I can use to develop and run 32 bit (with 32 bit pointers) and 64 bit binaries that utilize 64 bit pointers in them.

Well, that dual-processor requirement makes it much simpler - it's
either a J, or a server-class box. And _there_ the J2240 doesn't look
all that expensive anymore, and is probably much faster than a
fridge-sized K360/2 ... which is still fast enough for us.
(The reason why I feel I must explicity state 32/64 bit pointers is because SGI actually sells machines that are 64 bit in nature but can only utilize 32 bit pointers in them.)

The J2240 can do that too, optionally. IIRC it might be slightly faster
that way even ...

The critical thing is the kernel. The systems listed as "32/64 bit" are
capable of running both 32 and 64-bit kernels, and should ask about that
at install time, but you can also upgrade to 64 afterwards (one way
only). Such systems are at least C200, C240, C360, the J2240, a bunch of
K, D, and R-class servers, and some others.

The newer systems, like the J5000, can only run a 64-bit kernel (except
that some of the models might run 10.20 optionally, which is 32-bit only,
but not 32-bit 11.x). You can still build and run 32-bit userspace
binaries on all of them though, and in a number of cases it even makes
sense as the 32-bit stuff is still faster in some cases even there.

Yes, if you need to develop something that is kernel-intrusive and needs
to run on both 32- and 64-bit kernels, and requires at least 2
processors, the J2240 should be a good choice. You'll likely need to
make it a dual-boot rig (the 32 and 64 bit installations on different
disks) or get two of them though.


--
Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com>
#include <disclaimer.h>
#Not speaking for my employer. No warranty. YMMV.

[Ken Green]

Mikko Nahkola wrote:
Yes, if you need to develop something that is kernel-intrusive and needs to run on both 32- and 64-bit kernels, and requires at least 2 processors, the J2240 should be a good choice. You'll likely need to make it a dual-boot rig (the 32 and 64 bit installations on different disks) or get two of them though.

This is a real PITA, why did they have to go and put the 32bit & 64bit kernel
libraries into the same directory with the same name. For the user space
stuff they use different directories.

Cheers

Ken

[nissan350z]

"Ken Green" <Ken.Green@kgcc.co.uk> a écrit dans le message de news:
3F36BFC7.5025F037@kgcc.co.uk... Alain wrote: From reading the FAQ, I see that the Visualize J2240 workstations will Too old. Look for a C240 (inexpensive and 64bits), Isn't a J2240 a two processor equivelent of a C240? B2000, C3000 or better a J5000 (dual CPU) or a nice J5600. These are 64bit only systems under HP-UX 11

Ken, you are right. I apologize. A J2240 can do the job and a C240 is slower
since it's a single CPU.

[Rick Jones]

In comp.sys.hp.hardware Ken Green <Ken.Green@kgcc.co.uk> wrote: This is a real PITA, why did they have to go and put the 32bit & 64bit kernel libraries into the same directory with the same name. For the user space stuff they use different directories.

It was expected to have concurrent 32 and 64 bit stuff happening in
user space.

It was not expected to have people bouncing back and forth betwen 32
and 64 bit in kernel space, and/or the number of people doing so being
really small. Switching back and forth between a 64 and 32 bit kernel
requires a reboot anyway, disc's are ostensibly cheap these days, and
as time passes/passed, the kernel became 64-bit only , so any benefit
would have been short-lived at best.

my guesses only,

rick jones

PA-8000 and PA-8200 being the only PA 2.0 CPUs that run a 32-bit
11.x kernel, PA-8500 and later CPUs running only a 64-bit kernel when
running 11.X.

--
Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events.
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...

[Ken Green]

Rick Jones wrote:
In comp.sys.hp.hardware Ken Green <Ken.Green@kgcc.co.uk> wrote: This is a real PITA, why did they have to go and put the 32bit & 64bit kernel libraries into the same directory with the same name. For the user space stuff they use different directories. It was expected to have concurrent 32 and 64 bit stuff happening in user space. It was not expected to have people bouncing back and forth betwen 32 and 64 bit in kernel space, and/or the number of people doing so being really small. Switching back and forth between a 64 and 32 bit kernel requires a reboot anyway, disc's are ostensibly cheap these days, and as time passes/passed, the kernel became 64-bit only , so any benefit would have been short-lived at best. my guesses only, rick jones PA-8000 and PA-8200 being the only PA 2.0 CPUs that run a 32-bit 11.x kernel, PA-8500 and later CPUs running only a 64-bit kernel when running 11.X.

