home *** CD-ROM | disk | FTP | other *** search
- Path: firefly.prairienet.org!claevius
- From: claevius@firefly.prairienet.org (Brent Busby)
- Newsgroups: comp.sys.amiga.emulations
- Subject: Re: Bridgeboards and Linux
- Date: 16 Mar 1996 10:14:08 GMT
- Organization: University of Illinois at Urbana
- Distribution: world
- Message-ID: <4ie49g$is2@vixen.cso.uiuc.edu>
- References: <merrarkDo7ut1.Mru@netcom.com> <4ib46s$bup@leol.net-link.net>
- NNTP-Posting-Host: firefly.prairienet.org
- X-Newsreader: TIN [version 1.2 PL2]
-
- Mike Williams (mikew@net-link.net) wrote:
-
- : In article <merrarkDo7ut1.Mru@netcom.com> merrark@netcom.com (Mer'rark) writes:
- : > How well and which (including those that were not made by Commodore)
- : > Bridgeboards are up to running Linux with any degree of efficiency?
- : > Would you lose an or all abilities to share resources?
-
- : Why bother? Linux is available for the Amiga. Granted, it's usually running
- : a revision or two behind, but it's there and it works. Just run it on your
- : Amiga for less investment and a lot more speed. Or you could get NetBSD Amiga
- : and run that. Once you have some flavor of Unix with a C compiler you can
- : compile your own binaries for anything else you need.
-
- Well, speaking for myself, the reason *I* like to run Linux on the bridgeboard
- side of the machine is because the bridgeboard can be rebooted as often as you
- like without disturbing the native side. This makes changing operating systems
- back and forth between Windows, OS/2, and Linux easy and nondisruptive, which
- is very important to me since I like to run a BBS on the native side that must
- be online for the users at all times, nomatter what I happen to be doing.
-
- If it wasn't for the BBS factor, I'd probably *would* be running Amiga Linux.
-
- --
- Amiga /// | | "They had a glow-in-the-dark
- 040 /// | Brent Busby ("Sequencer") | Santa in their yard. Santa
- \\\/// | claevius@prairienet.org | isn't radioactive, is he?
- \XX/ | | Cool beans. Nuclear Santa."
-