List: axp-redhat
Subject: Does axp-Linux run OSF executables?
From: "Robert Williams" <bob () bob ! usuf2 ! usuhs ! mil>
Date: 1996-09-06 9:39:06
Might it be possible to run executables
compiled on an OSF/DEC Unix Alpha,
or to use libraries (such as DXML)
under axp Linux?
--
from Bob Williams, mailto:bob@bob.usuf2.usuhs.mil
List: axp-redhat
Subject: Re: Does axp-Linux run OSF executables?
From: "Harald Koenig" <koenig () tat ! physik ! uni-tuebingen ! de>
Date: 1996-09-09 10:08:54
> Might it be possible to run executables
> compiled on an OSF/DEC Unix Alpha,
> or to use libraries (such as DXML)
> under axp Linux?
yes for most static binaries this works fine and even using the
dynamic bianries using the DEC Unix shared libs and /sbin/loader
works most for most programs (of course the latter is only legal if you
have a DEC Unix license for your Linux/AXP box...)
Harald
--
All SCSI disks will from now on ___ _____
be required to send an email notice 0--,| /OOOOOOO\
24 hours prior to complete hardware failure! <_/ / /OOOOOOOOOOO\
\ \/OOOOOOOOOOOOOOO\
\ OOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO|//
Harald Koenig, \/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/\/
Inst.f.Theoret.Astrophysik // / \\ \
koenig@tat.physik.uni-tuebingen.de ^^^^^ ^^^^^
List: axp-redhat
Subject: Re: Does axp-Linux run OSF executables?
From: "Robert Williams" <bob () bob ! usuf2 ! usuhs ! mil>
Date: 1996-09-09 9:41:13
Harald Koenig wrote:
>
> > Might it be possible to run executables
> > compiled on an OSF/DEC Unix Alpha,
> > or to use libraries (such as DXML)
> > under axp Linux?
>
> yes for most static binaries this works fine and even using the
> dynamic bianries using the DEC Unix shared libs and /sbin/loader
> works most for most programs (of course the latter is only legal if you
> have a DEC Unix license for your Linux/AXP box...)
Would a DEC Unix license be required to link
DEC libraries from a linux machine via an NFS mount
to a licensed DEC Unix Alpha? DEC folks, are you
listening?
--
from Bob Williams, mailto:bob@bob.usuf2.usuhs.mil
List: axp-redhat
Subject: Re: Does axp-Linux run OSF executables?
From: "Richard Gorton" <gorton () amt ! tay1 ! dec ! com>
Date: 1996-09-09 10:06:27
>Would a DEC Unix license be required to link
>DEC libraries from a linux machine via an NFS mount
>to a licensed DEC Unix Alpha? DEC folks, are you
>listening?
Yes, and Yes. You need a license for every machine you use the libraries
on. No free lunches.
Rick
Richard Gorton All standard disclaimers apply.
Alpha Migration Tools Projects: DECmigrate (mx), FreePort Express,
Digital Semiconductor Linux/Alpha
Digital Equipment Corporation http://www.digital.com/info/semiconductor/amt
Reply-to: gorton@tallis.enet.dec.com
Definition: Micro$oft Moment - the sudden realization that all of your
programming frustrations could be alleviated by the complete (and
exquisitely violent) destruction of Redmond, WA.
List: axp-redhat
Subject: Re: Does axp-Linux run OSF executables?
From: "Jon 'maddog' Hall, USG Senior Leader" <hall () zk3 ! dec ! com>
Date: 1996-09-09 10:29:09
>DEC folks, are you listening?
Yes.
>Would a DEC Unix license be required to link DEC libraries from a
>linux machine via an NFS mount to a licensed DEC Unix Alpha?
The issue is where the binaries *execute*. If the binaries are executing on a
licensed machine, then it is legal. If they are executing on an unlicensed
machine, it is illegal. If you consider that we allow Sun or HP or IBM, or
Linux) machines to be an NFS server for Digital UNIX machines, this will
become clear.
