RE: FW: Your recent message to Topica.com
I was hoping the owner of the list would perhaps remove the e-mail address that is generating all that crap... I believe it is [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] . I think it would do us all a favour if this e-mail address was removed from the list. Here I go again here comes another message form topica... %(( Rod PS thanks to all the other people on the list that have the same problem I was thinking I was the only one. -Original Message- From: Luke Farrar [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 13 June 2000 10:21 To: Luke Farrar Cc: Rod Boyce; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: FW: Your recent message to Topica.com On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Luke Farrar wrote: On Mon, 12 Jun 2000, Rod Boyce wrote: Does anybody else get these messages when trying to reply to the Linux-8086 list? I got one of those a while back And another one for sending that... So do we tell them to piss off or what? Lukeboo -Original Message- From: Natasha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Monday, 12 June 2000 08:46 To: Rod Boyce Subject: Your recent message to Topica.com You recently sent a message, RE: Building ELKS to Linux-Lizard. This is a restricted list, which means that only subscribers of the list can post to it. Our records indicate that you are not a member of the list. If you would like more information about this list, or you would like to join the list, you can go to the Topica web site ( http://www.topica.com) http://www.topica.com) and search for the list. Topica's site also has thousands of lists you can join. See for yourself at: http://www.topica.com http://www.topica.com You can check out our collection of great TipWorld tips at: http://www.topica.com/tipworld?system1 http://www.topica.com/tipworld?system1 Questions about the service? Check out Topica's Help section at http://www.topica.com http://www.topica.com -- just click on "help" at the bottom of the screen. Still have questions? Email Topica at [EMAIL PROTECTED] Please include the email address of the list you're inquiring about, and the email address you use to subscribe to the list. Sincerely, Topica Customer Support --- + Original Message --- Return-Path: Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 13786 invoked by alias); 11 Jun 2000 20:46:08 - Delivered-To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Received: (qmail 13781 invoked by uid 0); 11 Jun 2000 20:46:07 - Received: from nic.funet.fi (193.166.0.145) by inmta007.topica.com with SMTP; 11 Jun 2000 20:46:07 - Received: from vger.rutgers.edu ([128.6.190.2]:15145 "EHLO vger.rutgers.edu" ident: "NO-IDENT-SERVICE[2]" smtp-auth: TLS-CIPHER: ) by nic.funet.fi with ESMTP id ; S
RE: Linux for a really old computer
IF memory serves (This is going back a long way) The Amstrad PC1640 was a 286 or 386. I saw one in operation about 5 years running an accounting package it was Very old then. I think they originally had 720K floppy disks. I do not know about running elks on it as I haven't played with ELKs much myself but I do know a bit about PC. Regards, Rod Boyce -Original Message- From: Dan Olson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Tuesday, 2 May 2000 18:51 To: Jan Dobrucki Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Linux for a really old computer Hi folks. Hi. Well, looks like there aren't any other folks out there with an answer, so why don't I take a shot at this one :) I have a little problem. I got an Amstrad PC1640 HD20. Real old. Well, really old means a lot of different things to different people. I thought the couple origional IBM PCs I had around were old until I bought a late 70s TRS-80 :) *Anyway*, if it's something old enough that it won't run plain old Linux, but is new enough to be X86 / X88 based, you're in the right place. I don't even know how much RAM it has. So tell me, any hope for porting Lunux to it, or do I have to find myself a 386 with 4 MB of RAM? What do you want in the end, exactly?? Elks and Linux aren't really quite the same, despite what the name implies. Elks doesn't have things like networking that you may want, and due to the type of CPU it's targeted to, memory protection / security really isn't there either. If you want a more advanced Linux install, your 386 suggestion is a good one. If you just want to have a little fun running the old machine, Elks may work for you. I don't know for sure, but I have an Amstrad manual around somewhere for one of their Z80 based (8 bit) machines. If you're still lost, I could see if it just happens to be the sam model. Good luck! Dan
RE: Location of ELKS Archive?
