Results 1 to 6 of 6
Hello, im a newbie to linux, so first i think i will explain a bit. For those who would rather get to the question, goto the next paragraph . Im ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 04-02-2004 #1
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
Hello, im a newbie to linux, so first i think i will explain a bit. For those who would rather get to the question, goto the next paragraph . Im what you call a minimalist, hell, im still using 133mhz desktops running 98 to do my work and and as everyone knows, any machine with windows on it is bound for a blue screen in a day or less. Well i like to leave my computer on all night and download things, or encoding home videos(not wise on a 133 ), number crunching... the list can go on... but with windows i must boot down and save progress every morning because i know a blue screen will screw things up, so i decided linux will be the way to go. I knew they were free for download, so i downloaded a mainstream distro. The default mandrake install was WAY too slow and large for me(as xp and any newer os's seem to be). So then i formatted, went and downloaded 4 more distros. The lindows livecd trail w/e wouldnt even boot, but why would i install linux to get back into windows again hehe. anyway, gentoo took WAY too long to compile. slackware and delilinux(minimalist slackware) were the only ones to install right. Since i prefer minimalism and have unneeded "bloat" (thats why i dont upgrade past windows 98 ), I tried the slackware "newbie" install and took off a few things, and install was just under 2 gigs. I then tried with "menu" and deselected almost everthing except stuff like file manager, window maker, compiler. This install was amazingly still 1 gig. Some people might be saying "wtf, who cares".. well compared to windows 98 installs of less then 150mb, thats with all the "basics", this is huge. I currently have 1 gig hdd with windows 98 cabs, photoshop, k-meleon, dirextx, windows installed, a few shells, visual studio + approx. 100mb left over .. so i dont see why kernel + window maker+freex + compiler + file browser = 1 gig
Now for the question, is there a distro that will install only kernel, then allow you to select/download packages you wish, like gcc, a paint program ect. Im sure if some distros can install at 1mb-50mb then the kernel cant be THAT big. Just for reference, how large is there average kernel? the source? I want to try some "minimalist" distros but most are very small, and made for livecd servers only which is not what i want. they say they are geared toward experts so i think i should really stay clear lol. Now there was one called "Damn Small Desktop" or something that was 50mb with all software you need, this sounds great except its mainly for livecd only, you COULD copy to your hard drive but iirc it said soemthing about not allowing any other software to be added, but i could be wrong. So any other hints, distros, guides i could use would be great... i plan on looking in the guides section of the forum later tonight. I also tried to search the forums so i didnt repeat a question, so sorry if i did, and also wasnt sure if here, or "Newbie" section was appropriate(sp).
- 04-03-2004 #2
- Join Date
- Apr 2003
- London, UK
Re: Minimum Install.Originally Posted by Endo_
I dont know of a system that is TOTALLY minimalist like you ask, to be honest i have never really paid much attention to how much HD space is used on a minimum install. Check out Debian when you have a moment, it may do what you need, and you can remove a lot of stuff during install if you need, though DSelect is a pain in the a**.
- 04-05-2004 #3
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
I thought 1 gig was too high, turns out going to "Expert" mode got me down to 200MB, bare bones. This is still alot to me for a system that doesnt do anything yet, but i guess you gotta learn what you can delete and stuff eh? Thanks though, ill try that out when i got another free moment.
- 04-05-2004 #4Originally Posted by Endo_
- 04-09-2004 #5
- Join Date
- Apr 2004
Why windows of course. (and i do not wish to turn this into one of the other 1000000000000000 posts fighting over which is better).
Anyway, ive learnt that linux from scratch might be the way to go. Compile what i need, scrap what i dont. Only thing is I dislike is you need another distro on the hdd. I asked around about a LiveCD that would have the tool to do it, but got no respons. And one more thing i hope you guys wouldnt mind answering... why is X such a standard? Basicly every graphical app i looked into runs on X, and the X "alternatives" (the few i found) were so different they couldnt use X apps. I see how X would have been great when you couldnt run graphics on a machine and ran them off the server, but why still do it today? The average home user wont do this, so is it not just using up resources? And isnt having it using the net just an unnessesary risk? (you know, like anything using the network has to potential to have a whole). Thanks alot guys.
- 04-09-2004 #6
The point was ment to be that you were complaing that linux takes up to much space when a minum windowsXP install is about 1.2Gb. A minum install of Debian is 97Mb seems pretty good to me. (About 150Mb with a toolchain)
About LFS just get any liveCD and you can build it from there its simple ive done it before.
And the X protocal is a networked protocal so you can use remote desktops which is very handy and more people use them then you would think. And you can control access to it so I would not worry about it being on the network (Any good firewall is a simple solution).