On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Steve wrote:
> On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Rob wrote:
>
> > Just a comment about the BasicLinux. For a computer newbie dummy like
> > me, who is still trying to comprehend different file systems, commands,
> > structure and all sorts of acronyms and jargon, and with extremely limited
> > resources, like a free, ten year old [I guess that's seventy year old]
> > computer, BasicLinux is perfect, no matter what the kernel, libc glibc
> > thing is. At least for now, while trying to work a job and go to school
> > I have something to work and learn with. Once I have learned enough and
> > have enough resources, then maybe I can move on to the KDE, GNOME latest
> > and greatest thing. But for now I'm darn glad something like it is
> > available!
> > Spouting off; Rob:
>
> Absolutely. My first experience wasn't with library
> incompatibilities, but with a FreeBSD shell account at
> my ISP.
> BasicLinux gives you all that, PLUS root privilege.
> ;-)
> It certainly has a lot more going for it than Monkey
> Linux which was the first Linux I installed.
>
> - Steve
>
> ------------------------------
>
In order to make full use of a Linux distro (mini or macro) adding a C
compiler is compulsory. Otherwise you won't get anywhere (being like
having DOS installed on your computer but you're in no position to
install a new program because you lack any data-transfer and storage
media except the HDD) .
AFAIK Monkey Linux offered a separate package containing GCC 2.72. This
might work on BasicLinux, providing the header
files for the kernel and libc5 do exist in your Linux tree. Can BasicLinux
deal with it?
(Note: AFAIK the current version of GCC is 3.02 and of the binutils is
2.11.something).
Cristian Burneci
Bucharest, Romania
