The OS was written in *assembler*, not machine code. While there is roughly a 1-to-1 mapping between the two, assembly language generally includes such things as macros, pseudoinstructions, and oh, maybe the occasional comment. These are then turned to machine code by the assembler.
While hexdump (or any hex editor) is a good tool to have, I seriously doubt it can regenerate these things from the binary. Hell, may as well run it through a decompiler and see what the original C code would have looked like...
Re:Yes, you are not 100% correct.
on
MenuetOS Debuts
·
· Score: 1
Then for you Apple ][ folk out there... what does 2C 30 C0 do?:-)
BIT $C030
This should produce a pop from the speaker. Reminds me of one of my first assembly programs for the Apple ][; it'd access the speaker much like this, read one of the joystick axes, and then loop back. Depending on the position of the joystick (err... paddle), there would be a different delay. This allowed you to make *the* most annoying squealing sounds just by turning the paddle or moving the stick.
Careful! You're using a very high level definition of "Operating System". A decent Linux-based server and a Linux workstation will have most of the kernel, many libraries, and some command-line utilities in common, but the differences end there.
Most Linux servers will probably have very differently compiled kernels to add support for specific hardware and networking protocols (and related things) while excluding such things as all the funky video, sound, and other things you'd want in a desktop. Of course a decent part of this can also be done with modules... It should be obvious too that the actual software running and installed on a desktop will be completely different than on a server.
If I wanted to turn my desktop machine into an efficient and secure (it's currently behind a firewall) server, it would probably take me the better part of a day installing and uninstalling software, and changing configuration settings all over the place.
You know, I could personally think of many more questions that I'd like to ask Bero. Since he's a slashdot pseudo-regular and might just end up reading this, maybe he should contact the Powers That Be (if they don't get to him first!) and set up an actual slashdot interview where we get to ask him our ten most highly moderated questions.
Some of the most obvious questions are already answered on some of his websites (bero.org comes to mind), but I'm sure we could collectively come up with some that are interesting for both him and us!
That's absolutely true, but using ssh-agent in this way, your actual account has to be compromised now; someone has to log in as you by getting your local password first.
Using only a private key with no passphrase for authentication is slightly less secure because in that case, someone would just need to *obtain* that key somehow. That could be accomplished by exploiting various bugs, using trojan scripts, or just plain old user stupidity (i.e. accidentally emailing it out to a mailing list-- worse things have happened!)
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Actually OpenSSH wasn't developed in the U.S. As part of the OpenBSD project, it was developed internationally (much of it here in Canada) *because* of American restrictions on encryption exports. Take a look at openssh.org for some more info, specifically their history page.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
The password never gets sent to the server, though. That's the key difference. You get a challenge sent to you, and if you can use your private key to sign the challenge, you are allowed access.
Hmmm... The way I understood the article, you're not signing; you're decrypting. The server that you are logging into sends you a random number which it has encrypted using your public key. Ssh on your end then decrypts that number using your private key and sends it back to the server. If it matches what the server originally generated, you're in.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Of course, on those rainy days, big clunky CRTs are great for drying out bike helmets and gloves. There is almost nothing worse than putting on a cold, wet clothing and having to bike home when it's already getting dark out.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
The biggest problem with LCDs is that of fixed resolutions. An LCD screen has a fixed number of pixels, so adjusting the screen resolution is difficult at best and hideously ugly at worst...
Hate to disappoint you, but I don't think these CRTs are going to be any different. These "tubes" accelerate electrons from a cathode the size of the entire screen through a grid of holes with magnets, one hole per pixel. These magnets then redirect the beam slightly, hitting either the red, green or blue phosphors in the front of the screen.
I'd imagine, though that monitors based on this technology would have *much* less flicker than conventional CRT monitors. Since there is essentially one beam per pixel, the speed at which one can accurately scan a single beam around the screen is no longer a limiting factor for refresh rate. The *only* factors should be the bandwidth between monitor and video card, and the latency of the phosphors in the screen.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Because the kit that is being sold in Japan includes a hard-drive, network adapter, vga out, and other goodies, all in one handy (proprietary) package.
