Linux distro request
in [ASM]
|
From: Rod Pemberton on 9 Apr 2008 05:01 "Rugxulo" <rugxulo(a)gmail.com> wrote in message news:f1800076-532c-4be3-801f-83edbd89d8c4(a)e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com... > ZipSlack swears to be usable on 8 MB (or even 4 MB with swapfile), but > I've never tried (yet??). If you really want low RAM, maybe you should > try Minix?? It's got a lot of GNU utils now (and 3.x series has a > liveCD). BTW, I assume you're aware of the older DOSMinix (2.0.4), but > that's fairly slow. Wow, I forgot about ZipSlack... I remember trying it, but I can't seem to recall when that was or what happened. :( > Still, I think DeLi (2.4.x kernel, no X = 8 MB min. RAM) might be more > what you really want. Since I've got a pile of a dozen or more Linux "coasters," I decided to try DeLi under QEMU first. I didn't see what I was looking for in the deli-0.7.2.iso or deli-0.7.2-big.iso. Now the other one you recommended, Linux from Scratch, appeared at first to just be a how to book. But, if you click LiveCD and then "download" (it switches between a number of "download" pages, that's odd...), it had .iso's for a LiveCD. I tried lfslivecd-x86-6.3-r2145-min.iso under QEMU (very slow), but had _many_ of the things I listed!! Bootable CD, current GCC, current Kernel, had C includes, actual fdisk etc., compiled for 486, no /dev/hdx or /dev/cdrom in /etc/fstab. I could tell what libc/glibc version, and won't know until burned and booted if it will release or unmount the CD, or work with the low memory... Excepting that I forgot to check VFAT and make etc., it looks real good so far. I think it's worth another coaster... I'll let you know how things turn out. I might not try until the weekend. Rod Pemberton
From: Frank Kotler on 9 Apr 2008 14:59 Rod Pemberton wrote: > "Rugxulo" <rugxulo(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > news:f1800076-532c-4be3-801f-83edbd89d8c4(a)e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com... >> ZipSlack swears to be usable on 8 MB (or even 4 MB with swapfile), but >> I've never tried (yet??). If you really want low RAM, maybe you should >> try Minix?? It's got a lot of GNU utils now (and 3.x series has a >> liveCD). BTW, I assume you're aware of the older DOSMinix (2.0.4), but >> that's fairly slow. > > Wow, I forgot about ZipSlack... I remember trying it, but I can't seem to > recall when that was or what happened. :( ZipSlack was my first introduction to Linux. (first that "took" at all) The "Zip" is from the old Iomega "Zip drive" - a 100MB removable medium - although it's "zipped", too. IIRC, it'll actually fit in about 40MB. Makes a very full-featured "rescue disk" - I kept it around after I'd installed a "real" Linux partition. That was FAT16, I think. May work on FAT32 these days. Doubt if it works on NTFS. If anyone's got space on an appropriate partition, it makes a nice gentle introduction to Linux. May or may not be any part of what you want... >> Still, I think DeLi (2.4.x kernel, no X = 8 MB min. RAM) might be more >> what you really want. > > Since I've got a pile of a dozen or more Linux "coasters," I decided to try > DeLi under QEMU first. I didn't see what I was looking for in the > deli-0.7.2.iso or deli-0.7.2-big.iso. > > Now the other one you recommended, Linux from Scratch, appeared at first to > just be a how to book. But, if you click LiveCD and then "download" (it > switches between a number of "download" pages, that's odd...), it had .iso's > for a LiveCD. I tried lfslivecd-x86-6.3-r2145-min.iso under QEMU (very > slow), but had _many_ of the things I listed!! Bootable CD, current GCC, > current Kernel, had C includes, actual fdisk etc., compiled for 486, no > /dev/hdx or /dev/cdrom in /etc/fstab. I suppose they "work through the examples" of how this live CD was created. If you *have* to "roll your own", you *can*. > I could Correction noted. > tell what libc/glibc version, There's (or was) a script called "version" or "version.sh" buried somewhere in /usr/src/linux which burps up the version of everything in sight. Might be useful... once you're "up". > and won't know until burned There was a gizmo in... "Vector" Linux (a "cut down" Slackware), which allowed me to boot an installation disk straight from the .iso, without having to burn it to a "coaster". I *think* that's where I saw it. IIRC, I