Does this mean ELKS has TCP/IP networking with PPP and/or SLIP? -Original Message- From: Alistair Riddoch [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Wednesday, 26 April 2000 21:43 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: Location of ELKS Archive? On Tue, Apr 25, 2000 at 11:56:40PM +0100, Alan Cox wrote: that is unusable. I was hoping to be able to get a linux derivitive on it in hopes of making it useable for terminal emulation as well as some standard development. I will poke around for a while, but I don't doubt you. Its not so much dead as rather inactive. Its all there and it seems to work passably. I am not actively working on the kernel code at the moment because I am busy with other things, and mainly because there has been no real interest in the project for some time. Now that the project is hosted on sourceforge it is easier for others to work on it without my involvement, but if anyone else did start contributing, I would probably do some work on the code too. Looking at the state of the project it is no longer obvious to me which way to proceed. It essentially runs pretty stably on all my test platforms, and I have reached the point where it is no longer obvious to me what to do next. Any ideas anyone? Al
Getting off this list
Please can someone tell me who to send e-mail to get off this list. I seem to have lost my original sign up e-mail ( Blasted Microsoft and outlook). I am leaving this job and would like to tie up all the loose ends. Regards, Rod Boyce
RE: OS development
What about uCOSII book search on any technical book site and you will find the book describing uCOSII. The book and OS was written by a chap called Jean Laprose ( sorry for the misspelling of his name I am doing this from memory). Regards, Rod Boyce -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of Tracy Camp (Hurrah) Sent: Wednesday, 8 September 1999 03:29 To: Matthew Kirkwood Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: OS development Also a facinating book called the "developement of the BSD 4.4 operating system" not much around that talks about non-unix OSes though. On Tue, 7 Sep 1999, Matthew Kirkwood wrote: On Tue, 7 Sep 1999 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Does anybody on the list know where some docs, HOWTO's, books, etc are(preferably on the net) on the theories behind OS/kernel development and maybe how to implement them? I'm hoping there's something out there not necassarily on linux but on OS/kernel development in general. The Minix book[0] is probably as good a place to start as any. It's quite heavily microkernel-oriented, but that's probably an advantage - otherwise it's very easy to forget that all the world isn't monolithic Unix. After that, you might get some more information from looking at the LDP's "The Linux Kernel"[1] which wil show you how a lot of the stuff in the Minix book is anchored to Linux, and introduce some of the more modern bits which the Minix book omits. Matthew. [0] "Operating Systems: Design and Implementation" by A S Tanenbaum [1] http://www.linuxdoc.org/LDP/tlk/tlk.html Tracy Camp 503.380.3218 Hurrah Internet Services [EMAIL PROTECTED] Consultants to the Networked World http://www.hurrah.com/
RE: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos support?
If you want an embedded system you could also go for a micro-controller from the MCS51 family. It is time you UNIX bunnies realised that there is more to the world that UNIX. If it wasn't for small mocro-controllers we would not have a lot of the moderm electronic equipment. A small OS is very important to the rest of the world. In a lot on cases even Elks is to big to fit in the space provided. EG 8192 bytes of code space and 256 bytes of RAM. STOP SLAGGING OFF AT ELKS IF YOU NOT LIKE IT GO SOME WHERE ELSE. Rod -Original Message- From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] On Behalf Of David Given Sent: Friday, 12 February 1999 00:52 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject:Re: kernel fission was: msdos/umsdos support? On Wed, 10 Feb 1999, Steve Drake wrote: The reason I can see for ELKS is what first lead me to take an interest in it -- the "E" in ELKS stands for "Embeddable." For those looking for a free, open source, embeddable OS, check out: http://www.cygnus.com/ecos/ It does require a 32-bit (or 64-bit) processor, but AFAIK that's not a big deal for real embedded projects. If you want an embedded system, you do *not* go for an Intel processor. You particularly don't go for a 16-bit Intel processor. They're too expensive, don't have enough oomph, require far too much glue, and require strange software. If you want an embedded system, you buy an off-the-shelf ARM or M-Core or SH based processor which consists of one chip with a thousand-and-one peripherals built in. And you don't run ELKS on it; you run a proprietry RTOS like eCos or vxWorks or Elate or something. The reasons for ELKS are primarily for fun and secondly to get useful work out of old hardware *we already have*. If you start having to pay money for the hardware, it no longer becomes worth it. I don't have a problem with this. -- +- David Given ---McQ-+ | Work: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | FNORD | Play: [EMAIL PROTECTED] | +- http://wired.st-and.ac.uk/~dg -+