That said, it may be possible to use their source code to port Linux to the PS2 in different ways, or even using it to come up with ideas on how to interface conventional hardware to it. As slow as USB is, it might be possible to interface your network and hard-drive through there.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
If it runs Linux properly, Kaffe support should be pretty much automatic. A simple recompile, and there ya go!
Getting a commercial (Sun, IBM, etc.) Java port running would probably be as easy from a technical point-of-view. The only issue would be that you'd have to convince the vendor to do it, a social engineering hack if I ever saw one!
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Too bad there's no way of actually telling that it was taken from a PS2, though. I mean, I probably could take a shot of my current desktop on my pc here and try and claim it's running on my microwave, using the fridge as a fileserver.
I suppose there's no real reason to suspect this'd be faked, though. If the PS2 can run X and Gnome, I'd be surprised if it *did* look different than on a desktop!
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I suppose I may as well start the inevitable thread...
With the Linux kernel and GNU utilities being released under the GPL, does anyone know if the source to the modifications Sony has made to them are available? Even if the US version of the PS2 "kit" never becomes a reality, having this source would probably help people independently port Linux to the machine.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I disagree. There are many uses for this. One that comes to mind almost instantly is as an mp3 player. I can see this possibly being done in two ways.
First, if the PS2 is networked, all it needs to do is boot, and nfs mount the directory with the gigs and gigs of music on your desktop. From there, a simple gui would allow playing of music using the controller pad. Why Linux? It's got decent networking support, and it (hopefully) shouldn't be to difficult to port a player such as mpg123 over to the PS2.
Another alternative would be to burn a minimal kernel and interface software to a CD (or DVD), followed by as many mp3s as can fit on the disk. Essentially this should give you a bootable, playable mp3 disk for the PS2. I realize that this would probably require modification of the actual PS2 unit to recognize the burned disks, though. Again, Linux would be great for this since similar things have already been done for PCs, and development could be done on a regular PC using a cross compiler.
My point is, though, that just because it can run Linux doesn't mean that it should be turned into yet another desktop system or web server. Granted, the PS2 has enough horsepower that it probably *could* do these things, but I think there are many more uses for a powerful-yet-inexpensive kernel on these devices.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I was ready to suggest something along these lines, but you beat me to it!;)
I should probably add that for playing around with things like this, minicom is the best terminal program to use in Linux. Hopefully it's still bundled with most of the distros out there. Use it to send the appropriate AT commands to your modem, and then dial the number from an outside line. If it's all working as expected (and you don't have auto-answer turned on!), you should see "RING 0", "RING 0",... appearing in the terminal for each ring of the phone line.
Now, there may even be a way to get a modem to identify distinctive rings if it doesn't support them, although this will take a lot of magic and a bit of coding. Since most "distinctive" rings are done by spacing the actual rings of the phone line in groups, you could possibly set a timer to measure the timing in between each time the modem sends "RING" into the serial port. Based on the grouping and timings, it might be possible to identify the different distinct rings. This'd probably require a fairly hefty customization of mgetty, though, to get it to work reliably, assuming it can be done at all.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Whoa there, toughguy (heh). Nobody's accusing you of not doing your homework. Both your question and the hardware answer are interesting. Personally I hadn't known until now that such devices exist.
Judging by your response, though, you seem to be looking for a software-only solution. That said, I think the hardware answer should probably work for what you're trying to do if the computer is only supposed to handle *one* of the ring-types. Of course, if you want, one of the ring-types to be a fax line, and the other, say, a bbs, all handled by the same computer, you'd either need two modems or a software solution.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I really wonder, though, if my Palm m100 is someplace I want to run Linux. PalmOS works fine, and does the intended job. If it ain't broke....
You can stop wondering. The m100 (and 105) don't have a flash rom, so you can't upgrade the OS on it. Palm.com's comparison chart of all their models shows which of their current models have a flash rom.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
...In my current job, I submit code to review all the time, but none of the reviewers actually understand it...
