LinuxQuestions.org
Share your knowledge at the LQ Wiki.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Distributions > Slackware
User Name
Password
Slackware This Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.

Notices

Reply
 
Search this Thread
Old 11-09-2003, 12:08 AM   #1
shodekiagari
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Posts: 47

Rep: Reputation: 15
Can an older notebook run Slackware 9.1?


I'm looking at buying a used IBM notebook

IBM 600e

PII 400MHz (256KB)
64MB RAM
10.0GB
13.3 TFT 1024x768
24x-10x CD-ROM
Modem

and I was wondering if Slackware would work on it. I know Slackware.com lists the absolute basics you need to run Slackware, but does anyone know of a reason why I shouldn't install Slackware?

E.G. Speed or Compatibility or Graphics problems running X Windows or KDE/Gnome?

Thank you everyone, and I apologize if this seems like a redundant question (I just don't want to spend a couple of hundred bucks to realize that Slackware wouldn't work.

~Deki

(Title changed twenty seconds after posting to be more precise).

Last edited by shodekiagari; 11-09-2003 at 12:09 AM.
 
Old 11-09-2003, 12:35 AM   #2
Scruff
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2002
Location: Stoughton, MA
Distribution: Gentoo x86_64 & PPC
Posts: 949

Rep: Reputation: 30
You should be able to get Slack working on that machine. I don't think you will be able to use X with only 64mb's of ram. Maybe... Use a light WM like Fluxbox or something (maybe even lighter than flux) and a decent size swap. I boot at like 50-60mb's using a full Slack 9.1 install and Flux as a window manager. See if the machine can handle 128mb's of ram. You will be able to make a lot more happen if you can get in that range.
 
Old 11-09-2003, 02:31 AM   #3
Mrcdm
Member
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: Australia
Distribution: Debian 3, 31r0, 4, slackware, DSL, RH8.0/7, MDK9/10, et al. Vista is cute but not Linux - I tried
Posts: 70

Rep: Reputation: 15
64 Mb ram is very shi..y if you want to use gnome or kde but other than that it should run very nicely--sans pretty window manager.

Just my experience. Most of my 'play' pc's are very old -486DX4-100 12MB ram, PII-200 32 MB ram etc. I'm very happy with them but don't use the wm.
 
Old 11-09-2003, 04:49 AM   #4
Vincent
Member
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Germany
Distribution: Slackware 9.1
Posts: 77

Rep: Reputation: 15
For example, at the moment I run fluxbox with xmms, firebird, xchat and aterm, which I consider a normal session.

Altogether, 80mb ram are used, whereas firebird consumes 7,5% of my total space of 450mb (alternatives?)
 
Old 11-09-2003, 07:29 AM   #5
changcheh
Member
 
Registered: Nov 2003
Location: china
Distribution: Linux Mint
Posts: 49

Rep: Reputation: 15
Smallx might be the solution

You might want to try running smallx instead of the full X-Window system.

Their homepage says: smallX is a subset of the X Window System for Linux on Intel machines that will run on a system with as little as 4 megs of ram memory. The hard disk foot print is about 3 megs. This package includes rxvt (a reduced version of xterm) and a small window manager (wm2). Uses libc 5.0.

The project hasn't been updated since 2000 but there are sure to be other projects if you look around. I think with small x its hard to use a window manager other than what they provide but I'm not sure.

changcheh
 
Old 11-09-2003, 09:42 AM   #6
matt3333
Member
 
Registered: Dec 2002
Location: Winnipeg, Manitoba, Canada
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 371

Rep: Reputation: 30
Ok the computer im on now is a 200mHz with 160 ram (which i got for free) and im using xfce and its going good little glity everyonce inawhile but its still good its chuggin but its going good hehe anyways good luck i would run on there if i was you maybe get some more ram and you'll be good!!!


Matt3333
 
Old 11-09-2003, 09:51 AM   #7
trickykid
Guru
 
Registered: Jan 2001
Posts: 24,133

Rep: Reputation: 197Reputation: 197
I just installed Slackware 9.0 on a test machine I built. Its a 233mhz 128MB of RAM system with an 8MB video card running smoothly with no problems. I attempted to load Gnome but it was a little slower but XFce, WindowMaker and all the other smaller WM and Desktops work fine on it. I also customized it and it actually boots to the console in about 20 seconds...

With 400mhz machine though and plenty of RAM, you could run Gnome or KDE even. I have another machine that is a 400mhz Celeron that runs Gnome just fine. Its 1.4 version but I don't think there is that much difference in resources taken from 1.4 to some of the later versions.
 
Old 11-09-2003, 11:10 AM   #8
Rodrin
Member
 
Registered: May 2003
Location: Upstate NY, U.S.
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 247

Rep: Reputation: 31
I have installed Slackware 9.0 on an old Toshiba laptop with a 133 MHz Pentium and 64 MB of RAM. I used Fluxbox as a window manager and xfm for file management (although if I had used it for any length of time I probably would have found something else for file management, like Gentoo file manager (nothing to do with Gentoo distribution), for example). It would choke a little when I ran Mozilla (although not that bad - mostly just very slow to load up). Just keep your expectations in line with the hardware, and remember that more RAM would help a lot.
 
Old 11-09-2003, 11:21 AM   #9
php
Member
 
Registered: Jun 2001
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware
Posts: 824

Rep: Reputation: 30
Slackware 9.1 runs on 486+ out of the box
 
Old 11-09-2003, 05:54 PM   #10
Fascistchicken
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: hellifniknow
Distribution: slackware for chickens
Posts: 182

Rep: Reputation: 30
i have a 75mhz laptop with 40 megs of ram runs slackware 9 just fine
and my main computer is a 550mhz with 512mb ram and runs it also just fine with multple gnome gtk-gnutella opera bluefish gnome-terminal xchat xmms running at the same time with three users logged on to their own x displays
 
Old 11-09-2003, 06:14 PM   #11
-X-
Member
 
Registered: Oct 2003
Location: Tx,USA
Distribution: Slackware, Red Hat, CentOS
Posts: 495

Rep: Reputation: 30
Never used xfce until few weeks ago with I installed Slack 9.1. Saw a few comments about it and want to put a thumbs-up for it and the developers.
 
  


Reply


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Desktop from Source for Older computers shepper Slackware 8 10-29-2005 02:07 PM
can lower run levels boost usefulness of older computers? dr_zayus69 Linux - Software 4 08-29-2005 06:25 PM
Upgrading older computers from Win98 to Linux RonRussell Linux - Newbie 1 04-18-2005 08:03 PM
userfriendly linux for older computers sterrenkijker Linux - Distributions 2 08-18-2004 02:31 AM
Why no good linux for older computers? vdogvictor Linux - General 41 05-29-2004 10:28 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:44 PM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration