Subj : multitask or die! To : Charles Angelich From : David Drummond Date : Wed Nov 28 2001 11:01 pm Charles 27 Nov 01 12:13, Charles Angelich wrote to David Drummond: DD>> I'm talking of the distribution CDROM - Most are designed DD>> to be installed on a 80386 and up. Admittedly one or two DD>> have been optimised for Pentiums and won't run on anything DD>> less. CA> I'm not so sure any recent distribution would work on an 80386 CA> (if you can find one with a CD reader). Slackware 8 install will work on a 386, when booted from startup diskette. CA>>> From what I have read sys admins keep images handy and use CA>>> them to setup dozens of machines at a time. It seems CA>>> rather commonplace from what I've read. DD>> We do that at work with Windows machines. We make the DD>> initial image for each particular type/model/config PC from DD>> scratch. DD>> I don't know anyone personally who runs that many Linux DD>> workstations. CA> From what I've read they like to do the same thing. CA> --8<--cut DD>>>> Basements are not a popular fitting in homes here so I'm DD>>>> not combing those. CA>>> Maybe the word "basement" was a clue and I just didn't get CA>>> it. I never considered that basements would not exist in CA>>> other places. DD>> Most relatively recent homes here are bult on a concrete DD>> slab - straight onto the ground. Many of the older homes DD>> are on "stumps", 5 to 6 foot piers with airspace underneath. CA> I was not aware of that. DD>>>> I have the word out amoung my friends/associates to DD>>>> borrow a working 386 box. Someone's sure to have one DD>>>> somewhere that I can use. CA>>> Probably. DD>> Heard of three so far. One is some sort of laptop, 2Mb RAM DD>> and a 40Mb harddrive - I won't be attempting that. DD>> Another is an IBM PS/2 - still to get my hands on it. DD>> Similar RAM and drive sizes to the laptop, but I should be DD>> able to replace with something more usable. CA> Not necessarilly. The majority of an IBM PS/2 is proprietary. I CA> had a difficult time just finding the necessary setup disks to CA> get two of them working. IBM decided to erase much of this from CA> their servers just six months or more after I found what I CA> needed and people on usenet IBM echos were frantically CA> downloading all of it to save it. I found a setup disk (on the IBM site), but am unable to find RAM to suit. It appears to take ordinary 72pin stuff, but none I've tried will work. DD>> The third is a clone - It has 4Mb RAM and a 99Mb drive. It DD>> keeps falling over with parity errors, so I'm still playing DD>> with it's memory. CA> So far you're finding machines closer to what I remember as CA> typical 80386's and not the 8 meg of memory or 500 meg (or CA> larger) hard drives people seem to think were sold. I now have the 4Mb boosted to 8Mb (although the machine insists that it's 7.8Mb - now to find a slightly larger HD that will work in there. I agree that 386s may not have come with those specs, but the average hacker playing with this stuff usually has access to the extra bits necessary. CA> I guess no one wants to know that it's all so bloated now? Hardly anyone runs 386s anymore. Much more powerful stuff is so cheap. Many want performance from their equipment, they're not into playing with vintage gear for vintage sake. DD>> You add an 8Mb swap partition, not a RAM drive. CA> I read ramdrive many times, never swap file. I've used W31 for CA> over a decade I would notice the different words. ;-) What was the distribution? CA>>> It is hard if the install won't execute in 4 meg of memory. DD>> One enables the swap partition as the first part of the DD>> install as explained in the docos. CA> Are you saying that you think a 4 meg 80386 will be enough to CA> get an install going and actually install LINUX on the machine? NOT with Slackware 8. I believe I've done it with Slackware 4 however (I have located someone who reckons they still have the CDs - I'm waiting for him to get back to me re making a copy there-of). With only 4Mb it does tend to flog the swap file a bit. DD>> No point unless I can get the applications I need. CA> No point installing LINUX on a machine if you have no hard CA> drive