In that case, I'd say there are a few serious problems with your working environment. I'll bet that at least one of the following apply:
1. Your code is being reviewed by people that are not programmers. I can't really see anything too productive coming out of this. If you're working at a place where unqualified people are conducting code reviews, maybe you should start looking around a bit for other opportunities
2. You're obfuscating your code (either on purpose, or just out of habit). Anyone who is not commenting their code decently (excessive verbosity is almost as bad as not commenting at all!), or who is writing muddled, unclear code, is hurting the team and company more than helping it. There is a reason code standards exist, and while nobody likes being told how to style their code, they work.
3. You're using Perl.;)
Ok, I just don't like Perl. I know it's got lots going for it, readability and consistency aren't some of them. (I'd better stop now before some militant Perl fanatics show up at my doorstep...)
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Now *that* just brought back a stream of old memories. I used to spend hours and hours playing games on our old Apple//e (a clone, actually). Some of my favourites were Rescue Raiders and Black Magic. Anyone remember those?
I'm pretty sure I can remember the sounds that the old 5 1/4" drive made for each game as it loaded up... Some of the adventure games you could even tell you were about to meet a big monster by the extra disk activity before the next room loaded up.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
With the giant display of scrolling queries (filtered, though) they have in their lobby, I think it's time to start sending little messages to the Google staff using searches.
"Help, I'm stuck in here!!" is an obvious classic to try. If enough of us do it, it might even get noticed...
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I don't think the fact that Netscape uses Motif is the issue here. Take a look at the about: url to see what proprietary stuff is included in Netscape.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
It's not the quantity of documentation that's the problem, it's the *quality* of it-- at least from the perspecive of a newbie.
Chances are that you already have more than enough documentation installed than you'll ever care to read. Ever try running du on/usr/share/doc/? Chances are you'll follow up pretty quickly with 'rm -rf/usr/share/doc'. Man pages, the HOWTOs et al are quite useful, but chances are that the average newbie will either not know where to look for them (or that they even exist), or will have trouble understanding a single word.
Compare this with the documentation included with Windows. This is the complete opposite; there is a fairly consistent interface for it (althought the intuitivity of it is debatable), and it addresses almost all problems a newbie could have. Unfortunately it is completely useless if you ever try and look up something remotely technical in it.
What the Linux community (perhaps through the Linux Documentation Project) needs to do is compile the various documents that are out there into a consistent format and style. If the various distribution vendors would only then make their own distro-specific docs compatilble with this, Linux documentation would become just a bit more cohesive...
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
So my question is, what's the size of the non-development/non-application stuff? What's the size of the kernel plus the essential utilities (most of which are GNU, as RMS points out ad nauseum)?
The question is meaningless. If you want just a bare-bones system that boots and does nothing interesting other than run a shell with a few of our GNU friends (ls, rm, cp, etc.), you'll have a (compiled) size of about a single floppy disk.
If you want a rudimentary firewall, add a bit more. If you want a web server as part of your OS, more still. If you want some form of GUI for a desktop machine, you're including much more-- X, various other libraries such as qt, gtk, etc.
It all depends on what functionalities you consider to be a part of your operating system. This in term, depends on what you're actually wanting to do with the system.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
...But think about it, re-compile the kernel with only support for devices you have installed, drop the alternate desktop packages, and you have a LEAN MEAN FIGHTING MACHINE...
Completely unnecessary. Pretty much every stock distro kernel has almost everything as a module that *can* be a module. Unless you need support for experimental things, just install and delete the modules you know you'll never need. It might be possible to save a few bytes here and there by tweaking a compile, but I've found it generally isn't worth it (unless you're *very* pressed for RAM, or your time is worth next to nothing).
FWIW, I've got a Redhat 7.0 install happily running on a 486 with 24 megs of ram. The whole install fit in under 200 megs of hd space too-- a quick delete of everything in/usr/share/doc can do wonders! Apache & mysql are serving my home lan off this with no problems whatsoever.
Next thing you know RH will be PnP:)
Kernel 2.4 actually *has* isapnp support. It's been around in userspace for quite some time before this.;)
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Slashdot Mirror
The OS was written in *assembler*, not machine code. While there is roughly a 1-to-1 mapping between the two, assembly language generally includes such things as macros, pseudoinstructions, and oh, maybe the occasional comment. These are then turned to machine code by the assembler.
