Linux on an older computer

Linux on an older computer

Post by KetoglutaricAc » Fri, 15 Mar 2002 11:54:10



I have an old 586 Pentium 133MHz computer with a 2 GB hard drive and
24 MB of RAM which I installed Red Hat 6.0 on a while ago. I was
having configuration problems, so I upgraded to Mandrake 8.1.
Unfortunatly, I didn't realize that Mandrake's system requirements
required a computer much better than that, so now the computer runs
extremely slowly, worse than Windows (*gasp*). What would be a good,
light version of Linux to run on the above kind of computer? Would an
older version of Mandrake (7.0?) work? If so, which one? I have heard
a lot of good stuff about Slackware, which version would be the "best"
for this computer? Would the latest version of Slackware (8.0, I
think), be too advanced, and too loaded? I want a good, stable, smooth
distro. And what about SuSE (version, etc.)?

I don't feel like trying Red Hat again, so please keep your
suggestions to only Mandrake, SuSE, and Slackware.
 - Ketoglutaric Acid

 
 
 

Linux on an older computer

Post by Travis Case » Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:09:40



> I have an old 586 Pentium 133MHz computer with a 2 GB hard drive and
> 24 MB of RAM which I installed Red Hat 6.0 on a while ago. I was
> having configuration problems, so I upgraded to Mandrake 8.1.
> Unfortunatly, I didn't realize that Mandrake's system requirements
> required a computer much better than that, so now the computer runs
> extremely slowly, worse than Windows (*gasp*). What would be a good,
> light version of Linux to run on the above kind of computer? Would an
> older version of Mandrake (7.0?) work? If so, which one? I have heard
> a lot of good stuff about Slackware, which version would be the "best"
> for this computer? Would the latest version of Slackware (8.0, I
> think), be too advanced, and too loaded? I want a good, stable, smooth
> distro. And what about SuSE (version, etc.)?

> I don't feel like trying Red Hat again, so please keep your
> suggestions to only Mandrake, SuSE, and Slackware.

It's not so much the version of Linux you use, as what you run on Linux.  
KDE and Gnome are both very memory-hungry, and are going to be slow on the
computer you describe.  If you're happy at the command line, you can
install without X and have tons of space and a nice, snappy system.

If you're happy with a basic X system (e.g., twm and mostly working in
xterms, using the older X programs like aXe and such), again you should be
fine.

If you want a more "modern" setup, though, you're either going to need more
memory, or to look hard at how to do a low-memory X setup.

--

       /,`.-'`'    -.  ;-;;,_   No one agrees with me.  Not even me.
      |,4-  ) )-,_..;\ (  `'-'
     '---''(_/--'  `-'\_)

 
 
 

Linux on an older computer

Post by Chris Brag » Fri, 15 Mar 2002 13:16:28



> I have an old 586 Pentium 133MHz computer with a 2 GB hard drive and
> 24 MB of RAM which I installed Red Hat 6.0 on a while ago. I was
> having configuration problems, so I upgraded to Mandrake 8.1.
> Unfortunatly, I didn't realize that Mandrake's system requirements
> required a computer much better than that, so now the computer runs
> extremely slowly, worse than Windows (*gasp*). What would be a good,
> light version of Linux to run on the above kind of computer? Would an
> older version of Mandrake (7.0?) work? If so, which one? I have heard
> a lot of good stuff about Slackware, which version would be the "best"
> for this computer? Would the latest version of Slackware (8.0, I
> think), be too advanced, and too loaded? I want a good, stable, smooth
> distro. And what about SuSE (version, etc.)?

> I don't feel like trying Red Hat again, so please keep your
> suggestions to only Mandrake, SuSE, and Slackware.
>  - Ketoglutaric Acid

For the same reason you wouldn't try to put Windows XP on that system and
expect it to work, you have to realize that while you can still certainly
run a GUI system on it, you need to think about what you have under the
hood. You're trying to put Mandrake 8.1 on there, and likely are using KDE
or GNOME as the environment. Naturally, the world of computing doesn't
stand still for old hardware... Linux is no exception. These environments
are too resource intensive for what you have. You can even stick with
Mandrake 8.1 if you like. Just choose to use one of the lighter weight
windows managers that come with it. IceWM, Blackbox, FVWM, etc...

