Baslinux mailing list

[Sindi Keesan <keesan AT iamjlamb.com>]

On Tue, 29 Jun 2004 3aoo-cvfd AT dea.spamcon.org wrote:

> Sindi Keesan wrote:
> >
> > Would there be any problem in installing BL3 to hard 
> > drive but also copying over from BL1 the pertinent 
> > modules
> 
> BL1 modules will not work on BL3.

And vice versa because they are kernel specific. I meant make a separate
directory for the BL1 kernel modules in addition to 2.2.16 for BL3, and
then if I boot with the BL1 kernel I hope I can use the kernel modules
from BL1 with the rest of the files from BL3.  Will this work?

I would probably just want the slhc and ppp modules so that I can go 
online with the smaller kernel.

> 
> > ftp (and /etc/services) 
> 
> Binaries from BL1 should work on BL3, but you might have
> to copy an extra library or two (from BL1).

I should be able to figure this out with ldd.  I am mainly just 
interested in trying out a smaller kernel (from BL1) without needing to 
keep both BL1 and BL3 on the computer in two partitions.  What programs 
from Bl1 might I want besides FTP that are not already in BL3?    
I think the viewer needed some library (ncurses?).



> > Steven, what is the size difference between the BL1 and 
> > BL3 kernels?  
> 
> BL1  2.0.34  464762
> BL3  2.2.16  435775

Hmm, looks like I would be better off with the BL3 kernel.  I presume BL3 
kernel takes up less RAM.

How did you get it smaller than the older kernel?  Are there features
missing that we might want to have, as a reason to also use the BL1 kernel
once in a while?

> 
> > It might be possible (I am hoping) to run BL1 with svgalib 
> > in 3M RAM, 
> 
> Unlikely.  
I will try it some day and report back, maybe with a swap partition.
If it works it might be too slow to bother with.
 
> > if the kernel loads into significantly less RAM than the 
> > BL3 kernel.  
> 
> On the contrary.  The BL3 kernel is smaller.  So is the BL3 init.
> BL3 is significantly leaner than BL1.


So is there any advantage to anyone of using BL1, other than the fact that 
it comes with ftp and different games and a viewer that does not require 
X?  

> > My only laptop computer is a 386 with 3M RAM. 
> 
> If I had such a laptop, I would install a large DOS partition
> and a smaller Linux partition (plus 6mb swap partition).  Forget
> about X on such a machine.  If you want a GUI, use DOS.

I have been using DOS on it.  I don't know if I have space for 6M swap and 
linux and DOS.  

 
> > It works (excruciatingly slowly) with Arachne, 
> 
> I seem to recall that Arachne performance could be greatly
> improved by using a HD cache and/or putting the temp directory 
> in a ramdisk (or was that the entire Arachne tree in a ramdisk?).
You can't put much in RAMdisk on a 3MB RAM computer.  Yes, there were 
instructions for running in RAM.  I prefer to use Lynx, much faster and it 
does SSL.  Just curious if I can also get linux/links working on there.

> 
> > If links2 graphical with svgalib does not fit into 3M RAM, 
> 
> links2 graphical is not viable on 3mb RAM.  

I should take your word for it but I will take a look at how much RAM
svgalib and links2 are is using, unless you happen to know.  Just curious.  
It sounds like linux and links with a viewer won't work in 3MB RAM in real
time.  I know X won't work in 3M and it sounds like svgalib won't either.
Do you know if svgalib uses more or less RAM than your stripped down Xvesa 
with xli?   

> 
> > What viewer is used in BL1?  
> 
> A stripped version of vimage.  It only views GIFs.
I see why you switched to xli and Xvesa.
 
> > Is this something that can easily be copied to BL3?
> 
> You would also have to copy the libvga files.
I might not bother, BL3 does seem better in all respects (other than the 
lack of ftp).

I will go ahead and install BL3 to hard drive and play with svgalib from 
hard drive.  Thanks for the information.  

> 
> Cheers,
> Steven
> 
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> BasLinux mailing list
> BasLinux AT lists.ibiblio.org
> http://lists.ibiblio.org/mailman/listinfo/baslinux
>