nanogui: Thread: Good "minimalist" Linux distro for FB stuff?

Good evening all!

Does anyone here have comments about good (or bad) minimalist Linux 
distros, on which to intall a Framebuffer-configured Nano-X project? I 
want to build a mini-ATX Linux box on which will run my 
Framebuffer-based project, and I want to have the install as 
trimmed-down as possible (I just need Framebuffer and network support, 
really). To begin with it'll be installed on one of those "flash" IDE 
units (that hold 512MB) but I'm hoping longer-term to build a PXE image 
for network transfer.

I /could/ fight with my usual choice of distro (SuSE) and see what I can 
strip out to get it down to a sensible size ... but I figure that this 
must be a task that others here have battled with.

Any comments?

Kris.

> Good evening all!
> 
> Does anyone here have comments about good (or bad) minimalist Linux 
> distros, on which to intall a Framebuffer-configured Nano-X project? I 
> want to build a mini-ATX Linux box on which will run my 
> Framebuffer-based project, and I want to have the install as 
> trimmed-down as possible (I just need Framebuffer and network support, 
> really). To begin with it'll be installed on one of those "flash" IDE 
> units (that hold 512MB) but I'm hoping longer-term to build a PXE image 
> for network transfer.
> 
> I /could/ fight with my usual choice of distro (SuSE) and see what I can 
> strip out to get it down to a sensible size ... but I figure that this 
> must be a task that others here have battled with.
> 
> Any comments?
> 
> Kris.

You could try LTIB, look at www.bitshrine.org, or pull down some of
Freescale's Linux BSPs (most based on LTIB).  They're pretty minimal,
and have qtopia, as well as nanox in them that you can select to build
into your rootfs.

-- 
Peter Barada
####@####.####

Peter Barada wrote:
>> Good evening all!
>>
>> Does anyone here have comments about good (or bad) minimalist Linux 
>> distros, on which to intall a Framebuffer-configured Nano-X project? I 
>> want to build a mini-ATX Linux box on which will run my 
>> Framebuffer-based project, and I want to have the install as 
>> trimmed-down as possible (I just need Framebuffer and network support, 
>> really). To begin with it'll be installed on one of those "flash" IDE 
>> units (that hold 512MB) but I'm hoping longer-term to build a PXE image 
>> for network transfer.
>>
>> I /could/ fight with my usual choice of distro (SuSE) and see what I can 
>> strip out to get it down to a sensible size ... but I figure that this 
>> must be a task that others here have battled with.
>>
>> Any comments?
>>
>> Kris.
>>     
>
> You could try LTIB, look at www.bitshrine.org, or pull down some of
> Freescale's Linux BSPs (most based on LTIB).  They're pretty minimal,
> and have qtopia, as well as nanox in them that you can select to build
> into your rootfs.
>
>   
openwrt.org
angstrom.org

Why reinvent the wheel?

--Yan


-- 
  o__
  ,>/'_          o__
  (_)\(_)        ,>/'_        o__
Yan Seiner      (_)\(_)       ,>/'_     o__
Certified Personal Trainer   (_)\(_)    ,>/'_        o__
Licensed Professional Engineer         (_)\(_)       ,>/'_
Who says engineers have to be pencil necked geeks?  (_)\(_)

Help out my kids' school: http://www.seiner.com/blog/Travels/

Kris Adcock wrote:
 > Good evening all!
 >
 > Does anyone here have comments about good (or bad) minimalist Linux distros, 
on which to intall a Framebuffer-configured Nano-X project? I want to build a 
mini-ATX Linux box on which will run my Framebuffer-based project, and I want to 
have the install as trimmed-down as possible (I just need Framebuffer and 
network support, really). To begin with it'll be installed on one of those 
"flash" IDE units (that hold 512MB) but I'm hoping longer-term to build a PXE 
image for network transfer.
 >
 > I /could/ fight with my usual choice of distro (SuSE) and see what I can 
strip out to get it down to a sensible size ... but I figure that this must be a 
task that others here have battled with.
 >
 > Any comments?
 >
 > Kris.
 >
 > ---------------------------------------------------------------------
 > To unsubscribe, e-mail: ####@####.####
 > For additional commands, e-mail: ####@####.####
 >

Take a look at buildroot. With it, you can generate a busybox/uClibc toolchain, 
userspace, and kernel all with one make command. It's definitely saved me a lot 
of time in the past trying to get gcc up and running on a new arch. It compiles 
everything from source so you can tailor it to exactly what you want. The 
minimal install with just busybox and uClibc is just over 1M, with tinyx/kdrive 
it's under 50M with freetype fonts and all the nice cairo/pango anti-aliasing stuff.

-Laine