I understand the points. That's why I have suggested creating a custom
Debian Distribution which focused on lighter-weight release for embedded
and older platforms. One thing I always liked about Ubuntu and its
releases that you could install and switch to one of the other releases by
doing apt-get install kubuntu-desktop, and get that release of kubuntu
(and then be able to remove the current release fairly easily).
While we should stil have the entire Debian package archive available, a
CDD will better suit the needs of embedded users and such who want to use
a Debian-based system without all the cruft ontop of it.
Michael
On Wed, 5 Mar 2008, Joel Ewy wrote:
> Date: Wed, 05 Mar 2008 16:41:09 -0600
> From: Joel Ewy <jcewy@swbell.net>
> To: debian-68k@lists.debian.org
> Subject: Uses for m68k Was: Re: debootstrapping m68k-coldfire
> Resent-Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:45:56 +0000 (UTC)
> Resent-From: debian-68k@lists.debian.org
>
> Brad Boyer wrote:
>
>>> On Tue, Mar 04, 2008 at 09:17:54PM -0500, Michael Casadevall wrote:
>>>
>>
>>>>> I suspose the question needs to be asked; what are people doing with their
>>>>> old m68ks. Most people around here are using them for (obviously enough)
>>>>> buildds to attack the unstable queue. I popped over to netbsd, which is
>>>>> the only other operating system distro besides Debain and Gentoo to
>>>>> support m68k. The mailing list is completely dead looking at the archive,
>>>>> and the latest NetBSD releases do not offically support any m68k
>>>>> architecture as far as I can tell.
>>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> I'll be quite honest about what I use my m68k machines for. They are
>>> all turned off and mostly not even hooked up to anything unless I am
>>> doing development on Linux. I use m68k as an excuse to look at things
>>> like SCSI and ethernet drivers without any pressure to fix something
>>> that people actually use. It's an excuse to mess around with stuff I
>>> wouldn't have a chance to get code accepted on an architecture that
>>> had real users. I don't expect to ever use any of my m68k systems
>>> for any actual work. However, I would be a little disappointed if
>>> there wasn't a distribution I could install and work on a current
>>> kernel tree.
>>>
>>> Brad Boyer
>>> flar@allandria.com
>>>
>>
> I guess I need to turn on popcon and be counted.
>
> I have installed Debian on several m68k machines over the years (all
> Macs, since my Amigas don't have the CPU or memory requirements, and I
> haven't gotten my hands on a suitable Atari yet). I haven't done too
> much practical work with them to date, in part because there have always
> been little software issues that have stood in my way. But I believe,
> from a philosophical point of view, that there ought to be an Open
> Source operating system for the 68k machines that provides a comparable
> level of functionality and software support to their original
> proprietary systems.
>
> I would actually use a 68k Mac for basic word processing with AbiWord or
> Ted. Just a couple years ago I wrote rather extensively using
> WordPerfect on a Quadra 700. Why shouldn't I be able to do the same
> thing on the same machine using all Free / Open Source software? I
> would do light web browsing with Dillo, and possibly use Silpheed. I
> would also use netpbm to do some image manipulation -- possibly by means
> of a web/CGI interface -- for things like converting images for display
> on even older computers (Tandy Color Computer 3, MM/1, Amiga 500, 1000,
> etc.) I would even do a little programming in C, Perl, and Lua. I
> recently switched on a Quadra 630 with Debian so I could test tunneling
> X over ssh in preparation for remotely administering a web server for a
> client. So I have actually used Debian m68k in support of a paying job
> within the last week!
>
> Sure, I could do all these things with other computers and other
> architectures. But the point is that I have the 68k hardware; it is (or
> ought to be) capable of doing the tasks mentioned above, and a lot more;
> and I want to see these computers become useful again, to the best of
> their ability, and not throw them away, or pack them in boxes in the attic.
>
> Why continue the Debian port to m68k? Because existing Debian releases
> have issues on m68k that warrant further development. Perhaps the
> direction Debian is going doesn't help matters, but I believe that some
> kind of new OS development is needed for these machines -- if only a
> final, polished farewell release -- and so far Debian has been the
> closest thing to a usable Open Source OS for them that I have seen, but
> it hasn't quite done yet what it should be capable of doing.
