Steven wrote:
>
> Clarence Verge wrote:
> >
> > To put Linux in palm portables or settop thingys
> > is pointless.
>
> Sorry to disappoint you Clarence, but Linux is already
> in palm portables and embedded devices. If you want
> some info on this, see: http://alllinuxdevices.com/
Hi Steven;
Not much disappointment to me - I have no stock in either Linux or palm
hardware. <G> If someone wants to do it, it will be done tho.
> > The incredible fatness of Linux
> > compared to DOS
> Are you talking about a minimalist DOS with just
> the DOS3 command.com? Or a full-blown DOS6 with
> smartdrv, defrag, msav, msbackup and all the rest
> of that crap.
You are correct, that is a lot of CRAP. So, no I mean just the stuff needed
to make it run. Equivalent to your "kernal". The DOS 5 "kernal" is 7.7k.
The total DOS 5 load required to make the hardware accessable is 56k and
that includes Emm386.sys and Himem.sys and the file and buffer space.
> "BasicLinux" contains the powerful BASH shell, the
> standard Linux utilities, TCP/IP networking, dial-up
> ppp, telnet, ftp, web browser and the capability to
> route/firewall an entire network. All of this in
> a package that is SMALLER than the default DOS6
> installation.
I'm not knocking your BasicLinux at all. Just come within a factor of 3
of 56k for the bare basics and I'll readily agree that a re-write in ASM
will make it fit. You may even be there already, I just don't KNOW.
> > could never be justified in such a resource limited
> > environment.
But someone can make the judgement call to throw more memory at it and
sure, it will fit. It will run. But why ?
I just don't get it yet. <G>
- Clarence Verge
--
- Help stamp out FATWARE. As a start visit: http://home.arachne.cz/
--
