Is Gentoo usable on a 486?

tecknojunky · Posted: Thu Jan 16, 2003 2:51 am Post subject: Is Gentoo usable on a 486?

Not without problems, I got it installed on my laying-around 486.

Full Spec:
CPU: Intel 80486 DX2/66
Memory: DRAM 4x4MB + 4x1MB (All 36 pins 70ns)
Hard Drive: Samsung IDE UDMA33 3GB (or so)
Video: Trident (some model) 256Kb
Nics: 2x 3Com 3C509 ISA 16bits
All the usual rest for junks (serial mouse, monitor, bla bla).

Gentoo spec:
Kernel: 2.4.20
CPU type: Intel 386
Everything is modular except boot time needed.
File system: Reiserfs
Compile options:
USE="-X" (of course)
CHOST=i386-pc-linux-gnu
CFLAGS="-march=i386 -pipe -fomit-frame-pointer"
Compiler: gcc 3.2.1

Once booted, it runs suprisingly smoothly for a 2.4.20 kernel (compares very well to the Freesco 0.3.0 that used to run on it which use a 2.0.39 kernel). Running top on a "plain" configuration (that is, minimal services) and you can see that top itself is the process taking the most juice out of the cpu

zojas · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 8:45 pm Post subject: Re: Is Gentoo usable on a 486?

zojas · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 8:49 pm Post subject: Re: Is Gentoo usable on a 486?

tecknojunky · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 9:16 pm Post subject:

The i386 flag works just fine on my 486. Well, I think. I never succesfully got everything working like I wanted with gentoo, that, on whatever machine I tried it on. Always some little thing not quite ok and you must than analyse the whole system to try to put your finger on it. I blame it mostly on my newbiness, but also in part to Gentoo's lack (if any) of intuitivity.

I sometime feel like gentoo makes things more complicated than needed. I wish sometimes I could just edit the scripts but I can't because they will get overwritten at some point (which I often don't know when). For example, try to set LS_OPTIONS=' --color=auto -F' in /etc/env.d/00basic. You'll see that something is wrong with that. Obviously, 00basic is not simply imported into another script ( . /etc/env.d/00basic) otherwise bash would leave the = alone.

About java. I got that compiled also on all my system because I was unaware that gcc even supported that. I realised that when, like you, I tought this gcc thing was long to build. The installation document does not emphasize enough (does it?) on what I considere a critical step in installing gentoo, and that's setting the proper USE variable for your needs. So, even gentoo is bloatedware (to some extent) when you start with it because you blindly assume it will not install anything without your holly permission. How wrong was I

Like I often say, I'm indugent because Gentoo is being put togheter, still. But as it is, it's far from being perfect yet (to my own taste anyway)
_________________
(7 of 9) Installing star-trek/species-8.4.7.2::talax.

zojas · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 10:01 pm Post subject:

I think the compiled code will just be faster if you use 486 rather than 386.

if you have CONFIG_PROTECT set (or even at the default) nothing in /etc should ever be overwritten by portage.

in my /etc/make.globals, I have this line:

tecknojunky · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 11:00 pm Post subject:

486 vs 386: maybe so, but then the binaries would not run at all on a 386 woudln't they.

CONFIG_PROTECT: There are a few (a lot) of little twists like that that i'm unaware of.
_________________
(7 of 9) Installing star-trek/species-8.4.7.2::talax.

zojas · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 11:13 pm Post subject:

true, if you put '486' in there it won't run on a 386. but fortunately your running system is a 486 :lol:

I'm surprised you don't already have CONFIG_PROTECT in /etc/make.globals, i think it's the default.

tecknojunky · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 11:44 pm Post subject:

zojas · Posted: Fri Jan 17, 2003 11:52 pm Post subject:

tecknojunky · Posted: Sat Jan 18, 2003 12:27 am Post subject:

thanx,
_________________
(7 of 9) Installing star-trek/species-8.4.7.2::talax.