Text 3959, 92 rader
Skriven 2005-10-20 12:16:00 av CHARLES ANGELICH (1:123/140)
     Kommentar till en text av MAURICE KINAL
Ärende: software for linspire
=============================

123c7dee8636
linux



Hello Maurice - 

CA>> So ... are you creating a rackmount type system or? 

MK> I have one of those. I got the case From Calgary and added
MK> my own stuff to it. Very nice and I am really happy with
MK> the case itself. The motherboard, a P3 SMP system, leaves a
MK> bit to be desired, mostly due to the bios and a 686a VIA
MK> chip, but it performs quite well. However that is not my
MK> pet project just a tool that I use to build for what DOS
MK> programmers would consider or call embedded systems. The
MK> main difference between what I do and what most embedded
MK> programmers do is to make them less embedded and more
MK> dynamic with minimalized Linux 'installs' from the main
MK> development system which gives them a much needed
MK> kickstart. For that I have used pcmcia to compactflash but
MK> later on also started using usb. Both are good for flashing
MK> systems to all sorts of flash devices. I've also seen
MK> serial based flash devices but decided to instead take
MK> advantage of ide on embedded boards and thuse a pcmcia or
MK> usb flash system was vastly superior for that sort of idea
MK> or so I discovered. The end result is that once 'flashed',
MK> if I can call it that, these can now be mounted onto a
MK> adapter or straight onto the pins of the ide interface on
MK> the target and booted up not unlike regular ide HDs on a
MK> regular PC. 

I read some articles about building something similar to what
you describe to use as unattended long-term recording devices.
It was an interesting concept, one I doubt I would've thought
of even if I had the need for such a device. 

CA>> Well not really no. Compaq distributed it's utilities and
CA>> drivers as floppy image files and the BIOS is also
CA>> accessed via software. 

MK> I remember those. HP used to do the same. I never did like
MK> that idea. Still don't. 

It's my understanding that linux ignores the hardware BIOS and
does it's own detection/configuration etc. or am I mistaken?
That would qualify as a somewhat similar arrangement to what
IBM PS/2s, Compaq, and HP were doing I would think. 

CA>> At the time it was DOS/W31 but that machine also has one
CA>> of my two mini-linux installs with a GUI desktop and an
CA>> older version of Netscape (really horrible as a browser
CA>> but it does work). 

MK> I remember that too. Lynx made everything better though so
MK> all wasn't lost. 

Mine use LINKS2. 

MK> Besides, most of my systems don't even bother with X, let
MK> alone a gui browser. 

Been awhile since I set that GUI install up but I think it uses
tvwm or something like that. 

MK> Some of them don't even have browsers!!! What for? They
MK> don't ever care to surf the web. 

CA>> _think_ it also has OBERON on it too. That machine isn't
CA>> here where I am right now so I can't check. 

MK> I'll take your word on that. 

CA>> I think it would be interesting myself. I would automate
CA>> as much of it as possible and enjoy the challenge. 

MK> No doubt. I still would want BIG bucks to look after all
MK> that though. 

I would guess they _do_ pay BIG bucks for that, yes. 

>
>        ,                          ,
>      o/      Charles.Angelich      \o       ,
>     <|                              |>  __o/
>     / >          USA, MI           < \   __\__
 

--- * ATP/16bit 2.31 * 
... DOS the Ghost in the Machine! http://www.devedia.com/dosghost/
 * Origin: Try Our Web Based QWK: DOCSPLACE.ORG (1:123/140)