Subj : fantasy & folklore pt2 To : Charles Angelich From : David Drummond Date : Thu Nov 22 2001 11:46 am Charles 21 Nov 01 04:21, Charles Angelich wrote to David Drummond: DD>>>> "Learn to use Linux" as in learn to control it at the DD>>>> commandline, make batch scripts etc? CA>>> With a monolithic kernel I would guess it's necessary to CA>>> be able to recompile in order to added needed drivers etc.? DD>> The kernel source has always been included with the Linuxes DD>> I've dabbled with (back to slackware 2.x) CA> Source code with no compiler or the wrong lib files is useless, CA> as you well know. That which is included with Slackware is always the correct lib files for that version. Slackware tends not to do the "leading edge" thing. CA>>> I'm referring to a user being able to familiarize CA>>> themselves with the basic structure, standard commands, CA>>> read manpages, connect via TCP/IP using PPP. Things that CA>>> most other OS can do. DD>> I've yet to see a version of MS DOS come with TCP/IP DD>> support included (or AppleDOS for that matter)... CA> PTSDOS and DRDOS both come with TCP/IP support. Time marches on CA> etc. Ah - so we're speaking of modern OSs? DD>> Those things were included back in the days of Slackware DD>> 2.x - those are the sort of things they were teaching the DD>> students at work. DD>>>> The earlier (kernal 1.x.x) versions are/were certainly DD>>>> suitable for that. CA>>> I didn't say they weren't suitable. I said I have been CA>>> unable to find a working install that is by anyone's CA>>> definition complete for an 80386 machine. DD>> All of the earlier distribs were designed for 386 and above DD>> machines. The 386 was just as operational as the 486 - just DD>> slower. All of the features were there. CA> What is stored on a CD is `there' but moving it to the computer CA> and getting that computer to use it is a different story. Sorry, I don't understand the problem. The startup diskettes have standard CDROM drivers built into the boot kernel. Admittedly one must create the startup diskettes some how. A DOS based machine with CDROM drivers is usually suffient. CA>>> btw: This is academic, for me, at this point since I no CA>>> longer have an 80386 machine but I did have one at the CA>>> time that I was searching for a working install. DD>> Maybe you should have inquired in the LINUX echo - I seen DD>> posters send copies to inquirers. CA> I've read the LINUX echo for quite awhile now - over a year. CA> I've seen people who are there daily say they were going to CA> install LINUX on a 386 "just for the heck of it". I've seen CA> them return for help, and I've watched as they slowly realized CA> that the folklore was just that. Some just go away others CA> rapidly begin to make excuses. The 386 project becomes turning CA> it into a terminal or is scrapped altogether. I've not noticed such messages. CA> To even manage to create a terminal they must install on a CA> larger/newer machine and then image copy that setup to the CA> 80386. How, by moving the harddrive? CA> That was one reason I was hoping to find an image copy. CA> I know that has been how the `gurus' manage to do even as much CA> as they can do. ;-) CA> Before you ask, yes I remember who some of them are/were, and CA> no I won't list names and then fight them off one at a time or CA> in a group. CA> If you can manage to word the question in a way that is CA> acceptable to the LINUX echo users - ask them about installs on CA> 80386's and watch what happens. Be careful or you'll be labeled CA> a `troll' by you-know-who. Certain questions aren't acceptable CA> there AFAIK. CA> In usenet LINUX message groups you will usually be told to forget CA> it. Less bravado there? Many people consider Linux to be X. If it won't run X then they're not interested. Regards, David --- Msged/LNX TE 06 (pre) * Origin: If you can't laugh at yourself, make fun of others. (3:640/305) .