How Different Is The Red Hat Terminal To Gp2x Terminal?


Cervante

PS3 ID: Cervante1
Joined
Jun 28, 2006
Messages
573
Location
SD card slot
Website
Visit site
The only Linux OS ive toyed with was Red Hat, little by little im learning how to install things via the terminal, creating scripts & using /.(something) commands..How different is the GP2X terminal to the red hat linux terminal? how can I access the terminal on gp2x?
 
all terminals are the same. Thats the glue that holds to gather all Linux Distros, the kernel. But I too would like to know how to access the GP2X terminal from my PC. Also side note: Is my sig too big now, I cant decide.
 
To get at the terminal from your PC you will need to get the usb networking to work (or use a serial lead fromn the EXT port). Once this is up and running you can use 'telnet' to connect to the GP2X.

On windows press Win+R and type in 'telnet' followed by the IP address of your GP2X. On Linux do the same but from the shell. If all goes well you should get a login prompt - login as root and press enter for the password and away you go.

You can also get at the GP2X shell with the sterm utillity from the archive. The GP2X runs 'BusyBox' which is a light-weight version of 'bash' so not everything you have on a full-blown Linux shell will be there but have a go.

More instructions/discussions for getting the usb network to work are here and here and there's some stuff on Samba here you may find interesting. Also, for :ph34r: status on the terminal look at these two pages.

Have fun!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
No.

The GP2X does indeed run BusyBox, and there's a list of supported commands on their website. This includes the most common ones like ls, cd, cat, vi, rm, tar, gzip, etc.
 
Lupin posted on Sep 28 2006 at 11:08 PM said:
all terminals are the same. Thats the glue that holds to gather all Linux Distros, the kernel. But I too would like to know how to access the GP2X terminal from my PC. Also side note: Is my sig too big now, I cant decide.

Thats not entirely true, all terminals that run the Bash shell are the same.

There are plenty of systems that use other shells, and on most linux systems you can choose which you would like to use. (the default is bash however) :)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Aimless_E posted on Sep 29 2006 at 08:58 PM said:
all terminals that run the Bash shell are the same.

There are plenty of systems that use other shells, and on most linux systems you can choose which you would like to use. (the default is bash however) :)

Wrong. Bash is merely an interface - it's not like BusyBox that incorporates many utilities into one binary, bash is a shell. I use bash on my computer, now you tell me it's the same (it's not).

Also, bash is not strictly the standard, although it is generally preffered and people use it over shells such as sh.

Mind you, the gp2x has both bash and sh.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
sorry guess I was wrong in my previous statement, but all I know is that Ive tried out about 5 or 6 different distros and been on a few peoples installs and they have all used Bash, so I just assumed that was the core and SH was just an additional opitional layer.
 
Lupin posted on Sep 29 2006 at 10:11 PM said:
sorry guess I was wrong in my previous statement, but all I know is that Ive tried out about 5 or 6 different distros and been on a few peoples installs and they have all used Bash, so I just assumed that was the core and SH was just an additional opitional layer.
There is no "core", in fact, I think sh was around before bash. You don't get layers, only alternatives. sh is dated and bash is generally better, that's all.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Alvin posted on Sep 30 2006 at 08:18 AM said:
Lupin posted on Sep 29 2006 at 10:11 PM said:
sorry guess I was wrong in my previous statement, but all I know is that Ive tried out about 5 or 6 different distros and been on a few peoples installs and they have all used Bash, so I just assumed that was the core and SH was just an additional opitional layer.
There is no "core", in fact, I think sh was around before bash. You don't get layers, only alternatives. sh is dated and bash is generally better, that's all.

Yep .. the tsh, csh, sh, ksh, rsh ... etc ...

these as all command line interperters that allow you to create shell scipts and type commands. bash is a much more recent shell than all of the others. It is "generally" the default shell on linux but that can be changed and you can switch shells. Most shell scripts have a comment line as the first line that specifies what shell should be used to run the script (in case the one you are using does ny support the syntax of the script).
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Back
Top