f



UNIX FOR AN OLD 486

Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.


0
frogw
2/8/2004 4:25:32 PM
comp.unix.bsd.freebsd 391 articles. 0 followers. Post Follow

20 Replies
555 Views

Similar Articles

[PageSpeed] 51

comp.unix.bsd.freebsd is not widely propagated, so you won't
necessarily get much help here (in comp.unix.bsd.freebsd).
See http://www.freebsd.org/support.html for better ideas...
[followups redirected accordingly]

"frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> writes:

> Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.

Nearly all of them.

-- 
Lowell Gilbert, embedded/networking software engineer, Boston area: 
	resume/CV [with username/password "public"] 
	 at http://be-well.ilk.org:8088/~lowell/resume/
0
Lowell
2/8/2004 4:27:13 PM
frogw/wings wrote:
> 
> Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.

Try NetBSD. I have 1.6.1 installed on a 486DX2/66 MHz with 16 MB
RAM. Works great. 
Of course it depends also, what applications/servers you want to
run on that PC. 

CU, Martin

-- 
When you think that Big Brother is watching you, try boring him
to death.
0
Martin
2/8/2004 11:33:19 PM
frogw/wings wrote:

> Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.

Time for a round of "my computer is smaller than your computer".

I've got FreeBSD 4.9 on a 12MB 50MHz 486 DX2.
0
Glen
2/9/2004 3:53:14 AM
"LegionX" <legionx@NOSPAMevilmonks.net> wrote in message
news:c08i4m$2dsk$1@news.cybercity.dk...
> Glen Ditchfield wrote:
> > frogw/wings wrote:
> >
> >
> >>Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> >>with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
> > Time for a round of "my computer is smaller than your computer".
> >
> > I've got FreeBSD 4.9 on a 12MB 50MHz 486 DX2.
>
> Might i ask, what is the use for such an old computer?

I'm working on some unix scripts for work and I need a unix machine to try
some stuff out on at home.  I don't want to dual boot any of my good
machines and this 486 is just setting around.


0
frogw
2/9/2004 6:29:37 PM
"Glen Ditchfield" <GJDitchfield@ACM.org> wrote in message
news:KuDVb.433802$JQ1.100959@pd7tw1no...
> frogw/wings wrote:
>
> > Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> > with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
>
> Time for a round of "my computer is smaller than your computer".
>
> I've got FreeBSD 4.9 on a 12MB 50MHz 486 DX2.

I just downloaded FreeBSD 5.2.1.  I think I'll give try it out since 4.9
worked for you.  Thanks.


0
frogw
2/9/2004 6:31:59 PM
Glen Ditchfield wrote:
> frogw/wings wrote:
> 
> 
>>Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
>>with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
> 
> 
> Time for a round of "my computer is smaller than your computer".
> 
> I've got FreeBSD 4.9 on a 12MB 50MHz 486 DX2.

I've got:
   FreeBSD 4.7 on a 486SX 25MHz w/8MB RAM
& FreeBSD 4.6 on a 386 25MHz w/ 8MB RAM
0
Chuck
2/9/2004 7:58:01 PM
LegionX wrote:
> Glen Ditchfield wrote:
> 
>> frogw/wings wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
>>> with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
>>
>> Time for a round of "my computer is smaller than your computer".
>>
>> I've got FreeBSD 4.9 on a 12MB 50MHz 486 DX2.
> 
> 
> Might i ask, what is the use for such an old computer?

My 486SX 50MHz makes a fine router and firewall for my network of 10 
machines.

And the 386, well... It just pretty much sits in the closet and does SETI
0
Chuck
2/9/2004 8:12:41 PM
Glen Ditchfield wrote:
> frogw/wings wrote:
> 
> 
>>Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
>>with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
> Time for a round of "my computer is smaller than your computer".
> 
> I've got FreeBSD 4.9 on a 12MB 50MHz 486 DX2.

Might i ask, what is the use for such an old computer?
0
LegionX
2/10/2004 3:12:02 AM
>Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
>with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.

