I would think that you could use mosix (http://www.mosix.org/) for something like this. I have not tried this myself yet though. Jeff On Tue, 19 Mar 2002, Troy.A Johnson wrote: > I think Bob is thinking of a kind of distributed > processing more than clustering. Clustering > seems (at least to me) to reduce the utility of > the hardware used for other purposes. A > distributed processing type that is less "life > changing" for workstations is nice when you > still want to use those workstation for other > things. > > Examples would be distributed.net, Seti at Home > (the search-for-aliens-in-static one), and > programs like Pooch > (http://daugerresearch.com/pooch/). > > Is that what you are thinking of Bob? A "pooch" > for linux, or maybe a cross platform "puppie"? I'd > like that... > > >>> chrome at real-time.com 03/19/02 11:51AM >>> > On Tue, Mar 19, 2002 at 12:45:18AM -0600, Bob Tanner wrote: > > I'm talking about distributing the compile of the kernel across idle boxes on > > your network. > it's possible that just building a beowulf cluster (which is what > you're looking for) and substituting 'pmake' for 'make' will do the job for > some problems. > ...<snip>... > > Something ala pvm. NOT like a cluster. > pvm is what beowulf clustering uses (tho it could be that I'm > equivocating here). you're probably thinking of other types of clustering; > for redundancy or network load-balancing, which most certainly aren't > appropriate here. > > > _______________________________________________ > Twin Cities Linux Users Group Mailing List - Minneapolis/St. Paul, Minnesota > http://www.mn-linux.org > tclug-list at mn-linux.org > https://mailman.mn-linux.org/mailman/listinfo/tclug-list > >