Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 routers while waiting for a bug to regenerate itself in one of our pops some time around 1996 :) I was referring to the 100MHz 486 you looked at. I'd still get an fpu so you can install a largely unpatched OS of your choice even if the fpu is redundant beyond installing the OS. I guess you looked at the Soekris stuff and discounted it. Shame, because a lot of folks find them useful with *BSD. The last I checked Soekris boards were using more power. We use similar boards from pcengines.ch for wireless routers. This application I am working on needs a computer with VGA and sound interfaces. Heikki Regards, ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 FreeBSD in terms of installation and use. A linux with basic userland and ports(-like) system, and quick and easy install like FreeBSD ? Heikki Suonsivu I don't think you will have much luck installing any modern linux distro on ancient hardware. In your case, I would consider running an older version of FreeBSD, like e.g. 4.11. This will work without a math co-processor. You can see the hardware notes here: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.11R/hardware-i386.html Download from ftp-archive, here: ftp://ftp-archive.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD-Archive/old-releases/i386/ISO-IMAGES/4.11 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. You could also go with a Linux version specifically for old PCs, but better have a look at distrowatch.com for these. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 installation and use. A linux with basic userland and ports(-like) system, and quick and easy install like FreeBSD ? Heikki Suonsivu ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 installation and use. A linux with basic userland and ports(-like) system, and quick and easy install like FreeBSD ? run FreeBSD 4.* ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 swapping at all 12MB - boots without problems, little bit swapping 10MB - boots without problems, more swapping, hanged after booting multiuser, before displaying login. probably out of kernel memory for consoles 10MB again - after turning of all consoles but the first, boots fine, somehow usable, but for routers should be OK. then i made REALLY custom kernel. minimal but enough for a router. was able to get down to 9MB. so - on 12MB 486DX, FreeBSD 7 is useful system for routing, firewalling, small nameserver, general control etc. with 16MB - swap is barely touched. 486DX machines with 8-16MB RAM and small (like 100-500MB) disks are for free here, ISA network cards too. good to know they can run newest FreeBSD release! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 without problems, no swapping at all 12MB - boots without problems, little bit swapping 10MB - boots without problems, more swapping, hanged after booting multiuser, before displaying login. probably out of kernel memory for consoles 10MB again - after turning of all consoles but the first, boots fine, somehow usable, but for routers should be OK. then i made REALLY custom kernel. minimal but enough for a router. was able to get down to 9MB. so - on 12MB 486DX, FreeBSD 7 is useful system for routing, firewalling, small nameserver, general control etc. with 16MB - swap is barely touched. 486DX machines with 8-16MB RAM and small (like 100-500MB) disks are for free here, ISA network cards too. good to know they can run newest FreeBSD release! ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] To the OP, if you go ahead with trying to use this 486 or older hw, consider the effort of maintaining the system. Brian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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, 2008 at 12:54:07PM +0300, 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 FreeBSD in terms of installation and use. A linux with basic userland and ports(-like) system, and quick and easy install like FreeBSD ? Heikki Suonsivu ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- *** Herbert Langhans, Warschau *** Sprachtraining Langhans *** http://www.langhans.com.pl *** herbert at langhans.com.pl *** NIP 526-229-61-51 *** Regon 014911759 *** Tel. 603 341 441 ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 power with CF card as mass memory, 128M, 3 USB2, serials, sound, etc, it has VESA form factor so you can attach it behind many LCD displays, etc. They have beefier models, but this one is cheapest and uses least power, latter of which is the more critical requirement for us. We would like to use it for certain control applications. Linux works, has been tested, but requires patches (turn math emulation on, add support for built-in ethernet, bug workaround). The problem with is that while FreeBSD 4 seemed to boot on it, it did not recognize any peripherals as they are new. Old OS's are not really what we want, this is not one-off but volume product, it will be internet-connected so we need bugfixes and we need support for latest chipsets on 802.11 cards etc. There is another similar CPU, even slower and less power consuming, I do not remember the part number, I think it was about 100 MHz 486 without math as well. This was some manufacturer of microcontrollers. Heikki Manolis Kiagias wrote: 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 FreeBSD in terms of installation and use. A linux with basic userland and ports(-like) system, and quick and easy install like FreeBSD ? Heikki Suonsivu I don't think you will have much luck installing any modern linux distro on ancient hardware. In your case, I would consider running an older version of FreeBSD, like e.g. 4.11. This will work without a math co-processor. You can see the hardware notes here: http://www.freebsd.org/releases/4.11R/hardware-i386.html Download from ftp-archive, here: ftp://ftp-archive.freebsd.org/pub/FreeBSD-Archive/old-releases/i386/ISO-IMAGES/4.11 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. You could also go with a Linux version specifically for old PCs, but better have a look at distrowatch.com for these. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 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, sound, etc, it has VESA form factor so you can attach it behind many LCD displays, etc. They have beefier models, but this one is cheapest and uses least power, latter of which is the more critical requirement for us. We would like to use it for certain control applications. Linux works, has been tested, but requires patches (turn math emulation on, add support for built-in ethernet, bug workaround). I don't know if this machine is going to be sited on an insecure network or not. If it is, then you'll probably be using ssh. Without a math co-proc to do the crypto, it will be horrendous. I don't even know if ssh would work with an architecture without a maths unit. If it can't work with ssh, then you might be restricting your market. I think you are punishing yourself unneccesarily by going with a processor without maths. You restrict the software (both OS application) you can run. The problem with is that while FreeBSD 4 seemed to boot on it, it did not recognize any peripherals as they are new. Old OS's are not really what we want, this is not one-off but volume product, it will be internet-connected so we need bugfixes and we need support for latest chipsets on 802.11 cards etc. There is another similar CPU, even slower and less power consuming, I do not remember the part number, I think it was about 100 MHz 486 without math as well. This was some manufacturer of microcontrollers. Can't you find a manufacturer that makes something similar with a DX instead? Or can you email this company and ask them how much it would cost to run off X units with a 486DX rather than SX? Heikki -- Frank Contact info: http://www.shute.org.uk/misc/contact.html ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 the disk. security patches, port updates? Any OS will probably require at least some of this. Brian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 some security flawed programs on them, but what's a problem. every IP except some listed numbers are just blocked, dns server is cache-only with queries disabled from outside (and by netbsd's ipf to make sure), no outside-reachable services are running. that's about security :) about patches - why to patch fully WORKING thing. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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, sound, etc, it has VESA form factor so you can attach it behind many LCD displays, etc. They have beefier models, but this one is cheapest and uses least power, latter of which is the more critical requirement for us. That's a neat system. Are there any retailers in North America which sell them individually? --Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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. 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, sound, etc, it has VESA form factor so you can attach it behind many LCD displays, etc. They have beefier models, but this one is cheapest and uses least power, latter of which is the more critical requirement for us. We would like to use it for certain control applications. Linux works, has been tested, but requires patches (turn math emulation on, add support for built-in ethernet, bug workaround). I don't know if this machine is going to be sited on an insecure network or not. If it is, then you'll probably be using ssh. Without a math co-proc to do the crypto, it will be horrendous. I don't even know if ssh would work with an architecture without a maths unit. You apparently do not use the source :), go and grep double and float from some of the most common programs you use (games, scientific stuff and crappy UI code excused). If it can't work with ssh, then you might be restricting your market. ssh does not use any floating point for any crypto algorithm. Oh, openssh does use doubles, it prints some ratios in some places, such as how many percent of something has been transferred. It seems to be stirring random numbers as floating point non-exactness does is not a bother there, but that is not used past session init. There is no human-noticeable effect on normal ssh use. I was one of the first guinea pigs for original ssh. We did have plenty of non-math cpus back then, and I did run ssh on non-fpu hardware until two years ago. We did run backups and configuration tasks over ssh on number of non-fpu computers acting as routers and other servers those days. Today's games might be different, but that is not what we do on these embedded computers... I think you are punishing yourself unneccesarily by going with a processor without maths. You restrict the software (both OS application) you can run. Applications cannot tell the difference between math emulation and hardware from anything else than performance, so there is no code difference in application layer, and kernel does not do fp at all, other than trapping fpu instructions and emulating them on non-fpu hardware. Kernel itself does not do fp math. I do not quite understand where this fear of non-fpu came from, as it made no practical difference just few years ago for anything but scientists in labs and intensive cad/graphics work. In particular I do not understand why people have an idea that everything uses floating point. Very few programs do heavy math processing, most common use is to double divide two longs to print out some statistics when program ends. The problem with is that while FreeBSD 4 seemed to boot on it, it did not recognize any peripherals as they are new. Old OS's are not really what we want, this is not one-off but volume product, it will be internet-connected so we need bugfixes and we need support for latest chipsets on 802.11 cards etc. There is another similar CPU, even slower and less power consuming, I do not remember the part number, I think it was about 100 MHz 486 without math as well. This was some manufacturer of microcontrollers. Can't you find a manufacturer that makes something similar with a DX instead? Or can you email this company and ask them how much it would cost to run off X units with a 486DX rather than SX? This is not 486, it is System-on-Chip thing. There are couple of very cheap SoCs, which do not have math, but performance is otherwise adequate for most applications. They are much faster than 486SX, by 5-10 times factor, so they are becoming popular on embedded devices. Heikki ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 