PS3 and OpenSuSE 10.3

Hello,

I noticed today that OpenSuSE 10.3 is just released so I browsed
around. I will be upgrading to 10.3 in a few days after download.

I am interested in the PS3 as well so I thought it was great that it is
directly PS3 installable.
http://en.opensuse.org/PS3

I remember some comments that Python appears to be broken on the PS3 and
wonder if the Version 2.5.1 packages in 10.3 would address some of the
problems?

73 Eric (insert letter after B here)

On Sat, Oct 06, 2007 at 04:38:20PM -0400, Eric A. Cottrell wrote:

wonder if the Version 2.5.1 packages in 10.3 would address some of the
problems?

73 Eric (insert letter after B here)

Hi Eric,

If you want to run on the PS3, you’re most likely going to want the
IBM SDK 3.0. The SDK really, really wants FC 7 on the PS3.

Although SuSE 10.1 may install, I don’t think it’s what you want.

I’ll write up the seriously convoluted install procedure that is
required
to get FC 7 on the PS3 along with a known-good PS3 specific kernel,
and the IBM SDK 3.0 a bit later today.

If you want to get a head start, download the Fedora-7-ppc DVD iso and
burn it to a DVD:

http://torrent.fedoraproject.org/

You’ll also need Geoff Levand’s (Sony Linux kernel guy) 2007-08-31
ADDON disk:

http://www.kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/people/geoff/cell/CELL-Linux-CL_20070831-ADDON.iso

Download and burn it to CD. It’s got a PS3 specific 2.6.23 kernel on
it, along with the PS3 boot loader, and other magic pieces.

Eric, K7GNU

If you want to run on the PS3, you’re most likely going to want the
IBM SDK 3.0. The SDK really, really wants FC 7 on the PS3.

Some people will do anything for crunchons – or “promised future”
crunchons.
(A crunchon is a unit of number-crunching.)

I was wondering why this SDK wasn’t already part of the SuSe or FC7
releases. Ten minutes of research later, the answer is: it’s
proprietary.

Why would anyone on this mailing list want to install proprietary
compilers? The IBM license agreement is extortionate. Besides the
usual rape and pillage, it says that:

http://www14.software.ibm.com/cgi-bin/weblap/lap.pl?la_formnum=&li_formnum=L-MCHN-6MVMPV&title=XL%20C/C%2B%2B%20Alpha%20Edition%20for%20Cell%20Processor

  • You are not authorized to use the Program for productive purposes
  • THE PROGRAM MAY CONTAIN A DISABLING DEVICE THAT WILL PREVENT IT
    FROM BEING USED AFTER THE EVALUATION PERIOD ENDS. YOU MAY NOT TAMPER
    WITH THIS DISABLING DEVICE OR THE PROGRAM. YOU SHOULD TAKE PRECAUTIONS
    TO AVOID ANY LOSS OF DATA THAT MIGHT RESULT WHEN THE PROGRAM CAN NO
    LONGER BE USED.
  • You assign to IBM all right, title, and interest (including
    ownership of copyright) in any data, suggestions, or written materials
    that 1) are related to the Program and 2) You provide to IBM.
  • Your right to run the program “ends after 90 days.”

[I hope Eric hasn’t provided IBM a copy of the GNU Radio code that compiles under this compiler: IBM will end up owning the copyright on GNU Radio. This may occur even if Eric just posts the code in a public place where IBM can download it.]

If the above wasn’t enough, it’s also against GNU project policy to
use the mailing list or project documentation to advertise or advocate
for proprietary software.

If the GNU compilers for the CELL aren’t good enough for us, I suggest
that we improve them. If we just can’t exploit the CELL processor
without
proprietary software and patented algorithms, then I suggest we go
back to focusing on hosting GNU Radio on hardware that comes with
freedom.

John

On Mon, Oct 08, 2007 at 09:59:03PM -0700, John G. wrote:

If you want to run on the PS3, you’re most likely going to want the
IBM SDK 3.0. The SDK really, really wants FC 7 on the PS3.

Some people will do anything for crunchons – or “promised future” crunchons.
(A crunchon is a unit of number-crunching.)

I was wondering why this SDK wasn’t already part of the SuSe or FC7
releases. Ten minutes of research later, the answer is: it’s proprietary.

Part of it is proprietary, most of it is not.

The part we are likely to use is all distributed under the GPL, LGPL
or IBM Common License. This includes binutils, the two versions of gcc
(one for the PPE, one for the SPE), gdb, libspe2 (the code that provides
the bridge between the Linux user-space code and the SPEs), etc.

  • Your right to run the program “ends after 90 days.”
    We’re not using those compilers.
    We’re not recommending them.
    I don’t even install them.
    And I get your point :wink:

If the above wasn’t enough, it’s also against GNU project policy to
use the mailing list or project documentation to advertise or advocate
for proprietary software.

If the GNU compilers for the CELL aren’t good enough for us, I suggest
that we improve them. If we just can’t exploit the CELL processor without
proprietary software and patented algorithms, then I suggest we go
back to focusing on hosting GNU Radio on hardware that comes with freedom.

