On Mon, 28 Feb 2000, Bruce Irving wrote:
I have a 386 AND a 486 that I am unable to bring up on Linux because the
current version requires more than 8 MB ram. The setup that I want requires
the greater security that Linux brings over bloat 95-2k. Currently, I am
waiting with baited -- er,
"Dan" == Dan Olson [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Bruce I have a 386 AND a 486 that I am unable to bring up on Linux
Bruce because the current version requires more than 8 MB ram. The
Bruce setup that I want requires the greater security that Linux
Bruce brings over bloat 95-2k. Currently, I am
I have a 386 AND a 486 that I am unable to bring up on Linux because the
current version requires more than 8 MB ram. The setup that I want requires
No. The current Linux is fine in 4Mb. The distribution installers with all
their GUI garbage frequently require more. If you are trying to build
On 29 Feb, Alan Cox wrote:
I have a 386 AND a 486 that I am unable to bring up on Linux because the
current version requires more than 8 MB ram. The setup that I want requires
No. The current Linux is fine in 4Mb. The distribution installers with all
their GUI garbage frequently require
On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Alegria Loinaz. Inaki wrote:
I am a new participant in the list and after reading FAQs I have a couple
of questions:
- Is ELKS able to run executable programs from standard Linux?
Not directly, since standard Linux programs are in 32bit code, ELKS is
mainly for 16bit
On Wed, 1 Mar 2000, Ken Yap wrote:
For the definitive list of Linux distributions, go to
lwn.net/bigpage.phtml There are a few tiny distributions listed there
that may install and run in as little as 2 MB.
We used to run a very useful system (6 concurrent users) on 3.5mb, mainly
running mail
On Wed, Mar 01, 2000 at 01:10:52AM +1100, David Murn wrote:
On Tue, 29 Feb 2000, Alegria Loinaz. Inaki wrote:
I am a new participant in the list and after reading FAQs I have a couple
of questions:
- Is ELKS able to run executable programs from standard Linux?
Not directly, since
Actually, I recently installed RedHat 6.1 on a 486/8Mb. The trick was to
do a NFS install, and forget about the installation program the moment
the shell-prompt appeared on the second console.
I had to custom-create the boot disk and root fs, but I've got
Slackware 7.0 running on a 386
Iñaki,
I am looking for a simple OS to use teaching (modifying the kernel) and
despite simplicity is very important, I'd like to be possible to load
pre-compiled programs and to have a file system in hard disk.
I think that Minix may be a better option for teaching because there are
books
Le Tue, Feb 29, 2000 at 04:29:47PM +0100, Juanjo Marin a écrit:
About Linux, there are some documents and books about the kernel. There is
a translation of David Rusling's "The Linux Kernel" avalaible in any mirror
of LuCAS (LinUx en CAStellano). And there is a translation of a French (or
last i checked freelsd required 5Mb to install/4Mb to run.
on the linux front the least demanding has allways been slackware since
you can setup swap before the instalation, and (at least for slackware
3.6) you didn't have to load the install image into a ramdisk
OK i have to get in somewhere,
I have a 386 AND a 486 that I am unable to bring up on Linux because the
current version requires more than 8 MB ram. The setup that I want requires
the greater security that Linux brings over bloat 95-2k. Currently, I am
waiting with baited -- er, held -- breath for ELKS to have networking
You might also try using a Slackware release as
they have install floppies for ow memory and some
docs on installing with low memory. I had a 386
with 2 meg. that ran pretty good. For graphics I
used X-win with Twm.
Regards
Helm.
--- Alan Cox [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I have a 386 AND a
13 matches
Mail list logo