space or memory remaining to _use_ the applications you CA> need. Harddrives are cheap! .... DD>> Ah - OK, that would make a acceptable CUI Linux machine. CA> Maybe but it's a Compaq and I'm told there can be problems CA> because of that (video is on the mb as is the `sound card' and CA> IDE controller). I did not have this machine when I was looking CA> for an 80386 install for LINUX. I believe it would run the newer Linuces. I've never got a soundcard working with Linux, haven't really tried - I never had sound in those older machines. CA>>> There were several DOSLinux's but they didn't get very CA>>> good reviews here on FIDO. WINLinux gets bad reviews most CA>>> of the time here on FIDO. CA> No comment on these? The only such product I've played with is ZIPSlack - it can install on a FAT16 or FAT32 partition. It's not as quick as running on the native ext2 partition. DD>>>> The ZIPSlack image on Slackware 8 does not include the DD>>>> text editor etc. CA>>> How would you make changes to the configuration with no CA>>> editor? DD>> It does contain a text editor (I've looked further), just DD>> not any of the ones I prefer to use. CA> I guessed it had something. ;-) I'll copy on something more to my prefence. vi doesn't ignite my passions - it's like edlin, without edlin's bells and whistles. DD>>>> I guess the main OS parts are taking up too much space DD>>>> now. If one had more than 100Mb available one could DD>>>> install the apps oneself. CA> Same problem you will have with a normal 80386. Typical drive CA> size was under 200 meg. DD>>>> You could consider it (ZIPSLack 8) on your 16Mb Pentium x5 CA> Maybe. It's a Compaq. If you have 100Mb free on the HD you could try it. No partitioning necessary, just delete the folder when you finish if it doesn't work. DD>>>> I no longer have my Slackware 4 CDROM however - it's got DD>>>> lost somewhere between here and work. I can avail you of DD>>>> ZIPslack 8 CA>>> Somehow I just knew that one was in the parallel universe. CA>>> ;-) DD>> I plan to start my 386 experiments with Slackware 8 (the DD>> latest publicly available Slackware). If it doesn't work DD>> then I'll try that Slackware 2 CD at work. CA> Decent of you to try it first before continuing to recommend CA> doing it when others ask about it. I wish you luck. Err, I am going to launch into an epistle real-soon-now about this subject. Further posts will be made in the LINUX echo. DD>> Slackware 4 (kernel 2.2.6) supported MCA - I think a prior DD>> version did too. CA> It may have been some driver that was absent for MCA or CA> possibly for a certain `flavor' of MCA. The server-class for CA> PS/2 had different hardware than the desktop PS/2's that I have CA> here. Something only recently was released that made the PS/2 CA> boys very optomistic about using LINUX. It was a server class machine that I had going back then. DD>> I don't know anyone using WFWG anymore. Those of my DD>> associates with low end hardware to play with, use LInux. CA> I randomly began discussing DOS with three people on IRC CA> recently. All three claimed to be LINUX users who dabbled in CA> DOS. All three have WFWG installs. I've also read this in CA> various places that WFWG was the second choice of many LINUX CA> users because of it's built in networking capabilities to CA> connect to their LINUX machine. Win95 and Win98 also network well into a Linux LAN - no need to stoop to WFWG (as long as the hardware is up to it). DD>> They keep their more modern/powerfull stuff for Win DD>> whateverversion. CA> This is a peculiar mindset (to me). To pamper the slower OS CA> with the best hardware and hold back the faster OS on older CA> slower hardware. I'm guessing that after a certain speed users CA> don't care anymore how fast or faster a machine can be? (other CA> than for bragging rights) Win9x/ME/XP/whatever won't run at all on the older hardware (of which we speak). Modern marketing has people running games and apps that require enormous horsepower - so the users run it on the "latest & greatest". Linux (and WFWG) will still run on the old junk. Regards, David --- Msged/LNX TE 06 (pre) * Origin: Make love, not war. (3:640/305) .