What about the C360 :-)
-- Wisdom Teeth are impacted, people are affected by the effects of events. these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :) feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...

[Rick Jones]

In comp.sys.hp.hpux Ken Green <Ken.Green@kgcc.co.uk> wrote: What about the C360 :-)

Yes, um, well, ah... the C360 has something of an identity crisis.
Yes, it is powered by a PA-8500 CPU, but IIRC, it "fibs" to the rest
of the system and claims it is a PA-8200 or somesuch.

Besides, there has to be at least one exception to every absolute
statement :)

rick jones
--
a wide gulf separates "what if" from "if only"
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...

[Jim Balson]

In comp.sys.hp.hpux Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com> wrote:

[snip]
Yes, if you need to develop something that is kernel-intrusive and needs to run on both 32- and 64-bit kernels, and requires at least 2 processors, the J2240 should be a good choice. You'll likely need to make it a dual-boot rig (the 32 and 64 bit installations on different disks) or get two of them though.


Thanks for your clarification. Can I, using the 64 bit kernel,
develop and run 32 bit binaries utilizing 32 bit pointers on the 64 bit
kernel?

It would be saner (for me) if I could do that with the 64 bit
kernel so I wouldn't have to reboot each time I needed to test my
software either in 32 bit or 64 bit mode.



Thanks, Jim


-- Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com> #include <disclaimer.h> #Not speaking for my employer. No warranty. YMMV.

--
-----------------------
Jim
balson AT comcast DOT net

[Rick Jones]

In comp.sys.hp.hpux Jim Balson <balson@attbi.com> wrote:
Thanks for your clarification. Can I, using the 64 bit kernel, develop and run 32 bit binaries utilizing 32 bit pointers on the 64 bit kernel?

A 64-bit HP-UX kernel is perfectly willing and able to run 32-bit
user-space applications.

rick jones
--
oxymoron n, Hummer H2 with California Save Our Coasts and Oceans plates
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...

[Mikko Nahkola]

In article <pQe_a.130489$uu5.18828@sccrnsc04>, Jim Balson wrote: In comp.sys.hp.hpux Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com> wrote:
Yes, if you need to develop something that is kernel-intrusive and needs to run on both 32- and 64-bit kernels, and requires at least 2 processors, the J2240 should be a good choice. You'll likely need to make it a dual-boot rig (the 32 and 64 bit installations on different disks) or get two of them though.
Thanks for your clarification. Can I, using the 64 bit kernel, develop and run 32 bit binaries utilizing 32 bit pointers on the 64 bit kernel?

Yes. In fact, you can even run most of the HP-UX 10.x (that was 32-bit
only) binaries on 64-bit HP-UX 11.x ...

The primary constraint is that your code must not touch the kernel. That
would be the only reason to need a "32/64 bit" box too, otherwise you
can get a "64-bit-only" just fine.
It would be saner (for me) if I could do that with the 64 bit kernel so I wouldn't have to reboot each time I needed to test my software either in 32 bit or 64 bit mode.

Indeed ... and, most of the system utilities that HP ships with "64-bit"
HP-UX are still 32-bit (most of the stuff in /usr/bin at least), "file"
says "(s800|PA-RISC1.1|PA-RISC2.0) shared executable dynamically linked"
or some such, with the "s800" meaning that the code would be compatible
with the very earliest PA-RISC1.0 processors and the 2.0 meaning that it
is 32-bit code that only runs on the PA8xxx - yes, 32-bit code that is
only compatible with 64-bit-capable CPUs ... ;-)

Whereas on a 64-bit binary "file" says "ELF-64 <something>". There are
exactly _two_ such files in /usr/bin on my 64-bit test box ... all the
rest of the system utilities are 32-bit there too.

Oh, the two files are "ipcrm" and "pipcrm" - they probably do need to
touch the kernel.


--
Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com>
#include <disclaimer.h>
#Not speaking for my employer. No warranty. YMMV.

[Tapani Tarvainen]

Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com> writes:
In fact, you can even run most of the HP-UX 10.x (that was 32-bit only) binaries on 64-bit HP-UX 11.x ...

Hey, you can even run many (dunno about most) HP-UX 9.x binaries under
11.x. Hmm, I seem to have a binary compiled in 1990 that works just
fine under 11.11, that must've been HP-UX 7.0 if memory serves...

