Re: Penalty of SELinux?
Douglas A. Tutty wrote:
Its not their thing either.
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.
I beg to differ. One of the "selling points" of DSL is that
it has a small RAM footprint. I have run it on a 486 with
16MB of RAM.
OBSD becomes new every 6 months with security patches whenever, but I
can't build with this small ram and especially this small a drive.
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.
Yes, there is that. Part of it is that we live in a "throw away"
world these days. What benefit expending effort keeping old machines
going, when people want the newer faster ones, anyway?
Linux's target is the modern desktop and the focus is on keeping up with
That is not my impression. My impression is that all UNIX like OS
target and has targeted large servers. Or at least, that's the
deployment.
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.
So I'll keep looking.
I wish you success.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
Oppose globalization and One World Governments like the UN.
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: