Re: Cheap hardware X-terms?

[Doug Loss <dloss@csrlink.net>]

Ray Olszewski wrote:
> 
> These are helpful simplifications, but they have some problems.
> 
> 1. The real problem with X isn't selecting a resolution; if you select
> 1024*768 and it won't work, X is (in every version I've used) smart enough
> to drop back to a working value. The real problems are matching the server
> to the video card, getting the video RAM right, and getting the hsybc and
> vsync of the monitor right.
> 
I realize that.  Couldn't you also assume minimal VRAM settings (512K?
1MB?) and a generic VGA monitor (not SVGA)?  These wouldn't work
everywhere, but even if it only worked 75% of the time it might be
useful.

> 2. These computers will need swap if they only have 16 megs of RAM, so
> making the hard disk a single partition isn't practical. The installer will
> need some intelligence to figure out the best tradeoff, especially on small
> (80 meg) drives.
> 
Again, just automatically create a swap partition of 16 MB and then
another partition of all the rest of the drive.  You don't need the best
tradeoff, I don't think, just enough swap for speedy operation and
enough room on the other partition for the OS and X-server software. 
It's not as though you're going to install a bunch of stuff locally.

> 3. You don't get to pick the IRQ and io base of an unknown NIC; you have to
> find them. Since IRQ 3 conflicts with a standard serial port assignment,
> I've always had to move NICs to a new IRQ. But since few of the modern NICs
> use jumpers, and you'll be lucky if you get the DOS-based config disks with
> donated machines, you pretty much have to live with what you get.
> 
Now this _is_ a problem.  I haven't played with a large range of PC
hardware for a few years now (I'm more of a network infrastructure kind
of guy in my real-world job).  But I'd think that this is not a giant
problem.  If you get NICs that can't be set to whatever settings you've
standardized on, toss them and get new ones.  After all, NICs can be had
for ~US$10-15 these days.  As to IRQ 3, that was just a number; how
about 5 (That's the IRQ for the second parallel port, right?  As I said,
it's been a while.) or some other setting that's almost always free.

> Don't get me wrong, Doug ... all of this stuff CAN be standardized. But when
> you are working with a mix of donated old PCs, you won't start with it
> standardized. That's the problem a good installer will have to deal with.
> The packages I've seen, BTW, generally simplify their lives by limiting
> themselves to one or two X servers (SVGA and maybe one other) and a couple
> of the more common NICs (ne2000 and 3c509, say).
> 
Ray, if people didn't call me on some of my less well-considered
suggestions there'd be a lot of strange things going on in the world.  I
often throw ideas out to stimulate discussion.  I'll defend them till
they become untenable, then happily discard them in the knowledge that
they worked to cause consideration of the underlying problem.  After
all, I'm Pennsylvania Dutch; the subject of the argument isn't nearly as
important as the argument itself.  Why, I've been known to change sides
just to keep the discussion going.  (That works best if the
person/people on the other side understand and also change sides at the
same time.)

> PS - I'm going to pass your Mac question on to someone I know who's focused
> on Linux on Macs. I'll pass on any relpy she offers.
> 
I appreciate that.  On Sunday I'll ask my contact at the parochial
school about the Macs and the possibility of trying this out.  It may
turn out to be a moot point (they've gotten rid of them) or more trouble
than it's worth (they have a group of volunteer parents designing their
network and computer labs).

-- 
Doug Loss                 The difference between the right word and
Data Network Coordinator  the almost right word is the difference
Bloomsburg University     between lightning and a lightning bug.
dloss@bloomu.edu                Mark Twain