[Info-vax] VAX cluster :-)

[Paul Sture]

On Wed, 08 Aug 2012 12:39:19 -0700, John Wallace wrote:

> Or, as I wrote on Jul 28th in this very ng:
> 
> "SIMH can be built for ARM Linux, who wants a VAX in their pocket for
> £30 plus the hobbyist licence and a few sundries ? Or a VMScluster in
> their pocket for £60? Of course if you had two Android smartphones you
> could already VMScluster them courtesy of SIMH...
> 
> http://www.designspark.com/content/raspberry-pi-vax-cluster"

Also see the RetroChallange 2012 blog:

http://dectec.info/blog/

 
> Marvel-ous. Oh hang on, Marvel was Alpha not VAX. Whatever.
> 
> 64bit ARM on the way before too long, not sure where that will lead.
> 
> Also not sure where Microsoft's (re-)entry into the world of ARM, with
> Windows RT or whatever it's called this week, will lead Microsoft and
> their "business partners" such as HP.
> 
> Interesting times.

>From the "MS Hardware Certification Requirements" found here:

http://download.microsoft.com/download/A/D/F/ADF5BEDE-C0FB-4CC0-A3E1-
B38093F50BA1/windows8-hardware-cert-requirements-system.pdf

linked off 
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/hardware/hh748188.aspx

on page 121 in my PDF viewer:

"17.  Mandatory. On non-ARM systems, the platform MUST implement the 
ability for a physically present user to select between two Secure Boot 
modes in firmware setup: "Custom" and "Standard" ...

18.  Mandatory. Enable/Disable Secure Boot. On non-ARM systems, it is 
required to implement the ability to disable Secure Boot via firmware 
setup. A physically present user must be allowed to disable Secure Boot 
via firmware setup without possession of PKpriv. 

...

Disabling Secure Boot must not be possible on ARM systems."

That appears to me to mean that any ARM devices certified for Windows RT 
might be stuck with Windows.  However see Hoff's article about Fedora's 
thoughts:

"Fedora, UEFI and Secure (Digitally-signed) UEFI Bootstraps"

http://labs.hoffmanlabs.com/node/1819

-- 
Paul Sture