--
Tapani Tarvainen

[Ken Green]

Tapani Tarvainen wrote:
Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com> writes: In fact, you can even run most of the HP-UX 10.x (that was 32-bit only) binaries on 64-bit HP-UX 11.x ... Hey, you can even run many (dunno about most) HP-UX 9.x binaries under 11.x. Hmm, I seem to have a binary compiled in 1990 that works just fine under 11.11, that must've been HP-UX 7.0 if memory serves... -- Tapani Tarvainen

Well behaved HP-UX 1 PA binaries should work on HP-UX 11.11

Things that rely on external files like the pre-POSIX NLS
environment might need you to copy their support files over
but the HP-UX kernel has maintained binary compatibity
since day 1. There is even a whole load of stuff in the kernel
to deal with the fact that pre- 8.04 PA1.0 binaries had 2K
pages and started half way through what is now the first
page.

Now you just need to come up with a good definision of
"well behaved" :-)


Cheers

Ken

[Jim Balson]

In comp.sys.hp.hpux Rick Jones <foo@bar.baz.invalid> wrote: In comp.sys.hp.hpux Jim Balson <balson@attbi.com> wrote:
Thanks for your clarification. Can I, using the 64 bit kernel, develop and run 32 bit binaries utilizing 32 bit pointers on the 64 bit kernel?
A 64-bit HP-UX kernel is perfectly willing and able to run 32-bit user-space applications.

OK, but can I also develop 32 bit binaries on the 64 bit kernel? This
would prevent me from having to reboot into the 32 bit version of HPUX. I just want to be 100% certain before I buy the machine.

I'll assume that the answer is yes, a 32 bit executable can be
compiled and linked on the 64 bit version of HPUX. I think the duap
processor J2240 is the machine I want then.



Jim




--
-----------------------
Jim
balson AT comcast DOT net

[Ken Green]

Jim Balson wrote:
In comp.sys.hp.hpux Rick Jones <foo@bar.baz.invalid> wrote: In comp.sys.hp.hpux Jim Balson <balson@attbi.com> wrote: Thanks for your clarification. Can I, using the 64 bit kernel, develop and run 32 bit binaries utilizing 32 bit pointers on the 64 bit kernel? A 64-bit HP-UX kernel is perfectly willing and able to run 32-bit user-space applications. OK, but can I also develop 32 bit binaries on the 64 bit kernel? This would prevent me from having to reboot into the 32 bit version of HPUX. I just want to be 100% certain before I buy the machine. I'll assume that the answer is yes, a 32 bit executable can be compiled and linked on the 64 bit version of HPUX. I think the duap processor J2240 is the machine I want then. Jim -- ----------------------- Jim balson AT comcast DOT net

There have been some reasonably priced J5000s on ebay of late
for not much more than the J2240. These should be quite a bit
quicker, they also get LVD SCSI, only downside is they're USB
keyboard and mouse systems which can be a pain in a mixed
environment where you want to use a KVM switch

Cheers

Ken

[Mikko Nahkola]

In article <Y9r_a.134808$o%2.57618@sccrnsc02>, Jim Balson wrote: In comp.sys.hp.hpux Rick Jones <foo@bar.baz.invalid> wrote: In comp.sys.hp.hpux Jim Balson <balson@attbi.com> wrote:
Thanks for your clarification. Can I, using the 64 bit kernel, develop and run 32 bit binaries utilizing 32 bit pointers on the 64 bit kernel?
A 64-bit HP-UX kernel is perfectly willing and able to run 32-bit user-space applications.
OK, but can I also develop 32 bit binaries on the 64 bit kernel? This would prevent me from having to reboot into the 32 bit version of HPUX. I just want to be 100% certain before I buy the machine.

Yes - but the default might be 64-bit. This can be changed with a
command-line switch to the compiler - '+DA1.1' for
the 32-bit-only machines, and '+DA2.0N' for 64-bit-capable machines
running a 32-bit kernel. (there's a '+DAportable' too, but if it still
makes the things to use only the PA1.0 instruction set like it used to,
it won't be of much use as your system libraries won't run on an OS
version that'd work on something that old.)

There might be something about library compatibility there too, but
AFAIK it's only when building on HP-UX 11.11, not 11.00.
I'll assume that the answer is yes, a 32 bit executable can be compiled and linked on the 64 bit version of HPUX. I think the duap processor J2240 is the machine I want then.

Should do the job.


--
Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com>
#include <disclaimer.h>
#Not speaking for my employer. No warranty. YMMV.

