Making Your Own Linux 147
jjr writes: "Have you ever wanted to make your own Linux distro? Now at www.linuxfromscratch.org
you can teach yourself how Linux works and even make your own Linux distro from the info they have at this site." This looks like a cool resource especially if your school or place of employ (or coven, biker gang, hunter-gatherer tribe, etc.) wants to create a site- or affinity-specific distribution.
That's sorta old, no? (Score:4)
Pablo Nevares, "the freshmaker".
department: (Score:1)
Am I missing something?
Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:2)
Am I missing something?
/ZL
Ohh what phun! (Score:1)
But I'd just like 2 know how many ppl out there would actually have the time to develop there own version of linux.
Enditallnow
make your own linux (Score:2)
tiny distributions (Score:1)
I'm in! (Score:2)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:2)
hmm (Score:1)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:1)
hmm 2 (Score:1)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:3)
(mini-)HOWTOs are Fun (Score:1)
make your own linux distro in your own language (Score:3)
I know slangsoft (http://www.slangsoft.com) has a library you can link with your java applications to accomplish this. But there are a few drawbacks to this toolkit.
1
this toolkit is a commercial product and therefore hard or impossible to integrate with a linux distribution whithout violating the GPL (correct me if I am wrong).
2
It only works with java.
3
It only works for webapplications
Wouldn't it be neat if there was some sort of an open source alternative? I think this would help spread linux usage worldwide because people can have an operating system in their native language. Maybe Slangsoft can be persuaded to open source their product.
Linux (Score:1)
Looks like a good idea (Score:3)
I'm currently discussing this with my boss, but there's one thing that's missing from that howto: how to burn the new distro onto CD and how to install it on other computers. That is the thing which is preventing us from implementing this reliably (there is always the possibility of using a boot disk and copying it using NFS, but that isn't for the faint of heart.)
Slashdot poll suggestion (Score:4)
What is the main reason you'd like to assemble your own Linux distro?
Re:hmm (Score:1)
can we have /. distro? (Score:1)
Moderators: Please note, the below is my signature. Do not moderate this post based upon my signature. That is counter to the moderator guidelines.
SlashLinux (Score:1)
SlashLinux (Score:4)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:1)
Slash distro??? (Score:2)
There simply is no excuse for this now. With such tools provided, they'd be hipocrites not to make one. This IS an open source shop right???
P.S.-Don't kill me Rob, was just making fun of all the comments just before Slash got released.
Re:Ohh what phun! (Score:1)
/. Effect - Mirror (Score:4)
Re:Slash distro??? (Score:1)
Re:Slashdot poll suggestion (Score:1)
any experience with VA's distribution? (Score:1)
On their page, they talk about this great 'optimized' version of RHL. Maybe I was a Windows user for too long, but I get wary when I hear things like that ...
Government Distro (Score:2)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:2)
Red Hat/Mastadon - Debian makes making a kernel package a standard part of compiling a new kernel, so that's no problem. With Debian or Red Hat, it should be trivial to not install what you don't want (I know it is in Debian.) And you can rely on the security patches from upstream matching up with your stuff.
Want to upgrade all the kernels in a Debian based
situation? Replace kernel-2.2.2 with kernel-2.2.8 in your apt-cache, and run apt-get install kernel-2.2.8 on each computer. Are you going to make it easier than that with your own distro, without a lot of pain?
Re:department: (Score:1)
-rt-
Jesux here I come! (Score:1)
I finally can fulfill my dream linux distro :)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:1)
Re:make your own linux distro in your own language (Score:1)
>long time, but did not know where to start. Now
>if there only was some way to easily add national
>language support for many languages (Arabic,
>Hebrew, Chinese etc.).
[snip]
>I think this would help spread linux usage
>worldwide because people can have an operating
>system in their native language.
There is no magic fairy dust. Gnome and KDE are both working on the Unicode and BIDI support needed for those langugages. Many Japenese are already using Linux - cf. www.debian.or.jp .
Many European languages - English, French, Spanish, German, Icelandic - are handled fine right now - the only thing missing is translations. There is really no magic fairy dust here - no quick hack. It needs lots and lots of translators work to translate the messages.