I would reccomend FreeBSD 3.x, due to it's support for a lotta obseleted
hardware.
(I haven't been able to get some nics, cd-roms attached via sounds cards,
etc to work with 4.x)

I ran a 486 DX-33 with 16MB RAM and FreeBSD 3.4 for a number of months
without any trouble.


Regards,
Chris


0
Skeleton
2/14/2004 6:20:32 PM
"Skeleton Man" <invalid_email@guestwho.com> wrote in message
news:402e6580_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> >Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> >with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
>
> I would reccomend FreeBSD 3.x, due to it's support for a lotta obseleted
> hardware.
> (I haven't been able to get some nics, cd-roms attached via sounds cards,
> etc to work with 4.x)
>
> I ran a 486 DX-33 with 16MB RAM and FreeBSD 3.4 for a number of months
> without any trouble.
>
>
> Regards,
> Chris
>
>
Thanks!  I was about to install 5.2.  So far 4.8 is the oldest I've found.
I'll keep searching.....


0
frogw
2/15/2004 2:29:17 AM
i just put 5.1...the 5.2 on a 486...


i built the disk on a pentium machine...unpluged the disk and put it in the
486...

N.B.

lst page of v5 book says distribution cdroms use generic kernel built for a
pentium (took me a while to discover that one!)

n.b.2

build a 486 kernel !!! on the pentium then plug the drive inta da 486.

question via email pls


"frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
news:2QAXb.28223$gl2.7412@lakeread05...
>
> "Skeleton Man" <invalid_email@guestwho.com> wrote in message
> news:402e6580_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > >Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486
pc
> > >with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
> >
> > I would reccomend FreeBSD 3.x, due to it's support for a lotta obseleted
> > hardware.
> > (I haven't been able to get some nics, cd-roms attached via sounds
cards,
> > etc to work with 4.x)
> >
> > I ran a 486 DX-33 with 16MB RAM and FreeBSD 3.4 for a number of months
> > without any trouble.
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> > Chris
> >
> >
> Thanks!  I was about to install 5.2.  So far 4.8 is the oldest I've found.
> I'll keep searching.....
>
>


0
capt
2/16/2004 4:24:18 AM
"capt bill" <william_f_fiore_jr@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:wAqdnbd0krec263dXTWc-w@speakeasy.net...
| i just put 5.1...the 5.2 on a 486...
|
|
| i built the disk on a pentium machine...unpluged the disk and put it in
the
| 486...
|
| N.B.
|
| lst page of v5 book says distribution cdroms use generic kernel built for
a
| pentium (took me a while to discover that one!)
|
| n.b.2
|
| build a 486 kernel !!! on the pentium then plug the drive inta da 486.
|
| question via email pls
|
|
| "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
| news:2QAXb.28223$gl2.7412@lakeread05...
| >
| > "Skeleton Man" <invalid_email@guestwho.com> wrote in message
| > news:402e6580_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
| > > >Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486
| pc
| > > >with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
| > >
| > > I would reccomend FreeBSD 3.x, due to it's support for a lotta
obseleted
| > > hardware.
| > > (I haven't been able to get some nics, cd-roms attached via sounds
| cards,
| > > etc to work with 4.x)
| > >
| > > I ran a 486 DX-33 with 16MB RAM and FreeBSD 3.4 for a number of months
| > > without any trouble.
| > >
| > >
| > > Regards,
| > > Chris
| > >
| > >
| > Thanks!  I was about to install 5.2.  So far 4.8 is the oldest I've
found.
| > I'll keep searching.....
| >
| >
|
|
Thanks.  I tried to install the 5.2 and got a fatal trap12 error stating
there were too many holes in the physical memory.


0
frogw
2/16/2004 9:44:14 AM
You could do a CVSUP for the older REL_ENG_3 and use that.  Or the 4.3
kernel was built for 486's still i think.




"frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
news:Wh0Yb.29660$gl2.21866@lakeread05...
>
> "capt bill" <william_f_fiore_jr@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
> news:wAqdnbd0krec263dXTWc-w@speakeasy.net...
> | i just put 5.1...the 5.2 on a 486...
> |
> |
> | i built the disk on a pentium machine...unpluged the disk and put it in
> the
> | 486...
> |
> | N.B.
> |
> | lst page of v5 book says distribution cdroms use generic kernel built
for
> a
> | pentium (took me a while to discover that one!)
> |
> | n.b.2
> |
> | build a 486 kernel !!! on the pentium then plug the drive inta da 486.
> |
> | question via email pls
> |
> |
> | "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
> | news:2QAXb.28223$gl2.7412@lakeread05...
> | >
> | > "Skeleton Man" <invalid_email@guestwho.com> wrote in message
> | > news:402e6580_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> | > > >Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old
486
> | pc
> | > > >with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
> | > >
> | > > I would reccomend FreeBSD 3.x, due to it's support for a lotta
> obseleted
> | > > hardware.
> | > > (I haven't been able to get some nics, cd-roms attached via sounds
> | cards,
> | > > etc to work with 4.x)
> | > >
> | > > I ran a 486 DX-33 with 16MB RAM and FreeBSD 3.4 for a number of
months
> | > > without any trouble.
> | > >
> | > >
> | > > Regards,
> | > > Chris
> | > >
> | > >
> | > Thanks!  I was about to install 5.2.  So far 4.8 is the oldest I've
> found.
> | > I'll keep searching.....
> | >
> | >
> |
> |
> Thanks.  I tried to install the 5.2 and got a fatal trap12 error stating
> there were too many holes in the physical memory.
>
>
>


0
AP200
2/21/2004 5:38:10 AM
older versions of fbsd lack proper pppoe support (sort of needed for verison
dsl)and dont have ufs2 filesystem
that why i went thru the trouble of moving up to v5.x

if you dont need the above... v4.x is just fine



"AP200" <dumbass@keepthespam.com> wrote in message
news:69CZb.54530$jH.349727@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
>
> You could do a CVSUP for the older REL_ENG_3 and use that.  Or the 4.3
> kernel was built for 486's still i think.
>
>
>
>
> "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
> news:Wh0Yb.29660$gl2.21866@lakeread05...
> >
> > "capt bill" <william_f_fiore_jr@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
> > news:wAqdnbd0krec263dXTWc-w@speakeasy.net...
> > | i just put 5.1...the 5.2 on a 486...
> > |
> > |
> > | i built the disk on a pentium machine...unpluged the disk and put it
in
> > the
> > | 486...
> > |
> > | N.B.
> > |
> > | lst page of v5 book says distribution cdroms use generic kernel built
> for
> > a
> > | pentium (took me a while to discover that one!)
> > |
> > | n.b.2
> > |
> > | build a 486 kernel !!! on the pentium then plug the drive inta da 486.
> > |
> > | question via email pls
> > |
> > |
> > | "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
> > | news:2QAXb.28223$gl2.7412@lakeread05...
> > | >
> > | > "Skeleton Man" <invalid_email@guestwho.com> wrote in message
> > | > news:402e6580_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
> > | > > >Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old
> 486
> > | pc
> > | > > >with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
> > | > >
> > | > > I would reccomend FreeBSD 3.x, due to it's support for a lotta
> > obseleted
> > | > > hardware.
> > | > > (I haven't been able to get some nics, cd-roms attached via sounds
> > | cards,
> > | > > etc to work with 4.x)
> > | > >
> > | > > I ran a 486 DX-33 with 16MB RAM and FreeBSD 3.4 for a number of
> months
> > | > > without any trouble.
> > | > >
> > | > >
> > | > > Regards,
> > | > > Chris
> > | > >
> > | > >
> > | > Thanks!  I was about to install 5.2.  So far 4.8 is the oldest I've
> > found.
> > | > I'll keep searching.....
> > | >
> > | >
> > |
> > |
> > Thanks.  I tried to install the 5.2 and got a fatal trap12 error stating
> > there were too many holes in the physical memory.
> >
> >
> >
>
>


