I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9, knl: 2.4*,
but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.

So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.

I'm being screwed-in-the-corner for ever step I take:
- this time of years is bad, for News queries, 'cos new students waste resource !
- no mc to navigate the dir-tree and cp, mv, edit..etc, so I have to juggle VTs.
   Can anybody tell how to set PS1 to show the VT number [I tried /etc/profile] 
   and failed ?
- to use the [essential for me] mc & gpm I've tried to chroot to instalations
   which do have these utilities; but Debian-Lenny shows 'out of memory'!
   OTOH when running Mandrk9 on the same small RAM box I can chroot 
   without problems -from the partition with kde to the partition with gnome.

Q. is chroot a memory-hog with kernel 2.6* , or is there some thing wrong with
    my Debian-lenny installation ?

Q. Since I'm used to seeing the rdev plus what I've mounted, like:-
# df  ==
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/hda6             2.0G  1.7G  216M  89% /
/dev/hda11            958M  293M  617M  33% /mnt/cdrom
/dev/hda12            1.9G  404M  1.4G  23% /mnt/mul
/dev/hda14            7.4G  4.8G  2.2G  69% /mnt/Fed14
/dev/hda16            3.8G  599M  3.2G  16% /mnt/Deb16
/dev/hda3             972M   36M  886M   4% /mnt/disk
     why does Debian Lenny show:
<normal-rdev>
tmpfs .............0% ....../lib/init/rw < ------?
udev  .............3%......./dev
tmpfs .............0% ....../dev/shm     < ------?
                    ??
This looks as if the install/boot is not complete ?

Thanks for answers to any of my questions.

no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9, =
knl: 2.4*,
> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.
>=20
> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.
>=20
> I'm being screwed-in-the-corner for ever step I take:
> - this time of years is bad, for News queries, 'cos new students waste re=
source !
> - no mc to navigate the dir-tree and cp, mv, edit..etc, so I have to jugg=
le VTs.
>    Can anybody tell how to set PS1 to show the VT number [I tried /etc/pr=
ofile]=20
>    and failed ?
> - to use the [essential for me] mc & gpm I've tried to chroot to instalat=
ions
>    which do have these utilities; but Debian-Lenny shows 'out of memory'!
>    OTOH when running Mandrk9 on the same small RAM box I can chroot=20
>    without problems -from the partition with kde to the partition with gn=
ome.
>=20
> Q. is chroot a memory-hog with kernel 2.6* , or is there some thing wrong=
 with
>     my Debian-lenny installation ?
>=20

chroot doesn't need memory other than the one used by the target shell...
But, chroot'ing to a different environment may cause weird failures if the =
running kernel is not compatible with the GLIBC of the new environment.
e.g. If you boot with a 2.4 kernel and chroot in a new environment with a r=
ecent GLIBC compiled for a 2.6 kernel with NPTL & co, than, results are unp=
redictable.
In that case, you may copy the new kernel to your /boot partition, and boot=
 with it... If the old system cannot boot with the new kernel (recent kerne=
ls try to preserve backward binary compatibility but some old features may =
be removed or disabled, such as devfs), you may either boot directly on the=
 new system, or, if it's not easily accessible, you may create a small init=
rd with a busybox and few utils to access the directory and chroot() in it.

--=20
Andr=C3=A9 Gillibert

On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:57:15 +0000, no.top.post wrote:
>    Can anybody tell how to set PS1 to show the VT number [I tried
>    /etc/profile] and failed ?

If using bash, then you need to set PS1 in bashrc, not /etc/profile
which is only sourced for login shells.

> Q. is chroot a memory-hog with kernel 2.6* , or is there some thing
> wrong with
>     my Debian-lenny installation ?

You could always try doing an exec chroot to ensure that the chroot
shell replaces the first shell and so that you do not have a shell
within a shell running.

no.top.post@gmail.com writes:

>I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9, knl: 2.4*,
>but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.

>So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
>kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.

>I'm being screwed-in-the-corner for ever step I take:
>- this time of years is bad, for News queries, 'cos new students waste resource !
>- no mc to navigate the dir-tree and cp, mv, edit..etc, so I have to juggle VTs.

So, install it!

But since you run Mandriva, why not put a newer Mandriva onto your
system. They you will presumably understant it better.


>   Can anybody tell how to set PS1 to show the VT number [I tried /etc/profile] 
>   and failed ?
>- to use the [essential for me] mc & gpm I've tried to chroot to instalations
>   which do have these utilities; but Debian-Lenny shows 'out of memory'!
>   OTOH when running Mandrk9 on the same small RAM box I can chroot 
>   without problems -from the partition with kde to the partition with gnome.

Why in the world would you do that? Just install the programs (mc and
gpm)
.. 

Unruh <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
> no.top.post@gmail.com writes:
>=20
> >I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9,=
 knl: 2.4*,
> >but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.
>=20
> >So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
> >kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.
>=20
> >I'm being screwed-in-the-corner for ever step I take:
> >- this time of years is bad, for News queries, 'cos new students waste r=
esource !
> >- no mc to navigate the dir-tree and cp, mv, edit..etc, so I have to jug=
gle VTs.
>=20
> So, install it!
>=20
> But since you run Mandriva, why not put a newer Mandriva onto your
> system. They you will presumably understant it better.
>=20

Since the system has only 30 (or 32) megabytes of RAM, I don't think a rece=
nt Mandriva can run on that, because the initrd may be too big.
<http://www.mandriva.com/archives/en/linux/spring/system_requirements.html>
It's a shame that noawadays, everybody lies about "min sys requirements". I=
'm almost sure Mandriva would run with 128MB of RAM, but 32 MB may be too s=
mall.

I don't know if it's easy to boot a Mandriva without initrd.

--=20
Andr=C3=A9 Gillibert

In comp.os.linux.misc no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9, knl: 2.4*,
> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.
> 
> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.
> 

You might want to save youyrself a whole lot of hassle
and spend 50 bucks or so at a garage sale/ebal/scrapyard
and upgrade to a more modern system. Cramming modern usable
OS onto a 30MB footprint is possible but will be ugly at best.

Alternately you could look at an older version, a relatively
raw distribution, freebsd, or the like.

Stan

no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9, knl: 2.4*,
> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.
> 
> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.

<snip>

Absurd to try it with that little RAM

either add more RAM

or pull the drive out of your old machine
and pop in in your better one


then install your OS on the 2nd drive and dual boot

On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 13:57:15 +0000, no.top.post wrote:

> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9,
> knl: 2.4*, but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems
> to need it.
> 
> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.

Not nearly enough RAM.  I'd want at least 128MB for a default commandline 
only system.  Maybe, if you really leaned it out, you could get by with 
64MB.   For a GUI like XFCE or IceWM, 256MB and a leaned out system would 
work.

I run a very customized--system file by system file, app by app--Debian 
Etch on a 500MHz, 192MB Thinkpad 240X with XFCE.  Nothing is on it or 
running in the background unless it's absolutely required and necessary.  
It works adequately for my purposes--e-mail, ftp, SSH, word processing, 
and light web browsing.  However, to free up more RAM, I'm thinking about 
ditching XFCE in favor of IceWM.


Stef

philo <philo@privacy.invalid> writes:

>no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
>> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9, knl: 2.4*,
>> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.
>> 
>> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
>> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.

><snip>

>Absurd to try it with that little RAM

>either add more RAM

>or pull the drive out of your old machine
>and pop in in your better one

Almost always impossible since they are different types of memory.
Note that you can probably still get some of the old memory, only is is
10-100 times as expensive as the newest type.




>then install your OS on the 2nd drive and dual boot

Unruh <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
> philo <philo@privacy.invalid> writes:
>=20
> >no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
> >> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk =
9, knl: 2.4*,
> >> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.
> >>=20
> >> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenn=
y,
> >> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.
>=20
> ><snip>
>=20
> >Absurd to try it with that little RAM
>=20
> >either add more RAM
>=20
> >or pull the drive out of your old machine
> >and pop in in your better one
>=20
> Almost always impossible since they are different types of memory.
> Note that you can probably still get some of the old memory, only is is
> 10-100 times as expensive as the newest type.
>=20

If you talk about moving RAM from the 130MB (128?) computer to the 30MB (32=
?) computer, then, it's not what philo suggested.
He suggested moving the hard drive from the old machine to the better one.

--=20
Andr=C3=A9 Gillibert

In <obtxm.25597$lR3.19567@newsfe25.iad> Stefan Patric:

[Snip...]

> Not nearly enough RAM

Betcha this was known going in; IMO, it's another troll stirring a pot.

-- 
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
I toss GoogleGroup (http://twovoyagers.com/improve-usenet.org/).