While hexdump (or any hex editor) is a good tool to have, I seriously doubt it can regenerate these things from the binary. Hell, may as well run it through a decompiler and see what the original C code would have looked like...
Then for you Apple ][ folk out there... what does 2C 30 C0 do? :-)
BIT $C030
This should produce a pop from the speaker. Reminds me of one of my first assembly programs for the Apple ][; it'd access the speaker much like this, read one of the joystick axes, and then loop back. Depending on the position of the joystick (err... paddle), there would be a different delay. This allowed you to make *the* most annoying squealing sounds just by turning the paddle or moving the stick.
Gawd, I miss that old machine.
Careful! You're using a very high level definition of "Operating System". A decent Linux-based server and a Linux workstation will have most of the kernel, many libraries, and some command-line utilities in common, but the differences end there.
Most Linux servers will probably have very differently compiled kernels to add support for specific hardware and networking protocols (and related things) while excluding such things as all the funky video, sound, and other things you'd want in a desktop. Of course a decent part of this can also be done with modules... It should be obvious too that the actual software running and installed on a desktop will be completely different than on a server.
If I wanted to turn my desktop machine into an efficient and secure (it's currently behind a firewall) server, it would probably take me the better part of a day installing and uninstalling software, and changing configuration settings all over the place.
You know, I could personally think of many more questions that I'd like to ask Bero. Since he's a slashdot pseudo-regular and might just end up reading this, maybe he should contact the Powers That Be (if they don't get to him first!) and set up an actual slashdot interview where we get to ask him our ten most highly moderated questions.
Some of the most obvious questions are already answered on some of his websites (bero.org comes to mind), but I'm sure we could collectively come up with some that are interesting for both him and us!
That's absolutely true, but using ssh-agent in this way, your actual account has to be compromised now; someone has to log in as you by getting your local password first.
Using only a private key with no passphrase for authentication is slightly less secure because in that case, someone would just need to *obtain* that key somehow. That could be accomplished by exploiting various bugs, using trojan scripts, or just plain old user stupidity (i.e. accidentally emailing it out to a mailing list-- worse things have happened!)
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Actually OpenSSH wasn't developed in the U.S. As part of the OpenBSD project, it was developed internationally (much of it here in Canada) *because* of American restrictions on encryption exports. Take a look at openssh.org for some more info, specifically their history page.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
The password never gets sent to the server, though. That's the key difference. You get a challenge sent to you, and if you can use your private key to sign the challenge, you are allowed access.
Hmmm... The way I understood the article, you're not signing; you're decrypting. The server that you are logging into sends you a random number which it has encrypted using your public key. Ssh on your end then decrypts that number using your private key and sends it back to the server. If it matches what the server originally generated, you're in.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Ummm... There is one. Just browse the topic and see.
As for Borgification of the logo or making other changes to it, I guess some of you haven't been around here long enough to remember this.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Of course, on those rainy days, big clunky CRTs are great for drying out bike helmets and gloves. There is almost nothing worse than putting on a cold, wet clothing and having to bike home when it's already getting dark out.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
The biggest problem with LCDs is that of fixed resolutions. An LCD screen has a fixed number of pixels, so adjusting the screen resolution is difficult at best and hideously ugly at worst...
Hate to disappoint you, but I don't think these CRTs are going to be any different. These "tubes" accelerate electrons from a cathode the size of the entire screen through a grid of holes with magnets, one hole per pixel. These magnets then redirect the beam slightly, hitting either the red, green or blue phosphors in the front of the screen.
I'd imagine, though that monitors based on this technology would have *much* less flicker than conventional CRT monitors. Since there is essentially one beam per pixel, the speed at which one can accurately scan a single beam around the screen is no longer a limiting factor for refresh rate. The *only* factors should be the bandwidth between monitor and video card, and the latency of the phosphors in the screen.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Because the kit that is being sold in Japan includes a hard-drive, network adapter, vga out, and other goodies, all in one handy (proprietary) package.
That said, it may be possible to use their source code to port Linux to the PS2 in different ways, or even using it to come up with ideas on how to interface conventional hardware to it. As slow as USB is, it might be possible to interface your network and hard-drive through there.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
If it runs Linux properly, Kaffe support should be pretty much automatic. A simple recompile, and there ya go!
Getting a commercial (Sun, IBM, etc.) Java port running would probably be as easy from a technical point-of-view. The only issue would be that you'd have to convince the vendor to do it, a social engineering hack if I ever saw one!
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
http://www.ps2linux.com/images/pv/screenshot.jpg
Pretty cool!
Too bad there's no way of actually telling that it was taken from a PS2, though. I mean, I probably could take a shot of my current desktop on my pc here and try and claim it's running on my microwave, using the fridge as a fileserver.
I suppose there's no real reason to suspect this'd be faked, though. If the PS2 can run X and Gnome, I'd be surprised if it *did* look different than on a desktop!
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I suppose I may as well start the inevitable thread...
With the Linux kernel and GNU utilities being released under the GPL, does anyone know if the source to the modifications Sony has made to them are available? Even if the US version of the PS2 "kit" never becomes a reality, having this source would probably help people independently port Linux to the machine.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I disagree. There are many uses for this. One that comes to mind almost instantly is as an mp3 player. I can see this possibly being done in two ways.
First, if the PS2 is networked, all it needs to do is boot, and nfs mount the directory with the gigs and gigs of music on your desktop. From there, a simple gui would allow playing of music using the controller pad. Why Linux? It's got decent networking support, and it (hopefully) shouldn't be to difficult to port a player such as mpg123 over to the PS2.
Another alternative would be to burn a minimal kernel and interface software to a CD (or DVD), followed by as many mp3s as can fit on the disk. Essentially this should give you a bootable, playable mp3 disk for the PS2. I realize that this would probably require modification of the actual PS2 unit to recognize the burned disks, though. Again, Linux would be great for this since similar things have already been done for PCs, and development could be done on a regular PC using a cross compiler.
My point is, though, that just because it can run Linux doesn't mean that it should be turned into yet another desktop system or web server. Granted, the PS2 has enough horsepower that it probably *could* do these things, but I think there are many more uses for a powerful-yet-inexpensive kernel on these devices.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I was ready to suggest something along these lines, but you beat me to it! ;)
... appearing in the terminal for each ring of the phone line.
I should probably add that for playing around with things like this, minicom is the best terminal program to use in Linux. Hopefully it's still bundled with most of the distros out there. Use it to send the appropriate AT commands to your modem, and then dial the number from an outside line. If it's all working as expected (and you don't have auto-answer turned on!), you should see "RING 0", "RING 0",
Now, there may even be a way to get a modem to identify distinctive rings if it doesn't support them, although this will take a lot of magic and a bit of coding. Since most "distinctive" rings are done by spacing the actual rings of the phone line in groups, you could possibly set a timer to measure the timing in between each time the modem sends "RING" into the serial port. Based on the grouping and timings, it might be possible to identify the different distinct rings. This'd probably require a fairly hefty customization of mgetty, though, to get it to work reliably, assuming it can be done at all.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Whoa there, toughguy (heh). Nobody's accusing you of not doing your homework. Both your question and the hardware answer are interesting. Personally I hadn't known until now that such devices exist.
Judging by your response, though, you seem to be looking for a software-only solution. That said, I think the hardware answer should probably work for what you're trying to do if the computer is only supposed to handle *one* of the ring-types. Of course, if you want, one of the ring-types to be a fax line, and the other, say, a bbs, all handled by the same computer, you'd either need two modems or a software solution.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I really wonder, though, if my Palm m100 is someplace I want to run Linux. PalmOS works fine, and does the intended job. If it ain't broke....
You can stop wondering. The m100 (and 105) don't have a flash rom, so you can't upgrade the OS on it. Palm.com's comparison chart of all their models shows which of their current models have a flash rom.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
...In my current job, I submit code to review all the time, but none of the reviewers actually understand it...
