Subj : multitask or die! To : David Drummond From : Charles Angelich Date : Wed Nov 28 2001 11:32 pm 1233343d41c1 unix Hello David - 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 DD>>> anything less. CA>> I'm not so sure any recent distribution would work on an CA>> 80386 (if you can find one with a CD reader). DD> Slackware 8 install will work on a 386, when booted from DD> startup diskette. First you need to install a CD reader since few had them at that time. Let me know when it's reading the CD. --8<--cut 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 DD>>> be able to replace with something more usable. CA>> Not necessarilly. The majority of an IBM PS/2 is CA>> proprietary. I had a difficult time just finding the CA>> necessary setup disks to get two of them working. IBM CA>> decided to erase much of this from their servers just six CA>> months or more after I found what I needed and people on CA>> usenet IBM echos were frantically downloading all of it to CA>> save it. DD> I found a setup disk (on the IBM site), but am unable to DD> find RAM to suit. It appears to take ordinary 72pin stuff, DD> but none I've tried will work. Compaq memory looks standard too but isn't and only one company sells it. No bargain deals. DD>>> The third is a clone - It has 4Mb RAM and a 99Mb drive. DD>>> It keeps falling over with parity errors, so I'm still DD>>> playing with it's memory. When mine did that it was a faulty (out of tolerance) power supply. CA>> So far you're finding machines closer to what I remember CA>> as typical 80386's and not the 8 meg of memory or 500 meg CA>> (or larger) hard drives people seem to think were sold. DD> I now have the 4Mb boosted to 8Mb (although the machine DD> insists that it's 7.8Mb - now to find a slightly larger HD DD> that will work in there. If this is another PS/2 you may want to read up on that missing memory. IBM put a special reserved memory location in high memory for OS/2 and LINUX might burp on that one? DD> I agree that 386s may not have come with those specs, but DD> the average hacker playing with this stuff usually has DD> access to the extra bits necessary. Not really. Not the ones I discussed this with. CA>> I guess no one wants to know that it's all so bloated now? DD> Hardly anyone runs 386s anymore. Much more powerful stuff DD> is so cheap. Many want performance from their equipment, DD> they're not into playing with vintage gear for vintage sake. We each have our game and we play it so well. ;-) This wasn't about what is popular, this discussion was about the legitimacy of telling a newbie to go ahead and install LINUX on his/her 80386 without mentioning no one is doing it or remembers how. Newbies are not `hackers' or parts collectors. They're just inexperienced people wanting to gain some experience and not the hard way either. DD>>> You add an 8Mb swap partition, not a RAM drive. CA>> I read ramdrive many times, never swap file. I've used W31 CA>> for over a decade I would notice the different words. ;-) DD> What was the distribution? I lurk and read, I don't memorize. Sorry. CA>>>> It is hard if the install won't execute in 4 meg of CA>>>> 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 CA>> to get an install going and actually install LINUX on the CA>> machine? DD> NOT with Slackware 8. Above, in this same message you assured me that S-8 _would_ work? Ok, one down and umpteen to go. DD> I believe I've done it with Slackware 4 however (I have DD> located someone who reckons they still have the CDs - I'm DD> waiting for him to get back to me re making a copy there- DD> of). What happened to the CD you wanted to copy and send to me? DD> With only 4Mb it does tend to flog the swap file a bit. Yes, it would wouldn't it? LOL 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 CA>> you need. DD> Harddrives are cheap! If you want to build a 486 around a 386 cpu just say so and admit defeat. I'll understand. 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' CA>> and IDE controller). I did not have this machine when I CA>> was looking for an 80386 install for LINUX. DD> I believe it would run the newer Linuces. You're doing it again. Recommending a `maybe' install even after I mentioned I think there are problems. DD> I've never got a soundcard working with Linux, haven't DD> really tried - I never had sound in those older machines. Just the "beep, beep" thing huh? I'm so accustomed to sound (real sounds) that the beep is annoying. Spoiled I guess? (I resequence MIDI files for fun here) CA>>>> There were several DOSLinux's but they didn't get very CA>>>> good reviews here on FIDO. WINLinux gets bad reviews CA>>>> most of the time here on FIDO. CA>> No comment on these? DD> The only such product I've played with is ZIPSlack - it can DD> install on a FAT16 or FAT32 partition. It's not as quick as DD> running on the native ext2 partition. DOS-linux though, huh? --8<--cut DD> I'll copy on something more to my prefence. vi doesn't DD> ignite my passions - it's like edlin, without edlin's bells DD> and whistles. I've used vi on SCO UNIX and DOS clones on my machine. It's much more capable than what you describe. Just difficult to learn the key combinations to do it all. --8<--cut DD>>>>> You could consider it (ZIPSLack 8) on your 16Mb Pentium DD>>>>> x5 CA>> Maybe. It's a Compaq. DD> If you have 100Mb free on the HD you could try it. No DD> partitioning necessary, just delete the folder when you DD> finish if it doesn't work. Maybe trash my entire drive and re-install what I have now too! No thanks. I have BASIC-LINUX here I might load it into a ramdrive and fiddle. DD>>>>> I no longer have my Slackware 4 CDROM however - it's DD>>>>> got lost somewhere between here and work. I can avail DD>>>>> you of ZIPslack 8 CA>>>> Somehow I just knew that one was in the parallel CA>>>> universe. ;-) 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 CA>> recommend doing it when others ask about it. I wish you CA>> luck. DD> Err, I am going to launch into an epistle real-soon-now DD> about this subject. DD> Further posts will be made in the LINUX echo. Not sure what you mean by an epistle? A cry for help from Tunis or Tunic or whatever? DD>>> Slackware 4 (kernel 2.2.6) supported MCA - I think a DD>>> prior 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 CA>> for PS/2 had different hardware than the desktop PS/2's CA>> that I have here. Something only recently was released CA>> that made the PS/2 boys very optomistic about using LINUX. DD> It was a server class machine that I had going back then. I made that too easy, didn't I? DD>>> I don't know anyone using WFWG anymore. Those of my DD>>> associates with low end hardware to play with, use LInux. --8<--cut DD> Win95 and Win98 also network well into a Linux LAN - no DD> 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. --8<--cut DD> Win9x/ME/XP/whatever won't run at all on the older hardware DD> (of which we speak). Modern marketing has people running DD> games and apps that require enormous horsepower - so the DD> users run it on the "latest & greatest". I think the people I ran into were true geeks who put WFWG on the slow machine and LINUX on their best machines? DD> Linux (and WFWG) will still run on the old junk. I blocked my computers ears so it wouldn't hear you refer to it as `junk'. > > , , > o/ Charles.Angelich \o , > <| |> __o/ > / > USA, MI < \ __\__ ___ * ATP/16bit 2.31 * .... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.undercoverdesign.com/dosghost/ --- Maximus/2 3.01 * Origin: COMM Port OS/2 juge.com 204.89.247.1 (281) 980-9671 (1:106/2000) .