![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 29 September 2023. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Linux on IBM Z article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
31 or 32 bits mode?
This article reads very much like an IBM ad... -- Liam Proven 19:54, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
That's not right, google is still obligated under the GPL. They cannot put their version of Linux under "some crazy Google license". (However, they do not have to disclose their source modifications). linas 04:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Looks like the last little bit of edits put back a bunch of the marketing-speak. Jay Maynard 16:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay -- sorry -- I have nothing against IBM, but Jay is right. This reads like a frigging brochure, not an encyclopedia entry. I think about 70 percent of this material should go. Rhombus 18:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey, Jay, when and if you do...a lot of the language seems awfully familiar to me. I think pieces of it may have been cut-and-pasted from my z/Journal articles. I'll see if I can find specifics in the next few days. If this is in fact the case, well, there's your NPOV right there. My articles were never intended to be neutral: they're very much, "Hey, look at the neat things you can do with Linux on z" -- Adam Thornton
Here's an example: "System z earned EAL5+ certification, no other commercial system in the industry has been certified higher under the Common Criteria security evaluation." The first part of the sentence is fine. Everything after the comma is marketing. I'll be bold and remove it. Fordsfords ( talk) 13:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
I tripped over this article in a Google search of "mainframe security linux" and this really does constitute an ad. I did wikipedia searches of "ibm linux" and "unisys linux". There is no similar "Linux on ClearPath" article about using Linux on the Unisys mainframes. This article mentions advantages and pricing for zLinux that read like a marketing white paper while NOT even mentioning that it has direct competition in performance and pricing from Unisys. The solution to the NPOV problem is not to have the article mention Unisys. Nor is the solution for Unisys to have it's own article. This article should be dropped as not being encyclopedic. My background: I'm a federal employee (IT specialist - DBA, series 2210) who programs on Unisys mainframes using CODASYL/COBOL. ThomThom ( talk) 13:25, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
I think the existing language violates NPOV, since there's only one person who's ever raised the issue of whether Hercules violates any IBM patents. See, especially, the undue weight section of that page. IBM itself has never approached anyone with such a concern. Further, this page is not the place to discuss those concerns, as they're not specific to Linux.
I propose replacing the language with this:
If someone thinks that the patent issues are that important, then an NPOV discussion can be added to the Hercules entry.
-- Jay Maynard 16:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Section on emulators says FLEX-ES is "the officially sanctioned option" Says who? Shouldn't that be amended to say something more NPOV that it is a commercially supported option, rather than "official" in any respect? Further wrt to NPOV, I think it might be worth mentioning in the Price/Cost section that alternatives for virtualization exist on other platforms, so the consolidation benefits claimed for Linux on z are not necessarily unique to this one platform, and that the cost of porting an application from its original platform also need to be factored in. Jsavit ( talk) 18:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
The article should probably have something on zUbuntu, the Ubuntu port for zSeries. -- Easyas12c 18:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
While 1700 installs might be large considering how many mainframes that are still out there, it's not a large user base. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.136.85.66 ( talk) 01:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
By now, there are less if you are honest. Unfortunately true numbers will not be published, neither by IBM, nor by those few customers who were so keen to try it out in production.
I've cut the quote down to a strict statement of the facts: that IBM claimed a certain number of installations at a certain time. This much can be supported by the cite given. JeffLicquia ( talk) 20:10, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry but I've tagged part of this as dubious. Please could the original author justify the statement "This 100% open source status is unusual among Linux distributions, many of which still contain OCO drivers from various vendors who wish to hide proprietary implementation details from the Linux community". Granted that on many architectures there is a small number of peripheral controllers that require proprietary microcode but I don't see IBM GPLing channel controller programs/firmware/microcode so in practice there's very little difference. MarkMLl 23:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I slightly revised this language. And no, we're not talking about microcode, BIOS, etc., here, which almost nobody publishes or provides as open source. The old and, better yet, new language makes it clear we're talking about drivers. And yes, this is a big deal to the Linux community, closed source drivers. So the new language has two changes: one is to repeat the word "drivers," since that's what's being hidden. The second is to remove the "from the Linux community" part since, in fact, closed source drivers hide implementation details from everyone. -- BBCWatcher —Preceding unsigned comment added by BBCWatcher ( talk • contribs) 06:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Simply one of the worst Wiki articles I have read. No Encylopedia article should ever include slang or non-standard grammar conventions. This whole article is full of very isolated slang used in the "xxx" format and all of it should be removed. In fact all of the "xxx" points should be removed period as the convention voilates professional writting conventions unless completely necessary which is to say almost never needed. Also, from working in IT I get the impression the author does not actually know what he is talking about. Any article written for an encyclopedia should not convey any opinion or emotion at all - it should be just the facts. This article is clearly not that.
