3 ms·
> 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 me
by yjftsjthsd-h 3y ago
> 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 retrocomputing, I just think we should acknowledge that that's what we're doing)
- haunter 3y agoYeah agreed. Given the toolchain source is available I wonder how low we can go with a modern kernel and the newest busybox
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoI 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.
- haunter 3y ago>Although, following the build steps with modern sources and toolchain would be an interesting exercise. Might do that this weekend
- FreeFull 3y agoIt would be rather difficult to fit any newer linux kernel onto a floppy, together with all the other software.
- hackneyedruse 3y agoThis article says > The new goal of DSL is to pack as much usable desktop distribution into an image small enough to fit on a single CD, or a hard limit of 700MB.
- yjftsjthsd-h 3y agoFWIW this subthread is about the xwoaf distro, not DSL; the projects have different goals
- mikepurvis 3y agoA lot of it would hinge on how much hardware you were trying to support. Router images can get nice and small because they build a kernel with the exact drivers in the target. Trying to support all the insane variety in laptop wifi, input devices, and power management is probably where a lot of the bloat comes from.
- deleted 3y ago[deleted]