The HP-UX kernel is a multitasking, multiuser, multiprocessor, multithreaded, load-leveling, supercalifragilisticexpialidocious modular operating system with real-time scheduling extensions. To get a handle on it, read this introduction to the basic organization of the kernel and its data structures.
The HP-UX Kernel: Basic Organization
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Now make it Open Source HP guys and it’ll be perfect… 😉
After wading through pages and pages of non-specific kernel generalities that apply to any UNIX-style kernel, we get here on page 5:
“As in the past when HP-UX was ported to the HP-PA RISC chip set, today we are on the threshold of another port of this operating system to an emerging new platform: the Intel IA-64 processor family. In this book, we concentrate on the HP PA-RISC implementation.”
Er, how old’s this book then? HP-UX was the first commercial UNIX ported to Itanium and that was some 3 years ago (not “on the threshold” like this book claims)! The latest version is *not* the PA-RISC 11.11 one, but actually the IA-64 11.23 release, which came out several months ago.
I wonder how much of the HP-UX-specific kernel stuff in this book is completely different on IA-64 vs. the arch they cover (PA-RISC). Don’t forget that PA-RISC only has one more chip revision left (PA-8900) and that’s it – HP is desperately migrating its PA-RISC users over to IA-64, so the usefulness of this book is debatable at best. It really should be covering the IA-64 kernel to be of any use.
What’s with this attitude that open-source systems are perfect and closed-source ones are evil and bad? Why would open-sourcing HP-UX (or Solaris, AIX or Windows for that matter) make it “perfect” ?
supercalifragilisticexpialidocious
…..But does it come with a spoon full of sugar to help the medicine go down???
What do you mean NO!!!!!
well i can agree with you on the fact that people are a bit to much with “yelling open source it”.
from my stand point it would be nice if they did or if they realesd some spec for the older machines they have.
since i have alot of older hp-ux servers and it would be nice with better linux support since the parisc arch dosent seem to get so many new releses of hpux.
ofcourse hp dosent have any obligation to me wath so ever to do this but it sure would be nice to be abel to use the hardwre that i have.
HPUX? I banish thee from my work network! No “less”, you have no “less”? How could you not? And CDE? What gives? Whaddayamean I can’t put my command line options (-s -c etc.) at the end? Oh spare me the pain! It might work well for us, but I find it so archaic having enjoyed using Linux for several years. Still, I prefer it to the Alpha we develop on.
Why would open-sourcing HP-UX (or Solaris, AIX or Windows for that matter) make it “perfect” ?
So the Penguin could get antyhing it found worth from it! And then, when it was done with it, <insert non OS OS here> could die.
That’s really all those people think when they say anything should be OS’d. The only ones who don’t are users – as in all the OS/2 users who’d like to see OS/2 OS’d, or BeOS ones for that matter, even if the latter aren’t very vocal about it.
Well, you know what everybody keeps saying:
less is more
http://hpux.cs.utah.edu/hppd/hpux/Gnu/less-382/
Mike, guess what, some people use Unix to get the job done, not to install KDE on it
The article looks like unix 101 to me, I was expecting more in depth information about what makes HPUX special. I’ve used a couple of times, and don’t really like it that much. I’d take AIX/Solaris or a BSD anyday over it.
It’s too bad Fiorina won’t admit what horrible failure Itanic2 is, PA-RISC is actually a very nice architecture. But considering what Compaq did to the Alpha it doesn’t surprise me.
System 3 lives… as HPUX! Ok, with a little 5 and 7 thrown in.
I was expecting more in depth information about what makes HPUX special. I’ve used a couple of times, and don’t really like it that much. I’d take AIX/Solaris or a BSD anyday over it.
Maybe i am biased but whenenver i work with Solairs or AIX i feel like i have re-entered the stone age. Having to Plumb a NIC in Solaris? wrestiling /home from the automount daemon? or ever type dmesg at the prompt of an AIX box? Where the heck are the log files kept on AIX? Of course each flavor has their little differences However i feel HP-UX is by far the easiest
commercial UNIX to configure and use.
You silly little boy, you have learnt nothing after all these years of using UNIX. It is about making things three thousand times harder and adding two million more contradictory switches to command line tools. That is the “development process” of UNIX 😉
Just talk to the Solaris people, oh, they *could* make some nice management tools for Solaris, they *could* realise that most people don’t want to dick around with a thousand files just to get their non-postscript based printer working with Solaris, but NOOOOOOOOO why not make it more complex than it needs to be? heck, why not make installing drivers next to impossible? heck, why not sell Solaris for x86 but require the administrator to add dev nodes manually when adding devices?
Sorry, I am with you on this moan about AIX. Want to know why people are moving to Linux? just have a look at the ease of use in terms of managing and deploying Linux on servers, heck, Windows MCSE junkies can do it. That alone speaks volumes on the ease of use.
Ease of use means lower costs, lower costs means bloody big smile on the PHB, happy PHB, happy employees.