If you’ve got some time, please put together a script, etc that pulls
the free stuff down from the Barcelona Supercomputer Center. That’s
where it’s all hosted. Then we can point users at that script and not
at the IBM SDK site.

Here’s a good starting point:

http://www.bsc.es/plantillaH.php?cat_id=431

FYI, the kernel and oprofile they’re distributing only work on bare
metal (e.g., IBM QS20 or QS21 bladeserver), not on the hypervisored PS3.

There’s currently lots of churn on the Cell kernels. You can watch
the sausage being made on the cbe-oss-dev mailing list. The IBM and
Sony Linux hackers are there.
https://ozlabs.org/mailman/listinfo/cbe-oss-dev

Thanks,
Eric

John:

We are not using xlc and are not likely to use xlc. We are using the
free parts of the SDK including spu-gcc and ppu-gcc for example. For
this project in fact, we cannot distribute any code built with xlc.

However, nothing about the gpl prohibits individuals from using xlc to
generate binaries for their own use so long as they do not distribute
the binary.

The PS3 has been available to the end users for only a few months. Yet,
it really does speak to the foresight (and good taste) of Sony that
before you or I could go to a store, even if it meant standing in line
for hours and hours, they had published a bootloader and clear
instructions on how to put Linux on the thing. Each and everything they
have done in this area has been with the support of IBM and released
GPL. Sony has multiple representatives in daily conversation with the
lead developer for the kernel. Eric and I both monitor the group and
the results will be the clear instructions (if non trivial) on bring up
a useful kernel on the PS3 that allows us to develop and use gnu tools.
IBM has contributed, under the GPL, their optimizations to FFTW. The
impact of this on GnuRadio using the PS3 is not to be underestimated.

While I understand your concern, support your the basis for your stance
on this and many of your other heartfelt issues turned cause célèbre, it
is my OPINION that in this case, your concerns are misplaced.

Bob McGwier
(speaking only for myself)

John G. wrote:

compilers? The IBM license agreement is extortionate. Besides the
under this compiler: IBM will end up owning the copyright on GNU Radio.
back to focusing on hosting GNU Radio on hardware that comes with freedom.

John


Discuss-gnuradio mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/discuss-gnuradio


AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL,
TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair
“An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why
must the pessimist always run to blow it out?” Descartes

John:

However, let me add hastily, nothing irks me more than the hypervisor
and the hidden IP in the graphics chip. So be it. I do not want to
steal anything that is covered by M$ DRM anyway and I do not envision us
using the PS3 to do graphical display (since its memory is too small to
support a window manager with any serious capability). I suggest that
we do exactly what your note suggests and stick to what the thing is
capable of delivering to use with free tools.

Bob

Robert McGwier wrote:

The PS3 has been available to the end users for only a few months. Yet,
impact of this on GnuRadio using the PS3 is not to be underestimated.

While I understand your concern, support your the basis for your stance
on this and many of your other heartfelt issues turned cause célèbre, it
is my OPINION that in this case, your concerns are misplaced.

Bob McGwier
(speaking only for myself)


AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL,
TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair
“An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why
must the pessimist always run to blow it out?” Descartes

Brian P. wrote:

Brian

released GPL


AMSAT Director and VP Engineering. Member: ARRL, AMSAT-DL,
TAPR, Packrats, NJQRP, QRP ARCI, QCWA, FRC. ARRL SDR WG Chair
“An optimist may see a light where there is none, but why
must the pessimist always run to blow it out?” Descartes

On 10/9/07, Robert McGwier [email protected] wrote:


However, nothing about the gpl prohibits individuals from using xlc to
generate binaries for their own use so long as they do not distribute
the binary.

This is more for curiosity than anything, but where do the USRP FPGA
bit files fit in with this?

Brian

it really does speak to the foresight (and good taste) of Sony that
[very early] they had published a bootloader and clear
instructions on how to put Linux on the thing. Each and everything they
have done in this area has been with the support of IBM and released
GPL.

This is indeed priaseworthy – particularly given Sony’s long and
ongoing history of making life hard for free software (e.g. with
documentation or drivers for their laptop chips) and their unfortunate
fondness for DRM and gratuitous incompatibility in all its forms.

We are not using xlc and are not likely to use xlc. We are using the
free parts of the SDK including spu-gcc and ppu-gcc for example.

I’m very glad to hear it.

While I understand your concern, support the basis for your stance
on this and many of your other heartfelt issues turned cause célèbre, it
is my OPINION that in this case, your concerns are misplaced.

I’m glad that people of the caliber of you and Eric are watching these
issues closely.

I’m looking forward to the day when there is a documented way to get
this free software – without wading through reading and agreeing to a
pile of nonfree licenses. :slight_smile:

John

This forum is not affiliated to the Ruby language, Ruby on Rails framework, nor any Ruby applications discussed here.

| Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Remote Ruby Jobs