0
capt
2/24/2004 4:26:35 AM
"capt bill" <william_f_fiore_jr@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
news:1YOdnSr7E_7nf6fd38DK-w@speakeasy.net...
| older versions of fbsd lack proper pppoe support (sort of needed for
verison
| dsl)and dont have ufs2 filesystem
| that why i went thru the trouble of moving up to v5.x
|
| if you dont need the above... v4.x is just fine
|
|
|
| "AP200" <dumbass@keepthespam.com> wrote in message
| news:69CZb.54530$jH.349727@twister.tampabay.rr.com...
| >
| > You could do a CVSUP for the older REL_ENG_3 and use that.  Or the 4.3
| > kernel was built for 486's still i think.
| >
| >
| >
| >
| > "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
| > news:Wh0Yb.29660$gl2.21866@lakeread05...
| > >
| > > "capt bill" <william_f_fiore_jr@speakeasy.net> wrote in message
| > > news:wAqdnbd0krec263dXTWc-w@speakeasy.net...
| > > | i just put 5.1...the 5.2 on a 486...
| > > |
| > > |
| > > | i built the disk on a pentium machine...unpluged the disk and put it
| in
| > > the
| > > | 486...
| > > |
| > > | N.B.
| > > |
| > > | lst page of v5 book says distribution cdroms use generic kernel
built
| > for
| > > a
| > > | pentium (took me a while to discover that one!)
| > > |
| > > | n.b.2
| > > |
| > > | build a 486 kernel !!! on the pentium then plug the drive inta da
486.
| > > |
| > > | question via email pls
| > > |
| > > |
| > > | "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
| > > | news:2QAXb.28223$gl2.7412@lakeread05...
| > > | >
| > > | > "Skeleton Man" <invalid_email@guestwho.com> wrote in message
| > > | > news:402e6580_1@news.iprimus.com.au...
| > > | > > >Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an
old
| > 486
| > > | pc
| > > | > > >with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
| > > | > >
| > > | > > I would reccomend FreeBSD 3.x, due to it's support for a lotta
| > > obseleted
| > > | > > hardware.
| > > | > > (I haven't been able to get some nics, cd-roms attached via
sounds
| > > | cards,
| > > | > > etc to work with 4.x)
| > > | > >
| > > | > > I ran a 486 DX-33 with 16MB RAM and FreeBSD 3.4 for a number of
| > months
| > > | > > without any trouble.
| > > | > >
| > > | > >
| > > | > > Regards,
| > > | > > Chris
| > > | > >
| > > | > >
| > > | > Thanks!  I was about to install 5.2.  So far 4.8 is the oldest
I've
| > > found.
| > > | > I'll keep searching.....
| > > | >
| > > | >
| > > |
| > > |
| > > Thanks.  I tried to install the 5.2 and got a fatal trap12 error
stating
| > > there were too many holes in the physical memory.
| > >
| > >
| > >
| >
| >
|
Oldest version I could find was 4.8 so.................. I spent the weekend
trying to get it loaded.  I found out that the problem with the 486 causing
the fatal trap12 memory holes error was in the Ram.  I pulled out 2 of the 3
Ram sticks and it loaded.  Unfortunately, it would not boot off the hard
drive.  Only a 120 meg drive though so I was not surprised since I had to
custom slice and label the drive and mount points (and I don't know what I'm
doing).

   Not to worry.  I had an old compaq 4770 and a 6 gig drive, so I tried to
load it too.  Got it to load but never got it to boot off the hard drive
either.  Bios settings looked correct in both machines.  The compaq is
worrisome though.  Bios is not fully accessible unless the factory installed
HD is installed, which it just dawned on me what a possible fix might be.
Once the bios is accessed you have to specify windows or nonwindows
operating systems for the drives.  I worry though that if I specify a
nonwindows drive for the primary I might never get back in the bios to
change it back to windows.  I guess I could slick the reloaded 120 Meg drive
and stick it in the primary with the secondary set to nonwindows OS and plug
the 6 gig drive in there.  Not sure how BSD will load on a secondary or even
if it can?  Boot sequence on the old compaq does not appear to be
configurable.

