Linux distro request
in [ASM]
|
From: Rugxulo on 10 Apr 2008 18:28 Hi, On Apr 10, 9:42 am, "Rod Pemberton" <do_not_h...(a)nohavenot.cmm> wrote: > "Rugxulo" <rugx...(a)gmail.com> wrote in message > > news:0b0a4ea2-891c-4fa5-a916-1525019b7d11(a)x41g2000hsb.googlegroups.com... > > > If you like only 32 MB of RAM limitations, > > No, I don't... I'm not completely sure, but I think that's all the MB will > accept. I'd have to do some research, but, even if I found out, I'm not > sure if memory is still available for it... It's odd that Linux won't run > that small. Windows 98 SE will "out of the box"... albeit a bit slow. My P166's motherboard docs say something along the lines that the max. is 64 MB, but you have to put it in in pairs, and there's a limit to how many you can put in. (Or something like that.) Linux will run that small, just not with everything and the kitchen sink! You should definitely try 2.4.x, I'm sure it's good enough for most needs. The latest is "2.4.36", updated on Jan. 1 2008! So it's not abandoned by any means. http://www.linuxhq.com/kernel/v2.4/36/index.html P.S. I forgot to mention, since I mentioned Minix (which is also POSIX compliant) and only needs very little in cpu resources (almost definitely much less than Linux), you should be aware that it has GCC (I think 2.7.2 for 2.x, 3.4.3 and 4.1.1 for 3.x) among other compilers and tons of GNU stuff nowadays. What it still doesn't have (last I checked) was virtual memory (although it's being worked on). However, if you want that, you can try Minix-vmd (old 2.x series fork, supposedly the testbed for things they eventually ported back to the official Minix). http://www.minix3.org/ http://www.minix3.org/software/ (coreutils, bash, gcc, make, perl, gawk, vim) http://www.minix-vmd.org/ http://minix1.woodhull.com/asw/ http://barnyard.syr.edu/minix.shtml (bash, make, gawk, file- text- shell-utils) > The earliest Intel/AMD style cpu I still have (and might use again someday) > is a DX2-66. That's when PC gaming (Doom, Mech Warrior) started to take > off. Everything prior to that was real slow. I gave my small collection of > earlier 86 cpu's to a former friend. Most of mine and my immediate family's > machines prior to AMD K6-2 500Mhz and Pentium II 450Mhz have been retired, > even if they were still useable. Windows 98 didn't run too well on > pre-450/500Mhz cpu's. So, I'd probably set the DX2-66 as a minimum useable > cpu for a modern OS without heavy GUI use. But, for a decently performing > OS with GUI and without 3D graphics, I'd probably set the minimum baseline > to the 450/500Mhz. Doom will almost definitely run on a 386 although not optimially. A 486 is approximately half as fast as an equivalent Pentium with the same clock speed. So, a Pentium 66 would be faster than your DX2-66. There are "overdrive" processors that let you upgrade your 486, but I've never tried. But yes, slow machines can be annoying. But if that's your only problem, you're okay. At least it'll help you develop patience. ;-) A lot of apps have lighter equivalents, so you can use those (e.g. Konqueror Embedded) instead of the typical fare (Firefox).
From: Rugxulo on 10 Apr 2008 18:38 Hi, On Apr 10, 11:36 am, Evenbit <nbaker2...(a)charter.net> wrote: > > > 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. > > I've looked at Tom's Root-Boot and I believe it shouldn't be too > difficult to "shoehorn" asmutils into it. NASM could be added and > would work as long as the programmer used Herbert's method of > generating the binary directly. tomsrtbt is old old old (2.2.20)! I wouldn't use it unless absolutely needed. Besides, it's an overformatted floppy, which (even if it works on your hardware, and it did work on my old 486), it's slower than normal floppy access. As far as using NASM, just use FASM instead (if possible) since it does directly generate ELF executable without needing a linker. (FASM is faster and smaller, too.) http://www.flatassembler.net > Or, if we remove the "single floppy" requirement, we could add the > needed GCC items, add AsmIDE, etc... and we'd have "alinux" on > steroids! :) Good luck!
From: Evenbit on 10 Apr 2008 21:48 On Apr 10, 6:08 pm, Rugxulo <rugx...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > You need a newer-style motherboard with ACPI support, I think (among > other things). So, it's unlikely it'll work on older cpus. (Even the > Asus EEE has to run XP because Vista isn't appropriate. And yet MS is > *still* going to stop selling XP after June 30.) Yes, but not June 30 of *this* year! It has been extended again... "2010, or one year after the availability of the next client version of Windows, whichever date comes later. " See: http://tech.slashdot.org/article.pl?sid=08/04/03/223257 That there Moblin project will be an interesting one to watch. Nathan.
From: Evenbit on 10 Apr 2008 22:12 On Apr 10, 6:38 pm, Rugxulo <rugx...(a)gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > On Apr 10, 11:36 am, Evenbit <nbaker2...(a)charter.net> wrote: > > > > > > 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. > > > I've looked at Tom's Root-Boot and I believe it shouldn't be too > > difficult to "shoehorn" asmutils into it. NASM could be added and > > would work as long as the programmer used Herbert's method of > > generating the binary directly. > > tomsrtbt is old old old (2.2.20)! I wouldn't use it unless absolutely > needed. Besides, it's an overformatted floppy, which (even if it works > on your hardware, and it did work on my old 486), it's slower than > normal floppy access. But as a "proof of concept" it would be interesting. I'd expect it would negate the need for overformatting. > > As far as using NASM, just use FASM instead (if possible) since it > does directly generate ELF executable without needing a linker. (FASM > is faster and smaller, too.) Yes, that's a good idea. > > http://www.flatassembler.net > > > Or, if we remove the "single floppy" requirement, we could add the > > needed GCC items, add AsmIDE, etc... and we'd have "alinux" on > > steroids! :) > > Good luck! Well, for this, I'd start with a version of LFS which asmutils would be happy with (or upgrade asmutils... which someone probably should do anyways). Then I'd add enough tools, debuggers, and tutes so that an ASM newbie _would_ be willing to burn a "coaster" or keep it on a spare pendrive. Nathan.
From: Frank Kotler on 10 Apr 2008 22:34
Evenbit wrote: .... >> 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, > > Anvin has that "covered" here: > http://syslinux.zytor.com/wiki/index.php/Boot_an_Iso_image Great info. What I had in mind was this "vinstall-iso" script: http://vectorlinux.osuosl.org/veclinux-5.8/install/vinstall/ But, as I remembered, it doesn't work with an "arbitrary" .iso image. Once we've mounted the .iso image on a directory (I didn't know you could do that!), it gunzips "initrd.img" from the "isolinux" directory, and apparently it has to be the "right" initrd.img. Probably more info on hpa's site... Haven't got it workin', but I'm learning a lot... Best, Frank |