Simple answer - forget it!
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| ayeomans Jun 03, 2007 1:26 PM EDT |
Just about all the Linux versions need rather more than 4 MB. Floppy disk "tomsrtbt" has a good chance to run but that's command line only. That would allow you to test it out. Perhaps you could look at the embedded distros and do a lot of work squeezing them to fit. But really Windows 95 is likely to be the best thing for such a machine. Since you can buy a much more powerful (250MHz, 64MB!) laptop on eBay for £25 or less, you can't be valuing your time very much if you want to try to get Linux on such an old machine. |
| pogson Jun 03, 2007 1:39 PM EDT |
ayeomans wrote:"But really Windows 95 is likely to be the best thing for such a machine." I agree with every thing ayeomans wrote except this snippet. Lose 95 is the reason I switched to Linux. It crashed repeatedly in 72 MB. It would be a nightmare at 4MB. There is not much point in running a slow unreliable system. I am sure a solid installation of Linux while slow would at least be reliable. The original poster mentioned word processing. There is no point typing stuff that will be lost in a BSOD. Linux will be difficult to install, but we used to do that on machines of that era, so the knowledge is available. The uncertainties are hardware drivers. Laptops were often using proprietary interfaces. She should give it a try and if it does not install go back to that other OS only as a last resort. A system without a GUI would be quite a suitable goal and would not be difficult if the display can be accessed by Linux. |
| tracyanne Jun 03, 2007 1:40 PM EDT |
Someone I know found it in the Tip, and it wasn't booting at all, I managed to get it to recognise the Hard drive and it booted into WIn 95, there are no applications, just the OS. I just thought it might be fun to install Linux on it, but with some small but usable applications. |
| Aladdin_Sane Jun 03, 2007 2:35 PM EDT |
>>Simple answer - forget it! I disagree. The skill required to make an OS work on such a system far outstrips what is called for today. Having done what tracyanne is attempting, though not with Linux, I know she has a challenge, and that is fun for us. It also makes us better at our IT jobs than those who who say trash it. Tracyanne's challenge would be much easier to help fulfill if she did not have the GUI requirement for us to struggle with. There have been 2 practical solutions I've seen so far: 1) Grab RH 7.0 from RH's alrchives, and 2) DSL. I say go for it, tracyanne! |
| pogson Jun 03, 2007 4:55 PM EDT |
Got it! Small Linux http://www.superant.com/cgi-bin/smalllinux.pl?Small_Linux They tell how to make a network connection using PLIP over a serial cable. They also have a tiny X server so this could connect to a bigger machine to do the work. |
| Aladdin_Sane Jun 03, 2007 5:22 PM EDT |
PLIP, I thought, was for Parallel, and SLIP and PPP were for Serial, no? |
| jrm Jun 03, 2007 5:40 PM EDT |
> PLIP, I thought, was for Parallel, and SLIP and PPP were for Serial, no? Yeah, that's right. I used to use PLIP to install Slackware on an old 486 with no CD-ROM. The last time I did that was probably Slackware 7. You have to have a null-modem parallel cable, but after the install you can continue to use the cable for NFS. (There's also a HOWTO at http://www.tldp.org.) I think the 4Mb is a bigger problem than the installation, but Small Linux looks interesting. |
| jrm Jun 03, 2007 7:40 PM EDT |
Sorry to double post, but I also found a "4Mb Laptop HOWTO". http://www.tldp.org/HOWTO/4mb-Laptops.html It builds on pogsons's idea. It uses SmallLinux or MuLinux to create the initial partition, and then installs a subset of Slackware. (He lists a few installation methods, including PLIP or Slackware 7 on 15 floppies.) |
| schestowitz Jun 04, 2007 3:40 AM EDT |
Try Deli. It works with old 486s and heas a nice GUI and everything... |
| tracyanne Jun 04, 2007 5:05 AM EDT |
I'm actually doing BasicLinux. It will actually run in under 4Meg, Deli requires 16+ and I'd have to find the extra RAM. I'm transfering the files now. I had to get a zip splitter, and I split the Basic Linux files into 1Meg portions, I'll put them back together on the Laptop extract them and copy them to the appropriate place. I'll let you know haow it goes. |
| Aladdin_Sane Jun 04, 2007 5:53 AM EDT |
Two questions from curiosity: From what distribution is BasicLinux derived? What is a Tip? |
| vainrveenr Jun 04, 2007 6:43 AM EDT |
Quoting:From what distribution is BasicLinux derived?In reverse order, 1) Do not know which Tip tracyanne is referring to when she writes "Someone I know found it in the Tip" above. 2) From the main BasicLinux page http://distro.ibiblio.org/pub/linux/distributions/baslinux/, BL3 derives from Slackware 4.0 Quoting:It is also possible to install packages from Slackware 4.0 (using the pkg command). You will find the packages in the /slakware directory. Note: packages from later Slackwares are not compatible with BL3.Readers wishing to find out more on BL3 and its Slackware derivative could not only delve into this BL site, but could also more extensively go through the 8yr-old Slackware 4.0 ftp site at mirrors such as ftp://carroll.cac.psu.edu/pub/linux/distributions/slackware/slackware-4.0 Also note that there are some obvious limitations in BL3 and from the "older" Slackware version upon which it is based. |
| number6x Jun 04, 2007 7:09 AM EDT |
that's very close to the specs of the firstcomputer I got to run Linux. 486 SX 75MHz, 8MB ram, 40MB HD, floppy. Windows 3.1 would run well on that. 95 really wanted 6MB or more ram. Look for an old Linux like slackware with the 1.9 or 2.0 kernel.If you want Gui, the window manager you will want is called FVWM. You will want older versions of that. I would suggest going command line and using tomsrtbt. You will probably have to recompile a few things. Being a laptop will make it very non-standard for the kernel in those days. You might want to check out the Linux Journal archive cd. They have reprints of their issues from the mid 90's. There were lots of how to's in LJ back then. It would be the era of your machine. I wish you luck on your adventure. |
| Sander_Marechal Jun 04, 2007 7:52 AM EDT |
Another thought -- with 4 MB of RAM, would some kind of embedded Linux -- with a few extra drivers -- work well on it? |
| tracyanne Jun 04, 2007 1:08 PM EDT |
Quoting:From what distribution is BasicLinux derived? Looks like Slackware, maybe. Quoting:What is a Tip? The place where you tip your rubbish. Over here they have a recycling depot as part of the Tip, and things like old computers get sent there to dies slowly. |
| dbmoyes Jun 05, 2007 2:54 AM EDT |
I ran X11 on an old 386/40MHz with 4MB of RAM in monochrome, and later in 16 color VGA. It can be done quite well. I also did most of my word processing using groff and vi, which worked very very well. Here's a few key points on running Linux under low memory: Dump GNOME and KDE. Use a light-weight window manager like fvwm2 or twm. Compile your own kernel, but include hard-coded in the drivers you need, and leave all the other filesystems and infrequently used drivers as modules. Do not include any module or driver you do not intend to use. Use something like Slackware, and go through and modify the configuration not to load X11 on start up and to only run the services you need. Yes, 4MB is doable. Just don't expect to run anything like OpenOffice in it. If you need pretty formatted documents, use the phototypesetter groff/troff -- it produces very nice output, and actually can safe you a lot of time when generating documents (after you learn the syntax). I've become a little lazy in recent years and use openoffice for most of my printed work. However, most of my writing is done in HTML now using the amazing powers of the VI editor. :ab tbls Now, whenever you type "tbls", "" will show up on the screen. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!