Date: Sun, 08 Jan 2006 07:34:34 +0000 From: Robert Slade <bsd@bathnetworks.com> To: Ted Mittelstaedt <tedm@toybox.placo.com> Cc: Michael Bernstein <bernsteinm@gmail.com>, jasonharback <jasonharback@frontiernet.net>, "freebsd-questions@freebsd.org" <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> Subject: RE: Sparc vs i386 architecture Message-ID: <1136705674.23844.15.camel@lmail.bathnetworks.co.uk> In-Reply-To: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNKEDMFDAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com> References: <LOBBIFDAGNMAMLGJJCKNKEDMFDAA.tedm@toybox.placo.com>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
On Sun, 2006-01-08 at 04:51, Ted Mittelstaedt wrote: > What machine code exploits currently exist for FreeBSD on the i386 > other than the F00F bug, which has already been patched out? > I wasn't aware of any. > > Ted > > >-----Original Message----- > >From: owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > >[mailto:owner-freebsd-questions@freebsd.org]On Behalf Of Michael > >Bernstein > >Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 1:53 PM > >To: Robert Slade; jasonharback > >Cc: freebsd-questions@freebsd.org > >Subject: Sparc vs i386 architecture > > > > > >Hi group, I was just wondering if there's an advantage to > >running FreeBSD on > >a SPARC than compared with a regular PC. Obviously the architecture is > >different (CISC vs RISC). How ever you can purchase a higher > >powered PC box > >for less money than it would cost for a SPARC. > > > >The main advantage I'm seeing here is for security. It's going > >to be harder > >to break into a SPARC running FreeBSD than an Intel/Amd running > >FreeBSD b/c > >most machine code exploits will be for the i386 type architecture. > > > >Any insights are much appreciated. > > > >Michael > > > > > >----- Original Message ----- > >From: "Robert Slade" <bsd@bathnetworks.com> > >To: "jasonharback" <jasonharback@frontiernet.net> > >Cc: <freebsd-questions@freebsd.org> > >Sent: Saturday, January 07, 2006 2:43 AM > >Subject: Re: Sparc dual boot problems > > > > > >> On Sat, 2006-01-07 at 03:47, jasonharback wrote: > >> > Here's the situation > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > The machine is a SUN ULTRA 5 and I have 4 IDE devices. I am > >new to SUN > >hardware I know much more about PC's. The first device primary > >master is > >the cdrom which Solaris 10 and FreeBSD were successfully installed from. > >Currently Solaris 10 which is the primary slave is the default > >boot device. > >FreeBSD is installed on the primary slave drive. I am used to > >the FreeBSD > >install on a PC and during that install it gave time for configuring the > >boot loader but I can't find it on the recent Sparc FreeBSD > >edition? During > >the partition process it says I will have the option to > >configure the boot > >loader latter. Right now I can't boot FreeBSD and I have no idea how to > >configure this machine to make it dual boot? I would like to > >have Solaris > >10 as the primary O/S, FreeBSD as the secondary and Sparc Linux > >on the third > >hd. > >> > > >> > > >> > > >> > Can you please help? > >> > > >> > Jason Harback > >> > >> Jason, > >> > >> You don't need to use a boot loader with the U5, just boot to > >the promt > >> (Stop A). Then just type boot followed by the alias of the slice you > >> want to boot. > >> > >> Rob > >> Ted, Good point. However, in my case I'm using the sparc (its a U10) because it there. I originally got it as I needed to find out about Solaris/Sparc. It was lying in the back of a cupboard so when I started to investigate replacements for a domain based on W2k using FBSD I dusted it off and I'm using it for the BDC. The only thing I really noticed is the disk(s) are slow compared (SUN's IDE) to the PDC which has a fast scsi setup. Given the choice I think I would still go for a good sparc from Ebay over a i386. Rob
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?1136705674.23844.15.camel>