Clarence Verge wrote:
>
> To put Linux in palm portables or settop thingys
> is pointless.
Sorry to disappoint you Clarence, but Linux is already
in palm portables and embedded devices. If you want
some info on this, see: http://alllinuxdevices.com/
> Linux is best at multi-USER functions. It's hard to
> get more than one person using the palm pilot at a time.
Multi-user, multi-tasking, whatever. Linux is very good
at handling several tasks simultaneously. As all of us
Arachne users realise, this is a very useful feature for
TCP/IP clients (even in a palm pilot).
> The incredible fatness of Linux
What do you mean? The incredible fatness of RedHat?
The incredible fatness of KDE? The incredible fatness
of StarOffice?
Linux is really just the kernel. You can compile a
very small kernel if you want. No bigger than DOS.
> compared to DOS
Are you talking about a minimalist DOS with just
the DOS3 command.com? Or a full-blown DOS6 with
smartdrv, defrag, msav, msbackup and all the rest
of that crap.
"BasicLinux" contains the powerful BASH shell, the
standard Linux utilities, TCP/IP networking, dial-up
ppp, telnet, ftp, web browser and the capability to
route/firewall an entire network. All of this in
a package that is SMALLER than the default DOS6
installation.
> could never be justified in such a resource limited
> environment.
Linux works fine in a resource-limited environment.
Just compile an appropriate kernel and appropriate
binaries. Open-source Linux allows you to customize
and recompile everything.
It is a mistake to judge the suitability of Linux
for palm portables on the basis of a bloated desktop
version that is designed to compete with win2000.
Horses for courses. Linux can do it all: from
super computer to embedded device.
Cheers,
Steven
____________________________________________________
Linux for old PCs: http://homepages.ihug.co.nz/~ichi