By the way, it is not just Digital being protective of its code for its own
benefit. Over the years we have licensed technology from Sun, HP, IBM, OSF,
AT&T (USL, NOVEL, etc.), Adobe, as well as some smaller companies. While
there are libraries that are more or less "Digital Only" from a legal
standpoint (such as the X11 libraries, where most of the code came from the
X Consortium so we owe no royalties to anyone else), the bulk of our libraries
either have royalty issues associated with them, or *may* have royalty issues
associated with them. Since all Digital UNIX systems have the royalties paid
back to the associated companies, we did not bother to track these code
intricacies to this level. Ergo it is difficult in most cases to say "This
Digital UNIX code is royalty free, therefore go ahead and use it." We have
said this in some past cases (PAL code, Digital Math Libraries), and we may
in some future cases as we both evaluate the legal aspects, and get feedback
from the freeware community with regards to its usefulness.
Sincerely,
Jon Hall
--
=============================================================================
Jon "maddog" Hall Internet: maddog@zk3.digital.com
Senior Leader, UNIX Software Group Executive Director, Linux International
Digital Equipment Corporation Linux International
Mailstop ZK03-2/U15 80 Amherst St.
110 Spit Brook Rd. Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A.
Nashua, N.H. 03062-2698 U.S.A.
Voice: +1.603.881.1341 Voice: +1.603.672.4557
FAX: +1.603.881.6059
List: axp-redhat
Subject: Re: Does axp-Linux run OSF executables?
From: "Robert Williams" <bob () bob ! usuf2 ! usuhs ! mil>
Date: 1996-09-09 11:55:19
Jon 'maddog' Hall, USG Senior Leader wrote:
>
> >DEC folks, are you listening?
>
> Yes.
>
> >Would a DEC Unix license be required to link DEC libraries from a
> >linux machine via an NFS mount to a licensed DEC Unix Alpha?
>
> The issue is where the binaries *execute*. If the binaries are executing on a
> licensed machine, then it is legal.
Then to be perfectly clear, a package like Gaussian 94,
STATICALLY compiled on a licensed DEC Unix machine with
the licensed optimized DXML (BLAS) library can be
run on a LINUX alpha with no DEC license?
Wouldn't you need a DEC Fortran runtime license of some kind?
I've called DEC Direct about this and they are
not sure about what "class" of licenses might be required
for these OEM boards. They think I would need a
base license (I think that cost is already known for each
class of board.), a Fortran runtime license and possibly
some fortran runtime software, and a DXML license.
The question here is how would you determine what
"class" of licenses to buy? DEC Direct sent me
to 1-800-axp4vme and they sent me to Dan Kilgore.
I'm waiting for Dan to call me back.
Would I also need more than one user license if
I intended to have several simultaneous users?
Also, is there an OS dependence built in to the
DEC optimized BLAS that would effect its
performance on a LINUX machine?
DEC has done an outstanding job of optimizing
the Matrix routines. For matrix intense calculations
this can make a huge difference. You wouldn't want
to buy a 433 MHz Alpha board and not run an optimized
matrix multiply routine in Gaussian 94, would you?
Would these optimizations be effective
enough running on an OEM Alpha board to justify the
expense and time involved in obtaining all of these DEC
licenses?
I may have answers to all of these questions soon.
I'll post what I learn.
--
from Bob Williams, mailto:bob@bob.usuf2.usuhs.mil
List: axp-redhat
Subject: Re: Does axp-Linux run OSF executables?
From: "Jon 'maddog' Hall, USG Senior Leader" <hall () zk3 ! dec ! com>
Date: 1996-09-09 13:04:22
bob@bob.usuf2.usuhs.mil said:
> Then to be perfectly clear, a package like Gaussian 94, STATICALLY
> compiled on a licensed DEC Unix machine with the licensed optimized
> DXML (BLAS) library can be run on a LINUX alpha with no DEC license?
