[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: micro debian



Douglas Tutty wrote:
On Sat, Oct 28, 2006 at 11:16:39PM +0800, Tim Post wrote:

I've been working on some very task specific Xen images based on Sarge,
and been playing with Oracle's 'Rasta' system to help make network pxe
pushes a little easier to tailor from a single root.

Unfortunately what I have makes sense only to me. That being said, if
some more info was provided, I may have something suitable which could
help.

What's the function / purpose of the SMM platform? Sorry to reply to a
reply, but I can't seem to locate the original thread.

My projects have been focusing on easily making appliances out of SBC's,
typically with 128 MB or less and small CF storage. Without some HW info
for the target, its really hard to offer up a generic solution.

For starters, are you looking for a 2.4 or 2.6 based distro?



My lowest level (and most reliable by reputation) is a 1993 IBM
PS/ValuePoint 486DX4-100. 32 MB ram.  ISA bus. Target hard drive is 171
MB IDE.  Floppy, CD, and 100 MB Zip drives; will not run CD-burner and
no USB.

Looking for a distro that I can keep updated/secure/stable.  Think of it
as a firewall, documentation browser, emailer.  2.4 or 2.6 I don't care
as long as its up-to-date re secure and stable.

The problem with just going with generic Debian is the size of the
stable/main section for aptitude to wade through (memory and drive
space).  It would be nice if main was split into main and extra.

Because of memory constraints, a live CD probably won't work.


I'll try suggesting DSL (D*mn Small Linux) LiveCD yet again. I told you
that I run it on a 486 class machine with 16MB RAM, ISA bus,
cannot by itself boot from CDROM and has no USB.

Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!



Reply to: