Welcome to the MacNN Forums.

DAlex · Mar 13, 2003, 03:33 PM

Is anyone running F@H on a linux machine, if so, what version/derivative of linux are you using - I've got a loud of spares coming soon so thought I'd have a go at putting a linux cruncher together.

Any thoughts/tips.

DAlex

Welnic · Mar 13, 2003, 04:15 PM

My "farm" runs only linux. The computers that I have borged at work all run XP. My computers at work and home run OSX.

I have two dual Athlon 2000MPs that run version 2.2.20 of linux. I had trouble getting both processors running without killing the network card. 2.4.20 was easier with 2 processors but I never got the network card to work.

I have a node server which runs 2.4.20. The 4 nodes run whatever it was that I got from Linux Terminal Server Project, http://ltsp.org/ .

When I set up the first dual machine I knew nothing about linux. I tried OpenBSD first, (I know it is not linux), but it didn't have support for dual proccesors. I then tried FreeBSD and I think that it also choked on the dual part. I then tried Debian and got it to work eventually.

For the second box I tried GenToo. It actually installed easily and worked with 2.4, duals and the network. But I think you really have to know what you want when you install it as when I was trying to adjust things later it didn't even have a text editor that I could find. I traded hard drives around for other reasons later and just ghosted the first duals hard drive so they both have Debian.

When it was time to set up the server node I really didn't have any trouble installing Debian. A little experience and just one processor made it seem easy.

One thing I learned is not to make floppy disks and do the install over the internet. Download and burn an installation CD.

Scotttheking · Mar 13, 2003, 04:40 PM

I run debian linux.
I use an install CD that has the base stuff, then downloads the rest off the internet.

One thing I would recommend if you have hard drives in the machines is to run f@h in wine. It is a bit faster. I never did get it working under netboot

It makes a lot more sense to optimize what hardware you have to get more production then it does to buy more hardware.

Welnic: what exactly do you have setup? My setup is based on LTSP, with some changes that I made to get other projects working. However, my netboot clients can't do DNS resolution. Do you have that ability? Also, did you use heretic's instructions to get it setup?

DAlex · Mar 13, 2003, 05:13 PM

Cheers, I was thinking of trying debian as I've got a boot cd/install of deb 3.

Just one final q, before I dive in

Is it possible to do a small install as the two drives that I've scrounged are both 200mb each! I may get a larger one later but for now I was hoping to experiment with these freebies.

All it would be running, other than the os, would be the folding client.

DAlex

Scotttheking · Mar 13, 2003, 05:44 PM

Originally posted by DAlex:
Cheers, I was thinking of trying debian as I've got a boot cd/install of deb 3.

Just one final q, before I dive in Is it possible to do a small install as the two drives that I've scrounged are both 200mb each! I may get a larger one later but for now I was hoping to experiment with these freebies.

All it would be running, other than the os, would be the folding client.

DAlex

Hmm.
If you have at least 128MB ram in the machines, give them 50MB swap, and install just the base debian stuff, then f@h, and see if it'll run. You might need a few other things, but it should fit. You can't get WINE on something that small though.

Welnic · Mar 13, 2003, 07:01 PM

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
...
Welnic: what exactly do you have setup? My setup is based on LTSP, with some changes that I made to get other projects working. However, my netboot clients can't do DNS resolution. Do you have that ability? Also, did you use heretic's instructions to get it setup?

I have 5 MS-6390 motherboards with 5 2100XP processors. I have 4 LinkSys NIC with bootroms that I bought at Diskless Workstations.com. I ended up using on of those on the server since I forgot that needed two NICs. Two of the nodes us the NICs with bootrom and two boot from onboard LAN using PXE. I used LTSP and followed instructions from a link on LTSP.org's front page:
http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/a...ss_Farm_1.html

I basically just ground through those instructions and eventually got it to work. I mainly run dFold (not at the moment, though

) so I had to make a /tmp directory as dFold writes about 5MBs and the default LTSP setup is having a 1MB ram disk that holds tmp.

So your question about DNS resolution, do you mean can they access the world on the other side of the server? They can, if they couldn't would that be a breakdown in the IP masquerade service on the server?

mikkyo · Mar 13, 2003, 07:37 PM

I have redhat 7.2 running on some Athlons.

Scotttheking · 08:12 PM

Originally posted by Welnic:
I have 5 MS-6390 motherboards with 5 2100XP processors. I have 4 LinkSys NIC with bootroms that I bought at Diskless Workstations.com. I ended up using on of those on the server since I forgot that needed two NICs. Two of the nodes us the NICs with bootrom and two boot from onboard LAN using PXE. I used LTSP and followed instructions from a link on LTSP.org's front page:
http://www.extremeoverclocking.com/a...ss_Farm_1.html

I basically just ground through those instructions and eventually got it to work. I mainly run dFold (not at the moment, though ) so I had to make a /tmp directory as dFold writes about 5MBs and the default LTSP setup is having a 1MB ram disk that holds tmp.

