Off-Topic > Off-Topic - Tiny Core Lounge

Tiny core on Eden ulv 500MHz cpu

(1/6) > >>

Stefann:
Yes,
That is indeed what I found,
Ddwrt or openwrt.
I have 2 linksys in some box collecting dust.
It would be fun, but it will have to wait.
I’m now in full transition of replacing damn small Linux with tiny core on my small homecontrol computer.
Last weekend I got Tiny core functional on a 2nd machine.
Now I want to get the full dsl stuff functioning on a side-booted tiny core usb on the primary machine.
If all works at some moment I will have to “jump”… erase dsl and install tiny core on the main flash.
That will be kind of a “no return” because I don’t really trust my dsl-backups.
That’s actually one of the reasons the upgrade is needed, in order to keep it functioning I had to tweak so much on the dsl install that I’m not sure that it’s all on the backups I have.
Example: I had to compile gcc to be able to use some libraries I needed… the compile took 5 hours. And I’m not completely sure I have all binaries in backup…..

Having said that…
I already love tiny core!
The concept op “mounting application on boot” is crazy clever and avoids a lot of clutter.

Leee:

--- Quote from: Stefann on August 01, 2024, 12:16:06 PM ---...
I’m now in full transition of replacing damn small Linux with tiny core on my small homecontrol computer.Last weekend I got Tiny core functional on a 2nd machine.
Now I want to get the full dsl stuff functioning on a side-booted tiny core usb on the primary machine.
If all works at some moment I will have to “jump”… erase dsl and install tiny core on the main flash.
That will be kind of a “no return” because I don’t really trust my dsl-backups.
...
--- End quote ---
If you can boot the target computer from the USB stick at all, there's no reason you can't do that indefinitely and just leave DSL intact until you're really comfortable with Tiny Core.  I have, for instance, run TC from a USB stick for years while leaving a working MS Windows installation intact and untouched on the hard drive.  In my use cases, I've never even noticed a performance penalty for  running Tiny Core from USB vs running it from a hard disk.  And one can always still use the hard disk for bulk storage if it has plenty of free space.

Are you using legacy DSL, as opposed to the "2024" DSL?  As a former DSL user myself, I'm curious - What sorts of home control functions do you use it for?  And why did you choose DSL?

Stefann:

--- Quote from: Leee on August 01, 2024, 01:31:42 PM ---
--- Quote from: Stefann on August 01, 2024, 12:16:06 PM ---...
I’m now in full transition of replacing damn small Linux with tiny core on my small homecontrol computer.Last weekend I got Tiny core functional on a 2nd machine.
Now I want to get the full dsl stuff functioning on a side-booted tiny core usb on the primary machine.
If all works at some moment I will have to “jump”… erase dsl and install tiny core on the main flash.
That will be kind of a “no return” because I don’t really trust my dsl-backups.
...
--- End quote ---
If you can boot the target computer from the USB stick at all, there's no reason you can't do that indefinitely and just leave DSL intact until you're really comfortable with Tiny Core.  I have, for instance, run TC from a USB stick for years while leaving a working MS Windows installation intact and untouched on the hard drive.  In my use cases, I've never even noticed a performance penalty for  running Tiny Core from USB vs running it from a hard disk.  And one can always still use the hard disk for bulk storage if it has plenty of free space.

Are you using legacy DSL, as opposed to the "2024" DSL?  As a former DSL user myself, I'm curious - What sorts of home control functions do you use it for?  And why did you choose DSL?

--- End quote ---
Yes I have tinycore functional the target computer from USB. VNC, samba and ssh are all working.
gcc compiler and apache are still "todo"
And the homecontrol application itself has not been tested yet.
Indeed I can & will run from USB before installing on the CFcard. But... it normally uses all usb-ports. When testing with tiny core on usb I need to sacrifice my energy-meter reading that is normally using that usb port. So... not something I want to do for weeks.
I will install on CFcard when feeling comfortable but it will still be a big thing.

I started the project in 2008. Long before the raspberry Pi existed, before home assistant was a thing.
The computer is a ULV 500MHz EDEN i386 1W cpu with 1G RAM.
it currently runs on damn small linux "legacy" from 2008.
I did choose it because it could run frugal in ram which I tweaked to having only 1 disk-access per 24hr (being the daily logging write) which keeps the flashdrive functioning.
Also damn small linux is "damn small" which is needed when running in ram and having only a flashdrive as "hard drive".
This 2008 project ws my very first linux experience so I'm sure I ended up with a "more than necessary cluttered configuration".

t.b.h., I don't like the DSL-2024, in my opinion it "misses the point", but everybody can do what they like.

Anyway,... I learned that Robert, the founder, actually started at DSL and did tiny core afterwards. I think that "shows". It's still early days for me but Tinycore seems to me the "improved DSL":
- frugal install like DSL
- much better apps-handling by "mounting" tgz files instead of either in backup or persistent /opt

And of course its "maintained".
So... I'm basically upgrading from linux 2.4.31 to 6.6.8 now. Whopping!

Leee:
That old cpu might be a sticking point - I'm pretty sure Tiny Core has always been targeted at 486 and later CPUs and even that sometimes causes problems when an "and later" instruction slips through and a 486 barfs on it.

I haven't tried DSL-2024 and, tbh, don't plan to.  It doesn't sound at all appealing to me when I've got my Tiny Core setup configured pretty much the way I want it.

CNK:

--- Quote from: Leee on August 01, 2024, 10:54:54 PM ---That old cpu might be a sticking point - I'm pretty sure Tiny Core has always been targeted at 486 and later CPUs and even that sometimes causes problems when an "and later" instruction slips through and a 486 barfs on it.

--- End quote ---

It looks like they're not really limited to the i386 instruction set, the list on Wikipedia shows they all support some later extensions.

Navigation

[0] Message Index

[#] Next page

Go to full version