;)
In that case, I'd say there are a few serious problems with your working environment. I'll bet that at least one of the following apply:
1. Your code is being reviewed by people that are not programmers. I can't really see anything too productive coming out of this. If you're working at a place where unqualified people are conducting code reviews, maybe you should start looking around a bit for other opportunities
2. You're obfuscating your code (either on purpose, or just out of habit). Anyone who is not commenting their code decently (excessive verbosity is almost as bad as not commenting at all!), or who is writing muddled, unclear code, is hurting the team and company more than helping it. There is a reason code standards exist, and while nobody likes being told how to style their code, they work.
3. You're using Perl.
Ok, I just don't like Perl. I know it's got lots going for it, readability and consistency aren't some of them. (I'd better stop now before some militant Perl fanatics show up at my doorstep...)
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
Now *that* just brought back a stream of old memories. I used to spend hours and hours playing games on our old Apple //e (a clone, actually). Some of my favourites were Rescue Raiders and Black Magic. Anyone remember those?
I'm pretty sure I can remember the sounds that the old 5 1/4" drive made for each game as it loaded up... Some of the adventure games you could even tell you were about to meet a big monster by the extra disk activity before the next room loaded up.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
With the giant display of scrolling queries (filtered, though) they have in their lobby, I think it's time to start sending little messages to the Google staff using searches.
"Help, I'm stuck in here!!" is an obvious classic to try. If enough of us do it, it might even get noticed...
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
I don't think the fact that Netscape uses Motif is the issue here. Take a look at the about: url to see what proprietary stuff is included in Netscape.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
It's not the quantity of documentation that's the problem, it's the *quality* of it-- at least from the perspecive of a newbie.
/usr/share/doc/? Chances are you'll follow up pretty quickly with 'rm -rf /usr/share/doc'. Man pages, the HOWTOs et al are quite useful, but chances are that the average newbie will either not know where to look for them (or that they even exist), or will have trouble understanding a single word.
Chances are that you already have more than enough documentation installed than you'll ever care to read. Ever try running du on
Compare this with the documentation included with Windows. This is the complete opposite; there is a fairly consistent interface for it (althought the intuitivity of it is debatable), and it addresses almost all problems a newbie could have. Unfortunately it is completely useless if you ever try and look up something remotely technical in it.
What the Linux community (perhaps through the Linux Documentation Project) needs to do is compile the various documents that are out there into a consistent format and style. If the various distribution vendors would only then make their own distro-specific docs compatilble with this, Linux documentation would become just a bit more cohesive...
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
So my question is, what's the size of the non-development/non-application stuff? What's the size of the kernel plus the essential utilities (most of which are GNU, as RMS points out ad nauseum)?
The question is meaningless. If you want just a bare-bones system that boots and does nothing interesting other than run a shell with a few of our GNU friends (ls, rm, cp, etc.), you'll have a (compiled) size of about a single floppy disk.
If you want a rudimentary firewall, add a bit more. If you want a web server as part of your OS, more still. If you want some form of GUI for a desktop machine, you're including much more-- X, various other libraries such as qt, gtk, etc.
It all depends on what functionalities you consider to be a part of your operating system. This in term, depends on what you're actually wanting to do with the system.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".
...But think about it, re-compile the kernel with only support for devices you have installed, drop the alternate desktop packages, and you have a LEAN MEAN FIGHTING MACHINE...
/usr/share/doc can do wonders! Apache & mysql are serving my home lan off this with no problems whatsoever.
:)
;)
Completely unnecessary. Pretty much every stock distro kernel has almost everything as a module that *can* be a module. Unless you need support for experimental things, just install and delete the modules you know you'll never need. It might be possible to save a few bytes here and there by tweaking a compile, but I've found it generally isn't worth it (unless you're *very* pressed for RAM, or your time is worth next to nothing).
FWIW, I've got a Redhat 7.0 install happily running on a 486 with 24 megs of ram. The whole install fit in under 200 megs of hd space too-- a quick delete of everything in
Next thing you know RH will be PnP
Kernel 2.4 actually *has* isapnp support. It's been around in userspace for quite some time before this.
"Intelligence is the ability to avoid doing work, yet getting the work done".