André Gillibert wrote:
> Unruh <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>> philo <philo@privacy.invalid> writes:
>>
>>> no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
>>>> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk 9, knl: 2.4*,
>>>> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need it.
>>>>
>>>> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Lenny,
>>>> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.
>>> <snip>
>>> Absurd to try it with that little RAM
>>> either add more RAM
>>> or pull the drive out of your old machine
>>> and pop in in your better one
>> Almost always impossible since they are different types of memory.
>> Note that you can probably still get some of the old memory, only is is
>> 10-100 times as expensive as the newest type.
>>
> 
> If you talk about moving RAM from the 130MB (128?) computer to the 30MB (32?) computer, then, it's not what philo suggested.
> He suggested moving the hard drive from the old machine to the better one.
> 


Correct

I said harddrive *not* RAM

also: I did not see where the OP mentioned the RAM type anyway

  This message is in MIME format.  The first part should be readable text,
  while the remaining parts are likely unreadable without MIME-aware tools.

--8323328-2089843061-1254578200=:19869
Content-Type: TEXT/PLAIN; charset=UTF-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: QUOTED-PRINTABLE

On Sat, 3 Oct 2009, philo wrote:

> Andr=C3=A9 Gillibert wrote:
>> Unruh <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>>> philo <philo@privacy.invalid> writes:
>>>=20
>>>> no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running Mandrk=
 9,=20
>>>>> knl: 2.4*,
>>>>> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to need i=
t.
>>>>>=20
>>>>> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install Deb-Len=
ny,
>>>>> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.
>>>> <snip>
>>>> Absurd to try it with that little RAM
>>>> either add more RAM
>>>> or pull the drive out of your old machine
>>>> and pop in in your better one
>>> Almost always impossible since they are different types of memory.
>>> Note that you can probably still get some of the old memory, only is is
>>> 10-100 times as expensive as the newest type.
>>>=20
>>=20
>> If you talk about moving RAM from the 130MB (128?) computer to the 30MB=
=20
>> (32?) computer, then, it's not what philo suggested.
>> He suggested moving the hard drive from the old machine to the better on=
e.
>>=20
>
>
> Correct
>
> I said harddrive *not* RAM
>
> also: I did not see where the OP mentioned the RAM type anyway
>
Except if you have 30megs of ram at this point, it has to be old.  The=20
200MHz Pentium I bought used in mid-2001 to run Linux came with 32megs of
RAM, 2 16meg SIMMs.  I eventually got it up to 96megs by finding suitable
RAM in computers lying on the sidewalk waiting for the garbage.  I guess=20
they were 72pin SIMMs.

This hand me down 1GHz Pentium that I got at the end of 2003 but I think=20
was bought new in 2001 came with a 256meg DIMM, no space for SIMMs so
you aren't likely to get significantly less RAM in there.

Yes, it should be really easy and cheap to find a better computer than one=
=20
that has only 30megs of RAM in it, either someone is throwing it out or
bought at a garage sale.  Since I got the 1GHz Pentium, I haven't brought=
=20
home a computer, because I've assumed the ones I see lying on the sidewalk=
=20
area but the same vintage. But if you have something older, it is easy to=
=20
find something newer, with more RAM and better specs.  The hard drive may=
=20
be missing, it's never clear whether the owner has kept it or trashed it
separately so no information gets loose with it, or someone has already=20
come along and taken the hard drive.  But those are cheap now.

    Michael

--8323328-2089843061-1254578200=:19869--

On Fri, 02 Oct 2009 18:37:22 -0500, Harold Stevens wrote:

> In <obtxm.25597$lR3.19567@newsfe25.iad> Stefan Patric:
> 
> [Snip...]
> 
>> Not nearly enough RAM
> 
> Betcha this was known going in; IMO, it's another troll stirring a pot.

Possible, but I don't think so.  Just sounds like any other Linux tyro.