Re:Slashdot poll suggestion (Score:1)
Ooooh yeah! Doh! I totally forgot about that... I remember posting something about including two "standard options" in every poll - one for the "Slashdot sucks" variations, the other for the "Hemos rulez" variations. Maybe I should put that into my sig or something :-)
Re:any experience with VA's distribution? (Score:1)
(Maybe someone should tell netscape about this
Interesting, but not what's needed (Score:2)
One of the things Debian are working towards (with debconf and apt) is a system where you can roll out a bunch of workstations with the same configuration automatically (just point them at your "config server"); or you can save your configuration to use as a backup, or to help someone else get started.
They're not there yet. But "zero administration" will be the killer app that gets linux onto office desktops...
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:2)
Looks like I need three (Score:4)
I'm employed, I'm wiccan and I'm a biker. Looks like I'm going to be very busy creating distros!
HH
Yellow tigers crouched in jungles in her dark eyes.
Re:Interesting, but not what's needed (Score:1)
No no no (Score:2)
No! Bad company! Attempting to design and maintain your own distro is guaranteed to end in insecurity. A much better idea would be to participate in an existing "high-security" distro.
--
LFS... (Score:1)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:1)
Personally ive been running linux for many years (the days of Slackware! aah). I can manage allmost all problems i stumble upon but the thing is, i dont have that gut feeling that i can build all the shit i need. That is the main reason i started to build my own os from the scratch. I will get solid info on how to do things and probably even the base i build will be used as a basic installation in our future projects.
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:1)
Re:Linux (Score:1)
Encap (Score:1)
Distro Idea (Score:1)
The idea behind this, would be to allow users to be able to "test" Linux without having a newbie tearing up his/her hard drive cause of it. Hell, now that I think about it, just disable all IDE/SCSI/FS support in the kernel or remove commands like fdisk from the cd-rom all together. So they couldn't trash their hard drive without first getting a "real" distro, by that time though they should have be intrested enough to take the time to do it Right.
You could actucally make a generic kernel that had module support for everything you could possiable think of. It would work like this, it would boot from CD-ROM, look for a floppy or zip drive, if there was config files on either of these media's it would use those when booting, else it would boot into the `default` setup.
This might be a really good idea for maybe a lugi, I can see it now `Luci Linux Demo Disk`
Pop the CD-ROM in (if the bios supports bootable cd-rom) or the boot floppy, it loads, someone from the lugi configs X, ppp and a couple other things for them really quick and off they go.
But then again this might have an ill effect, they might get a "false" or distrorted view of what exactly Linux is. And the second negative effect might be the user clicks on the `Netscape` icon and everything goes to hell...
CD-ROM based distro... (Score:2)
With an 80min CDR blank (which fits nicely into my wallet, and the ability to build a custom linux distro, imagine the possibility: Being able to walk into any computer lab, or borrow a machine, insert this little disc, and bam! have ssh, an xterm, etc...
-=- SiKnight
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:1)
Diskless Workstation Distro (Score:2)
Re:Distro Idea (Score:1)
For example, config a distro for my grandma's computer with all hardware pre-setup and all Internet settings/programs configed for them. Take it over there, boot from the cd-rom, save everything (email/web browser cache) to zip drive. They want to boot the system? Stick in the disk, click 'connect' on KPPP, click 'KMail' and now they are on the Information Superhighway, how easy is that?
Basically make it real simple like the iOpen-er or iMac, so that anyone can be sending their first email in 5 minutes or less. But every burn would have to be pre-configed for each system/isp, would could really get time intense. Plus if it got screwed up even in the littest way (opps forgot
Re:Encap (Score:1)
And with the nice little script stowES (found it on freshmeat a couple weeks ago), installing from source couldn't be easier (as long as the packages use configure).
Of course, nothing beats Debian, but if something isn't packaged yet, stow[ES] does a very nice job.
Re:No no no (Score:2)
Ask QNX if you don't believe this...
-BrentRe:CD-ROM based distro... (Score:1)
News flash (Score:1)
And also, Linux is a kernel. I doubt that the site has any information on making a Linux clone.
Re:can we have /. distro? (Score:1)
Well, since you had to make an effort to point this out, I've got to reply to it.
There is no one every, anywhere, at any time, that has claimed that Linux was free. (Except for maybe Microsoft) So I guess I'm missing what your (lame) point is. Has anyone claimed that Linux was free?
