/os/ - Online Security

News, techniques and methods for computer network security.

Posting mode: Reply

Check to confirm you're not a robot
Drawing x size canvas

Remember to follow the rules

Max file size: 350.00 MB

Max files: 5

Max message length: 4096

Manage Board | Moderate Thread

Return | Catalog | Bottom

Welcome to Online Security the place for internet and computer security, privacy and anonymity.
If you have some helpful tips please feel free to share your ideas. Start a new thread, or contribute to an existing thread.

Expand All Images

(120.89 KB 640x793 Lain.jpg)
System Resources Endwall 07/05/2017 (Wed) 03:13:35 [Preview] No. 965
I have some observations to make.

## I just tested these systems:
MS DOS 6.22 runs in 384K of memory (1994)
MS Windows 3.11 runs in 2MB of memory with a full mouse driven GUI (1994)
Macintosh OS 7.53 runs in 7.4MB of memory , full GUI + TCP/IP (1996)
Macintosh OS 8.1 runs in 13.2MB of memory, (1997)
Macintosh OS 8.6 runs in 26MB of meomory, (1998)

OpenBSD 6.1 starts in text mode command line in 27MB of memory
OpenBSD 6.1 in Xenocara uses 65-80MB of memory to start up.

## from recollection:
Windows 7 800MB of memory (2009)

Parabola GNU/Linux starts in text mode cli using 150MB of memory
Parabola GNU/Linux in weston uses 300MB of memory

If someone could fill in the blanks (ballpark) for Windowws 95,98, 200, XP,Temple OS, Minix, etc. That would be helpful. The point I'm trying to make is that if you could have a working GUI with TCP/IP networking in 2-15MB of ram why the hell does Linux need 150MB to start up and release a console to me? What the hell is going on in there?

How much does Alpine linux use? Minix? ReactOS? HelenOS? Temple OS? etc.

Less is better.
Edited last time by Endwall on 07/05/2017 (Wed) 03:17:31.

a@a 07/05/2017 (Wed) 09:53:03 [Preview] No. 966 del
I can't help you with the memory usages of those OSes, but I would say that at one point, I got down to 60 mb on an x86 Debian GNU/Linux (before Ian died) with X and running openbox and urxvt. x64 is at least double that with a similar barebones setup (very little background resources) for some dumbfuck reason that I have no idea why. I'd blame the hardware first, kernel second, OS third, yourself fourth, and some crackers fifth. They really just don't make things the way they used to anymore

Anonymous 07/05/2017 (Wed) 11:25:38 [Preview] No. 967 del
more rack-space. More machines.

Anonymous 07/05/2017 (Wed) 17:18:22 [Preview] No. 971 del
64bit, less asm, more library bloat, more security and less on disk/swap.

Endwall 07/11/2017 (Tue) 22:19:31 [Preview] No. 977 del
Macintosh OS 7.0 (1991) runs in 2MB of memory with GUI
Macintosh OS 9.22 (2001) runs in 68.2MB of memory with GUI+TCP on G4 800 MHz
Edited last time by Endwall on 07/19/2017 (Wed) 01:34:56.

Anonymous 07/26/2017 (Wed) 06:05:21 [Preview] No. 990 del
Inferno runs on stock Nintendo DS Lite with 4 MB RAM, but it can run on even smaller hardware.

There's a cut-down version of Linux that runs on the RC2014 Z80 SBC, which IIRC has only 512 KB of RAM. Demonstration here:
Watch his other videos too, they're pretty nice. I'm just not that crazy about Linux anymore though, and run OpenBSD on my laptop, but I'm not even too crazy about OpenBSD. It's gotten quite bloated as well. It used to run fine on Motorola 68030 systems (like Amiga, Atari ST, old Macs, etc.), but they abandonned those machines years ago. Anyway for the RC2014 I think CP/M makes the most sense, and you could probably code a TCP/IP stack for that. After all, they managed to do it with a Commodore 64 that has much less memory:

Here's another guy with some interesting videos about making custom computers with old processors and not much memory.

BTW CP/M itself will run fine on an 8080 or Z80 computer with just 64 KB RAM. The RC2014 is really souped-up compared to the stuff from the 80's.

A stock Amiga 1000 has only 256 KB RAM but still runs a full multitasking OS with GUI. Ditto with the original Atari ST. I consider them to be the last of the interesting machines. There was much more impressive stuff that came after (SGI Indigo, etc.) but nothing as tightly designed and affordable.