Good Luck!
--
Chris Bragg
Microsoft Emancipation - October 1999

"Someone should explain to MY desktop that it isn't ready for Linux..."

 
 
 

Linux on an older computer

Post by Pet » Fri, 15 Mar 2002 21:42:12


Hi,

I have Red Hat 7.1 running on an cyrix 166MX with 64MB of RAM and it's
fairly nippy. I suspect that you have loads of services running which
will cause slowdown on many machines. I good tight clean install,
running only the services you need should work with most distro. You
can always compile a specific kernal to your type of processor.

 
 
 

Linux on an older computer

Post by Pau » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 00:21:35



> I have an old 586 Pentium 133MHz computer with a 2 GB hard drive and
> 24 MB of RAM which I installed Red Hat 6.0 on a while ago. I was
> having configuration problems, so I upgraded to Mandrake 8.1.
> Unfortunatly, I didn't realize that Mandrake's system requirements
> required a computer much better than that, so now the computer runs
> extremely slowly, worse than Windows (*gasp*). What would be a good,
> light version of Linux to run on the above kind of computer? Would an
> older version of Mandrake (7.0?) work? If so, which one? I have heard
> a lot of good stuff about Slackware, which version would be the "best"
> for this computer? Would the latest version of Slackware (8.0, I
> think), be too advanced, and too loaded? I want a good, stable, smooth
> distro. And what about SuSE (version, etc.)?

> I don't feel like trying Red Hat again, so please keep your
> suggestions to only Mandrake, SuSE, and Slackware.
>  - Ketoglutaric Acid

With a little ram as you have I am guessing you are not using big gui
interfaces like kde and stuff.  Just a guess.  Slackware 8.0 will
install fine, I have it on an onld P166, 48rama and 2 gig harddrive.
It has an old pci matrox vid card and 2 netgear nics.  Plans are to
run it as a firewall, server etc when I get that all figured out.
SUSE in the graphical enstall mode needs more ram but you can install
in text mode with yast instead of yast2.  My problem was my box has no
cdrom so I just hooked my into one of my newer pcs, bypassing my other
hd, and installed away.  Slack and SUSE allow you to really pare down
the install so you dont have alot of unneeded junk.  So give slack a
try or borrow/buy a copy of suse and have fun/

Paul

 
 
 

Linux on an older computer

Post by aaron cono » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 02:21:42


Quote:> I have an old 586 Pentium 133MHz computer with a 2 GB hard drive and
> 24 MB of RAM which I installed Red Hat 6.0 on a while ago. I was
> having configuration problems, so I upgraded to Mandrake 8.1.
> Unfortunatly, I didn't realize that Mandrake's system requirements
> required a computer much better than that, so now the computer runs
> extremely slowly, worse than Windows (*gasp*). What would be a good,
> light version of Linux to run on the above kind of computer? Would an
> older version of Mandrake (7.0?) work? If so, which one? I have heard
> a lot of good stuff about Slackware, which version would be the "best"
> for this computer? Would the latest version of Slackware (8.0, I
> think), be too advanced, and too loaded? I want a good, stable, smooth
> distro. And what about SuSE (version, etc.)?

> I don't feel like trying Red Hat again, so please keep your
> suggestions to only Mandrake, SuSE, and Slackware.
>  - Ketoglutaric Acid

The big thing is that no matter what distribution of linux/GNU OS you use,
you're never gonna get it as fast as you'd like because from what I can guess
you don't want to take the time to configure your system properly. Re-compile
your kernel by stripping all un-neccessary drivers, remove things from startup
that you don't use, run in *gasp* console mode and startx when you feel the
need to be in a graphical environment. You can't get * from a stone, and you
can't overload an older system with so much overhead that it can't handle it.
That having been said, try looking into the debian distribution. Although I
don't really like this distro (for different reasons) it is a rather nice,
rather customizable distro. Of course, no matter what distro you use, I suggest
a re-compile of the kernel as a very first thing to do. After that, going
through the init cycle (either ntsysv or manually editing /etc/rc.d/rcXX/XXX)
and taking out anything you really don't use on a regular basis (Like the
sendmaild, which you probably will never use, or telnetd...etc) and going
through your X and .profile, .login, and .bashrc scripts and try to reduce
overhead. I have linux running blazingly fast on a 486 and it DOES run X...just
not by default (I keep it in runlevel 3)...
Hope this helps,
Aaron
 
 
 

Linux on an older computer

Post by KetoglutaricAc » Sat, 16 Mar 2002 14:23:25



> > I have an old 586 Pentium 133MHz computer with a 2 GB hard drive and
> > 24 MB of RAM which I installed Red Hat 6.0 on a while ago. I was
> > having configuration problems, so I upgraded to Mandrake 8.1.
> > Unfortunatly, I didn't realize that Mandrake's system requirements
> > required a computer much better than that, so now the computer runs
> > extremely slowly, worse than Windows (*gasp*). What would be a good,
> > light version of Linux to run on the above kind of computer? Would an
> > older version of Mandrake (7.0?) work? If so, which one? I have heard
> > a lot of good stuff about Slackware, which version would be the "best"
> > for this computer? Would the latest version of Slackware (8.0, I
> > think), be too advanced, and too loaded? I want a good, stable, smooth
> > distro. And what about SuSE (version, etc.)?

> > I don't feel like trying Red Hat again, so please keep your
> > suggestions to only Mandrake, SuSE, and Slackware.
> >  - Ketoglutaric Acid
> The big thing is that no matter what distribution of linux/GNU OS you use,
> you're never gonna get it as fast as you'd like because from what I can guess
> you don't want to take the time to configure your system properly. Re-compile
> your kernel by stripping all un-neccessary drivers, remove things from startup
> that you don't use, run in *gasp* console mode and startx when you feel the
> need to be in a graphical environment. You can't get * from a stone, and you
> can't overload an older system with so much overhead that it can't handle it.
> That having been said, try looking into the debian distribution. Although I
> don't really like this distro (for different reasons) it is a rather nice,
> rather customizable distro. Of course, no matter what distro you use, I suggest
> a re-compile of the kernel as a very first thing to do. After that, going
> through the init cycle (either ntsysv or manually editing /etc/rc.d/rcXX/XXX)
> and taking out anything you really don't use on a regular basis (Like the
> sendmaild, which you probably will never use, or telnetd...etc) and going
> through your X and .profile, .login, and .bashrc scripts and try to reduce
> overhead. I have linux running blazingly fast on a 486 and it DOES run X...just
> not by default (I keep it in runlevel 3)...
> Hope this helps,
> Aaron

Actually, I have MD set up to run on console when it starts up, but it
is still much slower than RH 60 (I tested using various software that
I found, and some I wrote). I installed them both using normal mode
and customized software, and I loaded much more software on the RH
system. I also ran GNOME no problem (probably was version 1.0,
though).
Is there any way to install a very 'basic' setup of MD 8.1? I might
just recompile my kernel. The funny thing is, when I used RH 60, I
installed 2.4.17 and I loaded it with a whole bunch of stuff, and it
had no adverse effects on the performance of the system.

Someone mentioned slackware 8.0 before, is there any advantage in
downloading an older version? Or will the latest one work fine on a
133 MHz 24 MB RAM 586?

 - Ketoglutaric Acid

 
 
 

Linux on an older computer

Post by Thomas Cor » Fri, 22 Mar 2002 07:09:28


I would suggest Slackware or Debian or Tiny Linux (http://tiny.seul.org).
They all have low system requirements. I am running debian on my laptop
(33MHz 486 with 12MB RAM).