Stef

Michael Black wrote:
> On Sat, 3 Oct 2009, philo wrote:
> 
>> André Gillibert wrote:
>>> Unruh <unruh-spam@physics.ubc.ca> wrote:
>>>> philo <philo@privacy.invalid> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> no.top.post@gmail.com wrote:
>>>>>> I can't afford to free-up my main-box: with 130MB RAM, running 
>>>>>> Mandrk 9, knl: 2.4*,
>>>>>> but I want a 2.6 kernel installation, for geda, which seems to 
>>>>>> need it.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> So, I've punished myself with trying to [first taste] install 
>>>>>> Deb-Lenny,
>>>>>> kernel 2.6x on a 586, 30 MB RAM spare-box.
>>>>> <snip>
>>>>> Absurd to try it with that little RAM
>>>>> either add more RAM
>>>>> or pull the drive out of your old machine
>>>>> and pop in in your better one
>>>> Almost always impossible since they are different types of memory.
>>>> Note that you can probably still get some of the old memory, only is is
>>>> 10-100 times as expensive as the newest type.
>>>>
>>>
>>> If you talk about moving RAM from the 130MB (128?) computer to the 
>>> 30MB (32?) computer, then, it's not what philo suggested.
>>> He suggested moving the hard drive from the old machine to the better 
>>> one.
>>>
>>
>>
>> Correct
>>
>> I said harddrive *not* RAM
>>
>> also: I did not see where the OP mentioned the RAM type anyway
>>
> Except if you have 30megs of ram at this point, it has to be old.  The 
> 200MHz Pentium I bought used in mid-2001 to run Linux came with 32megs of
> RAM, 2 16meg SIMMs.  I eventually got it up to 96megs by finding suitable
> RAM in computers lying on the sidewalk waiting for the garbage.  I guess 
> they were 72pin SIMMs.

Yep that's what I started out with

a P-75 and it originally had 8 megs of RAM and an 850 meg HD

Back then RAM was expensive but those old SIMMS can be had cheap enough 
now if one can find it on Craig's list.

I eventually unpgraded my p-1 to a p-200, 128 megs of ram and a 20 gig HD.

Dual booted win98 and Red Hat 5.2 and it ran rather well

> 
> This hand me down 1GHz Pentium that I got at the end of 2003 but I think 
> was bought new in 2001 came with a 256meg DIMM, no space for SIMMs so
> you aren't likely to get significantly less RAM in there.
> 
> Yes, it should be really easy and cheap to find a better computer than 
> one that has only 30megs of RAM in it, either someone is throwing it out or
> bought at a garage sale.  Since I got the 1GHz Pentium, I haven't 
> brought home a computer, because I've assumed the ones I see lying on 
> the sidewalk area but the same vintage. But if you have something older, 
> it is easy to find something newer, with more RAM and better specs.  The 
> hard drive may be missing, it's never clear whether the owner has kept 
> it or trashed it
> separately so no information gets loose with it, or someone has already 
> come along and taken the hard drive.  But those are cheap now.
> 
>    Michael

philo wrote:
> 
> Back then RAM was expensive but those old SIMMS can be had cheap enough 
> now if one can find it on Craig's list.
> 
> I eventually unpgraded my p-1 to a p-200, 128 megs of ram and a 20 gig HD.

philo,
Have you checked out the price of 72 pin simms?  They are more expensive 
than dimms!  That is because they don't make it anymore and the ram that 
is out there is like gold.  I upgraded to an IBM PIII that used 184 pin 
PC2100 dimms, unfortunately it will only take 512megs.  I had an old 
homemade 486DX-100 with 64megs, it ran OS/2 really great!

Count Floyd wrote:
> philo wrote:
>>
>> Back then RAM was expensive but those old SIMMS can be had cheap 
>> enough now if one can find it on Craig's list.
>>
>> I eventually unpgraded my p-1 to a p-200, 128 megs of ram and a 20 gig 
>> HD.
> 
> philo,
> Have you checked out the price of 72 pin simms?  They are more expensive 
> than dimms!  That is because they don't make it anymore and the ram that 
> is out there is like gold.  I upgraded to an IBM PIII that used 184 pin 
> PC2100 dimms, unfortunately it will only take 512megs.  I had an old 
> homemade 486DX-100 with 64megs, it ran OS/2 really great!


Yes

simms are expensive if you buy new...
that's why I do a
lot of wheeling and dealing and only rarely buy new parts.

I can usually pick up all the p-1's and P-II's free...
or perhaps pay a nominal fee.

A few weeks back I picked up a whole van full of computers for $12.

Many were fixed up and sold or given away...
and with the rest I stocked up my junk box



OS/2 ?

