-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- On Wed, 24 Feb 1999, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>* If I were to try to install Debian Linux, what would be >the optimum partition setup, and would it be possible >for me to change my current partition setup without >affecting the Mac side of the drive? I find that the one I use is quite a balanced setup (df output): Filesystem 1k-blocks Used Available Use% Mounted on /dev/sda7 142677 43732 91578 32% / /dev/sda6 400971 354212 26050 93% /public /dev/sda9 601091 491912 96759 84% /home /dev/sda10 1531694 1192151 307878 79% /usr /dev/sda11 149581 31862 114629 22% /var /dev/sda12 124005 2222 119222 2% /tmp although you don't need public if don't run an ftp/web server. I put that there for experimental purposes. >Does ppc-debian currently support the G3 machines? ppc-debian itself would support it, if the ppc kernel supported it. The ppc linux kernel currently does not (firewire is a major obstacle, although you could use ide/scsi disks at the start). I don't know about RAGE128 support, but I suspect that at best it would work in some combatibility mode with Geert's atyfb framebuffer driver. I hardly would expect it to work out-of-the-box without some hacking. Anyway, if you could get support in the kernel, it would be only a matter of installing some base filesystem (~7-10 MBs last time I looked), and installing the rest from the net (no cd yet). But, if I were you, I would anyway go for debian, because you wouldn't believe how many problems are solved with the new glibc 2.1 that is standard in debian/ppc. I can't help laughing at all the poor souls at the linucppc-user list that try to keep creating hacks to make a program compile, let alone run correctly. I had all these problems, which totally went away when I moved to debian. >If it doesn't, how involved do you think the port would be? quite. >Just for the sake of argument, suppose I had it running; how >good would the X11 support be? I think there are two or three >different options to providing X11 support on any particular >Mac machine: regular XFree for the graphics card, XFree going >through the frame buffer, and XPmac. Which is best? Will >there be significant work getting the X port working in the >first place, or will the driver for the 64 bit version of the >card be compatible? IMHO, the best would be to have some Xfree server specifically for the card. But, this is unrealistic, as evertything turns to modularization. Still, with a well written framebuffer device driver, the performance would be amazing on this card. Xpmac is not an option, as the author just release its final version and said he would work with framebuffers from now on. Alas, as for the port, unless the company (ATI) releases the specs to someone to build a linux driver, it's left to some extremely good hardware hacker to find its internals and produce a driver. The lucky thing is that there already is important work been done on the old chips and I suspect that the new one can't be THAT different. Final word: If you want linux on a Blue G3 NOW, get ready to hack. If not, you could get an older beige G3 and get going right from the start. -- Konstantinos Margaritis [EMAIL PROTECTED] -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: PGPfreeware 5.0i for non-commercial use MessageID: w2mvQ002hDWDzAqNduf0uiknF5U+9Dpu iQEUAwUBNtM/JHLbhkskV78BAQHwDgf2MEdKKazXhtDUAhnnMgbFStM+M6Dx6vYa s2qOF+//ghP5JCvRgNU/DcynR7lQ5/sHnoi+D/GmxhJTkg0A+M7ITaxab2is+Vhw 2MW6dHQJxv7TYSV4+nkNDRmfxLGdrKlqDj2MaD+K/M8MYOCLQN1/0bt63+kBVIGp gqHX0DXEgu/JrFPjWhqZgT1+fRfAnEh/wI/4Amw/j+HIUmfuUIculD3wg6Fy4+f8 5tYZtfkkhfHUu1lvNMXnCPe9ywoxmsE+2K2WEPekeXAvLZUB+1qRTBVYfzOEjjFA IOtnoaNUkphZUwju8iSmF+RPAsNNwrZZYOD+dAjPWXdx7QPnEzPj =v34u -----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
