From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 From: "Pat Gilliland" Subject: Re: Future of ELKS Date: Thu, 20 May 2004 08:40:27 -0500 Sender: linux-8086-owner@vger.kernel.org Message-ID: <40aca73b.5ed.0@cyberus.ca> Reply-To: patrick@inkpotproductions.ca Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Return-path: List-Id: Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" To: Miguel Bolanos , linux-8086@vger.kernel.org Very Large Caveat: I am an "end user" rather than a "developer" so all I can offer is help with documentation and very sincere thanks to all of you who have helped keep ELKS going. My wish list for ELKS would include: a comb image that continues to a 720 floppy. an easy way to install from a (720) floppy to hard drive. some sort of modem support . Now as for the future - a few questions. What is the realistic future of the 8088 architecture? Are there really enough machines left in existence to give ELKS a practical purpose, or will it remain the play thing old hardware addicts? I suspect that even in the third world the 8088 as hardware is dead. A few thoughts from un-educated user space: As I recall, the 386 (or was it 286) or better can run a number of applications as if they were on seperate virtual 8086 machines. Could this be of use to simulate large clusters on a single box? Could a number of virtual machines be used to simulate network topologies with ELKS virtual boxes, ELKS based virtual routers and switches and ELKS based "compromised" virutual machines. Related to virtual clustering, can the limited overhead and size of the ELKS kernel be used to advantage somehow? I'm thinking that a light weight kernel would allow more resources for applications - use a smaller engine to get more room in the passenger compartment. ELKS as I remember, was intially designed as an easier to understand version of linux. Should ELKS be kept intentionally simple as a kernel for "student" use? Can ELKS be used as a sort of nano-kernel used in keeping with the UNIX ideal of creating simple inter-connectable tools? I am way out of my depth here, but my understanding is that some things work better in kernel space than user space so would it be of any benefit to run applications each with their own kernel? Can ELKS be worked onto ultra-portable devices such as USB storage keys and watches? Yes I realize that these devices do not in general currently have processors but with modern chip techniques it should be simple to tuck an 8088 into some corner of the mask. One could say browse to the files on a keychain rather than having to mount and read it. Reduce the form factor further and you could have httpd on a business card to serve up your resume, business website or what ever, just plug it into an ethernet port and it's there. To extend the idea - a tiny machine that serves data for a specified number of times then rm -rf * 's it with no possiblity of user intervention. It could also incorporate onboard encryption and DRM - damn there goes my soul straight to hell. Limited play video, audio or any other data you want. Take your key down to the video store and load up a movie that deletes itself as it plays leaving an empty key for reuse. Yes I'm drifting off topic so lets just call it "prior art" and leave it that. For the gamers, what about a video card with one ELKS processor _per pixel_ - it may not be at all efficient but would probably sell just for the bragging factor. An finally, I must admit it would be satisfying in a very twisted way to make a beowulf cluster out of my two old laptops connected over a serial link. Pat G. Patrick Gilliland InkPot Productions www.inkpotproductions.ca (613) 722-1439 Sent using cyberus.ca WebMail - http://www.cyberus.ca/