Tiny core on Eden ulv 500MHz cpu

[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]

...
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.
...

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]

...
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.
...

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?

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]

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.

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

[Stefann]

It gets very off topic from original post, not sure that is a problem.

Anyway, it’s an EDEN ULV 500MHz cpu. Formally that is not i386 because that would be intel. Formally it “supports x86 instruction set”. I included i386 because that is of “comparable power” and nobody knows EDEN.

Anyway
I have Tiny Core already running from booted USB. I can already operate fully headless via VNC, samba and ssh. So I guess concerns on support are not so high now. Need to run it for few continuous days before being sure though.

[Leee]

Sorry - I thought it was some seriously old tech. 

[Stefann]

Sorry - I thought it was some seriously old tech. 

Ehh….. I guess “my sorry”.
I’m actually used to explaining that my home-control computer is seriously slow. Not comparable to i3-slow versus i7.
Tiny Core forum is clearly a different league.

I bought it in 2008 for about 200euro (approx 200$) as fanless, silent, very low power, mini computer.

Since the DSL to Tinycore upgrade is far from obvious I concluded I would need a “development workstation for testing”.
Wow… I was able to score an amazing double speed, double storage “development workstation” from the local equivalent of eBay for the incredible price of 10euro (10$)
(Hp t510 thin client).

Yes, I’m having fun.

[Leee]

Sorry - I thought it was some seriously old tech. 

Ehh….. I guess “my sorry”.
I’m actually used to explaining that my home-control computer is seriously slow. Not comparable to i3-slow versus i7.
Tiny Core forum is clearly a different league.

I bought it in 2008 for about 200euro (approx 200$) as fanless, silent, very low power, mini computer.

Since the DSL to Tinycore upgrade is far from obvious I concluded I would need a “development workstation for testing”.
Wow… I was able to score an amazing double speed, double storage “development workstation” from the local equivalent of eBay for the incredible price of 10euro (10$)
(Hp t510 thin client).

Yes, I’m having fun.

Is the Via Eden CPU in the T510 equivalent to the one in your home control unit?  I'm running 32 bit Tiny Core 14.0 on a a T520 - but the T520 is AMD based so maybe not comparable.

[Stefann]

Continuation from below thread as it went extremely off topic
https://forum.tinycorelinux.net/index.php/topic,27183.msg174692.html#msg174692

The computer that controls my home and that I’m “in the process of bringing from Damn Small Linux to TinyCore  is an Eden ulv 500MHz cpu.
That is 1Watt, 32 bit, single core
Ulv stands for “ultra low voltage” so it does not run fast but is very suitable for “low energy use 24/7 homecontrol system application”.

The HP t510 has  a VIA Eden X2 U4200 (1 GHz, 2 cores),
That is 9W, 64 bit
So it uses 9x more power, I don’t want to run this 24/7, but it has 2x speed, 2x cores. So i started using it as my “development workstation” which is a very luxurious title for a 12year old computer that I bought for 10euro (10$) from an eBay equivalent.  I run it on 32bit tinycore to be compatible with my target device.
I’m running both computers “headless”. After initial install using monitor/keyboard/mouse I now access them via vnc, ssh and samba from my MacBook.


The hp t520 has a Processor/Chipset
AMD GX-212JC 1.2GHz dual-core SOC APU with AMD Radeon HD Graphics*
This is the one you are using.
It is also 64bit (but of course you can run it on 32bit). It’s from 2014 which is 2 years newer than the 510 so will be faster.

Sorry - I thought it was some seriously old tech. 

Ehh….. I guess “my sorry”.
I’m actually used to explaining that my home-control computer is seriously slow. Not comparable to i3-slow versus i7.
Tiny Core forum is clearly a different league.

I bought it in 2008 for about 200euro (approx 200$) as fanless, silent, very low power, mini computer.