Endwall 08/25/2017 (Fri) 21:50:57 [Preview] No. 1004 del
After a fresh install of Parabola GNU/linux using OpenRC
$ free -h
Uses 100MB after booting into the console after login in text mode.

Using the parabola kernel to boot a stage 3 hardened Gentoo environment.
Uses 65MB after login in text mode.

Anonymous 08/25/2017 (Fri) 22:51:28 [Preview] No. 1005 del
(9.22 KB 640x480 gem1.png)
I use XP Pro 32 bit as a daily driver (gaming mostly) and I optimized it somewhat to get 167MB used at boot. On a normal system with less optimization would be ~180MB used. After a few days of use it sits around 250MB, largely due to caching.

My Debian stable (Jessie) 32bit file server only uses around 55MB idle (no x, just ftp). My desktop machine before it died ran Devuan testing 32 bit which used around 80MB at boot without X running. I only used icewm on it though. I could get it lower by compiling my own kernel, but not really worth the hassle.

The main problem with Linux nowadays is when you install large DE's like KDE/Gnome/whatever you end up with a bunch of unnecessary desktop related services installed even with X stopped. 64bit should add some memory usage, but not the large numbers I am seeing.

Unfortunately my FreeDOS rig is down at the moment otherwise I would get you memory figures from it. Memory usage with networking would be troublesome though due to pretty much every packet driver using different amounts of memory depending on how good the NIC vendor is about optimization. I have seen some packet drivers using less than 20K, but others nearly 80K, and thats just the hardware I have laying around. As for running a GUI on such a system, OpenGem would be what I would test with (pic related), but Arachne while ultimately just a web browser lets you do many filesystem functions with it.

I had Win2000 for years but I cannot recall the memory usage from it offhand. I just remember I was able to get it to run on a machine with 32MB of ram without drastic performance issues at one point. I think the numbers were comparable to my stripped down XP install though.

At least for a start, it would probably be helpful to know the minimum requirements of 95/98/ME until someone comes up with hard figures.
95: 386DX with 4MB (8MB recommended) ram
98: 486DX/66Mhz (Pentium recommended), 16MB ram (24 recommended)
ME: Pentium 150Mhz (Pentium II 350Mhz recommended), 32MB ram (64MB recommended)

From personal experience, 95 and 98 benefited greatly from 512MB of ram if you had it. 98 (not sure about 95 but i'd assume so) needs a patch to see more than 1GB. WinME on the other hand really needed 1GB+ before it was happy, otherwise you could expect frequent bsod's.

Anonymous 08/26/2017 (Sat) 05:19:43 [Preview] No. 1007 del

>why the hell does Linux need 150MB to start up and release a console to me?

"Linux" doesn't. Parabola does. Maybe Parabola sucks. I dunno. I just checked my Slackware installation:

Without X: 54 MiB
With X & a lightweight window manager: 83 MiB

It could be lower, too, but I am running a number of daemons like ntpd and sshd, and I recompiled those that don't come compiled with hardening flags by default. Usually, that means they take more memory. The tradeoff is better security.


>Inferno runs on stock Nintendo DS Lite with 4 MB RAM, but it can run on even smaller hardware.

This expands dong. I've always wanted to try Inferno, but never got around to it.

Anonymous 08/27/2017 (Sun) 17:39:20 [Preview] No. 1008 del
>OpenBSD 6.1 starts in text mode command line in 27MB of memory
Uses less than that for me.
This depends on architecture, with amd64 and i386 being some of the most memory using ones.

Endwall 09/19/2017 (Tue) 07:03:03 [Preview] No. 1031 del

I trust FreeDOS more than I trust GNU/Linux. Get your system back up and running. I used to run this on a Pentium III system but it corupted the file system twice in a row after copying some files into the games directory. I Wiped and reinstalled, and tried it again same result. So I stopped using it, and started using MS DOS instead. But that aside I think that FreeDOS and OpenGEM have a real future. I think that FreeDOS should be an important part of the private computing future. They just need to port a heavy duty file encryption program to the base system and I'm sure gpg is already ported. When you get your system back up please post the memory usage results. Thanks!

Endwall 09/19/2017 (Tue) 07:06:02 [Preview] No. 1032 del
The machine I used is a SunBlade 150 UltraSparc IIi 550MHz computer from 2003.

Top | Return | Catalog | Post a reply