Slashdot Mirror
Linux on Older Hardware
sparrow_hawk writes: "One of Linux's strengths has always been the wide variety of older/obsolete hardware it supports. However, most modern distributions seem to assume that the user has a brand-new machine with processor and RAM to spare. Linux Journal reports on the RULE project (Run Up2Date Linux Everywhere). They are trying to come up with a low-resource-requirement, easy-to-use Linux installation for use on older hardware, intended as an option when you install Red Hat Linux. The FAQ has more information."
Why not just use Slackware or Debian? Both have text-based installers and they let you choose which packages you want and don't want. I don't get it.
Give it away!!!!!
There are entire countries with very few computers out there. There are plenty of places around with reasonable power (nothing that a filtering UPS can't handle) but few PCs. They would love to have the latest and greatest but if they get a good old 486, they would be quite happy as long as they can use it.
Sorry, it won't un XP and you can't legally buy 95 for it or Win 3.11. This is where a mini-Linux can be particularly useful.
So they have to create their own software? No worries, man-hours are cheap there (I'm not being sexist here, women hours have a greater real value as they have to do all the hard work).
AMD 1800+ mobo/CPU combo sells for under $300
But the PPro 200 hanging on my wall at home was FREE. As in beer. Which means i could run something like RULE on it to serve the approximately 2 hits per month to my personal web page and use the $300 to buy more beer. The point is, people shouldn't have to spend $300 just to have a decent system while perfectly usable hardware is ending up in the dump.
The only people who need Linux to run on old hardware are the Luddites who refuse to part with their old equipment, and they are nothing but an albatross around the neck of the Linux community
It's not like writing less bloated code is a bad thing. Crapping out code that does stuff is not hard. If Linux was just a bunch of bloatware kludged together to barely work, it would require a lot less effort. (Hell, it'd probably be done.) The hard part is designing a good system, and that benefits everybody.
Older machines generally run cooler than the newest Athlons and P4's. If what you're looking for is a reliable machine to be a firewall, dns, router, print server, etc., then you want reliability. Ever seen a HSF die on a 1GHz+ Athlon? The machine will crash. Hopefully, the CPU will still work once you replace the fan. I've had the HSF on my old PPro 166 go out twice. The machine just keeps running. Oh yeah, it's actually a 150 overclocked to 166. And it's perfect as a firewall router machine. Before I tripped over the power cord, I had an uptime of 158 days. Before that, it was something like 109 days.
Anyway, the new systems are almost entirely the same from the software's point of view. They still use 32 bit PCI and 16 bit ISA buses. Yes, even if you don't have ISA slots, there's still an ISA bus there on the "south bridge" for the serial ports, parallel ports, keyboard port, mouse port, etc.
Access to memory is the same for a P4 as it is for an original Pentium. The instruction set of the processor abstracts access to memory. As long as you can compile a kernel that doesn't use P4-specific or Athlon-specific instructions, then you can run it on an old Pentium (or even an old 386, which is what Linus designed it for, IIRC). And as long as you can compile a kernel that disables drivers for devices you don't have, then you'll be able to use it on an old machine.
Cryptnotic
My other first post is car post.
Basing this distro on RedHat is probably the only innovation offered up here; I assume this is where the relative ease of use of the resulting distro comes from. As for minimal resource distros, you needen't go all that far... linux.org has an interesting list.
True, most of the minimal resource distros there lack things such as X and decent installers.
Besides, imho the proper way to install a minimal requirements linux on a machine is Linux from Scratch, though this, to reiterate a previously made point, sort of blows the whole 'ease of use' issue out of the water.
So my understanding would be that RULE is linux for the poor desktop.
This, by the way, could be the main thrust of the desktop push; windows pretty much has the high-end desktop market wrapped up; why not stage an attack from the ranks of those 486's stashed away in the closet?
Blearf. Blearf, I say.
