Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu, 27 Jul 2023 17:46:59 +0530 "Susmita/Rajib" wrote: > From: Greg Wooledge > > But you REALLY need to go over to python.org and start learning. > > > > Yes, Mr. Cater told me. Ref: > https://lists.debian.org/debian-user/2023/07/msg00637.html > > I have thanked him for that. Have ta

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from apython script, to be run on other computers that don't have pythoninstalled?

On 7/27/23 03:28, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 07:08:35AM +0530, Susmita/Rajib wrote: From: David Wright Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 12:22:04 -0500 Message-id: <[🔎] zmfwpfrxuvr5g...@axis.corp> Reply-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAEG4

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

From: Greg Wooledge Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:02:17 -0400 Message-id: <[🔎] zmjoucnj8uopw...@wooledge.org> Mail-followup-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAEG4cZV77VDaH+LEUA2tYv8LdnQvwXWe1J=zkw7c5p1s9ew...@mail.gmail.com> References: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXe=BUQ5VE_z

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

From: "Andrew M.A. Cater" Date: Thu, 27 Jul 2023 07:28:25 + Message-id: In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXBJ3CbFUN1LuRQsKR=xjkzuw92lxlnrxwkxae-ery...@mail.gmail.com> References: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXe=BUQ5VE_z0rcLqHGGERdANnZ=vjiznjbk439jif...@mail.gmail.com> and the rest [ ... ] Dear Mr. Cater, I than

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 08:57:26AM +0530, Susmita/Rajib wrote: > Is there something called a bare minimum virtualisation, where only > the python environment could be in a 'cage', isolated from the rest > system, so that irrespective of the virtual environment resides or is > removed the system rem

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 07:28:25AM +, Andrew M.A. Cater wrote: > You are trying to create a stand alone Python script on Debian that > you can give to someone running Windows. > > Python is an interpreted language - so that person will need a version > of Python on their machine to run your s

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 07:08:35AM +0530, Susmita/Rajib wrote: > From: David Wright > Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 12:22:04 -0500 > Message-id: <[🔎] zmfwpfrxuvr5g...@axis.corp> > Reply-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org > In-reply-to: <[🔎] > CAEG4cZXy=0lra4adonsaueeoafdyapoqf5cze3s1zer

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

From: Greg Wooledge Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 22:14:01 -0400 Message-id: <[🔎] zmhs6ajl2jzoi...@wooledge.org> Mail-followup-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXBJ3CbFUN1LuRQsKR=xjkzuw92lxlnrxwkxae-ery...@mail.gmail.com> References: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXe=BUQ5VE_z0rcL

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu 27 Jul 2023 at 07:08:35 (+0530), Susmita/Rajib wrote: > From: David Wright > Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 12:22:04 -0500 > > On Mon 24 Jul 2023 at 15:52:38 (+0530), Susmita/Rajib wrote: > >> Thank you for writing back with the link leading to the Python > >> Discourse thread. [ … ] > >> C

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu, Jul 27, 2023 at 07:08:35AM +0530, Susmita/Rajib wrote: > I have considered myself as the 1st party. Debian universe as the 2nd > party and the rest as the 3rd party. So by my consideration, anything > 'Python' outside of the Debian Universe is 3rd party. I have rarely > install software out

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

From: David Wright Date: Wed, 26 Jul 2023 12:22:04 -0500 Message-id: <[🔎] zmfwpfrxuvr5g...@axis.corp> Reply-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXy=0lra4adonsaueeoafdyapoqf5cze3s1zerrjfs...@mail.gmail.com> References: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXe=BUQ5VE_z0rcLqHGGERdA

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Mon 24 Jul 2023 at 15:52:38 (+0530), Susmita/Rajib wrote: > From: David Wright > Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 10:06:43 -0500 > > Thank you for writing back with the link leading to the Python > Discourse thread. [ … ] > Can't accept a third party website info on face value. PEPs are officia