Re:Slashdot poll suggestion (Score:1)
Heh (Score:1)
Re:can we have /. distro? (Score:1)
VMWare would be great here. (Score:1)
treke
News Flash (WAY OT) (Score:1)
Correction (sorry for being anal about it) (Score:1)
RPM Slack (Score:1)
Important, if redundant, iformation (Score:1)
A lot of folks grouse about how many distros there are right now. Quite frankly, though, I think that when Apple put together their own BSD system, they chose their name wisely: Darwin is indeed a wise name for a free-software project. Many steps have been taken in the evolution of free software, and some have fallen by the wayside due to disuse/poor design/etc. But the important thing to remember is that all the config managers and package managers out there got started by someone saying "this sucks; let's do something different."
The one thing I'd like to see change is the necessity for using a package manager to manage packages, and the risk of breaking config management tools simply by configing by hand once in a while (I've had problems with both on Red Hat/Mandrake/SuSE systems.) From what I've heard, it's kind of a necessity for Debian sytems to use the package manager to not break dependencies. Mandrake's terrible because all its packages have "MDK" in the name of the package; some Red Hat packages don't install at all.
What I'd like to see is something a bit like "alien" that can deal with rpms/potatoes/tgz/whatever, use traditional approaches to finding dependencies (if all else fails, find the required libs) and then use an "Encap"-like method of installing packages (i.e. use a seperate dir for every package, when convenient.)
Re:Looks like I need three (Score:1)
>>your school or place of employ (or coven, biker
>>gang, hunter-gatherer tribe, etc.) wants to
>>create a site- or affinity-specific
>>distribution.
>I'm employed, I'm wiccan and I'm a biker.
But are you a hunter-gatherer?
--Sam L-L
Re:Interesting, but not what's needed (Score:4)
I've been building a "fast install" of Linux based on Slackware 7.0 with many of my local mods (including a total rewrite of the sysinit rc scripts). The full install takes less than 8 minutes (when started from a HD based rescue partition) which is faster than some systems can even get booted up. Smaller configurations should go even faster. And this even includes repartitioning and reformatting. The configuration to be installed is entirely separate from the configuration of the system that serves the installation.
There is no concensus on what proper configuration management tools is, yet. What I am aiming for is less need to actually do any configuration. Right now the configuration I actually do involves editing files because there are no configuration tools around that know how to configure a collection of modularized installation feature groups as I have now. For those who prefer menu and/or graphical based central configuration, such tools will be needed. Since I'm not one who uses such tools, I would be a poor choice to program that part of the project. Maybe you could do that part?
I'm also currently looking at basing this from Debian 2.2. I would have to figure out how to change dpkg/apt so it can install into the installation repository instead of the host system, or run on the target machines and obtain configuration preferences from the central machine (e.g. what to install, etc).
Re:CD-ROM based distro... (Score:1)
If this runs on RAMDISK, does it only run on a MacIntosh? Can you use RAMDISK on Windows?
I done it. (Score:1)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:2)
OOPS. (Score:2)
Re:Multiple Flavors and Support (Score:2)
Re:Mod this down! (Score:1)
Re:No no no (Score:1)
Re:OOPS. (Score:2)
Excuse me?
The only credit-card sized CDs I have found hold 20 or 40MB, not 200. I would, however, be interersted in 200mb varieties. Got a link?
Re:Government Distro (Score:2)
Let's see, we could have -
ps - Although I've made a joke of it, I agree that it would be the ultimate in good sense for governments world wide to adopt OSS, aka "Trojan Free", solutions.
--
"Damn! And just when Piranha was starting to turn the tide of negative PR!"
Huh? (Score:1)
Re:No no no (Score:1)
QNX is _not_ a linux distribution; it's an embedded RTOS. It just happens to be able to run on x86 hardware, be POSIX compatible, run X etc.
http://www.qnx.com/
Re:Linux (Score:2)
There may or may not be any utility in rolling your own, but for me at least that consideration misses the point.
Re:Jesux here I come! (Score:2)
--
"Damn! And just when Piranha was starting to turn the tide of negative PR!"
Re:No no no (Score:1)
Yes [slashdot.org]
-BrentRe:I done it. (Score:1)
Any particular specific comments as to why glibc is such a bear, and what you did about them?
(For someone considering rolling-his-own distro for laptops, I'm curious.