So your question about DNS resolution, do you mean can they access the world on the other side of the server? They can, if they couldn't would that be a breakdown in the IP masquerade service on the server?

I got DF working by making /tmp a NFS mount.
By DNS resolution I mean that. It can't change URLs to IPs. Supposedly it's a bug, but I haven't seen it fixed yet.

Those instructions shouldn't be too different from what I used. The second link is the setup I used.

Edit: #%&*!)#%^!)@#%&^!#)%(^#%! <<< me cursing.
from the link you posted

One of the files says "local apps" in it, but you aren't going to be running anything locally really, there are files that it has for DNS resolution that the clients will need, I had that hardest time with the clients resolving DNS names until I found a random post while searching the net which said to try and install that RPM, and sure enough things started working after that.

/me installs

Two minutes later...
The biggest problem I had with netboot is now fixed. It is now ready for general implementation.
The next step is to get wine working with it. I've already sold my netboot server, maybe I'll make a new one

Edit 5 or so: Welnic, do you want to work on trying to get wine working over netboot? It provides a very substantial speedup for f@h, and a decent one for seti. I can tell you what I know (not much), and work too once I get money for a new netboot box.

Welnic · Mar 13, 2003, 08:27 PM

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
I got DF working by making /tmp a NFS mount.
By DNS resolution I mean that. It can't change URLs to IPs. Supposedly it's a bug, but I haven't seen it fixed yet.

Those instructions shouldn't be too different from what I used. The second link is the setup I used.

Edit: #%&*!)#%^!)@#%&^!#)%(^#%! <<< me cursing.
from the link you posted

/me installs

Two minutes later...
The biggest problem I had with netboot is now fixed. It is now ready for general implementation.
The next step is to get wine working with it. I've already sold my netboot server, maybe I'll make a new one

Edit 5 or so: Welnic, do you want to work on trying to get wine working over netboot? It provides a very substantial speedup for f@h, and a decent one for seti. I can tell you what I know (not much), and work too once I get money for a new netboot box.

I think that I tried to mount /tmp with NFS but that didn't work for some reason. I think that was fairly early and something else was wrong instead. I ended up with each node have their own tmp directory.

Okay, I see what you mean by DNS resolution, it didn't occur to me that that couldn't work. I lucked out when I installed because I thought I was going to be using local apps, I didn't really understand what that meant.

As far as running wine, first I will have to get X-Windows running on one of my boxes and then get wine on it before I would want to try to get it running over netboot. I'll start working on that, I was always going to try to get the X-Windows part running on at least one box and adding wine seems to be a reasonable thing to do.

Scotttheking · Mar 13, 2003, 08:32 PM

wine is very easy to setup on debian.
install x, install a very simple window manager, then install wine and winesetuptk.
Run winesetuptk, and you are pretty much done. The challenge is getting it over to netboot.

jbcool · Mar 16, 2003, 05:25 AM

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
/me installs

Two minutes later...
The biggest problem I had with netboot is now fixed. It is now ready for general implementation.
The next step is to get wine working with it. I've already sold my netboot server, maybe I'll make a new one

Edit 5 or so: Welnic, do you want to work on trying to get wine working over netboot? It provides a very substantial speedup for f@h, and a decent one for seti. I can tell you what I know (not much), and work too once I get money for a new netboot box.

Scott read PM and keep the netboot server until you get a new one built.

Look like you and Welnic are figuring out all the hard stuff for me.

Glad you smart kids can dummy it down for the ones like me.

DAlex · Mar 16, 2003, 05:42 PM

Originally posted by Scotttheking:
I run debian linux.

One thing I would recommend if you have hard drives in the machines is to run f@h in wine.

I'm probably going to regret asking this, but, what is wine? (please no alcohol related jokes

) And will two 200mb drives be sufficient, can it be on a separate drive?

Welnic · Mar 16, 2003, 06:46 PM

Wine stands for "Wine Is Not an Emulator". It allows you to run Window programs on linux on a x86 system. The linux client for FAH seems to not be written as well as the windows client, so it is actually better to run the windows client in wine than the regular linux client.

http://www.winehq.com/

DAlex · Mar 17, 2003, 11:50 AM

Originally posted by Welnic:
Wine stands for "Wine Is Not an Emulator". It allows you to run Window programs on linux on a x86 system. The linux client for FAH seems to not be written as well as the windows client, so it is actually better to run the windows client in wine than the regular linux client.
http://www.winehq.com/

Thanks! Well I've just spent a day playing with different versions of linux with only marginal success in actually doing anything constructive - but that has more to do with my inexperience! Still it was a good learning curve.

Unfortunately it means I'm admitting defeat and am going to install XP on this Athlon

Still, at least it's another cruncher for the team.

DAlex