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

Hello, On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 05:27:28PM +0530, Susmita/Rajib wrote: > My first post of this thread is illustrative. You did indeed state that you only wanted guidance from "Illustrious leaders and senior List Maintainers of Debian Users ML" so I don't know why anyone is bothering to give you an

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

From: Greg Wooledge Date: Mon, 24 Jul 2023 07:08:33 -0400 Message-id: <[🔎] zl5bsa9pgfixz...@wooledge.org> Mail-followup-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXy=0lra4adonsaueeoafdyapoqf5cze3s1zerrjfs...@mail.gmail.com> References: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXe=BUQ5VE_z

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Mon, Jul 24, 2023 at 03:52:38PM +0530, Susmita/Rajib wrote: > Thank you for writing back with the link leading to the Python > Discourse thread. I would have preferred a similar post assuring us > from the Debian Side. Can't accept a third party website info on face > value. You're talking to t

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

From: David Wright Date: Thu, 20 Jul 2023 10:06:43 -0500 Message-id: <[🔎] zllngwpvlwjpg...@axis.corp> Reply-to: debian-user@lists.debian.org In-reply-to: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXe=BUQ5VE_z0rcLqHGGERdANnZ=vjiznjbk439jif...@mail.gmail.com> References: <[🔎] CAEG4cZXe=BUQ5VE_z0rcLqHGGERdA

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu 20 Jul 2023 at 16:36:44 (+0530), Susmita/Rajib wrote: > I want to have other users run my python script on their computers, > that don't have python installer, as a standalone binary/executable. > > I searched the debian-user ML with the string, "standalone python &g

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

On Thu, 20 Jul 2023, Susmita/Rajib wrote: I want to have other users run my python script on their computers, that don't have python installer, as a standalone binary/executable. This is the wrong list. It's a 12 year old question. A Google search would have given

Re: How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

Hi, On Thu, Jul 20, 2023 at 04:36:44PM +0530, Susmita/Rajib wrote: > My dear Illustrious leaders and senior List Maintainers of Debian Users ML, Is there some reason that you only want answers from "leaders" and "senior List Maintainers" as opposed to the vast majority of list subscribers, like y

How could a standalone python binary executable be made from a python script, to be run on other computers that don't have python installed?

My dear Illustrious leaders and senior List Maintainers of Debian Users ML, I want to have other users run my python script on their computers, that don't have python installer, as a standalone binary/executable. I searched the debian-user ML with the string, "standalone python binary

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

Well, OK, yeah. It is not entirely impossible. Few things are. On 6/5/2020 10:13 AM, to...@tuxteam.de wrote: On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:52:34AM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote: As already mentioned, this simply will not work. As already mentioned in this thread, this isn't strict

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

On Fri, Jun 05, 2020 at 09:52:34AM -0500, Leslie Rhorer wrote: > As already mentioned, this simply will not work. As already mentioned in this thread, this isn't strictly true. There is USB "on the go" (aka OTG [1]); this has even a protocol to switch masters. That makes sense for mobile dev

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

: In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)". I don't know much about USB hubs, I guess all of the ports are two way. To clarify, if needed, I'd like to buy a 5 (or more) p

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

Thanks to all who replied! On Thursday, June 04, 2020 05:14:29 PM Gene Heskett wrote: > On Thursday 04 June 2020 14:46:50 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 > > computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

On Thursday 04 June 2020 14:46:50 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 > computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the > three PCs)". > > I don't know much about USB hubs, I guess all of t

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 computers, > 1 > printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)". > > I don't know much about USB hubs, I guess all of the ports are two way. > >

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

On Thu, Jun 04, 2020 at 08:53:26PM +0200, Sven Hartge wrote: > rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > > > In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 > > computers, 1 > > printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)". > &g

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

On Thu, 4 Jun 2020 14:46:50 -0400 rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 > computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the > three PCs)". > > I don't know much about USB hubs, I guess all of th

Re: OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

rhkra...@gmail.com wrote: > In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 computers, > 1 > printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)". > I don't know much about USB hubs, I guess all of the ports are two way. No. This is e

OT: Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)

In a way, the subject covers most of it: " Using a USB hub with 3 computers, 1 printer, 1 external drive (for backup for any of the three PCs)". I don't know much about USB hubs, I guess all of the ports are two way. To clarify, if needed, I'd like to buy a 5 (or more) p

Old computers (Re: Choice of VMs under i386 Stretch?)

