Results 1 to 8 of 8
any suggestion? I've took a glance at Yoper and Arch, but just in case there's something like slax but in i686 form?...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 07-25-2006 #1
slackware i686 variant
any suggestion? I've took a glance at Yoper and Arch, but just in case there's something like slax but in i686 form?
- 07-25-2006 #2
Slackware works on any processor, especially on pentium processors (i686)
- 07-25-2006 #3
yes i do notice that. But what if there's this slackware variant specifically optimized for latest hardwares (i.e optimized for i686 only). Currently most slackware packages are compiled for i486. Slackware is fast but would be faster with i686 optimizations, I think.
- 07-25-2006 #4
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
I don't think it makes much difference; but if you are so worried about speed, why not just compile everything yourself?
- 07-25-2006 #5Originally Posted by spoon!
If so, better use gentoo
- 07-25-2006 #6
Haven't tried Gentoo but I did try crux, but that distro would took some time to build a usable desktop.
Also looked into LFS, but would take even more time to build one.
Just thinking about end user level, ready to use i686 optimized linux like slax. Since most people today minimally have pentium 3 aren't they?
If i do had time and helps I would do one myself. But I'm not a programmer. I dream about a i686 desktop complete with addictive games such as neverball and Cube, also 3D authoring such as Blender and Wings prepared.
- 07-25-2006 #7
My two cents: There is imho not any noticeable difference in performance between i386, i486, i586 or i686 optimized distros (unless the developers have done something wrong). I have tested them all, Slackware, Arch, Gentoo, Debian, Yoper, ... It is imho just an ego-thing. ("My firefox opens in 4,462 seconds" "Bah, mine is better, it opens in 4,201 seconds!")
If Slackware works for you, stick to it. That simple.Windows free since 2002 | computing since 1984
- 07-25-2006 #8
well, did another question on slax forum. Somebody brought up about the compiling nature of slackware. Turn out it uses mtune=i686. Checked on slackware website also. Lol. All these time I don't notice. This question is dumb indeed. Sorry.