I love retrocomputing but I never really understood running a modern OS on old hardware. I have System 7.5 on my LC575 and NeXTSTEP 3.3 on my turbo color slab; I could run NetBSD on both, but I could also do that on modern hardware with much better software support (and build times that wouldn't take an epoch).
It's cool, and I'll still support it, but I won't understand it :)
As someone who mostly gets my retrocomputing kick from running modern software on old RISC hardware, I'll try to explain why that's my thing.
Typically, these venerable beasts come from a more "civilized" era of computing, at least that's how I feel. I wasn't around to actually experience it, coming up when real UNIX™ was already pushed to the fringes.
I'm completely aware that I'm romanticizing, but for me, there is something about these machines that a PC just still can't exactly match. Trying to move a mouse and typing with broken keyboard layouts through a buggy-as-hell IPMI interface that was somehow bolted to a machine that, from it's inception, never was meant to be operated remotely, just feels like a hack. It might get the job done, and it's cheap, but it most certainly isn't elegant. The PC as a whole just isn't elegant.
But these old SUN and IBM machines, they're something different. Tools from professionals, for professionals. With remote management built into the machine from the inception! No stupid GUI with whacky translations in sight!
Of course I'm also fascinated by Solaris, AIX and HP-UX and whatnot. But running modern software on these machines has it's own appeal to me.
My retrocomputing itch is to show off these machines, experience them. And what better way to do that than to actually use them to host modern software, impress people by showing how capable they still are, maybe as a glimpse into a future that never was.
I felt this way in my late teens and early 20, when I spent a lot of time e.g. finding a pipeline for playing YouTube videos on sun4m machines running NetBSD.
I'm now in my late 20s, and my impression is these machines were largely always hacked together piles of garbage, they had just cost a lot more ;)
There were highs of elegance, yeah. The OpenBoot PROMs introduced with the SPARCstation were marvelously functional and beautifully elegant, especially compared to the previous pre-boot environment. But when you look under the cover, you find a million patches of duck tape, like Sun having to force their compilers to avoid using the o7 register due to speculative instruction prefetching sometimes triggering DMA activity on a peripheral card and causing an unintended side effect. This was due to one buggy CPU (the 80 MHz Weitek upgrade CPU for the SS2), but the bug required changes for all sun4c kernels (at an minimum).
Or how the ILOM on newer SPARC servers are just embedded PowerPC chips running RedHat Linux. At least in the late 2000s :)
At the end of the day, NetBSD on my SPARCstation 2 is cool, super cool even -- there's even EXA acceleration support for the CG6 framebuffers in X!
But ultimate NetBSD/sparc is basically identical to NetBSD on my raspberry pi. I can even run the big endian port if I want a BE system!
On the other hand, running a contemporary OS like SunOS 4, or something exotic like Sprite, gives a very different experience. And honestly, these 80s OSes themselves feel more "elegant" in a hacker sort of way.
(I'd agree that most mid/late 90s+ Unix systems mostly just feel like worse versions of modern Linux/Unix, though)
For me: the retro operating systems are where it's at for having fun, but at the same time, being able to boot something modern to image a drive/edit partitions/copy files from the network/etc is also super helpful sometimes.
For me, i have some old (2000s/2010s) live CDs that i use for that purpose on PCs. On PowerPC Macs, they're powerful enough that having a vaguely modern browser is super useful for downloading software and drivers. And to do that you usually need a "modern" (snow leopard, 2008?) OS even if the hardware is ~2002
Also: for me the ultimate thing in retro computing is just _doing it because it can be done_. I spent weeks getting a PCMCIA 10/100 card working on DOS 6.22/WfW 3.11 just because i believed it could be done and i wanted it to happen. I built a Spotify frontend in .NET 2005 for 95/98 because, why not? I've got windows 2000 server on a Supermicro board from 2010 because, again, i believed it could be done, so I had to try lol
But it makes a kind of sense, right? There's long been straightforward upgrade paths for 486 users, making the 486 effectively totally obsolete and killing most of the demand for continued support. Whereas 68k machines have effectively become trapped in time, and their users are still going to work to keep support going.
Someday i hope to get Linux running on my Mac LCII... After i replace the power supply, and all the caps....
I was having fun building a custom distro for my 386 until the drive containing all the work died and coincidentally my backups had started failing without me noticing.
I love retrocomputing but I never really understood running a modern OS on old hardware. I have System 7.5 on my LC575 and NeXTSTEP 3.3 on my turbo color slab; I could run NetBSD on both, but I could also do that on modern hardware with much better software support (and build times that wouldn't take an epoch).
It's cool, and I'll still support it, but I won't understand it :)
As someone who mostly gets my retrocomputing kick from running modern software on old RISC hardware, I'll try to explain why that's my thing.
