PDA

View Full Version : Lightest footprint Linux



RogC
2008-09-20, 01:11
Hi,

I have an old laptop that I put mythbuntu on and then added slimserver. It seems fine with one reciever, but multiple gives it problems & I wonder if it is due to the low spec of the machine.

Can someone point me at the "smallest" (i.e. most performant on old machines) Linux distro that I can easily run slimserver on?

The laptop is a Pentium M 1500 with 500Mb Ram.

Thanks

bernt
2008-09-20, 01:24
If it's a dedicated server use Ubuntu Server edition.

My SC is up and running in less than 30sec after a complete shutdown.

RogC
2008-09-20, 07:45
Dont know if i've missed something, but I cant get Ubuntu server edition to start up on my laptop.
There only seemed to be one version to download but when installed it says it needs features not present on the CPU.

Any suggestions or other options?

jth
2008-09-20, 08:08
Although Ubuntu's foundation is Debian, I'd still give Debian stable a try on your laptop. There are several small distros that I know of (puppy, DSL) but I've only ever used them for desktop or livecd use. They might be worth a try.

Ubuntu 6.06 server is still supported and worth a try, although its collection of software is aging a bit at this point.

SuperQ
2008-09-20, 10:03
Ubuntu Server is going to be a no-GUI option. It sounds like you downloaded the amd64 version.

What you want is the standard i386 version:

http://mirrors.us.kernel.org/ubuntu-releases/hardy/ubuntu-8.04.1-server-i386.iso

If you still want a GUI, you would probably want Xubuntu which has a much lighter weight GUI interface than standard Ubuntu. http://www.xubuntu.org/

http://mirror.anl.gov/pub/ubuntu-iso/CDs-Xubuntu/8.04.1/release/xubuntu-8.04.1-desktop-i386.iso

SuperQ
2008-09-20, 10:04
Although Ubuntu's foundation is Debian, I'd still give Debian stable a try on your laptop. There are several small distros that I know of (puppy, DSL) but I've only ever used them for desktop or livecd use. They might be worth a try.

Ubuntu 6.06 server is still supported and worth a try, although its collection of software is aging a bit at this point.

Ugh, I would NOT suggest 6.06 anymore. The footprint differences in the server edition are minimal.

pfarrell
2008-09-20, 10:25
SuperQ wrote:
> Ugh, I would NOT suggest 6.06 anymore. The footprint differences in
> the server edition are minimal.

Agree, no point in ancient Ubuntu. I (IMHO) see no gain in the Ubuntu
"Server edition" as what you don't use has no impact on performance. It
takes a bit more disk, but a complete Ubuntu is only 3 to 5 GB anyway.

I don't think the distro is all that important, I think SC and MySql
overwhelm the resources needed by the distro itself.

I like pure Debian (Ubuntu is based on Debian) since it has fewer of the
bells and whistles that Ubuntu insists on adding.

I haven't heard of anyone trying a really tiny distro, say DSL. Might be
a fun experiment

--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

pichonCalavera
2008-09-20, 10:36
I think Voyage Linux has a very small footprint: http://linux.voyage.hk/ . It's based on Debian. I have actually never used it.

epoch1970
2008-09-20, 10:48
I've had the "debian on a server, (x)ubuntu on clients" policy for year. But I have to say my latest brush with Debian Lenny/Sid on a server makes me wonder if I am not going to switch entirely to Ubuntu.

The one and only reason being that 9 times out of 10 I found the online documentation to solve issues I had with the debian box... on Ubuntu forums (and the rest in Gentoo's wiki.)
Debian's doc was never outstanding IMO, but right now if you're playing with the testing/unstable distributions, it is scarce and/or outdated hence misleading...
I don't see how they can catch up with Ubuntu, even once Lenny is declared stable.
My 2cts.

RogC
2008-09-20, 10:56
Ok,
I did have the correct i386 version & the MD5 checked out, there seems to have been a few bug reports with this message in, but 1) They seem to relate to systems with abnormal amounts of memory and 2) The reports go way over my head!

Pat wrote:
Agree, no point in ancient Ubuntu. I (IMHO) see no gain in the Ubuntu
"Server edition" as what you don't use has no impact on performance. It
takes a bit more disk, but a complete Ubuntu is only 3 to 5 GB anyway.

Let me get this straight, I could put Desktop Ubuntu on (which I have done on this machine in the past) and then just start it without the GUI & it would have the same effect (footprint) as server edition?
If that is the case then that thats my route.

pfarrell
2008-09-20, 11:13
RogC wrote:
> Let me get this straight, I could put Desktop Ubuntu on (which I have
> done on this machine in the past) and then just start it without the
> GUI & it would have the same effect (footprint) as server edition?
> If that is the case then that thats my route.

Essentially, yes. If you don't start X-windows, its not in memory.

In other distros, there is an /etc/inittab file that controls things,
you can edit it with any editor.

But Ubuntu moved away from it, see this thread
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/ubuntu-63/since-we-have-no-etcinittab-506281/

In brief, you want to setup a default boot profile so you do not start
'gdm'. If you get in and need X-windows, you can just do a startx




--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

shadesbass
2008-09-21, 10:56
RogC wrote:
> Let me get this straight, I could put Desktop Ubuntu on (which I have
> done on this machine in the past) and then just start it without the
> GUI & it would have the same effect (footprint) as server edition?
> If that is the case then that thats my route.

Essentially, yes. If you don't start X-windows, its not in memory.

In other distros, there is an /etc/inittab file that controls things,
you can edit it with any editor.

But Ubuntu moved away from it, see this thread
http://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/ubuntu-63/since-we-have-no-etcinittab-506281/

In brief, you want to setup a default boot profile so you do not start
'gdm'. If you get in and need X-windows, you can just do a startx




--
Pat Farrell
http://www.pfarrell.com/

I've recently started playing about with Ubuntu and this sounds like exactly the sort of functionality I need too (quick bootup with the option for an occasional GUI when having to change settings, rip CDs etc.)

I'm very new to Linux, so how does one go about creating a default boot profile without X-Window/GDM, as you mentioned above? (your link appears to be broken)

EDIT: Link now working - please disregard last sentence above.

jth
2008-09-21, 13:34
Under ubuntu, to disable graphic login:

# update-rc.d -f gdm remove

to re-enable

# update-rc.d -f gdm defaults

shadesbass
2008-09-22, 06:34
Under ubuntu, to disable graphic login:

# update-rc.d -f gdm remove

to re-enable

# update-rc.d -f gdm defaults

Thanks. :)
Will give this a go when I get home tonight.

maggior
2008-09-22, 07:49
Hi,

I have an old laptop that I put mythbuntu on and then added slimserver. It seems fine with one reciever, but multiple gives it problems & I wonder if it is due to the low spec of the machine.

Can someone point me at the "smallest" (i.e. most performant on old machines) Linux distro that I can easily run slimserver on?

The laptop is a Pentium M 1500 with 500Mb Ram.

Thanks

Once upon a time, I had Open SuSE 10.2 running on an AMD K6 350MHz with 384MB or RAM. I had 2 squeezeboxes running off of it. I could be a bit sluggish, but once it started streaming, it ran well.

During the install, there was an option to install without the windowing subsystem, essentially making it a server installation.

Open SuSE is up to version 11.0. I'm sure it will still have this installation option. You might want to give that a try.