Since the DSL to Tinycore upgrade is far from obvious I concluded I would need a “development workstation for testing”.
Wow… I was able to score an amazing double speed, double storage “development workstation” from the local equivalent of eBay for the incredible price of 10euro (10$)
(Hp t510 thin client).

Yes, I’m having fun.

Is the Via Eden CPU in the T510 equivalent to the one in your home control unit?  I'm running 32 bit Tiny Core 14.0 on a a T520 - but the T520 is AMD based so maybe not comparable.

[WombatCrew]

When transitioning from Damn Small Linux to Tiny Core make sure all necessary libraries are available. Try using tools like tc-install for managing applications. You might also consider installing aditional extensions that could assist in the migration

[Stefann]

Thanks,
Yes I make sure to have all libraries
the transition is basically a brand-new OS install and brand-new application install, no re-use of the dsl-applications but all from the tc apps browser
By now I have it running on my second test system:
tiny core,
vnc, ssh, samba, apache, php, gcc, libusb: all standard from the apps browser
Getting it to work meant "editing the configuration files" and making sure they are persistent using the .filetool.lst file.
I lso was able to compile and test my application and it succeeded to compile and run on my test system, still without I/O.
I also was able to boot the target system with a Tinycore USB so that is confirmed as well.
Next step will be to test the application on the target system,. That will likely be next weekend.

[Leee]

I'm curious to hear how it works out.

[Stefann]

Holy moly…….. it works!

I’m not surprised I got it to work.
I AM surprised how easy that went.

Basically…
- I had to navigate my way on getting tiny core and all packages to work on my “development station”, a used 10euro hp t510 thin client. Nothing very difficult but as it’s my first journey into tiny core “some growing pains”.
- biggest pain was actually to get my 1st bootable tiny core usb. I had to manually get the syslinux bootloader on it which was difficult as I had to do that with my old damn small Linux that refused to do the newer syslinux versions. I had to select a “half way” version of syslinux to get it to work.
Once I had the 1st crippled tinycore functioning I used the internal tool to create  non compromised  bootable  tiny core USB’s. That was easy peasie.
- I was able to compile my application. The biggest challenge was that I use some pretty low level code that works with both libusb (via compact library) and libusb-1.0. This is not ideal but unless I rewrite my x10 drivers I have no way of leaving the old libusb.
- tested the compiled program on the hp510 which nicely worked, but all I/O still disabled as that is connected to my target machine.

Then today…
- I got everything on a bootable usb
- and booted the target machine.
Bang… worked at 1st try.

So…
- I had compiled the program on the hp510 which is a dual core 1G Eden 64bit cpu, on which I had put the 32bit tinycore.
- not only had I created a bootable usb with tinycore on that. I also had compiled my application on that.
- tinycore worked at 1st try
- application worked at 1st try without recompilation on the 500MHz single core 32bit machine.
- usb drivers for 1wire network and x10 gateway functional at 1st try. Application running at 1st try.

Wow… as said… I definitely had expected to get this to work. But not as smooth as this.

Only inconvenience I currently have is that the target device ignores the bootorder settings from the bios. I did set it to “usb first”, but it ignores that. I have to completely disable boot from internal drive (to disallow the baseline damn small Linux to boot) to het tiny core booting from usb.
The inconvenience is that this requires to hookup monitor and keyboard which is inconvenient as the computer is in  a crammed utility area.

Any advice is welcome but I can live with it.
It now works. I will let it run for a few days. Than load all to the internal drive so will need to hookup monitor/keyboard one more time to re-enable boot from internal drive.

Cool!

And many thanks to especially @Rich for helping me through.

[Stefann]

A,
No need to help me…

I guess running fdisk on the active disk and toggle the bootflag with the “a” command will make the active disk non-bootable and will at next boot start at the other disk.

A bit risky if you have only 1 computer but as I have my hp t510 to create bootable usb drives I can always get back to live.

Did not test this yet but I think it will work. And if not I need to hook on monitor/keyboard.

Note: I never knew “a” was a toggle. I so far used it only to “set” the bootflag.