DamnSmallLinuxThis forum is for the discussion of DamnSmallLinux.
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Introduction to Linux - A Hands on Guide
This guide was created as an overview of the Linux Operating System, geared toward new users as an exploration tour and getting started guide, with exercises at the end of each chapter.
For more advanced trainees it can be a desktop reference, and a collection of the base knowledge needed to proceed with system and network administration. This book contains many real life examples derived from the author's experience as a Linux system and network administrator, trainer and consultant. They hope these examples will help you to get a better understanding of the Linux system and that you feel encouraged to try out things on your own.
Click Here to receive this Complete Guide absolutely free.
I don't use DSL, but I imagine it's so you have a choice of a less-resource-hogging browser than Firefox, which is getting to be a bit ungainly. Less resource use would be in keeping with the "Small" in "Damn Small Linux."
Some distros offer four or more browsers, just so there's a choice. Another benefit, though, is that if you have resources to run more than one browser, sometimes you can do things like fill in forms and submit them, with one browser but not with another. I've had to use Opera several times to accomplish tasks on websites that, probably because they are non-standard (their developers probably had MS Explorer in mind), they could do but Firefox, which adheres rigidly to international standards (unlike IE), could not cope with. It's unfortunate this situation exists.
Dillo is an alpha browser designed to be embedded in mobile phones etc. The executable is ~320 KiB. It is written in pure C and extremely stable. It is brilliant for fast light browsing but has no https yet and no java support.
dillo is not specially designed for mobile phones. https is implemented but not a default compilation option.
imo dillo becomes really useful only with the patches from http://teki.jpn.ph/pc/software/index-e.shtml
I've used Firefox, I've used Opera. I've used Konqueror, and I've used IE (*shudder*). Firefox is faster loading IMHO, but Opera seems on par with it otherwise, but I don't think I'd class either as "lite". Maybe in Firefox 2.0 they should reduce code size, system req., ect and just basically minimize the code.
Linux, from my experiance, is alot about choice, hence the numerous programs you'll have for one thing (package managers, browsers, file managers, ect.).