On Fri, 02 Dec 2005 18:45:09 -0500 Chris Zakelj <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> spake:
> Johan P. Lindstrvm wrote: > > >I'm sorry if this comes across as flame bait, that's not my intention. > > > >With that out of the way; > > > >How about that BOINC initiative, http://boinc.berkeley.edu is that > >something that interests anyone else? > > > >I can come to think of plenty of reasons why one would not want a port > >of it, I use obsd for my critical servers where I want as few pieces > >of sw as possible. Is there a need /desire for it? > > > I run it on my WinXP machines and (knock on wood) haven't had any > incidents. If you or someone else creates a port, it'll find a home on > my machines, as they sit around doing absolutely nothing practically > 24/7, and I think contributing to the science projects represented is a > worthwhile goal. Does my answer work for other folks? Probably not. > Some will be bound by policies forbidding it even if they wanted. > Others may consider the risk too great. It's up to them whether or not > to trust BOINC and the port. > Same here... I've got a few non-critical "play" machines that just sit around running doing nothing of importance at all - they would be powered off if people were not so damn lazy to do it. When they were linux I ran the seti client on them, but have not done anything with them since. Really did not think about it till you mentioned it. This page lists an OpenBSD download with support for seti... http://boinc.berkeley.edu/download_other.php Have no idea how well it works though...