PUs by just buying, assembling, and changing out the CPU daughterboard. BTW, that wasn't my first computer -- when I was significantly younger (i.e., 10 to 15 years before 1976), I acquired two other things (both long gone, I think) that were called computers: * One was sort of a toy analog

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

On Monday 09 May 2016 23:38:02 Liam O'Toole wrote: > Therefore openjdk-7-* is not regarded as an > upgrade (in the Debian packaging sense) over openjdk-6-*. Instead, they > are different packages, and both can be installed at the same time. Therein lies the rub - and the explanation. Thank you.

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

On Monday 09 May 2016 23:38:02 Liam O'Toole wrote: > The openjdk-6-* packages are now obsolete and unsupported > (both by Debian and upstream), and will receive no further security > updates. Yes, I have discovered that!!! Lisi

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

re versions are obviously quite old, and not all >> packages are supported[1]. Previous LTS releases did not support >> graphical web browsers; I don't know whether that is the case for >> wheezy LTS too. >> >> > I still have jdk7 to sort out on three computer

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

ng list, and very active development if you've elected to use the r14 branch. I am, no surprises yet in about 9 months now. > > I still have jdk7 to sort out on three computers. In > > Stable or newer jdk6 would surely have been removed for me by > > aptitude? > > No, ob

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

es are supported[1]. Previous LTS releases did not support > graphical web browsers; I don't know whether that is the case for wheezy > LTS too. > > > I still have jdk7 to sort out on three computers. In > > Stable or newer jdk6 would surely have been removed for me by apti

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

don't know whether that is the case for wheezy LTS too. > I still have jdk7 to sort out on three computers. In > Stable or newer jdk6 would surely have been removed for me by aptitude? No, obsolete packages such as openjdk-6-* are left untouched[2]. It is up to you to remov

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

On 05/09/2016 09:18 AM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Monday 09 May 2016 13:18:26 Dutch Ingraham wrote: what version of Windows could you purchase today that would operate on an Intel Pentium M 750? Windows 10 CLAIMS to run on 32 bit computers. I would have to pay £90.00 to test it, so I don't i

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

ould > > >>operate on an Intel Pentium M 750? > > > > > >Windows 10 CLAIMS to run on 32 bit computers. I would have to pay > > > £90.00 to test it, so I don't intend to do so. I haven't researched it > > > much. I don't intend ever to use

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

indows 10 CLAIMS to run on 32 bit computers. I would have to pay £90.00 to > >test it, so I don't intend to do so. I haven't researched it much. I don't > >intend ever to use Windows 10 - I was lucky enough never to use Windows 8 at > >all :-)) - so it is academic rea

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

On 09.05.2016 17:18, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Monday 09 May 2016 13:18:26 Dutch Ingraham wrote: what version of Windows could you purchase today that would operate on an Intel Pentium M 750? Windows 10 CLAIMS to run on 32 bit computers. I would have to pay £90.00 to test it, so I don't inte

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

On Monday 09 May 2016 13:18:26 Dutch Ingraham wrote: > what version of Windows could you purchase today that would > operate on an Intel Pentium M 750? Windows 10 CLAIMS to run on 32 bit computers. I would have to pay £90.00 to test it, so I don't intend to do so. I haven't re

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

On Monday 09 May 2016 13:45:39 Stefan Monnier wrote: > > My client cannot run an up-to-date Flashplayer on Linux. > > Why not? AFAIK my daughter's computer (running 32bit Debian stable) has > a working flash player (and yes, I'm talking about Adobe's crap plugin, > rather than gnash which sadly se

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

> My client cannot run an up-to-date Flashplayer on Linux. Why not? AFAIK my daughter's computer (running 32bit Debian stable) has a working flash player (and yes, I'm talking about Adobe's crap plugin, rather than gnash which sadly seems to have died). Stefan

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

On Mon, May 09, 2016 at 09:38:54AM +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > I seem to have hit the following: > My client cannot run an up-to-date Flashplayer on Linux. If she insists on > running Flashplayer, she can run an out of date Flashplayer in her current > Debian system (if I can get a functional one

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

Le primidi 21 floréal, an CCXXIV, Lisi Reisz a écrit : > It is a sad day when Windows is in any way better for a legacy computer than > Linux; It is a sad day when the ability to run crappy and dying proprietary software is the main criterion to tell which system is better. Regards, -- Nicol

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

Hi, Lisi wrote: > In Stable or newer jdk6 would surely have been removed for me by aptitude? Can you still get jdk6 built from source ? (Possibly a nighmare of dependencies.) > It is a sad day when Windows is in any way better for a legacy computer than > Linux; Well, talk about concurrent DVD

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

ay better for a legacy computer > > than Linux; one of whose strengths used to be how good it was for legacy > > computers. > > If the vendor of proprietary software X decides that they will provide a > version of X for proprietary OS Y but not for the open source OS Z you &g

Re: Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

nstalled) or she can go out, > buy and install Windows. She will then be able to run an up-to-date > Flashplayer. Or she can buy a new computer. > > It is a sad day when Windows is in any way better for a legacy computer than > Linux; one of whose strengths used to be how good it

Flashplayer on 32 bit computers

then be able to run an up-to-date Flashplayer. Or she can buy a new computer. It is a sad day when Windows is in any way better for a legacy computer than Linux; one of whose strengths used to be how good it was for legacy computers. It is also a pity that Wheezy LTS appears not to be a truly

Re: [computers] bad sectors on disk

Le 12/02/2016 05:12, David Wright a écrit : I can't see any point in running badblocks and not putting any bad blocks that it finds into the badblock inode. So running inode is related to filesystem, so any repartitioning needs to re-run badblocks and can be as long as one day. I often noti

Re: [computers] bad sectors on disk

On Wed 10 Feb 2016 at 20:05:39 (-0800), Joseph Loo wrote: > > On 9 February 2016 at 19:57, Ritesh Raj Sarraf > On my RPi2, I saw the following reported by my kernel. > > > > [156278.815976] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] UNKNOWN(0x2003) Result: > > hostbyte=0x00 driverbyte=0x00 > > [156278.82

Re: [computers] bad sectors on disk

On 02/10/2016 07:35 PM, TWS Admin wrote: > Please remove julius.robe...@wildernes.org.au > from this list, he's no longer > working with us. > > thanks, > > the Wilderness society > > On 9 February 2016 at 19:57, Ritesh Raj Sarraf

Re: [computers] bad sectors on disk

Please remove julius.robe...@wildernes.org.au from this list, he's no longer working with us. thanks, the Wilderness society On 9 February 2016 at 19:57, Ritesh Raj Sarraf wrote: > Hello, > > On my RPi2, I saw the following reported by my kernel. > > [156278.815976] sd 1:0:0:0: [sdb] UNKNOWN(0

Re: Old Computers

On 06/04/2015 05:44 PM, Jose Martinez wrote: On 06/03/2015 09:55 AM, Mike McClain wrote: On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:04:13PM -0500, Jose Martinez wrote: And I will probably not use these system(s) on line much if any at all. So most of the security issues will fixed or not will not really be

Re: Old Computers

On 06/03/2015 09:55 AM, Mike McClain wrote: On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:04:13PM -0500, Jose Martinez wrote: And I will probably not use these system(s) on line much if any at all. So most of the security issues will fixed or not will not really be a problem in this situation. I see I've spark

Re: Old Computers

On 06/03/2015 04:48 PM, John Hasler wrote: Renaud writes: Which certainly taught you the hard way to draw one (or several) diagonal pencil or ink lines across the top of your card deck... Or to number your cards so that you could simply run a scrambled deck through the card sorter. That's c

Re: Old Computers

On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 07:04:13PM -0500, Jose Martinez wrote: > And I will probably not use these system(s) on line much if any at > all. So most of the security issues will fixed or not will not > really be a problem in this situation. > > I see I've sparked a pretty good discussion on the list.

Re: Old Computers

Renaud writes: > Which certainly taught you the hard way to draw one (or several) > diagonal pencil or ink lines across the top of your card deck... Or to number your cards so that you could simply run a scrambled deck through the card sorter. -- John Hasler jhas...@newsguy.com Elmwood, WI USA

Re: Old Computers

On Wed, 3 Jun 2015 13:08:44 -0700 "Larry Owens" wrote: > And do you remember carrying your punched card deck from the keypunch room to > the data center--and have someone bump into you and spill the cards on the > floor? Which certainly taught you the hard way to draw one (or several) diagonal

Re: Old Computers

0C7 and 0CB compile errors anyone ? Cheers, Ron. -- First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they come to fight you, and then you win. -- Gandhi

Re: Old Computers

Jose Martinez wrote: > Marc Shapiro wrote: > > Jose Martinez wrote: > > > Yeah, there's nothing like making an antique useful. I remember the > > > days of the PDP-11 running *nixWhat I wouldn't give to come up with > > > one of those old things!! > > > > My first programming class, back in 19

RE: Old Computers

-Original Message- From: Jose Martinez [mailto:jomartinez...@gmail.com] Sent: Wednesday, June 03, 2015 12:51 PM To: debian-user@lists.debian.org Subject: Re: Old Computers On 06/03/2015 05:30 AM, Sven Arvidsson wrote: > On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 19:04 -0500, Jose Martinez wrote: >&

Re: Old Computers

On 06/03/2015 05:30 AM, Sven Arvidsson wrote: On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 19:04 -0500, Jose Martinez wrote: I see I've sparked a pretty good discussion on the list. I sure appreciate all the advice/information it will come in very handy when I actually have the systems in hand. You could always tr

Re: Old Computers

it comes to ram and disk space. But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall Lisi How about Tiny Core Linux http://distro.ibibli

Re: Old Computers

On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 19:04 -0500, Jose Martinez wrote: > I see I've sparked a pretty good discussion on the list. I sure > appreciate all the advice/information it will come in very handy when I > actually have the systems in hand. You could always try mining Bitcoin: http://www.righto.com/201

Re: Old Computers

x27;s always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall Lisi How about Tiny Core Linux http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/faq.html#req Needs i486. :-

Re: Old Computers

ntage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall Lisi How about Tiny Core Linux http://distro.ibiblio.org/tinycorelinux/faq.html#req Needs i486. :-( Ah, nostalgia. I learned linux using Basic

Re: Old Computers

; > > > when it comes to ram and disk space. > > > > > > > > But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) > > > > > > I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( > > > http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ > >

Re: Old Computers

On 06/02/2015 12:41 PM, Gary Dale wrote: On 02/06/15 12:49 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Tuesday 02 June 2015 17:37:01 Sven Arvidsson wrote: On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 16:07 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it

Re: Old Computers

and bear skins!:-) I think even squeeze would be a challenge (maybe a fun one though!) when it comes to ram and disk space. But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ http://distrowatc

Re: Old Computers

would be a challenge (maybe a fun one though!) when it comes to ram and disk space. But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall Geo

Re: Old Computers

On 02/06/15 12:49 PM, Lisi Reisz wrote: On Tuesday 02 June 2015 17:37:01 Sven Arvidsson wrote: On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 16:07 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( http://www.damnsmalllinu