Oh, how I wish Moore's Law would finally come to an end soon, or at least come to the point that it becomes impractical for the mass market to bear the cost of supporting its continued geometric growth. The factuality of Moore's Law is one of the biggest problems with the computer market: it's truth means that the market is not stable. This allows software makers to become sloppy with their design decisions because they wind up thinking, "Oh, it's slow now, but in 18 months the top of the line systems will double in power and then have enough computing power to run this kind of bloated crap I'm putting out without being as slow as a tired snail." It's as much true of the mainstream Linux distro makers as much as it is true of Microsoft and other proprietary software vendors.
Just for my workaday Linux distro, Red Hat 7.1. I for the life of me cannot understand why in heaven's name I need to install Kerberos to install the RPM package for CVS or LPRng. I don't have a Kerberized network and have no intention of setting such a creature up anytime in the near future, and likely it's true for most everyone. Or why I'm forced to install Japanese TTF fonts (xtt-fonts) just to get GhostScript up and running, or why printconf has to have a Kanji converter (nkf). I don't read Japanese, and I imagine the vast majority of the users of Red Hat's standard edition will never have any need to view, much less print, a Japanese-language document. The list of odd dependencies can go on and on ad nauseam, and there are many other signs of bloat. It's this kind of bloat that makes it impossible to run an up to date Linux distro on older hardware.
The other problem comes from hardware manufacturers, which is why unless Moore's Law comes to an end someday, this trend is going to keep going. And never mind us folks whose incomes cannot support a major hardware upgrade every 18 months. When a new technology appears, they stop making the old technology almost instantly. Can you still buy EDO SIMM's? Can you still buy a non-AGP video card? Well, unless you go to a surplus shop, probably not. Because of Moore's Law and its effect on the market, obsolete hardware has a way of becoming impractical or even impossible to maintain at some point, which is why everyone, even us in the third world who don't have a lot of disposable income and can't constantly support hardware upgrades, is eventually forced to upgrade.
While this project's aims are commendable, I wouldn't hold out too much hope for a universal adoption of its philosophy, not until Moore's Law comes to an end and the computer hardware market stabilizes as a result. Until then, I hope they remain true to the vision and not succumb to the temptations that have created the bloated monstrosities common nowadays.
Qu'on me donne six lignes écrites de la main du plus honnête homme, j'y trouverai de quoi le faire pendre.
You are obviously not unemployed with a very limited income. As a computer enthusiast with very limited money I pick up bits and pieces when possible, just the other day I got a 10G hard drive for my old 166, and because it's Linux, the kernel deals with it :-)
There is also the market for recylced computers, plently of people pick up computers which range from 486s all the way to the dizzy hights of 166s.
Do you want these people to have to use Win95? That's what they get installed on them, and it would be good to offer a Linux alternative.
As a side note, recycle computer places can be great for picking up pieces of hardware which shops can't supply, old ISA network card, different types of memory ect
First of all, there is already a "modified" RedHat out there, Peanut linux, which can be installed on more minimal systems. Second, Slackware and Debian, which use simple text based installers, can already be installed on machines with as little as 8 megabytes of RAM, and they aren't cut-down mini-distros, but real distributions which include lots of packages and can scale to almost any task. RedHat, with its resource-guzzling graphical installer and auto-configuration systems (which are absolutely useless and border on counter-productive on old machines with lots of non-PnP ISA hardware), is, with the possible exception of Mandrake, the worst possible basis I can think of for a minimalist linux distribution.
When I saw this, what came to mind was my memory of having installed Slackware 3.2 (kernel 2.0.30 IIRC) on a 386SX with 4 megabytes of RAM about 4 years ago. And I ran X on it (sort of)! To think that their target is "32mb or less", when the system requirements of quite a bit of the base software have not changed a lot, is ridiculous. There is a need for something that can install on machines with really low memory...I don't think the trick i used to get slackware 3 on my 386 (not mounting the initial root FS on a ramdisk, creating a swap partition and adding it immediately, using two floppy drives) would work with current versions of slackware. But this isn't it, not even close.
"(Man) tries to live his own life as if he were telling a story. But you have to choose: live or tell." --Sartre