Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!cs.utexas.edu!sdd.hp.com!caen!uflorida!bikini!bb From: bb@dolphin.cis.ufl.edu (Brian Bartholomew) Newsgroups: comp.sys.hp Subject: Re: HP9000 performance Message-ID: Date: 6 Feb 91 04:29:25 GMT References: <13092@sunquest.UUCP> <7370305@hpfcso.HP.COM> Sender: news@uflorida.cis.ufl.EDU Organization: /cis/lightning0/bb/.organization Lines: 43 In-reply-to: steve-t@hpfcso.HP.COM's message of 5 Feb 91 17:32:56 GMT bb@math.ufl.edu (Brian Bartholomew) writes: | The ... statement, that all 200, 300, and 400 binaries are | identical, is corroborated by an invocation of "file /bin/*", which | describes all the executables as written for the "s200 ..." | architecture. steve-t@hpfcso.HP.COM (Steve Taylor) writes: > "file" is telling you a little white lie, because it's afraid that if > it says s300 some script of yours will break. It seems unlikely that > many of your 7.0 executables would run on an S200 or a Model 310, due > to 68020 opcodes which wouldn't work on those 68010 machines. I could see someone thinking of this, as an aid to portability, as long as there was some good way to distinguish between machines so that I didn't try to use "7.0 executables" on an "S200 or Model 310". I expected that the "good way" was with the series of /bin/hp9000s[2358]00 programs. However, this is not the result I get: 1:/users/bb> hp9000s200 ; echo $status 0 2:/users/bb> ^200^300 hp9000s300 ; echo $status 0 3:/users/bb> ^300^500 hp9000s500 ; echo $status 1 4:/users/bb> ^500^800 hp9000s800 ; echo $status 1 Does this mean that programs are binary-compatible to the point of not using features of a math coprocessor that wern't present in the 68010-generation version? Exactly what is going on here? -- "Any sufficiently advanced technology is indistinguishable from a rigged demo." ------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Brian Bartholomew UUCP: ...gatech!uflorida!mathlab.math.ufl.edu!bb University of Florida Internet: bb@math.ufl.edu