To be perfectly clear, with the issue stated as above, the answer is
no.
There is a difference between compilation and linking. The binaries
which are created by taking the source code of a program and compiling them on
a Digital UNIX system using a Digital compiler bear no royalty or licensing
issues. However when you link them (either statically or dynamically) to
licensed libraries from a Digital UNIX system and the thread of execution
of a CPU that is *not* licensed runs through them, then you are in violation
of your license which you signed to get the code in the first place.
Therefore, if you compile a program (but do not link it) on Digital UNIX using
a Digital Compiler, and take the resultant objects to a Linux system, link it
against Linux libraries and run it, you are o.k. If you link in (either
statically or dynamically, either locally or over NFS) any Digital libraries
(i.e. royalty bearing code) which are licensed, you are not o.k.
>Wouldn't you need a DEC Fortran runtime license of some kind?
This depends on the license Terms and Conditions of the Fortran license (which
I am not familiar with) but in any case it would only cover the code that came
with the Fortran Runtime Libraries, which (in turn) typically use the
underlying operating system libraries (which are royalty bearing).
In the days when most Runtime licensing was conceived, there were two schools
of thought:
o sell the compiler cheap, and make it up in runtime licenses
o sell the compiler high, and give the runtime licenses away
Digital tended toward the latter, but gave little thought to having an
unlicensed binary compatible platform running the bulk of the OS. Therefore
the relationship between the "runtime libraries" and the "system
libraries" were not spelled out, since it was assumed that the licensed
system libraries would always be there on a licensed system.
Over time there was a third school of thought, which was to price the
compiler based on "simultaneous usage", or even "personal usage". This
allowed the cost of the compiler to drop for infrequent or personal use.
Perhaps it is time for a fourth school of thought, that of showing people
how to substitute the underlying libraries of an unlicensed operating system
in a run-time environment.
Of course there was also a fifth way of thought (that of GNU), but
Digital did not tend in that direction.
>Would I also need more than one user license if
>I intended to have several simultaneous users?
Again, the license typically only applies to the number of users of the
COMPILER (i.e. we priced the individual simultaneous users and the personal
user license low on a per-use basis). The number of people using the output
of the compiler (i.e. your compiled program) is typically not metered, (but
you should check the licensing of the run time libraries).
>Also, is there an OS dependence built in to the
>DEC optimized BLAS that would effect its
>performance on a LINUX machine?
There could be. Issues around mallocs, context switching, use of virtual
memory, file opening/closing. I am not familiar enough with the libraries
to see how they use the underlying operating system features to say if the
result would be positive, negative or neutral.
>DEC has done an outstanding job of optimizing
>the Matrix routines. For matrix intense calculations
>this can make a huge difference. You wouldn't want
>to buy a 433 MHz Alpha board and not run an optimized
>matrix multiply routine in Gaussian 94, would you?
I take this as a compliment, and representing Digital,
I thank you.
>Would these optimizations be effective
>enough running on an OEM Alpha board to justify the
>expense and time involved in obtaining all of these DEC
>licenses?
Even though your question is still unanswered, you
have formulated the parameters to obtain an answer.
>The question here is how would you determine what
>"class" of licenses to buy? DEC Direct sent me
>to 1-800-axp4vme and they sent me to Dan Kilgore.
>I'm waiting for Dan to call me back.
I will give Dan a call. Perhaps working together
we can clear up some of these issues.
md
--
=============================================================================
Jon "maddog" Hall Internet: maddog@zk3.digital.com
Senior Leader, UNIX Software Group Executive Director, Linux International
Digital Equipment Corporation Linux International
Mailstop ZK03-2/U15 80 Amherst St.
110 Spit Brook Rd. Amherst, N.H. 03031-3032 U.S.A.
Nashua, N.H. 03062-2698 U.S.A.
Voice: +1.603.881.1341 Voice: +1.603.672.4557
FAX: +1.603.881.6059