Typically, these venerable beasts come from a more "civilized" era of computing, at least that's how I feel. I wasn't around to actually experience it, coming up when real UNIX™ was already pushed to the fringes. I'm completely aware that I'm romanticizing, but for me, there is something about these machines that a PC just still can't exactly match. Trying to move a mouse and typing with broken keyboard layouts through a buggy-as-hell IPMI interface that was somehow bolted to a machine that, from it's inception, never was meant to be operated remotely, just feels like a hack. It might get the job done, and it's cheap, but it most certainly isn't elegant. The PC as a whole just isn't elegant.
But these old SUN and IBM machines, they're something different. Tools from professionals, for professionals. With remote management built into the machine from the inception! No stupid GUI with whacky translations in sight!
Of course I'm also fascinated by Solaris, AIX and HP-UX and whatnot. But running modern software on these machines has it's own appeal to me. My retrocomputing itch is to show off these machines, experience them. And what better way to do that than to actually use them to host modern software, impress people by showing how capable they still are, maybe as a glimpse into a future that never was.
I felt this way in my late teens and early 20, when I spent a lot of time e.g. finding a pipeline for playing YouTube videos on sun4m machines running NetBSD.
I'm now in my late 20s, and my impression is these machines were largely always hacked together piles of garbage, they had just cost a lot more ;)
There were highs of elegance, yeah. The OpenBoot PROMs introduced with the SPARCstation were marvelously functional and beautifully elegant, especially compared to the previous pre-boot environment. But when you look under the cover, you find a million patches of duck tape, like Sun having to force their compilers to avoid using the o7 register due to speculative instruction prefetching sometimes triggering DMA activity on a peripheral card and causing an unintended side effect. This was due to one buggy CPU (the 80 MHz Weitek upgrade CPU for the SS2), but the bug required changes for all sun4c kernels (at an minimum).
Or how the ILOM on newer SPARC servers are just embedded PowerPC chips running RedHat Linux. At least in the late 2000s :)
At the end of the day, NetBSD on my SPARCstation 2 is cool, super cool even -- there's even EXA acceleration support for the CG6 framebuffers in X!
But ultimate NetBSD/sparc is basically identical to NetBSD on my raspberry pi. I can even run the big endian port if I want a BE system!
On the other hand, running a contemporary OS like SunOS 4, or something exotic like Sprite, gives a very different experience. And honestly, these 80s OSes themselves feel more "elegant" in a hacker sort of way.
(I'd agree that most mid/late 90s+ Unix systems mostly just feel like worse versions of modern Linux/Unix, though)
Mirrors the Amiga experience. PC architecture still is a hack compared to 1200.
For me: the retro operating systems are where it's at for having fun, but at the same time, being able to boot something modern to image a drive/edit partitions/copy files from the network/etc is also super helpful sometimes.
For me, i have some old (2000s/2010s) live CDs that i use for that purpose on PCs. On PowerPC Macs, they're powerful enough that having a vaguely modern browser is super useful for downloading software and drivers. And to do that you usually need a "modern" (snow leopard, 2008?) OS even if the hardware is ~2002
Also: for me the ultimate thing in retro computing is just _doing it because it can be done_. I spent weeks getting a PCMCIA 10/100 card working on DOS 6.22/WfW 3.11 just because i believed it could be done and i wanted it to happen. I built a Spotify frontend in .NET 2005 for 95/98 because, why not? I've got windows 2000 server on a Supermicro board from 2010 because, again, i believed it could be done, so I had to try lol
68k outliving 486 support in the kernel will be hilarious
Is it still supported? The “News” page on the linked site reads:
Current Linux/m68k Releases
As of today, the following versions of the Linux/m68k kernel are "current":
Linux/m68k 2.0.36, released 5 February 1999, is a stable 2.0 series release. Users of earlier versions should probably upgrade; it's well worth it.
Linux/m68k 2.2.10, released 19 July 1999, is a developmental release (despite the 2.2 version number).
Linux/m68k 2.4.5, released 5 June 2001, is an experimental release. (More recent patches may be available in the linux-m68k mailing list archives.)
There are files for it in mainline:
https://git.kernel.org/pub/scm/linux/kernel/git/torvalds/lin...
Well, this page/project certainly isn't, but Wikipedia says it's still in the kernel:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux-supported_comput...
But it makes a kind of sense, right? There's long been straightforward upgrade paths for 486 users, making the 486 effectively totally obsolete and killing most of the demand for continued support. Whereas 68k machines have effectively become trapped in time, and their users are still going to work to keep support going.
I would imagine there are actually more 68k devices out there than 486 and, I am told, the 68k architecture is much more enjoyable to work with.
Someday i hope to get Linux running on my Mac LCII... After i replace the power supply, and all the caps....
I was having fun building a custom distro for my 386 until the drive containing all the work died and coincidentally my backups had started failing without me noticing.