Re: Old Computers

On Tuesday 02 June 2015 17:37:01 Sven Arvidsson wrote: > On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 16:07 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > > But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) > > > > I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( > > http

Re: Old Computers

On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 16:07 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: > > But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) > > I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( > http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ > http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall I was

RE: Old Computers

> From: lisi.re...@gmail.com > Date: Tue, 2 Jun 2015 16:46:17 +0100 > On Tuesday 02 June 2015 16:28:30 lostson wrote: >> On Tue, 2015-06-02 at 16:07 +0100, Lisi Reisz wrote: >>> On Tuesday 02 June 2015 14:55:51 Sven Arvidsson wrote: >>> >>> I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( >>> http://w

Re: Old Computers

ting. But, I can probably run > > > > Squeeze. Nothing like stone knives and bear skins!:-) > > > > > > I think even squeeze would be a challenge (maybe a fun one though!) > > > when it comes to ram and disk space. > > > > > > But there's

Re: Old Computers

stone knives and bear skins!:-) > > > > I think even squeeze would be a challenge (maybe a fun one though!) when > > it comes to ram and disk space. > > > > But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) > > I thought of DSL

Re: Old Computers

hallenge (maybe a fun one though!) when > it comes to ram and disk space. > > But there's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) I thought of DSL. But it needs an i486. :-( http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall Lisi

Re: Old Computers

here's always vintage operating systems for vintage computers :) -- Cheers, Sven Arvidsson http://www.whiz.se PGP Key ID 6FAB5CD5 signature.asc Description: This is a digitally signed message part

Re: Old Computers

On Tue, Jun 02, 2015 at 08:32:01AM +0200, Petter Adsen wrote: > ... > Look around and see if you can find a copy of fvwm 1.24r - I ran that > for years on a 386 with little RAM without any problems. Version 2 is a > little heavier, but you can compile it yourself and leave out options > you don't

Re: Old Computers

> I'm about to be blessed with several old PC computers. By old I mean that > some of them will not even have CDROM drives on them. Dont throw them away before considering that some may be given a second life, as dedicated firewall boxes, using the IPCop or IPFire distribution

Re: Old Computers

On Jun 1, 2015, at 5:56 PM, Jose Martinez wrote: > Hey guys, > I'm about to be blessed with several old PC computers. By old I mean that > some of them will not even have CDROM drives on them. I will probably tear > them all down, mix-and-match parts and make the best sys

Re: Old Computers

> > > > > Where you will also find problems is with various distros that > supposedly support Pentiums but that require PAE, which is missing > from a lot of them. > > Another huge issue is finding a windowing system that will be > lightweight enough to run in the mem

Re: Old Computers

to run in the memory older Pentium-based computers are likely to support. Debian is good starting point but you may want to start with as minimal an install as possible and only add things as you need them. -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-requ...@lists.debian.org with a subject of &q

Re: Old Computers

On 06/01/2015 09:10 PM, Martin Read wrote: On 02/06/15 01:56, Jose Martinez wrote: The question is, will jessie install and run on these old systems? If not, can I still get a debian distro that will? I expect that the processors on at least one of them will be at least i386 or better, so I a

Re: Old Computers

On 02/06/15 01:56, Jose Martinez wrote: The question is, will jessie install and run on these old systems? If not, can I still get a debian distro that will? I expect that the processors on at least one of them will be at least i386 or better, so I also expect that jessie will install and run, b

Old Computers

Hey guys, I'm about to be blessed with several old PC computers. By old I mean that some of them will not even have CDROM drives on them. I will probably tear them all down, mix-and-match parts and make the best system(s) I can from those parts. This is something I've done befor

Re: Supported hybrid PC/tablet computers

On Fri, 1 May 2015 20:14:19 +0200 Nicolas George wrote: > Hi. > > I wrote some time ago: > > I would like to know if some people here have accurate knowledge on > > the prospect of running Debian on low- and middle-end hybrid > > PC/tablet computers, like Asus Transf

