On Fri, 2007-03-23 at 10:49 -0400, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> On Fri, Mar 23, 2007 at 06:56:32AM -0500, Shawn K. Quinn wrote:
> > On Wed, 2007-03-21 at 22:37 -0400, Douglas Allan Tutty wrote:
> > > Hello,
> > > 
> > > I've got a 486DX4-100 with 32 MB ram, ISA bus, with two drives: 840 MB
> > > and 1280 MB IDE.  Currently running Debian GNU/Linux Sarge.
>  
> > Assuming you don't try to do more with it than you have CPU and RAM for,
> > you should be fine. However, once you've tested that all your hardware
> > works with the GENERIC kernel, I would strongly recommend you compile a
> > custom kernel and run that (do a Web search for a Perl program called
> > dmassage which will help immensely), but keep a copy of GENERIC around
> > in case problems do creep in. The reason for compiling a custom kernel
> > in this case is to save memory; I saved about 2.5M on a similar system,
> > which is a lot when you only have 32M to begin with (with any system
> > much newer it's usually not worth it).
> > 
> 
> I thought compiling a custom kernel was _discouraged_?

Officially it's discouraged; from my point of view, you have one of the
rare situations where a case could be made for it. Note that you should
*always* keep a copy of GENERIC around for troubleshooting.

> I just loaded the 486 to the most I ever do:
>       ssh to the big box (titan) to pon courer (the modem) and run bwm
>       ssh to titan for mutt
>       run aptitude, update the package list
>       run top to watch everything
>       run X with icewm:
>               rxvt > ssh titan, to run conquorer
>               go to theweathernetwork.com
> 
> I'm using 6 MB swap, but the system is not spending any time waiting for
> I/O.  Aptitude is taking 75% of the CPU, top on a 2 second delay is
> taking 10%.  I can still browse the net; the wait is a slow dial-up
> connection.
> 
> I don't know how to tell how big the kernel in memory is since its
> modular.

Linux, the kernel, as distributed in Debian GNU/Linux, the full
oeprating system, is modular. The OpenBSD kernel is not, it's
monolithic. An apples-to-apples comparison would be a Linux kernel
configured with no module support and most possible device drivers
compiled into the kernel directly (and, IMHO, that falls squarely into
the category of "kids, don't try this at home" for a box with only 32M
of RAM).

-- 
Shawn K. Quinn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>

Reply via email to