From: drew@juliet.cs.colorado.edu (Drew Eckhardt) Subject: Re: Basic info on LINUX. Date: Thu, 15 Apr 1993 06:55:08 GMT
In article <3V9y2B1w165w@pixie.login.qc.ca> phil@pixie.login.qc.ca (Phil) writes:
> Can anybody out there answer a few elementary questions on LINUX?
>I am familiar with the general concept of the system but I have quite a
>few simple questions. Here goes:
>
>- What are the minimun hardware requirements for decent operation? ( I
> have a 386DX40, 4megs and 120megs )
CPU : Linux runs fine on any processor that can run it. It's very
fast, disk accesses, vi, the VTxxx console will all blaze on a
lowly 386sx-16.
For CPU intensive tasks, like compiling, I'd want at least a
386-33.
Note that memory is more important than raw CPU speed - without
enough, you'll be paging to disk that's 1000 times slower than
real memory.
Memory :
2M is the *bare* minimum on which Linux will run. We've run it
on 2M laptops and not had any problems if we didn't compile anything
(ie, just a few shells, vi, and terminal emulation).
Note that with only 2M, you won't be able to install directly
off of the SLS distribution. Instead, you'll need to boot
single user first (ie no memory eating init, etc), make swap
space, and then do your install.
4M is the *bare* minimum to do any sort of real work.
With 4M, the system will be usable if you aren't running X.
While gcc 1.37 ran fine in 4M with no paging, GCC has grown considerably,
and will page when optomizing in a mere 4M of memory. X will swap some
with the monochrome server, but will still be usable (don't run GCC at
the same time!), with the larger color server, you won't be happy
at all.
8M lets X run happily. You'll still have some paging when running
big applications, but it won't be thrashing. With 8M (I've
pared down the kernel, and turned off BIOS shadowing to
gain a few hundred K) I can keep the load average > 1.0 when
running X and doing builds.
IMHO, you should invest in at least another 4M of memory ($100
if you buy used SIMMs).
More memory will let your cache grow larger, and will mean you
have even less paging, both very good for performance.
Disk :
It depends on how many goodies you want installed, how much
swap you want, etc.
If you pare it down enough, you can fit Linux on virtually
any size partition. Before I got my .12 kernel happy with
the bad blocks on my MFM drive, I ran it from my error
free 10M partition, with all of /bin, /usr/bin, vi,
gcc 1.37, 'C' libraries and other goodies. However,
this isn't very realistic if you want fun toys like
X, Tex, etc.
To handle memory hogging programs like GCC (when compiling
large initialized arrays, GCC can eat 16M of virtual memory!)
you should have a reasonable amount of virtual memory, say
24M, with a bare minimum of 12M if you're running X,
8M if not.
Since Linux doesn't back store, virtual memory is equal
to swap space + real memory, so with 8M of memory you'd
want to dedicate a single 16M partition to swapping.
Linux binaries are *small* because they use shared libraries.
I've run Linux + all of X11R5 + GCC + many other GNU goodies
on a 40M partition (with separate swap, 5M to spare after
kernel sources were installed).
My current set up is 16M of swap + ~95M for Linux. I have
a fairly complete installation, with X11R5, TeX, two
LISP interpreters, and all sorts of goodies like Ghostscript,
both byacc and bison, etc. With kernel sources, .o's and
other cruft lying around, I have over 30M of free space.
So, I'd say a comfortable minimum would be 40M without X and
large numbers of goodies, 60M with X and more goodies,
plus enough swap space to get you a reasonable amount of virtual
memory.
A few other comments on disk :
Like memory, more is always better. If you get the urge to
compile GCC yourself, you'll need over 30M of disk. A make
World on the X11 tape can eat over 150M.
Swapping should be to a partition, since swapping through
the filesystem is much slower. However, Linux supports
multiple swap files/devices, and in an emergency you can
add a swap file to suplement a minimally size swap partition.
>- Recommended hard disk space?
See above.
>- Can Linux run DOS apps? To what extent?
There is a DOS emulator that can handle some real mode BIOS and DOS using
programs. Things that get into hardware beyond the video frame buffer
won't work, 386 programs are out.
>- Is cohabitation of DOS on the same HD simple or a headache?
It's extremely simple - you have separate DOS / Linux partitions,
and can use a master boot record that prompts you for what to
boot when you powerup.
From Linux, you can also directly access your DOS files, with
all necesarry translations performed on text files (ie, CR/LF
combinations become newlines, etc).
>- What level of technical knowledge is required to install it?
With the stock SLS distribution, if everything works correctly
you plug in a disk, insert the second disk, and
follow the instructions.
You'll need to understand partitioning, and other PC basics.
To install separate goodies that have been ported, you'll
need to be familiar with Unix.
To install unported goodies, you may need an understanding
of 'C', and Unix from a programer's level (ie, terminal
handling, replacing /dev/kmem accesses in things like
xload and GNU make with the appropriate /proc reads, etc).
To keep things running smoothly, you should understand
Unix as a user, and have some idea about system Administration -
ie, where things go, what should be in /etc/rc, etc.
>- Where can I find information text files via ftp? (I'm looking for basic
> info, not a whole manual)
tsx.11.mit.edu:/pub/linux/docs
-- Boycott USL/Novell for their absurd anti-BSDI lawsuit. | Drew Eckhardt Condemn Colorado for Amendment Two. | drew@cs.Colorado.EDU Use Linux, the fast, flexible, and free 386 unix |