>
> I first installed Potato on a Mac IIci. The main problem I recall at
> the time (aside from the general slowness of the IIci) was that the
> available software was pretty archaic (a perennial issue with Debian, I
> suppose, but I noticed it most pointedly with Potato.) What I wanted,
> not because I need it so much for my own comfort, but more for the
> principle of the thing, was a more complete, but still lightweight GUI
> -- something that would replace MacOS functionally without the bloat of
> GNOME or KDE. Things like IceWM and Fluxbox fit the bill rather nicely,
> and their continued development has remained focused on balancing low
> resource use with functionality and ease of use. More recent versions
> of these and other packages provide more of what was lacking in previous
> releases of Debian.
>
> On the other hand, an unresolved issue I've had with more recent
> releases of Debian is that (at least on the Mac) there is no key repeat
> in X. Console yes, X no. I think it's an issue with xorg, and I don't
> recall it being a problem on Potato (but that was a while ago now, and
> my memory could be faulty.) It doesn't happen when I run X apps
> remotely on, e.g., an AMD K6-2 450 running Ubuntu. It's just a problem
> with the X server in m68k. I believe I would actually use the old Macs
> more (for the purposes stated above) if this issue were resolved.
> Perhaps I should try xfree instead of x.org. But these are the kinds of
> little glitches that a future release could address. Older releases =
> archaic software. Recent releases = better software choices, but other
> usability issues.
>
> There is an unofficial patch for Dillo which adds support for frames.
> This version is used in Damn Small Linux. I ran Dillo on Woody on a
> Quadra 840av and was very pleased with its performance. A few months
> ago I made a first stab at getting the patched version to compile on a
> Quadra 630 [Sarge, I think]. I ran into problems and had to set it
> aside for a while, but I'm sure it can be made to work with a little
> more persistence. Now, the patched version isn't an official Debian
> package, of course. But everything else installed on that computer
> needed to compile it is. And the patched version is a significantly
> more usable browser than the official one that comes with Debian. The
> point is that we've got something that is very close to being useful --
> that could be much more useful than it is with a little, strategically
> selected work.
>
> Emile is very close to freeing us from legacy MacOS. I installed Sarge
> (IIRC) on a Q630 from an unofficial CD image that boots by means of
> Emile. IIUC, there's only a small bit of Apple code that needs to be
> replaced in order to make a distributable, bootable Debian Net Install
> CD image. How many more people would at least try installing Debian on
> an old Mac if such an easy option were available? Maybe those Apple
> drivers are too difficult to replace, but it seems to me that we're too
> close to real usability to quit now.
>
> Another reason that continued support for older, low-resource computers
> is important is that they share many traits with handheld and portable
> computers: comparatively low memory, slow CPUs, small/low resolution
> displays, low mass-storage capacity, etc. Programs like Dillo,
> Silpheed, SIAG Office, KDrive, and others can be useful on old desktop
> systems and also newer handhelds, and the more places they can be
> employed the more likely is their continued development.
>
> Perhaps the m68k platforms would be better served by a smaller OS,
> derived in large part from Debian, but not dependent on the Debian
> organization or infrastructure. But I have seen some of the prominent
> members of this list express that they would not contribute to any m68k
> effort that was not Debian. With the loss of such expertise, I can't
> see how any further development would be feasible. But a smaller
> release, with software hand-picked not only to run, but be potentially
> useful on real 68k machines would be of more value to any potential end
> users than a more comprehensive OS that is, for all intents and
> purposes, unusable.
>
> What about the possibility of developing a Debian package ('task'?
> suite?) designed specifically for installing a Debian subset on older,
> more resource-constrained machines irrespective of architecture, with
> arch-specific dependencies? Then put up some explicit instructions for
> how to use this to set up an old Mac or Amiga and see if we can get a
> few more users/maintainers to justify continuing the port, while at the
> same time shining a spotlight on some of the applications that are still
> potentially useful on older hardware.
>
> Again, I would use Debian m68k more if a few key usability issues were
> cleared up, and I think more people would at least try it if we could
> come up with a way to install it perhaps a little more easily on readily
> available hardware, maybe with an option (in tasksel or something like
> that?) for a pre-selected suite of lightweight apps, and if the
> information on the Web could be kept a little more up to date. How many
> extra users could that garner? Who knows? But with as few users as
> reportedly show up on popcon, it wouldn't take many to make a huge
> percentage change.
>
> JCE
>
>
>
>
> --
> To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
> with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
>
>
--
To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-68k-REQUEST@lists.debian.org
with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact listmaster@lists.debian.org
(text/plain)