Re:can we have /. distro? (Score:1)
So what? If they consider it free, what's that to you? Do you really have a problem with it? Do you have something against 'poor' college students being able to have an OS that didn't require real $$'s from them to use? Are you jealous because the OS that you want to use requires you to fork over real $$'s? What's the point of your .sig anyways?
-BrentRe:CD-ROM based distro... (Score:2)
OK, here's something I don't understand: How do you get your network settings right if you do this?
I've tried this with PicoBSD [freebsd.org] (fits on floppy--only gives you terminal access, but it's better than nothing) and want to try it with the QNX-on-a-floppy (has gui & browser!) [qnx.com] . However, I shove the floppy in a random machine at a public library, and it boots and then, since I'm not very networking literate, I don't know how to set things like my IP and routing info. Advice?
Disk-based linux. (Score:1)
Re:Who's the Slashdot author? (Score:1)
here's one for you...
return 0;
Good enough? :)
treke
Re:hmm (Score:1)
Re:Rather slanted? (Score:2)
And by the time you have compiled the basic system, you could compile and install Enlightenment or Gnome or Emacs or whatever by yourself
Everything that's installed right now is what the Author thou was best in his opinion... do whatever you like it did...
On a seperate note, if you check the mailing list you will see that the Book is in heavy development right now.
There's been a lot of discussion about where the Book should go, like should the Book explain how to setup this or what when there's pleny of HOWTO's that go into great detail about how to do something specific at http://www.linuxdoc.org
Anyways, hope i could clear up a few thinks...
Re:I done it. (Score:1)
Re:can we have /. distro? (Score:1)
If they consider it free, what's that to you?
Absolutely nothing. They can consider it free if they want. I don't.
Do you really have a problem with it?
No, I don't.
Do you have something against 'poor' college students being able to have an OS that didn't require real $$'s from them to use?
Well, being a "poor" college student myself, first I'd have to say that Windows doesn't cost anyone anything extra really anway. With the "Windows Tax," since the computers come pre-loaded with Windows (and the vast, vast majority do..especially academic packages), it's not like the users really have to pay anything extra to buy their operating system. It comes with the computer. I really didn't pay anything for my copy of windows, it came with my computer. Even though there was the "Windows tax" added, it's really negligable. If anyone wants to not pay the Windows tax, they're going to pay in other ways..which I'll get to in response to your last question...
Are you jealous because the OS that you want to use requires you to fork over real $$'s?
Again, no. Why would I be jealous? I've used Linux, and I'll continue to do so. I'll also continue to run Windows the majority of the time, and enjoy doing so. Despite what I hear from everyone on /., when I'm in Windows, my system doesn't crash every 2 minutes. In fact, right now I've been over a week without a reboot, and that reboot was changing from Linux to Windows. I can't remember the last time Windows crashed on me requiring a reboot.
What's the point of your .sig anyways?
Well, mainly that if you're not willing to pay the "Windows Tax," and you insist upon either buying a PC made by one of the smaller linux-installing shops, or if you want to load linux onto a machine that had Windows before, you're going to pay in ways other than "real $$." You're going to pay in terms of the time it takes you to get things working that you had taken for granted in Windows. Like truetype fonts. Like sound. Like an ethernet connection. Like UDMA66 support. Like USB support. Like a stable GUI (still waiting for a stable Linux GUI). So, unless you don't value your time at all, Linux really isn't free, because you're going to be wasting so much time getting simple things working that you'll really be wasting something valuable (time).
Maybe OT: Left-Right-Left? (Score:1)
I ask this because, from my experience with compiler construction, I believe that switching this around is somewhat more difficult than simply translating the reserved word list. Anyone have any experience with this?
Re:RPM Slack (Score:1)
Great (Score:1)
You hit my point precisely. (Score:1)
The fact is, different distros use different libs, different dir structures, etc. If you need to use --force --nodeps to install an RPM, then the package maintainer might as well have used a Slack package; in other words, just make a
Also, before you Debian fascists speak up, I'd just like to say that I'd like to have a setup that I *didn't* have to use a package manager, but could if I wanted to. Okay, that sounds like a newbie thought, but bear with me. Why not set up a packaging system that could, if deps fail, check the deps on its own? Open ld.so.conf and check those dirs, etc. It wouldn't be as impossible as it sounds, and would make installing from source almost a non-issue.
Well, that's my $0.02 for now.
Re:can we have /. distro? (Score:2)
Yes you did, thank you.
