Undecided: Ubuntu or Crunchbang
 

Hello all at LinuxQuestions:
I've been using Ubuntu recently (have not upgraded yet to Ocelot). While I do like how everything works, I find it a bit slow on the bootup time. Yes, The PC is a bit old, it's an E-machines T-5048 64-bit dual processor with 2gig Ram (the maximum).

In the past, I've used Crunchbang Linux and am considering switching back to it. I like that it's now Debian-based and from what I remember, has really fast start time. Of the few things I dislike about Crunchbang (and I'm nitpicking here) is that with the minimalist Openbox environment, the windowing design is just so... blah. I mean almost Windows 95-ish (in my opinion).

Another reason I'm undecided on the switch-back is my /home/myname directory. The drive is partitioned nicely so I can keep files where they are. The concern is the other folders that might be pushed in there. For instance, say I have a folder "Documents" and "Videos".

If a newly installed OS adds "documents" and "videos" I would then have redundancy since UNIX is case-sensitive.

Is there a way to tell what the possible folder structure of a Crunchbang install of folders into ones /home/myname directory?

Or (otherwise) can someone recommend a fast-loading distro that looks good, but is minimal and not bloated with slow start time and can run on a 64-bit PC with good support?

Thanks,
Adam

Just boot Crunchbang from the live-CD and have a look which folders are there, it will create the same folders when installing.

If you already have a separate partition for /home, just continue to use it, and nothing will change there. During the installation, specify that partition for /home, and do not format it. Nothing will be touched on it. That may or may not be a good thing, but I moved from Ubuntu to LMDE to standard Debian Sid, using the same /home all the way, and never had a problem.

Sounds good, thanks for the advice. I'll back up my files soon. Most likely going to go the Crunchbang route. Take care all.

Adam