I strongly suggest a complete rewrite —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.203.43.103 ( talk • contribs) 28 November 2007
Not sure how or if to interject performance into this story. Linux on zSeries is both a nice bit of work, and a bit of a joke. The nice part comes of getting Linux to work on mainframe hardware. The joke comes from the extremely weak performance of zSeries CPUs in comparison to common desktop CPUs. What this means is that programs that run well on current mainstream desktop or server hardware - and use significant CPU - will perform very poorly on mainframe hardware. Attempting to use mainframe hardware to host web servers - for anything other than static files - is likely a mistake.
At least this was true when I had access to zSeries hardware. Is this still true?
IBM used to disallow publishing benchmark results. Do they still? If so that means finding references for the Wikipedia article is unlikely. pbannister ( talk) 21:49, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Why was this part of assessment of emulation performance removed? It was very relevant for people wanting to know more about what emulation can give. Was that part removed by an IBM salesperson wanting to hide this information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.157.231 ( talk) 18:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm at a loss as to what would constitute a cite for the following statement: "However, currently Linux on System z is completely free software under the GNU General Public License." (currently marked as "citation needed") The s390 and s390x architectures are in the mainline kernel, and are used to build kernel packages suitable for Debian main, Fedora, etc. Ditto for the support packages (libc, gcc, binutils, etc.). Is it good enough to just link to, say, the s390 tree on kernel.org? JeffLicquia ( talk) 20:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I propose removing all paragraphs in this section except the first, second, and sixth, and heavily editing the sixth paragraph. There are too many uncited technical details. I'm pretty sure I can find cites for the first paragraph, but if not, then maybe that one needs to go as well. JeffLicquia ( talk) 19:35, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I suspect that there are actually some obstacles to running any distribution that doesn't have zSystem specific software, pre-compiled binaries, documentation, support, consulting services, etc.
While some Linux sysadmins could figure out how to bootstrap Yellow Dog Linux, etc. from source, I bet there are a few obstacles for even the most hard-core.
It might be worth pointing out that while not the officially endorsed by IBM distribution, openSUSE, just like the commercial version of SUSE Linux, has versions for zSeries (Leap for s390x). 2601:449:8300:AA50:39E8:1820:58FE:48FA ( talk) 21:52, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Linux on z Systems. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:43, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 17:42, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Linux on Z Systems → Linux on IBM Z – The page starts out with "Linux on IBM Z ... is the collective term...", and IBM's term for the mainframe line is now just "IBM Z", not "IBM z/Systems" or "IBM System z". Guy Harris ( talk) 17:40, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
The article states Linux on IBM Z (or Linux on Z for short, and previously Linux on z Systems) is the collective term for the
Linux operating system compiled to run on
IBM mainframes, especially IBM
Z and IBM LinuxONE servers. Similar terms which imply the same meaning are Linux on
zEnterprise, Linux on
zSeries, Linux/390, Linux/390x, etc.
However, the versions released for
ESA/390 were never called Linux on Z, since at the time IBM had not announced the Z designation. Further, those versions cannot run on current
IBM z boxes, since IBM no longer offers the ability to run in ESA/390 mode. How about
Linux on IBM Z (or Linux on Z for short, and previously Linux on z Systems) is the collective term for the Linux operating system compiled to run on IBM z/Architecture mainframes and development systems, especially IBM Z and IBM LinuxONE servers. Similar terms which imply the same meaning are, e.g., Linux on zEnterprise, Linux on zSeries, Linux/390x,.
as a replacement? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 11:14, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Linux on IBM mainframes is the Linux operating system compiled to run on IBM mainframes, especially IBM Z and IBM LinuxONE servers; earlier versions ran on ESA/390 servers. Terms used for it include Linux on IBM Z, Linux on Z, Linux on z Systems, Linux on zEnterprise, Linux on zSeries, Linux/390, Linux/390x, etc.
https://www.forbes.com/1999/12/28/mu1.html?sh=2473ec934d26
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20211226
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=LinuxONE&redirect=no
2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:20B9:2AD1:E56C:3372 ( talk) 16:03, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
At least one contrib has a COI Widefox; talk 23:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)
![]() | This article was nominated for deletion on 29 September 2023. The result of the discussion was no consensus to delete. |
This is the
talk page for discussing improvements to the
Linux on IBM Z article. This is not a forum for general discussion of the article's subject. |
Article policies
|
Find sources: Google ( books · news · scholar · free images · WP refs) · FENS · JSTOR · TWL |
![]() | This article is rated C-class on Wikipedia's
content assessment scale. It is of interest to the following WikiProjects: | |||||||||||||||||||||||
|
31 or 32 bits mode?
This article reads very much like an IBM ad... -- Liam Proven 19:54, 11 July 2005 (UTC)
That's not right, google is still obligated under the GPL. They cannot put their version of Linux under "some crazy Google license". (However, they do not have to disclose their source modifications). linas 04:47, 5 November 2005 (UTC)
Looks like the last little bit of edits put back a bunch of the marketing-speak. Jay Maynard 16:59, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
Okay -- sorry -- I have nothing against IBM, but Jay is right. This reads like a frigging brochure, not an encyclopedia entry. I think about 70 percent of this material should go. Rhombus 18:07, 20 January 2007 (UTC)
Hey, Jay, when and if you do...a lot of the language seems awfully familiar to me. I think pieces of it may have been cut-and-pasted from my z/Journal articles. I'll see if I can find specifics in the next few days. If this is in fact the case, well, there's your NPOV right there. My articles were never intended to be neutral: they're very much, "Hey, look at the neat things you can do with Linux on z" -- Adam Thornton
Here's an example: "System z earned EAL5+ certification, no other commercial system in the industry has been certified higher under the Common Criteria security evaluation." The first part of the sentence is fine. Everything after the comma is marketing. I'll be bold and remove it. Fordsfords ( talk) 13:17, 6 May 2014 (UTC)
I tripped over this article in a Google search of "mainframe security linux" and this really does constitute an ad. I did wikipedia searches of "ibm linux" and "unisys linux". There is no similar "Linux on ClearPath" article about using Linux on the Unisys mainframes. This article mentions advantages and pricing for zLinux that read like a marketing white paper while NOT even mentioning that it has direct competition in performance and pricing from Unisys. The solution to the NPOV problem is not to have the article mention Unisys. Nor is the solution for Unisys to have it's own article. This article should be dropped as not being encyclopedic. My background: I'm a federal employee (IT specialist - DBA, series 2210) who programs on Unisys mainframes using CODASYL/COBOL. ThomThom ( talk) 13:25, 27 January 2016 (UTC)
I think the existing language violates NPOV, since there's only one person who's ever raised the issue of whether Hercules violates any IBM patents. See, especially, the undue weight section of that page. IBM itself has never approached anyone with such a concern. Further, this page is not the place to discuss those concerns, as they're not specific to Linux.
I propose replacing the language with this:
If someone thinks that the patent issues are that important, then an NPOV discussion can be added to the Hercules entry.
