3 ms·
The article seems atleast 20 years old (Geocities archive). So in that context, your PCB would not have been able to run linux in 2 seconds.
by farseer 1y ago
The article seems atleast 20 years old (Geocities archive). So in that context, your PCB would not have been able to run linux in 2 seconds.
- Tor3 1y agoOn the other hand, when Linux was new (I switched to Linux in early 1992), you could install it all on a floppy and boot in a few seconds. Not much difference really. Just way more flexible with a Linux floppy than a DOS one.. I kept a Linux floppy around for doing various stuff with problematic PCs. It's way more important (or was, at the time) that MS-DOS could run on 8088/8086 and '286, unlike regular Linux.
- userbinator 1y agoyou could install it all on a floppy and boot in a few seconds. The first practically usable Linux kernel was already much bigger than the DOS kernel + shell + many utilities.
- Tor3 1y agoNot sure what you mean by practically usable Linux kernel. It was perfectly possible to use the < 1.0 kernels on a floppy, with enough tools to do useful work.
- zevv 1y agoI'm afraid it would: in 2002 I was involved with the development of a very early wifi AP implementation at Freehosting; this was running uclinux on an ARM7 with a pretty bare kernel and the whole OS fitting in under a megabyte. Booting was already pretty much instantaneous then.
- wobfan 1y agoBut could it change directories with "cd.."? That's the big question.
- keithnz 1y ago20 years old? more like 30-35 years old
- farseer 1y agoThey mention Windows XP, which was released in 2001.
- rascul 1y ago20+ years ago I was able to boot Linux with Busybox on a Pentium 2 in under 5 seconds after the BIOS POST completes.