HD Install :: Frugal Install + extensions = too much ram used
Can the unc extensions be used in a frugal hard drive install?
I like the idea of using the extensions over remastering so that i can easily get the latest versions of dsl linux. -ThanksEasy to extract wget from gnu-utils and even save it as a .dsl
$ mydsl-wget gnu-utils.dsl system $ sudo su # tar -C / -zxvf gnu-utils.dsl usr/bin/wget
Now to turn around as save it as a .dsl simply
# tar -C / -czvf wget.dsl usr/bin/wget
----
rsync is alread in DSL, no need to use rsync.dsl
MyCron is a simple but useable cron already in DSL
There is a new samba uci version in testing.Roberts, thanks for the tips, i'll try those out later today. With all these extension types: dsl, uci, unc....what are the advantages of each type? Can each be used in any type of install? Why use a dsl when there is a unc or uci of the same extension, and vice versa? -Thanks
Quote
what are the advantages of each type?
DSL and UNC load to traditional file paths, e.g., /usr/bin for binaries and /usr/lib for libraries. The difference is UNC does it via unionfs overlay. This means UNC doesn't load into RAM like DSL extensions do. This leaves you with more RAM for more things. If you're in a limited RAM environment, the UNC extensions may be more useful. You wouldn't notice any other difference because they load to the same paths.
UCI and tar.gz are self-contained. The difference is UCI extensions use compressed loops allowing them to be mounted/unmounted at will (via same mydsl-load command).
-Hold of on dsl extensions where possible since they load in ram (ramdisk)....check -UCI/tar.gz and UNC, i see the difference, but I don't see which would be better to use if a program is available in both extension types.