-- Jay Maynard 16:52, 15 May 2006 (UTC)
Section on emulators says FLEX-ES is "the officially sanctioned option" Says who? Shouldn't that be amended to say something more NPOV that it is a commercially supported option, rather than "official" in any respect? Further wrt to NPOV, I think it might be worth mentioning in the Price/Cost section that alternatives for virtualization exist on other platforms, so the consolidation benefits claimed for Linux on z are not necessarily unique to this one platform, and that the cost of porting an application from its original platform also need to be factored in. Jsavit ( talk) 18:29, 30 December 2008 (UTC)
The article should probably have something on zUbuntu, the Ubuntu port for zSeries. -- Easyas12c 18:33, 15 June 2006 (UTC)
While 1700 installs might be large considering how many mainframes that are still out there, it's not a large user base. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 216.136.85.66 ( talk) 01:19, 7 December 2006 (UTC).
By now, there are less if you are honest. Unfortunately true numbers will not be published, neither by IBM, nor by those few customers who were so keen to try it out in production.
I've cut the quote down to a strict statement of the facts: that IBM claimed a certain number of installations at a certain time. This much can be supported by the cite given. JeffLicquia ( talk) 20:10, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
Sorry but I've tagged part of this as dubious. Please could the original author justify the statement "This 100% open source status is unusual among Linux distributions, many of which still contain OCO drivers from various vendors who wish to hide proprietary implementation details from the Linux community". Granted that on many architectures there is a small number of peripheral controllers that require proprietary microcode but I don't see IBM GPLing channel controller programs/firmware/microcode so in practice there's very little difference. MarkMLl 23:54, 17 August 2007 (UTC)
I slightly revised this language. And no, we're not talking about microcode, BIOS, etc., here, which almost nobody publishes or provides as open source. The old and, better yet, new language makes it clear we're talking about drivers. And yes, this is a big deal to the Linux community, closed source drivers. So the new language has two changes: one is to repeat the word "drivers," since that's what's being hidden. The second is to remove the "from the Linux community" part since, in fact, closed source drivers hide implementation details from everyone. -- BBCWatcher —Preceding unsigned comment added by BBCWatcher ( talk • contribs) 06:57, 12 September 2007 (UTC)
Simply one of the worst Wiki articles I have read. No Encylopedia article should ever include slang or non-standard grammar conventions. This whole article is full of very isolated slang used in the "xxx" format and all of it should be removed. In fact all of the "xxx" points should be removed period as the convention voilates professional writting conventions unless completely necessary which is to say almost never needed. Also, from working in IT I get the impression the author does not actually know what he is talking about. Any article written for an encyclopedia should not convey any opinion or emotion at all - it should be just the facts. This article is clearly not that.
I strongly suggest a complete rewrite —Preceding unsigned comment added by 157.203.43.103 ( talk • contribs) 28 November 2007
Not sure how or if to interject performance into this story. Linux on zSeries is both a nice bit of work, and a bit of a joke. The nice part comes of getting Linux to work on mainframe hardware. The joke comes from the extremely weak performance of zSeries CPUs in comparison to common desktop CPUs. What this means is that programs that run well on current mainstream desktop or server hardware - and use significant CPU - will perform very poorly on mainframe hardware. Attempting to use mainframe hardware to host web servers - for anything other than static files - is likely a mistake.
At least this was true when I had access to zSeries hardware. Is this still true?
IBM used to disallow publishing benchmark results. Do they still? If so that means finding references for the Wikipedia article is unlikely. pbannister ( talk) 21:49, 26 May 2010 (UTC)
Why was this part of assessment of emulation performance removed? It was very relevant for people wanting to know more about what emulation can give. Was that part removed by an IBM salesperson wanting to hide this information? — Preceding unsigned comment added by 213.114.157.231 ( talk) 18:32, 27 December 2013 (UTC)
I'm at a loss as to what would constitute a cite for the following statement: "However, currently Linux on System z is completely free software under the GNU General Public License." (currently marked as "citation needed") The s390 and s390x architectures are in the mainline kernel, and are used to build kernel packages suitable for Debian main, Fedora, etc. Ditto for the support packages (libc, gcc, binutils, etc.). Is it good enough to just link to, say, the s390 tree on kernel.org? JeffLicquia ( talk) 20:21, 23 October 2013 (UTC)
I propose removing all paragraphs in this section except the first, second, and sixth, and heavily editing the sixth paragraph. There are too many uncited technical details. I'm pretty sure I can find cites for the first paragraph, but if not, then maybe that one needs to go as well. JeffLicquia ( talk) 19:35, 29 August 2014 (UTC)
I suspect that there are actually some obstacles to running any distribution that doesn't have zSystem specific software, pre-compiled binaries, documentation, support, consulting services, etc.
