Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 9th May 2006 21:25 UTC
SGI and IRIX Got $18m to spare? That's the market capitalization of one of Silicon Valley's most glamorous companies this morning, after Silicon Graphics Inc. filed for Chapter 11 bankruptcy. The size of SGI's debt - at $664m it's twice the value of its assets - is enough to deter all but the most determined bargain hunter. Apart from a ragbag of trademarks - such as OpenGL - what growth has SGI left to offer?
Thread beginning with comment 123002
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Irix
by pablo_marx on Wed 10th May 2006 12:49 UTC
pablo_marx
Member since:
2006-02-03

Also Irix is written from the ground up for MIPS and has been tested for years on MIPS hardware. Porting would be a massive undertaking requiring re-writing large parts and thus introducing plenty of new bugs.

When was Irix written from the ground up, let alone "for MIPS" ? Most of the kernel code is SysV (with a touch of BSD for network code). There are the additions SGI made (NUMA, xfs, etc) but there doesn't seem to be anything "for MIPS" about them (i.e. assembly code, etc).

So, would you care to enlighten me about these two points ("written from the ground up", and "written for MIPS")?

Reply Score: 1

RE[2]: Irix
by ncc4100 on Wed 10th May 2006 15:54 in reply to "RE: Irix"
ncc4100 Member since:
2006-05-10

[Most of the kernel code is SysV (with a touch of BSD for network code). There are the additions SGI made (NUMA, xfs, etc) but there doesn't seem to be anything "for MIPS" about them (i.e. assembly code, etc). ]

Actually, you are only partially right. You are right in the fact that it is based off of SysV and BSD, but there are MIPS specific stuff in IRIX.

There are pieces that are written in assembly for performance issues. Furthermore, there are MIPS specific stuff related to addressing and paging. Consequently, any port of IRIX would be quite complicated.

Reply Parent Score: 1