On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 10:30:38PM -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: > On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 03:43:11PM -0700, Andrew Sackville-West wrote: > > On Sun, Sep 23, 2007 at 11:13:13AM -0400, Douglas A. Tutty wrote: > > > > > I know there are minidistros like DSL but DSL is small as in how much > > > can they pack onto a small CD, not how to shoehorn into 16-32 MB ram. > > > I'm also not sure how they keep up with security fixes. > > > > My biggest problem is that there is not OS designed to be great for a > > > stand-alone old small computer. An OS that can both fit on small > > > resources, and be kept up-to-date without a separate build machine. > > > > Linux's target is the modern desktop and the focus is on keeping up with > > > new hardware. The BSDs keep the drivers for old hardware but patches > > > require building and that building relies on gcc which isn't optimized > > > for use on old systems. > > > > I think they're all 32+ bit, but if you're looking for something to > > play with, you might check out something like menuet or > > kolibrios. Both are OSes written in assembler and are pretty cool/fun > > thigns to play with. Pretty low resource requirements. > > I'll look into it. However, mostly, my old boxes get used as thin > clients, so they have to have ssh and preferably X. yeah, they're definitely not going to work for that. Just fun toys at the moment, I think. A
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: Digital signature