66

I'm just curious if it's possible to install the Linux kernel alone, or if you need to use one of the flavours. If it were possible, how would you do it? I don't need a detailed tutorial. I just want to know how it would be done conceptually. I'm not good with low-level stuff, and want to know how you get an OS into the computer. I imagine it has something to do with the MBR.

Oh and I noticed that a lot of the answers suggest a certain distribution of some minimal Linux. I should have probably stated that I am not looking to install a minimal or bare bones Linux. This question is purely theoretical. Still, I really appreciate all the answers, and will refer to them immediately, if ever I would want to install a truly personalized Linux.

Jeff Schaller
  • 67,283
  • 35
  • 116
  • 255
cesar
  • 779
  • 3
    What do you mean by "alone" and "flavors"? Linux is not an OS it is a kernel, what would a kernel without an OS be good for? Are you trying to figure out the boot loader sequence instead? – Caleb Jul 21 '11 at 10:24
  • 4
    If you want to understand how a kernel/OS is getting into the computer, here is the place to start. Just make sure not to ask "newbie" questions there, they will bite you, ask them on SO instead. – Philomath Jul 21 '11 at 10:35
  • 3
    By alone, I mean just the kernel, minus the user interface and included programs like OpenOffice. By 'flavours', I mean the different distributions of linux, like ubuntu, redhat, debian, and mandriva. I have almost no idea of what I'm talking about. I was imagining that the Linux kernel had some basic bash capabilities like DOS. I think I may have my ideas of kernels and operating systems tangled up. – cesar Jul 21 '11 at 10:47
  • 4
    Yes you are them REALLY tangled up :) Bash is just a user-land program that runs as a process managed by the kernel. A kernel by itself gives you nothing except a platform to run other things on. The suggestion of LFS (Linux From Scratch) in Shadur's answer is right on target. You would learn a lot about what all the different pieces are and what makes a distro a distro and where the kernel ends and user-land begins by building a scratch system. – Caleb Jul 21 '11 at 10:54
  • Thanks, philomath. I'll check it out. I think I got my ideas tangled up. – cesar Jul 21 '11 at 10:54
  • @anonymous: Actually, the definitions for OS aren't agreed-upon. Sometimes the kernel is called the OS. – tshepang Jul 21 '11 at 10:57
  • @Tshepang: Right. I can't remember a lot of what was discussed in my "Introduction to OSs" class. I can only remember some of the names of the algorithms involved, such as shadow paging, and best-fit. I also remember that the kernel is responsible for managing memory, allocating it to requesting applications; managing the CPU queue; and handling devices. – cesar Jul 21 '11 at 11:16
  • Well, the discussion of how many of those things should be done by the kernel and which are safely delegated to userspace is as old as the linux kernel itself (Google for monolithic/microkernel some time if you've a free couple of weeks) – Shadur-don't-feed-the-AI Jul 21 '11 at 11:27
  • 2
    Actually, the DOS kernel didn't have any basic bash capabilities either. The standard user interface was provided by the shell program COMMAND.COM. The closest you could get to a bare kernel doing anything useful would be to boot using the kernel parameter init=/bin/bash (assuming a minimal Linux is on disk). As answered, if you only have the bootloader and the kernel, it will stop very quickly when it doesn't find init. – StarNamer Jul 27 '12 at 18:41
  • so you're saying the large hadron collider, international space station, and traffic systems all use distributions? isnt it just barebone linux, DOS style? –  Jul 15 '14 at 22:07
  • @NickBailuc barebone linux, DOS style ** is** a user distribution. Just a minimal distribution. – RonJohn Mar 05 '19 at 01:12

6 Answers6

64

You can technically install just a bootloader and the kernel alone, but as soon as the kernel boots, it will complain about not being able to start "init", then it will just sit there and you can't do anything with it.

BTW, it is a part of the bootloader that is in the MBR. The kernel sits somewhere on the regular area of a disk. The bootloader is configured to know where that is, so it can load the kernel and execute it.

Shawn J. Goff
  • 46,081
  • How would you put it into the MBR? – cesar Jul 22 '11 at 06:07
  • Every bootloader comes with a tool for installing itself into the MBR. There are also friendlier tools like Boot-Repair (https://help.ubuntu.com/community/Boot-Repair). – Shawn J. Goff Jul 22 '11 at 12:26
  • Well you could create an initramfs and embed it into the kernel image, and then you'd have a fully working system from just a kernel image file :-) – phemmer Jul 27 '12 at 14:22
  • @ShawnJ.Goff Why would the kernel complain of not being able to start init, if we provide the initramfs ? – Pratik Singhal Nov 02 '14 at 13:34
  • 4
    @ps06756 If you have the initramfs, that is not the kernel "alone" as the question asked. If the initramfs has an init, the kernel will not complain. – Shawn J. Goff Nov 03 '14 at 14:44
  • Will you even get a command line? Or you have to "set up things" by external tools? – birgersp Dec 04 '16 at 13:13
  • @Birger You will not get a command line. It is provided by a shell (part of userland tools, not kernel). Simply said the kernel makes an interface (with abstraction and management) between the computer hardware and userland programs. The actual useful work is performed by the userland programs. --- Regarding the "set up": There will be nothing to set up without userland. All the usual configuration of the system is performed from the userland. Only very special parameters could be set when the kernel is being loaded or compiled. – pabouk - Ukraine stay strong Jul 20 '17 at 08:33
24

I don't think you understand exactly what you're asking, but you might want to take a look at the Linux From Scratch project.

Shadur-don't-feed-the-AI
  • 31,260
  • 1
    LFS would be a good idea to figure out how to build a minimum system. Or you could look at MINIX (and read the book). Or, for a different introduction (less work, but less informative), look at the packages tagged “essential” (aptitude search '?essential') on Debian or Ubuntu and understand what each does (there's a bit more than the bare minimum). – Gilles 'SO- stop being evil' Jul 21 '11 at 15:47
  • @shadur Here is what I am trying to achieve: Linux Kernel + Bootloader (Grub) + Basic GNU System Utils (not busybox). I am trying to avoid busy box and want the GNU utils. Seems linux from scratch uses busybox. Anything that I missing so I use the same scripts and get GNU System utils working? I appreciate your patience. – Gary Feb 27 '22 at 03:44
16

If you are asking if you can just install or upgrade a kernel "over" an existing system without installing a bunch of other programs?

The Linux kernel is a binary file usually named vmlinuz-x.x.x-x-name in the boot directory (which is usually a separate small partition at the beginning of the hard drive) where the x's are a version number. "name" is just a chosen name for the kernel that can be set at compile time, you can use it to identify what type of machine or architecture the kernel is for or any other reason.

It's loaded at boottime by a bootloader, typically GRUB which is invoked by boot code in the MBR which is invoked by the BIOS ROM. Once it's loaded it's not "held open" or protected specially. So you can replace that file with another working kernel. But, GRUB has a cool feature which lets you select multiple kernels to boot from. So it's pretty smart to add your additional kernel to that list, but keep the original known working kernel just in case things go wrong.

Almost all distributions I believe make a "modular" kernel where device drivers are in separate files. So most kernels need a filesystem containing drivers available to it at boot time and that is what an "initrd" (initial RAM disk) or "initramfs" is for. GRUB will load the kernel at a location in memory, and the initrd at a different location, and jump to the kernel telling it where the initrd is, starting Linux.

Drivers can also be "built into" the kernel and are therefore automatically loaded and available when the bootloader loads the vmlinuz image. Kernels that are meant to work on diverse systems (such as those of most distributions) usually minimize what is built into the kernel because available hardware will be scanned later in the boot process and only modules representing present hardware will be loaded.

There are tools to modify and create initrds. Debian has nice tools and I imagine other distributions do as well.

So, if you download a more recent kernel from kernel.org and compile it to create a new kernel binary image, you need to make or update an initrd with drivers that work with that kernel. The old initrd won't work because drivers have to match up with the version of the kernel that is running.

The initrd file is named initrd.img-x.x.x.x-name similarly to the kernel, and can be replaced after boot just like the kernel, and best practice would indicate you don't delete a known working initrd until you know you can boot into your new kernel+initrd successfully.

I hope that provides some context.

If you are looking for a "barebones" Linux install that has little to no additional programs installed with it, my favorite choice has always been installing the Debian netinst image. Pretty much you have only the most basic tools needed to run a command line text console and nano as a text editor.

LawrenceC
  • 10,992
  • Thank you for this answer, I learned a lot that I was googling without knowing what to google for. – Vidur Jan 07 '20 at 14:24
12

Single executable rootfs

The absolute minimum system runs a single /init program as I've explained at Single Application Linux | Super User

Minimal Linux Live

https://github.com/ivandavidov/minimal

For a more interesting interactive system, this is a (mostly educational) small script that:

  • downloads the source for the kernel and busybox
  • compiles them
  • generates a bootable 8Mb ISO with them

The ISO then leaves you in a minimal shell with busybox.

With QEMU you can easily boot into the system.

I have modified it to allow running it from the kernel source directory: https://github.com/cirosantilli/runlinux

Usage:

git clone https://github.com/ivandavidov/minimal
cd minimal/src
./build_minimal_linux_live.sh
# Wait.
# Install QEMU.
# minimal_linux_live.iso was generated
./qemu64.sh

and you will be left inside a QEMU Window with you new minimal system. Awesome.

Since it is small, this is a good option to read the source and understand what is going on.

Tested on Ubuntu 16.04.

Buildroot

https://buildroot.org/

Large set of Makefile scripts that manage:

  • GCC cross compilation toolchain
  • kernel compilation
  • bootloader compilation
  • generation of rootfs
  • has tons of package download / build recipes in the source tree, including complex stuff like GTK. There is a dependency system.

Minimal example:

git clone git://git.buildroot.net/buildroot
cd buildroot
git checkout 2016.05
make qemu_x86_defconfig
# Can't use -jN, use `BR2_JLEVEL=2` instead.
BR2_JLEVEL=2 make
# Wait.
# cat board/qemu/x86_64/readme.txt
qemu-system-x86_64 -M pc -kernel output/images/bzImage -drive file=output/images/rootfs.ext2,if=virtio,format=raw -append root=/dev/vda -net nic,model=virtio -net user
# You are now in a shell with BusyBox utilities.

It even has recipes for building X11 from scratch: How to install X11 on my own Linux Buildroot system?

Professional stuff.

Alpine Linux

https://github.com/gliderlabs/docker-alpine

Embedded distribution with a package manager that offers precompiled binaries from a website.

See also

User mode Linux (UML)

Not what you want most likely, but arguably the thing that answers the question most literally: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/User-mode_Linux

It basically compiles the kernel into a userland executable that acts as a kernel simulator.

Kind of cool, but also kind of killed by QEMU: https://stackoverflow.com/questions/36353143/is-user-mode-linux-uml-project-stopped/44670393#44670393

Ciro Santilli OurBigBook.com
  • 18,092
  • 4
  • 117
  • 102
  • Here is what I am trying to achieve: Linux Kernel + Bootloader (Grub) + Basic GNU System Utils (not busybox). I am trying to avoid busy box and want the GNU sys utils. Seems linux from scratch uses busybox. Anything that I missing so I use the same scripts and get GNU System utils working? I appreciate your patience. – Gary Feb 27 '22 at 03:45
  • 1
    @Gary not something I've done, but I would have a look at the build options of your favorite distro builder (Buildroot/Aplpine/NixOS0 for options to enable GNU coreutils/GNU bash/etc. , and disable Busybox. E.g.: https://github.com/rancher/buildroot/blob/881dae3a9c086ee3880834e10f72baea221f4945/package/coreutils/coreutils.mk / https://github.com/rancher/buildroot/tree/881dae3a9c086ee3880834e10f72baea221f4945/package/bash – Ciro Santilli OurBigBook.com Feb 27 '22 at 09:05
5

It is possible to install a Linux kernel without the usual user-space tools. This is commonly done in embedded systems such as routers. Typically, the kernel is loaded from ROM or Flash memory, and has been customised for the device in question (usually with required drivers compiled into the kernel rather than being loaded as modules).

At least one user-space program needs to exist, to become the 'init' process (not necessarily called init, but started by the kernel as process 1, and the automatic parent of any orphaned processes) - unless the kernel has been modified (rather than simply customised) to not require this.

It's certainly not necessary to have a shell available to have a working Linux-based device, although it can make development much easier!

Toby Speight
  • 8,678
4

I would like to second Shadur's suggestion you should make your hands dirty the Linux From Scratch way.
Also, something similar, try Pocket Linux.

The Pocket Linux Guide demonstrates how to build a small console-based GNU/Linux system using only source code and a couple of diskettes. It is intended for Linux users who would like to gain a deeper understanding about how their system works beneath the shroud of distribution specific features and tools.

Community
  • 1
Philomath
  • 2,877
  • 2
    Although note that no one in their right mind recommends /either/ LFS or PocketLinux for any kind of important production task -- they're good for learning how stuff works, but there's a reason most distributions come with a full set of tools and frontends for most stuff. – Shadur-don't-feed-the-AI Jul 21 '11 at 14:30