Heck were my Warp3 install not limited to dial-up

I'd probably still be using it!

philo wrote:
> Count Floyd wrote:
>> philo wrote:
>>>
>>> Back then RAM was expensive but those old SIMMS can be had cheap 
>>> enough now if one can find it on Craig's list.
>>>
>>> I eventually unpgraded my p-1 to a p-200, 128 megs of ram and a 20 
>>> gig HD.
>>
>> philo,
>> Have you checked out the price of 72 pin simms?  They are more 
>> expensive than dimms!  That is because they don't make it anymore and 
>> the ram that is out there is like gold.  I upgraded to an IBM PIII 
>> that used 184 pin PC2100 dimms, unfortunately it will only take 
>> 512megs.  I had an old homemade 486DX-100 with 64megs, it ran OS/2 
>> really great!
> 
> 
> Yes
> 
> simms are expensive if you buy new...
> that's why I do a
> lot of wheeling and dealing and only rarely buy new parts.
> 
> I can usually pick up all the p-1's and P-II's free...
> or perhaps pay a nominal fee.
> 
> A few weeks back I picked up a whole van full of computers for $12.
> 
> Many were fixed up and sold or given away...
> and with the rest I stocked up my junk box
> 
> 
> 
> OS/2 ?
> 
> Heck were my Warp3 install not limited to dial-up
> 
> I'd probably still be using it!
You could have found Warp Connect, or used the hack to get networking in 
Warp 3.  I think guys like Trevor Hemsley could have helped you with 
that one, or any of the guys on the ibm.ps.hardware group.

Count Floyd wrote:
> philo wrote:
>> Count Floyd wrote:
>>> philo wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Back then RAM was expensive but those old SIMMS can be had cheap 
>>>> enough now if one can find it on Craig's list.
>>>>
>>>> I eventually unpgraded my p-1 to a p-200, 128 megs of ram and a 20 
>>>> gig HD.
>>>
>>> philo,
>>> Have you checked out the price of 72 pin simms?  They are more 
>>> expensive than dimms!  That is because they don't make it anymore and 
>>> the ram that is out there is like gold.  I upgraded to an IBM PIII 
>>> that used 184 pin PC2100 dimms, unfortunately it will only take 
>>> 512megs.  I had an old homemade 486DX-100 with 64megs, it ran OS/2 
>>> really great!
>>
>>
>> Yes
>>
>> simms are expensive if you buy new...
>> that's why I do a
>> lot of wheeling and dealing and only rarely buy new parts.
>>
>> I can usually pick up all the p-1's and P-II's free...
>> or perhaps pay a nominal fee.
>>
>> A few weeks back I picked up a whole van full of computers for $12.
>>
>> Many were fixed up and sold or given away...
>> and with the rest I stocked up my junk box
>>
>>
>>
>> OS/2 ?
>>
>> Heck were my Warp3 install not limited to dial-up
>>
>> I'd probably still be using it!
> You could have found Warp Connect, or used the hack to get networking in 
> Warp 3.  I think guys like Trevor Hemsley could have helped you with 
> that one, or any of the guys on the ibm.ps.hardware group.



well I also have an ECS installation that I use.
works fine...but a bit on the slow side

I have looked at the hack to get MPTS imported  in Warp 3
but it seemed like too much work...

maybe a good winter project.

probably mentioned this a hundred time by now...
but those fonts were the best I've ever seen...

maybe I should spend my time importing those fonts onto the machines I'm 
presently using

philo wrote:

> but those fonts were the best I've ever seen...
> 
> maybe I should spend my time importing those fonts onto the machines I'm 
> presently using

philo,
What fonts do you mean?  Warpsans?  I liked that font, but at a fixed 9 
points was a little too small.  Always had to go to Arial 12 in order to 
"see".  Getting older!  I too, have an eCS machine, waiting for the 2.0 
GA version.  Don't know if I will stick around after that however.  Just 
running it as a hobby now.

Count Floyd wrote:
> philo wrote:
> 
>> but those fonts were the best I've ever seen...
>>
>> maybe I should spend my time importing those fonts onto the machines 
>> I'm presently using
> 
> philo,
> What fonts do you mean?  Warpsans?  I liked that font, but at a fixed 9 
> points was a little too small.  Always had to go to Arial 12 in order to 
> "see".  Getting older!  I too, have an eCS machine, waiting for the 2.0 
> GA version.  Don't know if I will stick around after that however.  Just 
> running it as a hobby now.



I will have to go down into my workshop and boot up my old machine to 
see what fonts it was that I liked so much

but in general, I just liked the entire GUI

Though my eCS installation is still usable...
I don't really use that machine any more