reduce base packages

taylorchu · 2011-05-07 00:47:23

updated! 4 packages that are required:
1. kernel26 //the heart of linux
2. pacman //the heart of arch
3. initscripts //well, you need to boot, right?
4. vim // I think you will need this all the time.

There are of course more packages installed just for the dependencies.

Last edited by taylorchu (2011-05-10 07:55:17)

ConnorBehan · 2011-05-07 01:59:12

I'm a little surprised at these "minimal lists." Don't you also need a shell to be able to run any program? And if you don't install any bootloader, does the most recent Arch install automatically load after POST? And I assume by "vi" you just mean "some text editor otherwise you can't configure anything."

falconindy · 2011-05-07 02:15:43

My shed will be blue.

PReP · 2011-05-09 22:30:55

Makes me think, how did people go about making the first text-editor; or, how would one edit raw text without a pre-made tool or a shell of sorts.

Edit: Addition:

Scenario: you have an x86 computer, with a working BIOS, and an empty harddrive.
You will now go about getting an enviroment in which to work.

Rule: you are not allowed to use disc or optical disc media, no usb-thumb drive with premade bootloader, and no net-access for getting an already made boot manager of any sorts.

Where do you start?

Last edited by PReP (2011-05-09 22:35:27)

sudokill · 2011-05-10 01:00:17

PReP wrote:

Makes me think, how did people go about making the first text-editor; or, how would one edit raw text without a pre-made tool or a shell of sorts.
Edit: Addition:
Scenario: you have an x86 computer, with a working BIOS, and an empty harddrive.
You will now go about getting an enviroment in which to work.
Rule: you are not allowed to use disc or optical disc media, no usb-thumb drive with premade bootloader, and no net-access for getting an already made boot manager of any sorts.
Where do you start?

God knows, you'd have to research the invention of computers. The x86 processor wasn't made by hand, it's universes apart from the first processors (which i guess were needed to make faster and better ones). As technology evolves it's easier to make new things because you already have a base to work with that gets better and better. Saying that I don't know anything, all I know is that those people are very clever

PReP · 2011-05-10 10:17:37

sudokill wrote:

PReP wrote:
Makes me think, how did people go about making the first text-editor; or, how would one edit raw text without a pre-made tool or a shell of sorts.
Edit: Addition:
Scenario: you have an x86 computer, with a working BIOS, and an empty harddrive.
You will now go about getting an enviroment in which to work.
Rule: you are not allowed to use disc or optical disc media, no usb-thumb drive with premade bootloader, and no net-access for getting an already made boot manager of any sorts.
Where do you start?
God knows, you'd have to research the invention of computers. The x86 processor wasn't made by hand, it's universes apart from the first processors (which i guess were needed to make faster and better ones). As technology evolves it's easier to make new things because you already have a base to work with that gets better and better. Saying that I don't know anything, all I know is that those people are very clever

If god truly knew, i would see another new dangerous religion in the making..

Joke aside, yeah it's a mind-boggling-thing this, i mean, even LFS starts from an already made working enviroment from which one recompiles and builds a new linux system from sources and such - from what i gather - what would be the step, or several steps, further towards the most hardcore basic base..

I am even trying my true and tested "light a cigarette, ponder the problem and find ways to go about it"-technique, but even that is not coming up with any easy point in the right direction.

As a conclusion, we should be grateful to linus torvalds, the dudes that hacked unix together before that, the people on the various projects one sort of takes for granted (grub, xorg, the kernel, gcc),
and our very hard working and great arch developers, pulling out the greatest base in which to sort and use these projects - they should have a day in their names!

Last edited by PReP (2011-05-10 10:19:31)

Anthony Bentley · 2011-05-10 11:55:45

PReP wrote:

Scenario: you have an x86 computer, with a working BIOS, and an empty harddrive.
You will now go about getting an enviroment in which to work.
Rule: you are not allowed to use disc or optical disc media, no usb-thumb drive with premade bootloader, and no net-access for getting an already made boot manager of any sorts.
Where do you start?

You would bootstrap it on a working computer, write the programs directly to the hard drive in a manner that you can boot from it, then put the hard drive back in the x86 computer. You don’t start with nothing, you start with a working environment elsewhere.

bernarcher · 2011-05-10 13:11:09

PReP wrote:

Makes me think, how did people go about making the first text-editor; or, how would one edit raw text without a pre-made tool or a shell of sorts.
Edit: Addition:
Scenario: you have an x86 computer, with a working BIOS, and an empty harddrive.
You will now go about getting an enviroment in which to work.
Rule: you are not allowed to use disc or optical disc media, no usb-thumb drive with premade bootloader, and no net-access for getting an already made boot manager of any sorts.
Where do you start?

Historically there were computers where you had to input a series of binary bootstrap codes through some physical means, e.g. switches, diode arrays or the like (I remember literally hours playing with the toggles of the veritable Altair microcomputer back in the late 70s). These made some sort of loader device available, usually a paper tape reader from which some simple OS could be loaded, which provided more usable I/O means.

Take a look into computer history. Most of your questions are answered there.

Arch Linux

#26 2011-05-07 00:47:23

Re: reduce base packages

#27 2011-05-07 01:59:12

Re: reduce base packages

#28 2011-05-07 02:15:43

Re: reduce base packages

#29 2011-05-09 22:30:55

Re: reduce base packages

#30 2011-05-10 01:00:17

Re: reduce base packages

#31 2011-05-10 10:17:37

Re: reduce base packages

#32 2011-05-10 11:55:45

Re: reduce base packages

#33 2011-05-10 13:11:09

Re: reduce base packages

Board footer