couldn't get it to work except on that one image. Involved, as root, going into "single-user mode"... apparently undoes some of the "protection" so you can boot into something else ("restart in dos mode"???). I don't think this is what you mean when you say "no multi-user", but it might have potential for "trying things out" without actually "making coasters". > and booted if it will release or unmount the CD, > or work with the low memory... May be a conflict there. If you're gonna unmount the CD, everything's gotta be on ramdisk, no? An "unlive" boot might be better on memory(???). > Excepting that I forgot to check VFAT and > make etc., it looks real good so far. NTFS, even if only readonly, would also be cool. Not on your list, as I recall, but... That, too, may conflict with "low memory". Unless I'm mistaken, these things were originally developed as "add ons" to kernels that didn't support 'em, so it might be possible to shoehorn 'em into an earlier kernel that will be easier on memory. Probably you can find something "close enough" without having to resort to that. > I think it's worth another coaster... Tuition... :) [do these things reflect enough sunlight to build a "solar furnace" from an array of 'em? I envision 'em being supported around the edge and pulled into a slightly "parabolic" shape from the center... doubt if they're actually reflective enough for that...] [Olympic Flame (re)lighter???] > I'll let you know how things turn out. I might not try until the weekend. I was thinking of you during my adventures with Slackware 12.0. First I tried to install 4.5GB of software onto a 3.5GB partition. I knew it wouldn't work, but I expected it to holler "disk full" somewhere in the middle of X - and I don't care if X works, I just wanted to see if I could kill the loader. :) (yes) Next try was a "custom install". You can create a "minimal" system even from an "everything but the kitchen sink" distro. For example, there's more to gcc than gcc! Support for C++, Java, Ada, and god knows what else are separate packages from the "base" gcc package (they're all "huge", IMO). Same with most of it. There are "dependencies", of course.. All the kernels with Slackware 12.0 have "huge" in the name. There's a note in one of the READMEs "good luck getting a useful 2.6 kernel onto a 1.44" [sic! :)] floppy". IIRC, earlier distros included some "low memory" kernels. I'll look back and see what the propaganda claimed they'd do... if I can stay focused that long... At the extreme end of the spectrum, there's that "alinux" distro which uses the "asmutils" utilities. A one-floppy job, but a little *too* spartan to be useful... except as a "proof of concept", perhaps. You can probably find something "close enough" to what you want, but if not, you "should" be able to do pretty much anything, if you're ambitious enough... (ambition is nice... I'm told... :) Best, Frank
From: Rod Pemberton on 9 Apr 2008 16:40 "Frank Kotler" <fbkotler(a)verizon.net> wrote in message news:Em8Lj.1680$Xy2.861(a)trndny04... > There was a gizmo in... "Vector" Linux (a "cut down" Slackware), I've got that coaster too... Hmm, I don't see a DSL coaster... > > and booted if it will release or unmount the CD, > > or work with the low memory... > > May be a conflict there. If you're gonna unmount the CD, everything's > gotta be on ramdisk, no? An "unlive" boot might be better on memory(???). > If it fails, it'll probably be insufficient memory. That's what I'm expecting. The LFS LiveCD looked like it might have enough on it that I won't need to unmount the CD. > I was thinking of you during my adventures with Slackware 12.0. First I > tried to install 4.5GB of software onto a 3.5GB partition. Been there... > I knew it > wouldn't work, but I expected it to holler "disk full" somewhere in the > middle of X Done that... Amazing, I expected that too! I guess the Easter bunny isn't real after all... > - and I don't care if X works, I just wanted to see if I > could kill the loader. :) (yes) Congrats, you killed Kenny! > Next try was a "custom install". You can create a "minimal" system even > from an "everything but the kitchen sink" distro. For example, there's > more to gcc than gcc! Support for C++, Java, Ada, and god knows what > else are separate packages from the "base" gcc package (they're all > "huge", IMO). Same with most of it. There are "dependencies", of course.. > Linux installer, um, don't add too good nomore... The last time I installed Linux, dependencies, extra source, and apps you couldn't remove from the install bloated the install to far more space than what the installer said it was going to install... I had to reduce the installed packages to probably like 80% of the disk space available. I think it took three attempts at installing. > All the kernels with Slackware 12.0 have "huge" in the name. That's a bad sign... > There's a > note in one of the READMEs "good luck getting a useful 2.6 kernel onto a > 1.44" [sic! :)] floppy". Bootable USB kills the floppy? Rod Pemberton
From: Rugxulo on 9 Apr 2008 17:40 Hi, On Apr 9, 4:01 am, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...(a)nohavenot.cmm> wrote: > "Rugxulo" <rugx...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:f1800076-532c-4be3-801f-83edbd89d8c4(a)e67g2000hsa.googlegroups.com... > > > ZipSlack swears to be usable on 8 MB (or even 4 MB with swapfile), but > > I've never tried (yet??). If you really want low RAM, maybe you should > > try Minix?? It's got a lot of GNU utils now (and 3.x series has a > > liveCD). BTW, I assume you're aware of the older DOSMinix (2.0.4), but > > that's fairly slow. > > Wow, I forgot about ZipSlack... I remember trying it, but I can't seem to > recall when that was or what happened. :( Dunno, but some people swear by Slackware. Of course, like I said, there is no ZipSlack for Slackware 12 (due to no UMSDOS support in the newer 2.6.x kernel). But ZipSlack 11 works fine for some people (or so I heard) via FAT32 / FreeDOS. > > Still, I think DeLi (2.4.x kernel, no X = 8 MB min. RAM) might be more > > what you really want. > > Since I've got a pile of a dozen or more Linux "coasters," I decided to try > DeLi under QEMU first. I didn't see what I was looking for in the > deli-0.7.2.iso or deli-0.7.2-big.iso. Well, it may not be exactly what you wanted, but it is a "lite" Linux distro for older machines. And such distros (that aren't long abandoned!) are getting harder to find (due to various factors). BTW, if you buy a CD+RW or two, you don't have to waste a million CD- Rs trying a bunch of distros. > and won't know until burned and booted if it will release or unmount the CD, > or work with the low memory... Excepting that I forgot to check VFAT and > make etc., it looks real good so far. I think it's worth another coaster... I would doubt it works with 32 MB, personally, unless they scaled it down drastically. The 2.6.x series (128+ MB RAM for full kernel??) is just not suited to older machines, that's why they still mostly maintain 2.4.x and backport stuff (AFAICT). In particular, if you're hoping to use Firefox, that won't work, you'll have to use a smaller browser instead. Also, GCC is fine, but I'm pretty sure there's no way you can recompile the entire Linux kernel with only 32 MB. That much is only good for making normal programs. (I have an old P166 w/ 32 MB, but I only run DOS w/ DJGPP. Anything higher than -O2, especially with GCC 4.x, uses lots of RAM.) <sarcasm> If you like only 32 MB of RAM limitations, you'll love Windows Vista. DJGPP (or any DPMI programs) caps out at such, even with SP1 (must be considered a "security" feature, doh). Fun fun fun, especially since XP handled it fine. :-/ </sarcasm> P.S. All the major *BSDs now use GCC 4.x (last I checked). However, they all require a 486DX or better (although the emulation is still found in NetBSD's "LAPTOP" kernel, for example). I don't know of any liveCDs, but you could probably pester somebody on IRC to build you one. (Or not. Sometimes people get snooty when you try doing things for old hardware.) Are you never intending to install (only exclusively use as liveCD) or just want to test first?? Because obviously the HD is useful for things (at least virtual memory). ;-)
From: Phat Sam on 10 Apr 2008 07:58
On Tue, 8 Apr 2008 13:43:22 -0400, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_have(a)nohavenot.cmm> wrote: >That would work for a newer PC... add +$30USD for USB card for old PC. And how much to add to get the 80486 BIOS upgraded to allow booting from a USB drive? Not to mention, I went to the site and found lots of versions of linux that where not faintly related to what the original poster wanted.... All seemed to have a GUI/xwindows, etc... |