gafisher at sprynet.com
Fri Aug 9 09:10:00 UTC 2002
It might be helpful to look at the micro-distribution from 1999 called
"squeakos" (as distinguished from the more current SqueakNOS), which boots a
working, graphical Squeak2.2 image via a minimalist Linux, all from a single
3.5" floppy disk. (Get a copy at http://swain.webframe.org/squeak/floppy/
or grab the source code at
not much use in its present form, having been built primarily just to prove
it could be done, but certainly ought to be able to offer some direction in
how to do a more useful version.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Alan Grimes" <alangrimes at starpower.net>
To: <squeak-dev at lists.squeakfoundation.org>
Sent: Friday, August 09, 2002 1:58 AM
> I noticed the thread about putting togeather a bare-bones squeak linux
> distribution and wish to contribute some suggestions.
> The suggestions on the table were
> - to replace init with a squeak loader. and
> - to use the X server.
> As for init, there is a kernel parameter that lets you specify an
> alternate init. It should be possible to add a lilo option to any
> distribution that will boot squeak directly.
> Squeak should _NOT_ use X, as that would be redundant and wasteful. I
> beleive that recient kernels have a "framebuffer" device of some sort.
> Development should focus on using these.
> I should also mention that I have a dual-display setup. While I don't
> use the second display frequently, it would be nice to have some
> commands in the system to configure Squeak for multi-display operation.
> As the system is now, it is extremely convenient as I can have a
> full-screen squeak *and* a full screen linux session.
> Now as for creating a squeak only distribution, the chalenges are much
> more significant as the system needs to be picked appart to discover
> what is absolutly essential to proper operation.
> A major goal of any such distribution is to be fully self-maintaining.
> It must provide the user the ability to maintain anything on the system.
> The kernel consists of many thousands of lines of badly written C/C++ so
> supporting GCC/binutils and a number of supporting packages is
> unavoidable. Unfortunately these packages have many flaws including a
> heavy dependancy on the unix-style file structures (which suck).
> It should not be terrably difficult to support these provided that
> squeak can launch system-level processes using the same meathods init
> does. On a squeak system that seeks to be a step on an evolution to pure
> squeak, extranious software must be keept to the absolute minimum.
> After I work through the tutorials I would be glad to contribute to such
> an effort as I think it is definetly a step towards better software.
> Linux has more source code than my brain.
More information about the Squeak-dev