Low-end Linux(jeelabs.org)
jeelabs.org
Low-end Linux
http://jeelabs.org/2011/09/08/low-end-linux/
4 comments
I don't really see the value of running 486 instead of equivalent ARM CPU. Looking at something like RaspberryPi[1], you'd get a lot more everything with the same price, and the performance characteristics are actually relevant to modern day low power systems.
http://elinux.org/RaspberryPiBoard#Provisional_specification
http://elinux.org/RaspberryPiBoard#Provisional_specification
The value is x86 compatibility.
Our seismograph network is held together by DMP eBox 2300 computers. These things have 200 MHz 486DX compatible CPUs, 128 MB RAM, and a CompactFlash slot that we populate with a 4 GB SLC NAND card (that are now ridiculously hard to find). The computers come in a nice, small, passively cooled metal case, cost about $150 each, and draw a few watts at idle.
Now, sure, we could get ARM-based systems that are cheaper, faster, and even less power hungry (and I hope in the future I can start using such systems!), but for now, I'm stuck with x86 because we have to run a proprietary Linux/x86 binary on each computer to get the data out of the digitizers and into a "common" data format.
(One day I'll write my own code to replace that proprietary binary, and then the company that makes a small, sub-$100 ARM board that boots Linux and has a flash memory slot of some sort, two Ethernet ports, and two real [not TTL-level] serial ports will be my most favorite company in the world.)
Our seismograph network is held together by DMP eBox 2300 computers. These things have 200 MHz 486DX compatible CPUs, 128 MB RAM, and a CompactFlash slot that we populate with a 4 GB SLC NAND card (that are now ridiculously hard to find). The computers come in a nice, small, passively cooled metal case, cost about $150 each, and draw a few watts at idle.
Now, sure, we could get ARM-based systems that are cheaper, faster, and even less power hungry (and I hope in the future I can start using such systems!), but for now, I'm stuck with x86 because we have to run a proprietary Linux/x86 binary on each computer to get the data out of the digitizers and into a "common" data format.
(One day I'll write my own code to replace that proprietary binary, and then the company that makes a small, sub-$100 ARM board that boots Linux and has a flash memory slot of some sort, two Ethernet ports, and two real [not TTL-level] serial ports will be my most favorite company in the world.)
Or a Gumstix, Beagle, Panda...
The thrust of this blog post appears to be that the software he has written works on even a very nerfed machine. It's about his software, not his hardware.
The thrust of this blog post appears to be that the software he has written works on even a very nerfed machine. It's about his software, not his hardware.
I've been a long time user of Soekris boards & cheap x86 boxes:
http://soekris.com/
They've just come out with their first Atom based system; it's been 486 class (Amd Elan) and 586 class (Amd Geode) processors until now.
http://soekris.com/
They've just come out with their first Atom based system; it's been 486 class (Amd Elan) and 586 class (Amd Geode) processors until now.
Soekris is good suggestion for small boxes to use as Linux/BSD appliances. That said, they're too high a spec/cost a device for the kind of applications one would want to use a bifferboard for.
Some years ago I had some memory problems installing Debian in a similar setup (486dx4/100Mhz/24mb), Netbsd worked fine though. I think these days most Linux distributions are compiled for i686.
It has been tasked to do quite a bit of things, including:
Debian/arm provides a huuuge number of packages. The biggest constraint is actually not the CPU but the RAM, 2x or 4x that amount would be nice.
Many of those have been phased out when I replaced my wrt54g (v5, dd-wrt) with a Time Capsule, but it saved (and still saves) me time (or even my ass) quite a lot.
Total cost: ~100€ + 5W max. Well worth it.