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, sound, etc, it has VESA form factor so you can attach it behind many LCD displays, etc. They have beefier models, but this one is cheapest and uses least power, latter of which is the more critical requirement for us. We would like to use it for certain control applications. Linux works, has been tested, but requires patches (turn math emulation on, add support for built-in ethernet, bug workaround). I don't know if this machine is going to be sited on an insecure network or not. If it is, then you'll probably be using ssh. Without a math co-proc to do the crypto, it will be horrendous. I don't even know if ssh would work with an architecture without a maths unit. You apparently do not use the source :), go and grep double and float from some of the most common programs you use (games, scientific stuff and crappy UI code excused). No, I don't use the source :) I kind of assumed It must do a lot with numbers, so it will run like a dog without a co-processor. If it can't work with ssh, then you might be restricting your market. ssh does not use any floating point for any crypto algorithm. Oh, openssh does use doubles, it prints some ratios in some places, such as how many percent of something has been transferred. It seems to be stirring random numbers as floating point non-exactness does is not a bother there, but that is not used past session init. There is no human-noticeable effect on normal ssh use. It was explained to me (off-list) that co-processors work on floats not ints. I was one of the first guinea pigs for original ssh. We did have plenty of non-math cpus back then, and I did run ssh on non-fpu hardware until two years ago. We did run backups and configuration tasks over ssh on number of non-fpu computers acting as routers and other servers those days. Today's games might be different, but that is not what we do on these embedded computers... 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! :) I think you are punishing yourself unneccesarily by going with a processor without maths. You restrict the software (both OS application) you can run. Applications cannot tell the difference between math emulation and hardware from anything else than performance, so there is no code difference in application layer, and kernel does not do fp at all, other than trapping fpu instructions and emulating them on non-fpu hardware. Kernel itself does not do fp math. I do not quite understand where this fear of non-fpu came from, as it made no practical difference just few years ago for anything but scientists in labs and intensive cad/graphics work. In particular I do not understand why people have an idea that everything uses floating point. Very few programs do heavy math processing, most common use is to double divide two longs to print out some statistics when program ends. I used to do a lot of CAD and buying a machine without a co-processor was considered madness. That's where my prejudice comes from. The problem with is that while FreeBSD 4 seemed to boot on it, it did not recognize any peripherals as they are new. Old OS's are not really what we want, this is not one-off but volume product, it will be internet-connected so we need bugfixes and we need support for latest chipsets on 802.11 cards etc. There is another similar CPU, even slower and less power consuming, I do not remember the part number, I think it was about 100 MHz 486 without math as well. This was some manufacturer of microcontrollers. Can't you find a manufacturer that makes something similar with a DX instead? Or can you email this company and ask them how much it would cost to run off X units with a 486DX rather than SX? This is not 486, it is System-on-Chip thing. There are couple of very cheap SoCs, which do not have math, but performance is otherwise adequate for most applications. They are much faster than 486SX, by 5-10 times factor, so they are becoming popular on embedded devices. I was referring to the 100MHz 486 you looked at. I'd still get an fpu so you can install a largely unpatched OS of your choice even if the fpu is redundant beyond installing the OS. I guess you looked at the Soekris stuff and discounted it. Shame, because a lot of folks find them useful with *BSD. Heikki Regards, -- Frank Contact info:
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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 distro which is closest to FreeBSD in terms of installation and use. A linux with basic userland and ports(-like) system, and quick and easy install like FreeBSD ? Heikki, Gentoo (http://www.gentoo.org) is a pretty easy install and is the most closely aligned Linux distribution I've seen to the build it from source mentality. It's gotten fancier over the years but still has at its core the notion of building blocks and doesn't push binary package distribution the way most seem to these days. Whether it'll install on an FPU-less system I don't know. Might be worth a look. Please do report back with what you ultimately find works; this is a source of interest for me and I'm sure others. -- Jon Hamilton [EMAIL PROTECTED] ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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: http://lists.freebsd.org/pipermail/cvs-src/2003-July/007431.html It's probably not that difficult to reintroduce. ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Re: FreeBSD-like linux distro?
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, 128M, 3 USB2, serials, sound, etc, it has VESA form factor so you can attach it behind many LCD displays, etc. They have beefier models, but this one is cheapest and uses least power, latter of which is the more critical requirement for us. That's a neat system. Are there any retailers in North America which sell them individually? --Andrew ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED] A lot of peeps use Soekris type boards, that may be an option as well. http://www.soekris.com/products.htm. Even the lowest model has these specs, including floating pint capability. http://www.amd.com/epd/processors/4.32bitcont/14.lan5xxfam/24.lansc520/index.html Brian ___ freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions To unsubscribe, send any mail to [EMAIL PROTECTED]
