Baslinux mailing list

[3aoo-cvfd AT dea.spamcon.org]

Sindi Keesan wrote:
>
> > BL1  2.0.34  464762
> > BL3  2.2.16  435775
> 
> How did you get it smaller than the older kernel?  

By eliminating many unnecessary capabilities.

> Are there features missing that we might want to have, 
> as a reason to also use the BL1 kernel once in a while?

The BL1 kernel is the bare.i kernel from Slackware 3.5.
It has the full range of capabilities.

> So is there any advantage to anyone of using BL1, 

Not really.  BL3 is a big improvement over BL1.
Leaner/faster and more capable.

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

How big is the HD?  Even 40mb is enough:
-----------
DOS      25
BL3      10 
swap      5
-----------
After you install BL3, delete the contents of /usr/X11R6.
That should give you a comfortable amount of room to work
with.  BTW swap is not optional for 3mb RAM.  You definitely
need swap if you want to run Linux with so little RAM.

> It sounds like linux and links with a viewer won't work 
> in 3MB RAM 

The viewer needs svgalib.  That's when 3mb RAM gets overloaded.

> > A stripped version of vimage.  It only views GIFs.
> I see why you switched to xli and Xvesa.

That's not why I switched to Xvesa.  I could have put a more 
capable viewer in BL1 without switching to X.
  
> BL3 does seem better in all respects (other than the lack 
> of ftp).

ftp is not worth the space (which is limited to what can fit
on two floppies).  ftp downloads are better handled by wget.  
Fewer users need ftp uploads (you are the only one who seems 
to miss it).  The ftp client was removed in BL2.  There was 
no good reason to restore it in BL3.  I would, however, be 
happy to consider creating an add-on package for ftp.

Cheers,
Steven