Re: Slimserver on linkstaiton instructions
> I can't "open" the .gz to expose the .tar. If I double-click theI think maybe the whole extraction of a plain tar file is unneeded.
> .tar.gz it extracts the whole ball of wax... No .tar.
On my LinkStation, I was able to just use the tar.gz files directly
by adding the "-z" flag. In other words where you have "tar -xvf
tarfile.tar ...", I used "tar -zxvf tarfile.tar.gz ...". I'm pretty
sure the stock tar command has this capability. Could someone with a
stock LS take a look at "tar --help" to verify this ?
- I did better than that. The link is posted in the
"links" section of this group. If I remember, there
were a couple of Debian versions, a Gentoo, and a
Vine-Linux one plus some other stuff I just starting
to figure out.
Note when upgrading that they had made some changes to
some of the script files to do things like the "halt"
operation correctly. Debian's package manager will
catch all this and give you a chance to deal with it.
--- Wilson <sonsondei@...> wrote:
> It'll be great if you can email me or post the=== message truncated ===
> japanese site to download the debian (38MB) package.
> --- James Stewart <wartstew@...> wrote:
> > --- James Ronald <jronald@...> wrote:
> > > When you have even a draft for the Debian How-To
> > > ready let me know as I'm very intested in giving
> > it
> > a
> > > try.
> > Yes, I guess I need to quit playing around with
> > and do real work towards completion of this Debian
> > install project.
> > I've presently just been booting on the Buffalo
> > frimware, telnetting into it and then doing
> > into a Debian file system, then mounting another
> > /proc
> > in that environment. It is amazing to me that
> > running
> > this way works this well, so I've been sluggish to
> > proceed further.
> > > I'm also interested in which kernel your
> > > running.
> > I'm running the standard one that came with the
> > V1.44
> > Buffalo OS, because it is the Buffalo OS that is
> > actually what is running on top of it all. I am
> > effect running Debian inside of the Buffalo OS,
> > it
> > works.
> > > When I checked out Debian.org it seemed
> > > Debian is not a very up to
> > > date distribution at least kernel wise.
> > I was confused by this also. Debian "Stable"
> > (currently called "woody") is out of date. Woody
> > was
> > a couple of months out of date the day it was
> > released
> > a loooonnnnggg time ago. People use it for
> > servers because it is very well tested and
> > considered
> > very "stable". The only Debian that is very
> > interesting to me is Debian "Unstable" (otherwise
> > always called "Sid"). This is very up to date.
> > example I installed Mozilla Firefox 1.0 on my
> > linkstation last night which showed up in Debian
> > unstable 2 days after it was officially released
> > from
> > Mozilla. Sid also has many kernel choices
> > the lastest of the 2.6 series. I do think that we
> > probably need to compile our own kernel that is
> > customized to the Linkstation, but that is a whole
> > separate project.
> > The problem with "sid" is that there isn't really
> > installer for it other than "debootstrap" which
> > installs Linux from another Linux. So far I
> > been able to get debootstrap to work on the
> > Linkstation, but I think I will try again, because
> > it
> > makes the most sense to me for the Linkstation.
> > The other way people get "Sid" is to upgrade to
> > This is what I did. I found this copy of Debian
> > "woody" for the linkstation from a Japanese site.
> > simply downloaded it, and unarchived it in a
> > directory
> > on /dev/hda3 (the big data partition), chrooted
> > it and proceeded to upgrade it to "sid". If I
> > get the debootstrap to work, we can distribute
> > original Debian, which was a 38MB download, but I
> > trying to strip out some "fat" out of it (it has
> > partitioning tools for Amiga computers for
> > and get it down to maybe 30 MB or less. Then
> > could install it and build it up into what ever
> > want.
> > > I've been pretty much a RedHat &
> > > Fedora Guy but I'm ready to try a different
> > > distribution.
> > They are hard at work making "RPM" based
> > distributions
> > (like Redhat, Fedora, Mandrake, Yellowdog, etc)
> > as well as Debian's packaging system as far as the
> > ability to do updates are concerned. I haven't
> > Redhat since 6.2 and Mandrake since 8.0 (I then
> > began
> > using Slackware, and still really like it). Back
> > those days I was always flustered when trying to
> > major software upgrades, or even installing
> > something
> > new that wasn't native to the distribution. The
> > "dependency hell" term describes what happens.
> > I've
> > heard they have things working very well now. Do
> > they?
> > I also like the fact that Debian Sid for the PPC
> > over 14,000 packages in their repository ready to
> > install. What does Fedora (or probably a better
> > comparison: Mandrake-PPC "Cooker") have?
> > Finally, I've had better luck with Debian being
> > to start out small, with their 100MB (installed)
> > "base-debs" and then install only the additional
> > software I want, and not a lot of extra stuff I
> > don't.
> > Therefore I end up with a much leaner system, but
> > where everything still works.
> > Actually I don't have any major objections to RPM
> > based distos's. I'm sure we could get similar
> > results
> > with them that I got with Debian. I just chose to
> > steer clear of them long ago, and haven't
> > it
> > yet. Another direction worthy of investigation is
> > Gentoo Linux. The is a "source based" distro
> > you compile everything on the Linkstation. This
> > course would take a long time, but everything
> > be
> > fully optimized however. The Gentoo system
> > to "ports" in the *BSD world) works very well:
> > things
> > download, compile, install, and setup all with a
> > single "emerge" command. That said, I've never
> > actually played with Gentoo.
> > One drawback to Debian is that is isn't packaged
> > (from
> > Debian anyway) in a form that is easy to install
> > set up. There are many commercial Debian based
> > distributions out there, but most tend to break
> > Debian packaging system enough to attempt to lock
> > you
> > into buying their product when it is time for an
> > upgrade.
> > Another drawback is that I find Debian a little
> > to learn. The documentation exists, but you have
> > know where to look for it (and I don't, completely
> > yet). They have all kinds of slick mechanisms to
> > administrative chores, but you really have to hunt
> > around to find them and to learn how to use them.
> > Anyway, I guess I need to get busy. I really do
> > feel
> > sorry for all you out there who are struggling
> > getting new software compiled and running on your
> > Linkstaion. All this is so much easier for me now
> > with Debian.
> > James Stewart
> > __________________________________________________
Do you Yahoo!?
Check out the new Yahoo! Front Page.