[Rémy]

"Jim Hollenback" <jholly@cup.hp.com> a écrit dans le message de
news:3f3a6233$1@usenet01.boi.hp.com... Mikko Nahkola (mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com) wrote: : Yes - but the default might be 64-bit. This can be changed with a : command-line switch to the compiler - '+DA1.1' for : the 32-bit-only machines, and '+DA2.0N' for 64-bit-capable machines : running a 32-bit kernel. (there's a '+DAportable' too, but if it still : makes the things to use only the PA1.0 instruction set like it used to, : it won't be of much use as your system libraries won't run on an OS : version that'd work on something that old.) A little clarification here. +DA1.1 - generates code for the PA1.1 (32bit) architecture, will run on PA2.0 machines with either the 32bit or 64bit kernels. Uses the PA1.1 instruction set and conventions. +DA2.0N - generates 32bit code that will *only* run on a PA2.0 machine. It will fail on a PA1.1 machine even though it is 32bit code, it uses PA2.0 instructions and conventions. It will run on both a 32bit kernel and a 64bit kernel. +DAportable - As of 11.11 (or maybe even 11.0) I believe this now generates only PA1.1 code.

And +DA2.0W - generate 64bit code that will *only* run on a PA2.0 machine
with 64bit kernel.

[Jim Hollenback]

Mikko Nahkola (mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com) wrote:

: Yes - but the default might be 64-bit. This can be changed with a
: command-line switch to the compiler - '+DA1.1' for
: the 32-bit-only machines, and '+DA2.0N' for 64-bit-capable machines
: running a 32-bit kernel. (there's a '+DAportable' too, but if it still
: makes the things to use only the PA1.0 instruction set like it used to,
: it won't be of much use as your system libraries won't run on an OS
: version that'd work on something that old.)

A little clarification here.

+DA1.1 - generates code for the PA1.1 (32bit) architecture, will run on
PA2.0 machines with either the 32bit or 64bit kernels. Uses the
PA1.1 instruction set and conventions.

+DA2.0N - generates 32bit code that will *only* run on a PA2.0 machine.
It will fail on a PA1.1 machine even though it is 32bit
code, it uses PA2.0 instructions and conventions. It will run
on both a 32bit kernel and a 64bit kernel.

+DAportable - As of 11.11 (or maybe even 11.0) I believe this now
generates only PA1.1 code.

An example of +DA2.0N code can be found on most 11.11 PA2.0 boxes, it
is /usr/lib/libc.2. Previously this library was PA1.1 code. For the
curious, yes, PA1.1 shared executables work just fine with this library.
This library will be installed on a PA2.0 box regardless if the kernel is
32 or 64bits.

--
Jim Hollenback
jholly@cup.hp.com
my opinion.

[Rick Jones]

In comp.sys.hp.hardware Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com> wrote: Yes - but the default might be 64-bit.

Default is 32-bit, matching the instruction set of the machine on
which the compilation is performed.

So, if you compile with no other switches on PA 1.1, you get a 32-bit
PA 1.1 binary.

If you compile with no other switches on a PA 2.0 (anyhing with a
PA-8XXX processor) you get a 32-bit PA 2.0 binary.

If you compile with no other switches on an IA box you get 32-bit IPF
binary.

You add +DD64 to get a 64-bit binary. I think someone else covered
what you get with +DAportable.

rick jones
--
oxymoron n, commuter in a gas-guzzling luxury SUV with an American flag
these opinions are mine, all mine; HP might not want them anyway... :)
feel free to post, OR email to raj in cup.hp.com but NOT BOTH...

[Jim Hollenback]

Rick Jones (foo@bar.baz.invalid) wrote:
: In comp.sys.hp.hardware Mikko Nahkola <mnahkola@trein.ntc.nokia.com> wrote:
: > Yes - but the default might be 64-bit.

: Default is 32-bit, matching the instruction set of the machine on
: which the compilation is performed.

: So, if you compile with no other switches on PA 1.1, you get a 32-bit
: PA 1.1 binary.

: If you compile with no other switches on a PA 2.0 (anyhing with a
: PA-8XXX processor) you get a 32-bit PA 2.0 binary.

: If you compile with no other switches on an IA box you get 32-bit IPF
: binary.

: You add +DD64 to get a 64-bit binary. I think someone else covered
: what you get with +DAportable.

While we are throwing switches all over the place, on PA you can, with
wreckless abandonment, include +DS2.0 on any compile. It does nothing
for a PA1.1 but helps PA2.0 all flavors. I'm not sure about IPF, consult
a man page for that.

--
Jim Hollenback
jholly@cup.hp.com
my opinion.