Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 11
Well, first and foremost I'm surely way over my head. I'm trying to get that handicapped computer in my room to run (it's not connected to the internet and the ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Here. There. Anywhere.
    Posts
    157

    "My" OS


    Well, first and foremost I'm surely way over my head. I'm trying to get that handicapped computer in my room to run (it's not connected to the internet and the memory...well, it shouldn't be able to do ANYTHING, but somehow I have some functionality, so... yeah) but after being incapable of getting anything but Puppy Linux installed (which does not have a gcc compiler built in) I have decided to make this thing work, whatever I have to do to it. What I'm going to try to do is take the HDD from that computer and, assuming it's possible, compile and "install" everything into that drive while telling it that the properties (processor and such) are that of the other computer (of course, I won't be actually running the OS on this computer --this processor is AMD64 while the other is a pentium II, I think). Anyways, long story short, assuming I can confuse the kernel into working and stuff from here, where would I start adding things aside from the kernel? I'm looking into Linux from Scratch, but I was wondering what people here had to say as well....

  2. #2
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,754
    That is *possible* but I think it will give you more headaches than it's worth.

    If the machine is a P-II, DSL (Damn Small Linux) should run on it without a problem.

    I'd give DSL a shot before getting too radical.

    Some points from DSL's website:

    # Boot from a business card CD as a live linux distribution (LiveCD)
    # Boot from a USB pen drive
    # Boot from within a host operating system (that's right, it can run *inside* Windows)
    # Run very nicely from an IDE Compact Flash drive via a method we call "frugal install"
    # Transform into a Debian OS with a traditional hard drive install
    # Run light enough to power a 486DX with 16MB of Ram
    # Run fully in RAM with as little as 128MB (you will be amazed at how fast your computer can be!)

  3. #3
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Here. There. Anywhere.
    Posts
    157
    Actually, I have DSL, too. For some reason as of yet unknown to me (further reason why this probably won't work), Puppy Linux is the only OS (including Win3.1, DSL, Yoper --which almost worked, but something horrible, and funny, happened... --and a few other "small" Linux installations) that would actually install. DSL and ...some German Linux (can't recall the name...) would run as a LiveCD, but would be incapable of installing.
    I don't suppose it would be a terrible thing to make one of those custom versions of DSL or Puppy and use it, but I figure that would be too easy (*cough*), so I want to try this. Honestly, if this doesn't work, the computer probably would be better off used as a clock or paperweight. 'Cept the hard drive; it's 30 GB, which is still HUGE in this house ('cept when compared to my 320 GB SATA, which I am very proud of ^,^ ).

  4. #4
    Linux Guru
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    1,754
    If you are getting install issues from multiple distro's, you likely have a hardware issue. Maybe the HDD or CDROM? Point is, going through all this trouble may not solve your problem.

    Edit: If you're doing it "for the fun of it", go for it. But I wouldn't get my hopes up that this will get your P-II system working well.

  5. #5
    Linux Guru anomie's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2005
    Location
    Texas
    Posts
    1,692
    Quote Originally Posted by ryokimball
    ... after being incapable of getting anything but Puppy Linux installed (which does not have a gcc compiler built in)
    What's the end game here? (I'm confused by that comment.) Would you just like gcc so that you can compile a kernel and userland applications?

    If so, surely puppy provides a gcc binary that you can install.

    If not, never mind.

  6. #6
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Here. There. Anywhere.
    Posts
    157
    Oh, I know it's a hardware problem --the memory is shot. I ran multiple RAM tests, and every single one of them completely failed --I might as well have no memory installed. I don't understand how it does what it does, but it does. So basically all this computer is good for is "just for fun," but of course I'm learning plenty with messing it up at the same time.

  7. #7
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    211
    If you can get hold of an old Red Hat 9 or Fedora 1, I would suggest something with a 2.2 or 2.4 kernel, and from that era.
    I have a mandrake 6.0 & a 9.2 & Red Hat 9 (pre fedora 1)which install small and I had them ages ago on a 400MHz P II with 256MB ram, and worked OK.

  8. #8
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Here. There. Anywhere.
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by anomie View Post
    What's the end game here? (I'm confused by that comment.) Would you just like gcc so that you can compile a kernel and userland applications?

    If so, surely puppy provides a gcc binary that you can install.

    If not, never mind.
    Yeah, I think they do, and that is basically my goal, but I thought I would go ahead and try this. I've decided that come Summer I'm going to "geek out" for a good while and do practically nothing but learn about really detailed computer stuff, program and write (well, writing isn't so geeky, but I want to do that too). But late at night, when I'm being an insomniac and have nothing better to do, I thought I'd set this computer up to (a) program and (b, assuming I can get some text editor working, which is kinda a prerequisite for programming, so I guess this whole sentence is useless) write, when I feel like it.

  9. #9
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Here. There. Anywhere.
    Posts
    157
    Quote Originally Posted by wowbag1 View Post
    If you can get hold of an old Red Hat 9 or Fedora 1, I would suggest something with a 2.2 or 2.4 kernel, and from that era.
    I have a mandrake 6.0 & a 9.2 & Red Hat 9 (pre fedora 1)which install small and I had them ages ago on a 400MHz P II with 256MB ram, and worked OK.
    That might work, but it's kinda missing the point --I want to make it myself. Right now, at least. If I give up then I'll try something premade, and I'm still considering taking the drive out and installing an OS while it is in this computer and doing what I can to make it work in the other hardware profile... but the until I really prove to myself that I cannot make this work, I want to try this.


    But since you mentioned the older kernels, is there necessarily a benefit to using an older kernel? I think the processor runs around 1 GHz (which probably means it's not P. II, but that's not really my concern...) --would an older kernel have any benefit for an old machine besides being smaller and less to run?

  10. #10
    Linux Newbie
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Location
    UK
    Posts
    211
    I think they are easier to play with, which is what I did to learn about the kernel and compiling kernel, removing / installing packages etc.

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •