On Sunday 03 April 2011 15:13:09 luis jure wrote:
on 2011-04-03 at 10:47 Neil Bothwick wrote:
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with no mass storage
might be a little too challenging.
3.5? wow, i always thought that the name meant it had 20K... like the C64
and C128. but no.
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 16:04, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Sunday 03 April 2011 15:13:09 luis jure wrote:
on 2011-04-03 at 10:47 Neil Bothwick wrote:
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with no mass storage
might be a little too challenging.
3.5? wow, i always
On Monday 04 April 2011 11:13:58 Pandu Poluan wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 16:04, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Sunday 03 April 2011 15:13:09 luis jure wrote:
on 2011-04-03 at 10:47 Neil Bothwick wrote:
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with no mass storage
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 16:35, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Monday 04 April 2011 11:13:58 Pandu Poluan wrote:
Oh, the nostalgy... :-)
My first computer I believe was an Apple ][, a hand-down from an
uncle. It ran only for 1-2 weeks before it went to the Bit Bucket in
the Sky.
On Monday 04 April 2011 11:49:02 Pandu Poluan wrote:
On Mon, Apr 4, 2011 at 16:35, Joost Roeleveld jo...@antarean.org wrote:
On Monday 04 April 2011 11:13:58 Pandu Poluan wrote:
When its floppy drive (5.25) gave up the ghost, I got another
hand-down; a PC-XT compatible no-name with a huge
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 09:09, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Paul Hartman wrote:
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
I would hate to know that you guys got bored and needed something to do.
LOL
And here I am reading this thread while Firefox using
Pandu Poluan wrote:
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 09:09, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
I got you beat tho.
27229 dale 20 0 770m 271m 38m S 39 1.7 22:46.02 seamonkey-bin
27210 dale 20 0 750m 219m 38m S5 1.4 34:57.04 firefox
I got both Seamonkey and Firefox running.
On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 21:09:56 -0500, Dale wrote:
I wonder if we could put Linux on a old Vic-20? I think I got one out
in the old shed somewhere.
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with no mass storage
might be a little too challenging.
--
Neil Bothwick
Old hitchhikers
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 21:09:56 -0500, Dale wrote:
I wonder if we could put Linux on a old Vic-20? I think I got one out
in the old shed somewhere.
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with no mass storage
might be a little too challenging.
I
On 2011-04-03 10:53, Dale wrote:
Do you know what a Vic-20 is? It came out a bit before the Commodore
64. I guess the Vic-20 was my first computer, if you want to call it
that. I think mine ran at 2Mhz and had just a few K of ram. Seems like
it was 4K or so. This may help:
Of course,
On 04/03/11 20:04, Dale wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 21:09:56 -0500, Dale wrote:
I wonder if we could put Linux on a old Vic-20? I think I got one out
in the old shed somewhere.
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with no mass storage
might be a
on 2011-04-03 at 10:47 Neil Bothwick wrote:
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with no mass storage
might be a little too challenging.
3.5? wow, i always thought that the name meant it had 20K... like the C64
and C128. but no. now, almost 30 years later, i learn that it had 5K,
On Sun, Apr 3, 2011 at 10:04 AM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
Neil Bothwick wrote:
On Sat, 02 Apr 2011 21:09:56 -0500, Dale wrote:
I wonder if we could put Linux on a old Vic-20? I think I got one out
in the old shed somewhere.
It's been done on a C-64, but I think a 3.5KB box with
I had the little cassette thing to store my stuff on. I think the OS in on
a ROM which would be hard to get around unless the ROM was changed. Then it
may not really be a Vic-20 anymore. I'm not sure about the C64 since I got
me a 20Mhz oscilloscope to work on TVs and stuff. I still got
Bill Longman wrote:
I had the little cassette thing to store my stuff on. I think the
OS in on a ROM which would be hard to get around unless the ROM
was changed. Then it may not really be a Vic-20 anymore. I'm not
sure about the C64 since I got me a 20Mhz oscilloscope to
I already feel old but I think I'm really getting old now. It is amazing
how far computer have come tho. Both in hardware and the OS, well, except
for windoze. It hasn't come that far yet. lol
If windows hasnt come far for you, then you've never used the pre-windows
2000 editions, let
Adam Carter wrote:
I already feel old but I think I'm really getting old now. It is
amazing how far computer have come tho. Both in hardware and the
OS, well, except for windoze. It hasn't come that far yet. lol
If windows hasnt come far for you, then you've never used the
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 03:28, Albert Hopkins mar...@letterboxes.org wrote:
On Sat, 2011-04-02 at 02:22 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
Good grief! How'd you do that?!
*bow in respect*
Rgds,
Well, firstly, I managed to get it down to 3MB (though I cheated *a
little*):
lilpenguin ~ # sync ;
On Sat, 2011-04-02 at 13:24 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
Unfortunately, I can't go module-less; xtables-addons requires modules
support.
How do you get static /dev ?
Go into /etc/conf.d/rc and change RC_DEVICES to static. Also if you
are using virtio block devices (as I am) then you will need
Albert Hopkins wrote:
I'm not saying replace bash with dash. I'm saying change your login
shell with dash (i.e. chsh).
Moreover, dash is POSIX compliant so it should be able to be used with
most shell scripts. The only reason you need bash around is that
unfortunately baselayout-1 depends on
On Friday 01 April 2011 17:00:41 Albert Hopkins wrote:
.. got it slightly lower by switching to dash and disabling ACPI and
APIC:
good thing that apic has nothing to do with memory at all.
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Dale rdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
I would hate to know that you guys got bored and needed something to do.
LOL
And here I am reading this thread while Firefox using something like
800M of RAM just by itself...
Paul Hartman wrote:
On Sat, Apr 2, 2011 at 12:17 PM, Dalerdalek1...@gmail.com wrote:
I would hate to know that you guys got bored and needed something to do.
LOL
And here I am reading this thread while Firefox using something like
800M of RAM just by itself...
I got you
Good grief! How'd you do that?!
*bow in respect*
Rgds,
On 2011-04-02, Albert Hopkins mar...@letterboxes.org wrote:
On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 19:36 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
Just for fun, not for boasting ;-)
Out of curiosity, I pared down nearly everything from my Gentoo VMware
Guest.
On Sat, 2011-04-02 at 02:22 +0700, Pandu Poluan wrote:
Good grief! How'd you do that?!
*bow in respect*
Rgds,
Well, firstly, I managed to get it down to 3MB (though I cheated *a
little*):
lilpenguin ~ # sync ; echo 3 /proc/sys/vm/drop_caches # kinda cheating
lilpenguin ~ # free -m
.. got it slightly lower by switching to dash and disabling ACPI and
APIC:
root@lilpenguin $ free -m
total used free sharedbuffers
cached
Mem:18 4 13 0 0
1
-/+ buffers/cache: 2 15
Swap:0
On 04/01/2011 02:00 PM, Albert Hopkins wrote:
.. got it slightly lower by switching to dash and disabling ACPI and
APIC:
root@lilpenguin $ free -m
total used free sharedbuffers
cached
Mem:18 4 13 0 0
1
-/+
On Fri, 2011-04-01 at 14:44 -0700, Bill Longman wrote:
...
So, what can you actually *do* on this, other than an ls or two?
Well, first the challenge did not require that it had to have any use.
But thinking about what you said, I remember when I first started using
Linux, it was not
28 matches
Mail list logo