Re: Supported hybrid PC/tablet computers

On 05/01/2015 02:14 PM, Nicolas George wrote: Hi. I wrote some time ago: I would like to know if some people here have accurate knowledge on the prospect of running Debian on low- and middle-end hybrid PC/tablet computers, like Asus Transformer or Acer Aspire Switch that sell for 250-500 EUR

Re: Supported hybrid PC/tablet computers

Hi. I wrote some time ago: > I would like to know if some people here have accurate knowledge on the > prospect of running Debian on low- and middle-end hybrid PC/tablet > computers, like Asus Transformer or Acer Aspire Switch that sell for > 250-500 EUR around here? Since no answer

Re: Supported hybrid PC/tablet computers

Le septidi 27 germinal, an CCXXIII, Nicolas George a écrit : > [ Re-sending due to a mixup with my "from" address; hopefully will arrive > only once. ] Sorry for the dup, it was a matter of seconds after more than an hour :( Please disregard this mail and reply only on the other. Regards, --

Supported hybrid PC/tablet computers

[ Re-sending due to a mixup with my "from" address; hopefully will arrive only once. ] Hi. I would like to know if some people here have accurate knowledge on the prospect of running Debian on low- and middle-end hybrid PC/tablet computers, like Asus Transformer or Acer Aspire Switch

Supported hybrid PC/tablet computers

Hi. I would like to know if some people here have accurate knowledge on the prospect of running Debian on low- and middle-end hybrid PC/tablet computers, like Asus Transformer or Acer Aspire Switch that sell for 250-500 EUR around here? Note that I do not expect a "there's an app for

Re: More FUD for everyone: Computers Are Dangerous! (Users are devs, after all.)

On Tue 23 Sep 2014 at 10:43:24 -0400, Steve Litt wrote: > I *really* wish I'd evangelized daemontools on this list before the > majority of the systemd conversation occurred. Daemontools is much, > much more than a substitute for any init. You're an Evangelist? Here was me thinking you were one o

Re: More FUD for everyone: Computers Are Dangerous! (Users are devs, after all.)

On Tue, 23 Sep 2014 12:29:20 +0200 Håkon Alstadheim wrote: > Apparently Joel has (valid! ) other commitments. There are people > willing and able to work on systemd. Unless someone else steps up > with code or an online class in linux IPC, I'd say the case can be > closed. Huh? The whole point

Re: More FUD for everyone: Computers Are Dangerous! (Users are devs, after all.)

On Tue 23 Sep 2014 at 08:27:27 -0400, Jerry Stuckle wrote: > On 9/22/2014 10:02 PM, Joel Rees wrote: > > There are some people who are trying to squelch conversations on this > > list with cries of FUD! FUD! > > > > Well said, Joel. And it's interesting to see who reads it and who > doesn't.

Re: More FUD for everyone: Computers Are Dangerous! (Users are devs, after all.)

On 9/22/2014 10:02 PM, Joel Rees wrote: > There are some people who are trying to squelch conversations on this > list with cries of FUD! FUD! Well said, Joel. And it's interesting to see who reads it and who doesn't. No surprises, I must say. Jerry -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to debian-user-

Re: More FUD for everyone: Computers Are Dangerous! (Users are devs, after all.)

On 23. sep. 2014 04:02, Joel Rees wrote: [snipped] Just to off-set the negative comments, I'd say Joel R. States his case pretty well, though I think dropping the sarcasm-bit would have improved it. I'll paraphrase my understanding of A FEW of Joel's points, just to see if I read him correctl

Re: More FUD for everyone: Computers Are Dangerous! (Users are devs, after all.)

On 2014-09-23, Martin Steigerwald wrote: > Am Dienstag, 23. September 2014, 11:02:47 schrieb Joel Rees: >> There are some people who are trying to squelch conversations on this >> list with cries of FUD! FUD! > > Honestly: I stopped reading there. > I didn't get past the subject line. -- To UN

  1   2   3   4   5   6   7   >