Gentoo on 32MB RAM

lytenyn · n00b Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 40

Hi everyone

I was just chatting with someone complaining about her computer being that unstable etc ..
and I said something like: if you give your pc to me for a week, I could install a linux which would be more stable and fulfill your needs (office, browser, email, icq).

After that she told me that it's really slow (don't remember the mhz), contains 32 MB RAM and runs Win95 (!)

So .. I'm not quite sure, if it's wise to install a Gentoo. I mean, will the system (_with_ an X-Server, Desktop,Browser) run sufficiently fast (at last as fast as with win95), will the (minimalistic) programs that run that fast be sufficiently un-nerdy to be used by someone who has no linux experience?

Or should I just get some free, small programs for Win95 and the last service pack and leave it to windows?

lytenyn

(you can leave out the obvious statement: buy a new pc

)

robmoss · Posted: Wed May 12, 2004 1:24 pm Post subject:

Spend a tenner and get it up to 128MB RAM, and install Gentoo, is what I would do.

If changing hardware was absolutely out of the question, I'd still install Gentoo

I have Gentoo installed at home on a P200MMX with 32MB RAM. It works fine. I never tried to build OpenOffice as I would have been there for a week, but I have a fully fledged GNOME 2.6 installation with AbiWord and Gnumeric on a 2.6 kernel, and it runs fine!

I also have a computer of identical spec which runs Windows Me with the 98lite Pro thing. It rips out most of the crap that comes with Windows and makes it into a semi-reasonable OS. It's still slower than my Gentoo box.
_________________
Reality is for those who can't face Science Fiction.

emerge -U will kill your Gentoo
ecatmur, Lord of Portage Bash Scripts

the_y_man · Tux's lil' helper Joined: 25 Jan 2004 Posts: 80

32 megs of ram is not enough to have gnome running smoothly, i tried it on a 233mhz pentium, 196 mb ram, kernel 2.6, and it was choppy.

X takes a lot of memory. Upgrade 128+ mb ram and put xfce4 on it, it's light, and stable (i use kde

on my boxen).

lytenyn · n00b Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 40

well, what about kdrive?

It's a X server replacement, isn't it? What functionality will I miss? Is it faster?

is there a way to have a smoothly running X on 32 MB RAM?

robmoss · Posted: Thu May 13, 2004 12:39 pm Post subject:

d0nju4n · Posted: Thu May 13, 2004 7:24 pm Post subject:

I have a pII 233 with 32mb of ram as well, and fluxbox runs beautifully. I haven't even tried gnome or kde on this box, but since it seems from some other posts that this is still possible, maybe I'll emerge it (wtih distcc, or course

)
_________________
Linux User 355087

Pigeon · Guru Joined: 21 Jun 2002 Posts: 307

It should work fine, although it will take quite some time to compile. My ppro with 64 megs took about 3 days to get from 0 to X. I haven't really researched low memory browsers for linux, anyone have any recommendations?

Remember to compile with -Os. Anything else will take too much memory. -fomit-frame-pointer is fine too. And don't compile with MAKE_OPTS="-j2" leave/change it at/to -j1.

If you *do* decide to leave it with win95, re-install everything from scratch. I get the impression it hasn't had a fresh start in quite some time, (ie- ever) which Windows needs every few months.

lytenyn · n00b Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 40

yeah, fresh installing win really helps, that's also my impression.

I get the impression that you all tell me to, basically, make a standard installation (xorg, all that) [leaving out everything that's not absolutely needed] and taking, say 'standard' programs.

So I could use xorg, fluxbox or even kde3.2 (which afaik much faster than the older versions)?

Or should I try really minimalistic things (I don't know which, though ..)?

And keep in mind that the computer will be for someone who was almost no computer and certainly no linux experience .. so it has to be programs with non-cryptic interfaces ..

PowerFactor · Posted: Fri May 14, 2004 11:27 pm Post subject:

HydroSan · Posted: Sat May 15, 2004 12:19 am Post subject:

Stick with XOrg. I would suggest sticking to a stripped-down 2.4 kernel as 2.6 takes up slightly more RAM and can actually be slower on older machines.

Also, check out something like Fluxbox or XFCE4 instead of KDE/GNOME. They are more light weight, but still have basic features and are easy to navigate.
_________________
I was a Gangster for Capitalism, by Major General Smedley Butler.

Server status: Currently down, being replaced with fresh install - 20% completed.

lytenyn · n00b Joined: 29 Jan 2004 Posts: 40

ok, I see the point with XOrg.

With the 2.4/2.6 kernel, I'm not so sure though .. with 2.6 I could use NPTL with seems to economize memory as well?!?

And the overall question remains: Do you think it will be reasonably fast to use?

I remember my brother's PC (K6 - 400) which took a second to switch from X to console and generally was rather slow .. how much worse must it be with just .. 100 MHz (I don't know exactly) and 32 MB RAM?