    In both machines, after loading bsd seemed to be looking for fd0 (the
floppy drive) to boot from.  I noticed in the default boot loader that one
of the lines reads:  #root_disk_unit="0"    #Force the root disk unit
number.  I thought I might try to change this to "1" on the boot floppy
after the HD is loaded and see if it will drop to the HD to boot from?  I
tried using vi in the emergency shell before reboot but could not find a
file that would effect the needed change.  (Yes, I mounted the root drive.
Just couldn't find a boot configuration file to modify.)  Hope all this
helps someone.  These were some hard learned lessons.  Great way to spend
the weekend though.  Time flys by.


0
frogw
2/25/2004 2:52:13 AM
"frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message news:<ZptVb.15882$gl2.4738@lakeread05>...
> Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.

My router/firewall/webserver for my ADSL connections is using NetBSD
with 233Mhz and 16MB RAM. Like in the previous post, the best practice
is try to evaluate and check your current hardware either compatible
and supported or not. Normally, any *BSD can run with any 386
processor architecture. It is just a matter of installation, setup,
configuration and maintenance.

This links provides some other BSD project weblinks:
http://staff.mybsd.org.my/zam4ever/www/link/bsdlink.htm

Hopefully, it will help you.

regards,
zam4ever
0
zam4ever
2/27/2004 12:55:53 PM
In article <ZptVb.15882$gl2.4738@lakeread05>,
 "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote:

> Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.

An 80486 with 24MB of RAM? Must be nice! I just got done installing 
NetBSD 1.5.3 on an 80386 system with 8MB of RAM and a 101MB HD. It's now 
serving web pages with Apache 1.3.29. Despite what the nay sayers say 
this is a great system.

Josh

BTW - To answer your question: NetBSD. 1.5.3 is pretty new (1.6.1 is the 
latest with 1.5.3 being the last of the 1.5.x series. To my knowledge 
1.6 was the only other release between the two). It has support for a 
lot of current technology.
0
Josh
2/28/2004 12:37:09 AM
"Josh McKee" <jtmckee@rmac.know-spam-bogus.net> wrote in message
news:jtmckee-564837.17370827022004@netnews.comcast.net...
| In article <ZptVb.15882$gl2.4738@lakeread05>,
|  "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote:
|
| > Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
| > with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
|
| An 80486 with 24MB of RAM? Must be nice! I just got done installing
| NetBSD 1.5.3 on an 80386 system with 8MB of RAM and a 101MB HD. It's now
| serving web pages with Apache 1.3.29. Despite what the nay sayers say
| this is a great system.
|
| Josh
|
| BTW - To answer your question: NetBSD. 1.5.3 is pretty new (1.6.1 is the
| latest with 1.5.3 being the last of the 1.5.x series. To my knowledge
| 1.6 was the only other release between the two). It has support for a
| lot of current technology.

Believe it or not I spent many many hours playing the original Command &
Conquer and Doom on that old machine.  That's why it has so much Ram (for a
486).   I've also used it to learn how to set up a network, install
secondary drives, memory, windows, etc.....And....drum roll....I used it to
learn how to install free bsd.  Unfortunately, I never did get it to boot
off the hard drive.  I think I'll download that NetBSD you suggested and
give that a try this weekend.  Those old machines are like the energizer
Rabbit.  They just keep running.

Note:  When I was installing FreeBSD, it would not install initially.
Apparently there what were called "memory holes", so I had to take out two
of the chips and drop it to 8 Meg.  Then it installed.