While some Linux sysadmins could figure out how to bootstrap Yellow Dog Linux, etc. from source, I bet there are a few obstacles for even the most hard-core.
It might be worth pointing out that while not the officially endorsed by IBM distribution, openSUSE, just like the commercial version of SUSE Linux, has versions for zSeries (Leap for s390x). 2601:449:8300:AA50:39E8:1820:58FE:48FA ( talk) 21:52, 26 July 2022 (UTC)
Hello fellow Wikipedians,
I have just modified one external link on Linux on z Systems. Please take a moment to review my edit. If you have any questions, or need the bot to ignore the links, or the page altogether, please visit this simple FaQ for additional information. I made the following changes:
When you have finished reviewing my changes, you may follow the instructions on the template below to fix any issues with the URLs.
This message was posted before February 2018.
After February 2018, "External links modified" talk page sections are no longer generated or monitored by InternetArchiveBot. No special action is required regarding these talk page notices, other than
regular verification using the archive tool instructions below. Editors
have permission to delete these "External links modified" talk page sections if they want to de-clutter talk pages, but see the
RfC before doing mass systematic removals. This message is updated dynamically through the template {{
source check}}
(last update: 5 June 2024).
Cheers.— InternetArchiveBot ( Report bug) 13:43, 16 May 2017 (UTC)
The result of the move request was: moved as requested per the discussion below. Dekimasu よ! 17:42, 13 November 2019 (UTC)
Linux on Z Systems → Linux on IBM Z – The page starts out with "Linux on IBM Z ... is the collective term...", and IBM's term for the mainframe line is now just "IBM Z", not "IBM z/Systems" or "IBM System z". Guy Harris ( talk) 17:40, 6 November 2019 (UTC)
The article states Linux on IBM Z (or Linux on Z for short, and previously Linux on z Systems) is the collective term for the
Linux operating system compiled to run on
IBM mainframes, especially IBM
Z and IBM LinuxONE servers. Similar terms which imply the same meaning are Linux on
zEnterprise, Linux on
zSeries, Linux/390, Linux/390x, etc.
However, the versions released for
ESA/390 were never called Linux on Z, since at the time IBM had not announced the Z designation. Further, those versions cannot run on current
IBM z boxes, since IBM no longer offers the ability to run in ESA/390 mode. How about
Linux on IBM Z (or Linux on Z for short, and previously Linux on z Systems) is the collective term for the Linux operating system compiled to run on IBM z/Architecture mainframes and development systems, especially IBM Z and IBM LinuxONE servers. Similar terms which imply the same meaning are, e.g., Linux on zEnterprise, Linux on zSeries, Linux/390x,.
as a replacement? Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz Username:Chatul ( talk) 11:14, 13 May 2021 (UTC)
Linux on IBM mainframes is the Linux operating system compiled to run on IBM mainframes, especially IBM Z and IBM LinuxONE servers; earlier versions ran on ESA/390 servers. Terms used for it include Linux on IBM Z, Linux on Z, Linux on z Systems, Linux on zEnterprise, Linux on zSeries, Linux/390, Linux/390x, etc.
https://www.forbes.com/1999/12/28/mu1.html?sh=2473ec934d26
http://ars.userfriendly.org/cartoons/?id=20211226
https://en.wikipedia.org/?title=LinuxONE&redirect=no
2600:1700:D0A0:21B0:20B9:2AD1:E56C:3372 ( talk) 16:03, 26 December 2021 (UTC)
At least one contrib has a COI Widefox; talk 23:02, 7 October 2023 (UTC)