All that because you asked me a question ("does anyone really say Linux is free?") and I answered it in a way that you didn't want me to yet you can't refure? I'll answer your questions one at a time.I've heard that premise before ("Linux isn't free unless your time is free") and I've never understand what the point of it was. I mean, any OS is going to require "time", so it's not like Linux is any worse then anything else in that area. Windows requires "time" too, just like Linux does. You aren't going to not need "time", just because you use Windows instead of Linux. But I'm sure you already know that.
Now onto your other points.
I really didn't pay anything for my copy of windows, it came with my computer.I would have had to pay $200 if I wanted to buy a license to have Windows on my PC. Just because you got Windows preloaded, doesn't mean that you didn't pay anything for it. OEM's have to make a profit somehow, and that means that they are recouping the cost of the license. It just may not be as much as Microsoft gouges consumers for.
I can't remember the last time Windows crashed on me requiring a reboot.Windows continually runs out of resources and then crashes, or refuses to run more applications, or quites redrawing properly. I don't know while, but it happens on all my Windows boxes. I should have those problems with a AMD K6-350 and 64meg ram, when all I'm running is Access, Word, C++ Builder, 2 dozen instances of IE open, and email and irc clients. And a bunch of other software open too. But anyways, I can run a whole lot more programs then that in Linux, without having to close programs down, or hit the reset button.
You're going to pay in terms of the time it takes you to get things working that you had taken for granted in Windows.I wish I could claim to have that same experience. (Yeah, right!). However, when I've installed Windows, and Linux, it's always been Windows that has taken the time, been frusterating, and never worked. Linux, I can pop in the CD, and in 30 minutes have it rebooted and running. It'll have set everything up that I need, configured all my hardware, and is on the network. With Windows, it takes forever to install Windows to the hard drive. Then you've got to reboot. And reboot. And reboot. Install Office. Reboot. Install the drivers that didn't come with Windows. Reboot. Install Borland C++ Builder. Reboot. Install RealPlayer. Reboot. Install netmeeting. Reboot. Install an X server. Reboot. Configure the box to talk to the network. Reboot. Then if you've only got a modem connection, it'll be all night to download the 40+ meg from the Windows 98 update site that has been release since last June. Reboot. Also if you have the original 98 license, MS will send you the SE patches on CD (for S/H) but you'll have to install 98 first, and then the patches over that. Reboot.
I guess I don't know what to say. I *could* do my work in either Windows or Linux, I suppose. However, I value my time. And that's why I choose to use Linux.
In conclusion, I thank you for exmplaining your reasoning. But I must disagree. First of all, I think that everyone understands that nothing is ever completely free. However, certain qualities of things are free. For instance, in the case of Linux, I don't have to pay licensing costs. I'd call that free. Second, time is valuable. That's why you must make sure that you have a good investment. An OS that can't handle running all the applications I use, with the hardware I give it, isn't a good investment. An OS that doesn't eat up my valuable time be requiring my to run less applications then I should, or that requires me to reboot, certainly is less 'free' (in your own terms), then one that allows my to do everything I want.
Game distros? (Score:3)
Bryce
Re:Rather slanted? (Score:2)
Nothing prevents you from using RPM, for instance, on your homemade non-RedHat system.
Re:Diskless Workstation Distro (Score:2)
--
Re:Government Distro (Score:2)
Of course not. You can't prove either way about a POS. That's the whole point.
--
"Damn! And just when Piranha was starting to turn the tide of negative PR!"
Re:hmm (Score:2)
One more thing: if you can get several small HDs, you can use them together in software-RAID mode: the system I'm talking about actually has 5 HDs, ranging from 80M to 185M, for a total of 600M.
Hunter-Gatherer Linux (Score:2)
We at HG Linux torture tested our distro, by giving it to upper management for a month. Yes, we use our own distribution internally, as many of our tech support personel also have sloping foreheads and prognathous jaws.
We've carefully selected a minimum set of tools, considered uncomplicated enough for use by the illiterate. We know that many of you who are capable of actually READING don't bother to crack the manual open, so printed manuals aren't included. HG Linux is intentionally missing the usual READMEs and manpages. Not to worry! We've replaced them with simplified cave-paintings, in PNG format. Just point and grunt!
http://hglinux.example.org/
[...Example.org: providing all your RFC 2606 compliant sample domain name needs...]