0
frogw
2/28/2004 1:22:02 AM
"frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote in message
news:%2S%b.3801$PY.141@lakeread05...
|
| "Josh McKee" <jtmckee@rmac.know-spam-bogus.net> wrote in message
| news:jtmckee-564837.17370827022004@netnews.comcast.net...
| | In article <ZptVb.15882$gl2.4738@lakeread05>,
| |  "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote:
| |
| | > Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486
pc
| | > with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
| |
| | An 80486 with 24MB of RAM? Must be nice! I just got done installing
| | NetBSD 1.5.3 on an 80386 system with 8MB of RAM and a 101MB HD. It's now
| | serving web pages with Apache 1.3.29. Despite what the nay sayers say
| | this is a great system.
| |
| | Josh
| |
| | BTW - To answer your question: NetBSD. 1.5.3 is pretty new (1.6.1 is the
| | latest with 1.5.3 being the last of the 1.5.x series. To my knowledge
| | 1.6 was the only other release between the two). It has support for a
| | lot of current technology.
|
| Believe it or not I spent many many hours playing the original Command &
| Conquer and Doom on that old machine.  That's why it has so much Ram (for
a
| 486).   I've also used it to learn how to set up a network, install
| secondary drives, memory, windows, etc.....And....drum roll....I used it
to
| learn how to install free bsd.  Unfortunately, I never did get it to boot
| off the hard drive.  I think I'll download that NetBSD you suggested and
| give that a try this weekend.  Those old machines are like the energizer
| Rabbit.  They just keep running.
|
| Note:  When I was installing FreeBSD, it would not install initially.
| Apparently there what were called "memory holes", so I had to take out two
| of the chips and drop it to 8 Meg.  Then it installed.
|
|

Almost forgot,  anyone know a good website for really obsolete drivers?
When I installed that Unix, I erased a driver for an ISA serial port
controller card (thus no mouse now).  The company that made the controller
went out of business some time (many years) ago.


0
frogw
2/28/2004 1:36:36 AM
In article <%2S%b.3801$PY.141@lakeread05>,
 "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote:

> "Josh McKee" <jtmckee@rmac.know-spam-bogus.net> wrote in message
> news:jtmckee-564837.17370827022004@netnews.comcast.net...
> | In article <ZptVb.15882$gl2.4738@lakeread05>,
> |  "frogw/wings" <abcde@asd.net> wrote:
> |
> | > Can anyone tell me what version/flavor of unix will run on an old 486 pc
> | > with 24mb of ram?  Thanks.
> |
> | An 80486 with 24MB of RAM? Must be nice! I just got done installing
> | NetBSD 1.5.3 on an 80386 system with 8MB of RAM and a 101MB HD. It's now
> | serving web pages with Apache 1.3.29. Despite what the nay sayers say
> | this is a great system.
> |
> | Josh
> |
> | BTW - To answer your question: NetBSD. 1.5.3 is pretty new (1.6.1 is the
> | latest with 1.5.3 being the last of the 1.5.x series. To my knowledge
> | 1.6 was the only other release between the two). It has support for a
> | lot of current technology.
> 
> Believe it or not I spent many many hours playing the original Command &
> Conquer and Doom on that old machine.  That's why it has so much Ram (for a
> 486).   I've also used it to learn how to set up a network, install
> secondary drives, memory, windows, etc.....And....drum roll....I used it to
> learn how to install free bsd.  Unfortunately, I never did get it to boot
> off the hard drive.  I think I'll download that NetBSD you suggested and
> give that a try this weekend.  Those old machines are like the energizer
> Rabbit.  They just keep running.

These older computers are great for learning the basics of computers. I 
am amazed at how useful they are. I can't believe that people think that 
these things are worthless.

> Note:  When I was installing FreeBSD, it would not install initially.
> Apparently there what were called "memory holes", so I had to take out two
> of the chips and drop it to 8 Meg.  Then it installed.

FreeBSD wouldn't install on my 80386 system either. I don't think that 
the standard distribution will work on this system. This led me to 
NetBSD. I had a number of problems with NetBSD versions prior to 1.5.3. 
The installation would hang most of the time. Though this might have 
been due to an 8 chip SIMM that was mixed with 9 chip SIMMs. If you're 
looking for an early version of NetBSD let me know...I have version 
1.3.2. Since I was able to install 1.5.3 on a system with lower specs 
than you system this probably won't be necessary.

They make great systems. Too bad that people think they need the latest.

Josh
0
Josh
2/28/2004 2:19:22 AM
Reply: