On Tue, 24 Apr 2001, Ewald Wasscher wrote:
Perhaps a way to think about it is from the point of view
of the newcomer.
I think we really should.
Agreed. This, however, is more a function of marketing than the
engineering behind it. Easy enough to do, once we have that base system
laid
Scott C. Best wrote:
George:
Sorry for the late reply...
Time to do some good old-fashioned market classification here. We have
two base-level types of people using LRP:
1. People who want to have a firewall/router that will let them share IP
addresses and don't want to spend
George:
Sorry for the late reply...
Time to do some good old-fashioned market classification here. We have
two base-level types of people using LRP:
1. People who want to have a firewall/router that will let them share IP
addresses and don't want to spend the money on a
Any thoughts or ideas? I'm thinking that trimming the fat off of this
stuff, combined with UPX, might be enough for us to go glibc 2.1.x or even
2.2.x for base router images. At least then, it would be easier to
transition from the basics to the fun stuff.
I think glibc 2.1.x or 2.2.x on a
Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
Any thoughts or ideas? I'm thinking that trimming the fat off of this
stuff, combined with UPX, might be enough for us to go glibc 2.1.x or even
2.2.x for base router images. At least then, it would be easier to
transition from the basics to the fun stuff.
I
It'd be interesting to see how much each option affected size, but
overall a
411K 2.4 kernel is VERY COOL, and should be quite usable for floppy
firewalls. While I'd like to see a 'one size fits all' kernel, perhaps
there could be a floppy only, minimal kernel, and a larger kernel with
Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
Well, I generall think almost EVERYTHING should be modules. You can regain
IDE support for booting by adding the modules to the initial ramdisk (the
linuxrc mods I posted a while ago for my SCSI-RAID support do this).
When I first compiled kernels for LRP, I used
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, David Douthitt wrote:
When I first compiled kernels for LRP, I used the EigerStein kernel as
my base. I later found that by NOT compiling modules, I could save
space let me explain.
Okay. Not that I can stop you in an e-mail. =)
If there is an item in the kernel
On Sat, 21 Apr 2001, Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
Well, I generall think almost EVERYTHING should be modules. You can regain
IDE support for booting by adding the modules to the initial ramdisk (the
linuxrc mods I posted a while ago for my SCSI-RAID support do this).
Yeah, Oxygen does the
sleep less and play more, but I may
take some convincing on that.
Regards,
Hilton
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:leaf-devel-
[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of George Metz
Sent: Friday, 20 April 2001 4:58 PM
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: [Leaf-devel] Patched kernel
Okay gang, got the FTP security patch from the Netfilter boys and applied
it. Kernel is compiled and I'm about to tar and gzip it. I also took the
opportunity to go weeding.
The final result is as follows:
1. Kernel is no longer able to mount filesystem images on the loopback
device.
George Metz wrote:
The final result is as follows:
1. Kernel is no longer able to mount filesystem images on the loopback
device.
This is something that Oxygen takes advantage of quite a bit; it's not
required, but even in the boot process it can be used as desired.
Oxygen has the
I would definitely put serial back in for those of us who use serial
console. Everything else looks like a good idea.
--
Jack Coates
Monkeynoodle: It's what's for dinner!
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, George Metz wrote:
Okay gang, got the FTP security patch from the Netfilter boys and applied
it.
On Fri, 20 Apr 2001, Charles Steinkuehler wrote:
1. Kernel is no longer able to mount filesystem images on the loopback
device.
This seems like a bad thing, but it is probably tolerable. Why not make the
loopback device a module? Note that a loopback device or a spare ramdisk
will
14 matches
Mail list logo
