Frank Shute wrote:
I didn't think you'd be having the odd game of Quake on one of your
boxes. But think of it as an added feature! :)
Oh, doom does not require fp, its integer only and on 100MHz Pentium it
was very smooth! I did couple of hour-long doom sessions on one of our
FreeBSD
Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
I need to get something to run on x86 computers which do not contain
math in hardware, and FreeBSD dropped non-math cpus long time ago.
NetBSD did the same, so Linux seems to be the only possibility.
So, the question:
What is the linux distro which is closest to
I need to get something to run on x86 computers which do not contain
math in hardware, and FreeBSD dropped non-math cpus long time ago.
NetBSD did the same, so Linux seems to be the only possibility.
So, the question:
What is the linux distro which is closest to FreeBSD in terms of
I need to get something to run on x86 computers which do not contain math in
hardware, and FreeBSD dropped non-math cpus long time ago. NetBSD did the
same, so Linux seems to be the only possibility.
So, the question:
What is the linux distro which is closest to FreeBSD in terms of
See also this very interesting post on minimum memory requirements for each
FreeBSD version:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/2006-August/011029.html
I have a 4.11 installed successfully on a 386 with 20Mb RAM.
NetBSD 1.5 runs for sure and runs fast on 486SX and 8MB RAM
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/2006-August/011029.html
now i made my tests with FreeBSD 7. no installer, my semi-custom kernel i
use everywhere on x86 (everything moduled, all needed things in
loader.conf).
i used qemu
results:
16MB RAM - boots without problems, no
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/freebsd-doc/2006-August/011029.html
now i made my tests with FreeBSD 7. no installer, my semi-custom
kernel i use everywhere on x86 (everything moduled, all needed things
in loader.conf).
i used qemu
results:
16MB RAM - boots
Also Slackware has a rather Unix-like concept. The versions until 11 (if
I remember right) still run on the 2.4 kernel and have an option to
install without X11 and KDE and such. I still use it on a slow server,
it is easy to understand when you come from BSD-land.
Cheers
herbs
On Wed, Jun 11,
Oops, sorry, I was not specific enough:
FreeBSD 4 or older NetBSD are no go:
The computer I am doing this is not old, it is otherwise brand new, but
it uses an embedded cpu, a 486 clone as SoC without math. See
www.compactpc.com.tw, eBOX 2300SX. It is very low cost, runs on about
3W of
To the OP, if you go ahead with trying to use this 486 or older hw, consider
the effort of maintaining the system.
maintaning? while running netbsd 1.5, my routers don't need any
maintaining. they just works. what maintaining? just make your config so
logs won't fill the disk.
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 05:06:49PM +0300, Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
Oops, sorry, I was not specific enough:
FreeBSD 4 or older NetBSD are no go:
The computer I am doing this is not old, it is otherwise brand new, but
it uses an embedded cpu, a 486 clone as SoC without math. See
Wojciech Puchar wrote:
To the OP, if you go ahead with trying to use this 486 or older hw,
consider the effort of maintaining the system.
maintaning? while running netbsd 1.5, my routers don't need any
maintaining. they just works. what maintaining? just make your config
so logs won't fill
maintaning? while running netbsd 1.5, my routers don't need any
maintaining. they just works. what maintaining? just make your config so
logs won't fill the disk.
security patches, port updates? Any OS will probably require at least some
of this.
for router - not much :) there are for sure
Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
The computer I am doing this is not old, it is otherwise brand new,
but it uses an embedded cpu, a 486 clone as SoC without math. See
www.compactpc.com.tw, eBOX 2300SX. It is very low cost, runs on about
3W of power with CF card as mass memory, 128M, 3 USB2, serials,
Frank Shute wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 05:06:49PM +0300, Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
Oops, sorry, I was not specific enough:
FreeBSD 4 or older NetBSD are no go:
The computer I am doing this is not old, it is otherwise brand new, but
it uses an embedded cpu, a 486 clone as SoC without math.
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 09:30:17PM +0300, Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
Frank Shute wrote:
On Wed, Jun 11, 2008 at 05:06:49PM +0300, Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
Oops, sorry, I was not specific enough:
FreeBSD 4 or older NetBSD are no go:
The computer I am doing this is not old, it is otherwise brand
On Wed, June 11, 2008 04:54, Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
I need to get something to run on x86 computers which do not contain
math in hardware, and FreeBSD dropped non-math cpus long time ago. NetBSD
did the same, so Linux seems to be the only possibility.
So, the question:
What is the linux
On Wednesday 11 June 2008 11:54:07 Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
I need to get something to run on x86 computers which do not
contain math in hardware, and FreeBSD dropped non-math cpus long
time ago. NetBSD did the same, so Linux seems to be the only
possibility.
This is the commit that removed it:
Andrew Berry wrote:
Heikki Suonsivu wrote:
The computer I am doing this is not old, it is otherwise brand new,
but it uses an embedded cpu, a 486 clone as SoC without math. See
www.compactpc.com.tw, eBOX 2300SX. It is very low cost, runs on
about 3W of power with CF card as mass memory,
19 matches
Mail list logo
