Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Damn Small Linux 2024

damnsmalllinux.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 185 posts

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#91

Post by mathiasgredal »

moffkalast wrote: post #49
haunter wrote: post #38

A truly damn small Linux is the xwoaf rebuild project 4.0 https://pupngo.dk/xwinflpy/xwoaf_rebuild.html >The forth version of xwoaf-rebuild is containing a lot of applications contained in only two binaries: busybox and mcb_xawplus. You get xcalc, xcalendar, xfilemanager, xminesweep, chimera, xed, xsetroot, xcmd, xinit, menu, jwm, desklaunch, rxvt, xtet42, torsmo, djpeg, xban2, text2pdf, Xvesa, xsnap, xmessage, xvl,…

So uh, who's gonna be first to get it running on a Pi Pico?

Not possible, unless you want to do it using an emulator and external memory. The lowest you can go for Linux is probably an ESP32:

https://web.archive.org/web/20230515075935/http://wiki.osll....

https://github.com/jcmvbkbc/linux-xtensa/commits/xtensa-6.4-...

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#92

Post by pimlottc »

mobilio wrote: post #90
pimlottc wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I remember running Linux Router Project [0] on a 1.44mb floppy disk back in the late 90s! Of course, it didn't have a GUI, but I don't think you could even fit the linux kernel on a single floppy disk today. 0: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Router_Project

In 2000 i was using FloppyFW for same reason.

Was that reason running IP Masq to share a 56k modem connection? :)

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#93

Post by Medox »

haunter wrote: post #38

A truly damn small Linux is the xwoaf rebuild project 4.0 https://pupngo.dk/xwinflpy/xwoaf_rebuild.html >The forth version of xwoaf-rebuild is containing a lot of applications contained in only two binaries: busybox and mcb_xawplus. You get xcalc, xcalendar, xfilemanager, xminesweep, chimera, xed, xsetroot, xcmd, xinit, menu, jwm, desklaunch, rxvt, xtet42, torsmo, djpeg, xban2, text2pdf, Xvesa, xsnap, xmessage, xvl,…

The desktop reminds me of TinyCore Linux, although bigger by 15-20 MB.

Fun fact: It was developed by Robert Shingledecker, who was previously the lead developer of Damn Small Linux.

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#94

Post by charcircuit »

ravenstine wrote: post #27

Wow, this is crazy. I came across the DSL website last night while trying to figure out how to compile a minimal Linux kernel myself, and now here it is on HN! I used DSL back in high school when it was new. As a side note, why does compiling Linux have to be so... obtuse? It just stops for me after several minutes of building out objects with no explanation.

It shouldn't ever stop for more than maybe 10 seconds. Try using a task manager to see what it's running. I think some steps take a few GB of RAM, so is it possible you exhausted your memory?

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#95

Post by eKKiM »

codethief wrote: post #41
ravenstine wrote: post #27

Wow, this is crazy. I came across the DSL website last night while trying to figure out how to compile a minimal Linux kernel myself, and now here it is on HN! I used DSL back in high school when it was new. As a side note, why does compiling Linux have to be so... obtuse? It just stops for me after several minutes of building out objects with no explanation.

Are you looking to build just a minimal kernel or also a minimal distribution? (Which is what I happened to be thinking about last night :)) In the latter case, do you know any good resources about that topic?

Some resources i used in the past are Linux From Scratch https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/ and Yocto https://www.yoctoproject.org/ However i have no idea how up to date these are.

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#96

Post by FreeFull »

yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #85
haunter wrote: post #38

A truly damn small Linux is the xwoaf rebuild project 4.0 https://pupngo.dk/xwinflpy/xwoaf_rebuild.html >The forth version of xwoaf-rebuild is containing a lot of applications contained in only two binaries: busybox and mcb_xawplus. You get xcalc, xcalendar, xfilemanager, xminesweep, chimera, xed, xsetroot, xcmd, xinit, menu, jwm, desklaunch, rxvt, xtet42, torsmo, djpeg, xban2, text2pdf, Xvesa, xsnap, xmessage, xvl,…

> Only 2.2.26 kernel tho so that's very dated The whole thing is dated; that looks like more of a retrocomputing project (mostly) than an updated version. I mean, busybox 1.00 is probably fine for what it is, but it's not exactly new. (Note that this is a clarification but not a criticism; having played with things like "how old of a distro can I shove in docker and run on a current kernel", I certainly support retro…

It would be rather difficult to fit any newer linux kernel onto a floppy, together with all the other software.

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#99

Post by Atreiden »

seemaze wrote: post #30
alchemist1e9 wrote: post #4

Fantastic to have another option with modern tools! great work that will be appreciated by many. Between this, Puppy, and Tiny Core Linux so much old hardware can be put to potential use. I’d also mention Finnix as an excellent rescue image solution. Any other awesome projects for limited hardware and Linux use that should be more well known?

I've been quite happy with Alpine Linux. You can build it up to suit your needs for desktop, server, embedded or containers, but will run quite speedily on any supported arch from a few tens of MB of memory. The APK package manager is pleasant and quick, and the package list is quite extensive.

Wow I've never heard of someone running Alpine as a desktop OS before. How is the experience without glibc? What are you using for a DE? I'd thought X relied on glibc

Re: Damn Small Linux 2024

#100

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

haunter wrote: post #86
yjftsjthsd-h wrote: post #85

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Only 2.2.26 kernel tho so that's very dated The whole thing is dated; that looks like more of a retrocomputing project (mostly) than an updated version. I mean, busybox 1.00 is probably fine for what it is, but it's not exactly new. (Note that this is a clarification but not a criticism; having played with things like "how old of a distro can I shove in docker and run on a current kernel", I certainly support retro…

Yeah agreed. Given the toolchain source is available I wonder how low we can go with a modern kernel and the newest busybox

I don't think you can use the old toolchain; newer kernel+busybox are unlikely to build with that old of a compiler. Although, following the build steps with modern sources and toolchain would be an interesting exercise.
Post reply on HN