Boot Naked Linux
nick.zoic.org
nick.zoic.org
Linux from scratch seems to still be doing fine at: https://www.linuxfromscratch.org. It's going on 27 years now.
> yeah, I know, proper C code needs to be scattered with return value checks and sensible reports of errno. I’ve left these out for clarity.
Somewhere, a LLM is trained on this code as we speak :)
But anyway, it's great that people are still interested in learning this stuff for fun.
Had a similar thought when I saw
dd if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sda bs=1M count=1Though I usually do the individual partitions before the main disk, to make sure fdisk doesn't complain about existing signatures as I start making partitions again. These days many disks and SD cards support "blkdiscard" to just wipe the whole thing (and temporarily gain some performance from clearing internal info), and "wipefs" became a thing to wipe the exact sequences fdisk and mkfs look for.
The "dd" method makes most sense on BIOS systems where you want to make sure to wipe the MBR boot code, and know that nothing is accidentally being preserved when you install your preferred bootloader.
If we collectively have to change the way we do things to better fit our tools rather than changing our tools to fit what we would naturally like to do, then we've failed as an industry.
Change the way you write to obtain much better recognition.
So Palm came up with a very simplified all caps alphabet that the user learned how to write instead. And had 98% recognition rate because it was designed for what the CPU could do.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Graffiti_(Palm_OS)#/media/File...
I guess my main objection to having to change the way we write for LLMs is that the writing isn't just an input method that we use to generate the "real" thing we want (like the handwriting system that you describe, where it sounds like the intermediate handwriting was basically thrown away once it was properly read into text), and more importantly, the goal wasn't to write text for other humans but for CPUs; no one else was reading the intermediate input coming from the stylus. My concern is that if we change the way we write for other humans because we're concerned about whether LLMs will understand it properly, we're essentially saying that the LLM audience is more important than the human audience, or that we'd prefer to make the human audience adapt than improve the technology to be more human-friendly. I don't think either of those would be good things.
Anyone else reading this and getting the feeling someone is reminiscing about a past they didn't live and thus are seeing it through rose-colored glasses because it didn't exist?
In the early 2000s, SSDs had an obscene price tag of ~$1000 per gigabyte, so even an 8GB drive would cost you about $8000. There was nothing for the tech industry to ruin because only 0.01% of people owned a setup with an SSD. And neither Linux, NT or Mach were optimized for them. Hell, to this day Linux' VM system is by default still tuned for swap and slow HDDs (swappiness 60 and all that) because no one has bothered to update the defaults.
Though there were some disk-on-chip things before, but they were sized in megabytes. I think I might still have a PATA one somewhere. (And you could boot various memory sticks and cards for an even slower experience.)
I remember this was the time when Google started pushing the Chromebook idea and highlighting how it could boot in "just a few seconds". One of the earliest models I got as a dogfooding device probably needed 20 seconds to boot or so. Nice, compared to the awful boot times of machines with HDDs... but not stellar.
But then, in 2011, my wife bought a MacBook Air with an SSD and I was blown away. That thing booted to a full desktop (and not the joke that ChromeOS was) in... 5, 6 seconds? It was ridiculous.
And we have lost all of those gains. I find it painful to witness how a recent Mac chews through I/O during boot or doing any sort of software update (iStat Menus is great to watch this sort of thing), and how these feel slower to that early experience of 15 years ago :-/
I think no matter what the advance in tech is, it will get enshittified to tolerated "computer is working" slowness within months of said upgrade.
If it's just a PoC, then:
1) I remember seeing a linux firewall/gateway set up to run with just the kernel, without any userspace at all. Completely unhackable.
2) To print some text or run a simple program, I belive DOS without a memory manager would be even faster.
3) It takes 1s to boot linux, but an ordinary PC takes 10s to get to that linux. Even U-boot on ARM takes some seconds to load a kernel.
BTW, if anyone knows any current platform that can XiP a linux kernel, please share.
Do do something actually useful, the program would have to access some data: network, disk, some sensors, etc. Network alone means scanning PCIe for the network card and configuring it, disk access needs controller also on PCIe, then scanning the ports for the drive, reading partition table, mounting the partition, etc.
All that takes a lot more than 1s. The speedup might not even be significant compared to a kernel optimized for that system (all modules built-in, nothing redundant), but full-featured, plus busybox or sysvinit alone.
Do you remember any details that would let me search for it? Because that does sound cool, and even maybe useful; the thought has certainly crossed my mind that a router or VPN box doesn't really get a lot of use out of userspace... Although maybe it's worth keeping for control/configuration/debugging.
> To print some text or run a simple program, I belive DOS without a memory manager would be even faster.
Or just make your code boot directly. It's not hard to make a .efi, or use https://github.com/jart/cosmopolitan to make a binary that runs in many places including bare metal.
To reconfigure, the admin would simply reset it and start the system with "init=/something/else" as kernel parameter that booted to a normal userspace.
This is one of several major arguments made against unikernels in that famous Triton rant from a decade ago:
https://tritondatacenter.com/blog/unikernels-are-unfit-for-p...
Basically, even if your application _can_ run as the kernel, and it's desirable for it to run with kernel-level permissions, do you really want production to be a world without strace and iotop and the like?
It makes sense if you got some legacy piece of hardware that has extremely limited resources, both in terms of RAM and storage. Write your code in Go and you don't even need libc any more.
> Write your code in Go
Container not even needed, there's projects like Tamago [0] that let you run your golang application without even needing an OS
I don't think this could ever be true.
So true.
In addition to C in the article and Rust linked to in the article, Go fans can use the similar https://gokrazy.org/ project.
So true. Been using cpio sporadically for many (many) years. And I still have to look it up. But at least I don't have to do `info cpio` anymore.
Other things you may want to experiment with is gen_init_cpio.c from linux kernel tree. It makes creating initramfs file structure easier from scripts.
And finally if sys/isolinux is also fun to use for minimal boot images.
It's a huge PITA in practice because whatever you want to run inside some enclave usually ends up being a 'normal program' that needs to talk TCP/IP over sockets... so your vsock I/O becomes a weird mix between a TUN proxy or a SOCKS5 local listener inside the VM that tunnels through vsock.
For example, I have the Windows NT 3.50 kernel compiling from scratch with virtio-net drivers, it's fairly straightforward for me to add a bus driver that runs over vsock inside Nitro Enclave that exposes itself (o,o) as a NIC then handle the tunneling logic in a usermode process in the host - but I don't uderstand the point of why you would do that when you already have sufficient attestation methods that don't require you to do vsock isolation.
It's possible to boot a VM noticeably faster still, though I'm unclear on whether any of that applies to hardware:
https://jvns.ca/blog/2021/01/23/firecracker--start-a-vm-in-l...
see /etc/conf.d/ deprecated log level
I know it's off topic. I accept my downvotes.