What makes a lightweight linux distro lightweight?
 

I'm still using windows, I know, I know, shameful. But my desktop is getting old so I'm leaning heavily towards linux. I need a lightweight distro because gnome and kde would pull from my resources too much. I just wanted to know what made a distro lightweight? Is it the Desktop Environment, or something else. I know websites tell you lightweight distros but I was thinking of using debian XFCE as a lightweight distro.

Thanks,
Linux Noob

WooHoo first post!

Welcome to the forums! What are the specs of your hardware? That will help us make a good recommendation to you.

Debian Xfce is a wonderful choice, and you can read about its hardware requirements here: http://www.debian.org/releases/stabl...h03s04.html.en

Well to be honest I dont know. I was really just wondering in general what is the biggest factor in a lightweight distro. Is it the desktop environment?

"Lightweight" is a subjective term that doesn't have a strict definition. For some people, it might mean "a minimalist base system without a lot of preinstalled applications." For others it might mean "designed to run on older computers without much RAM or CPU power." Still others might measure "lightweight" by the size of the installer .iso CD image. What does "lightweight" mean to you?

For example:

Arch is lightweight because its install process allows you to be very selective what goes on your system.
Tinycore Linux is lightweight because the .iso download is only 12mb.
Puppy is lightweight because it includes drivers for a wide variety of older hardware.
Xubuntu is lightweight because it is an Xfce alternative to Ubuntu.
Slackware is lightweight because it does not add a lot of unnecessary complexity.

^---- all the above are true statements.

If people speak of lightweight distributions for older hardware they mean usually distributions that come with a lightweight desktop environment or a window manager only, but also with software that is in general low on resources.
For example, lightweight distributions usually don't come with Firefox as browser, since Firefox is simply a resource hog. They rather use browsers like Midori or other browsers that have a small footprint.
Or they replace OpenOffice/LibreOffice with the combination of Abiword and Gnumeric.

Good lightweight distributions are:
Ubuntu based: Lubuntu (LXDE desktop), Bodhi (Enlightenment window manager)
Debian based: antiX (IceWM window manager)
Slackware based: Vector Lite (JWM or Fluxbox window manager), Salix (several versions with different DEs/WMs)

Of course you can also just turn any of the general purpose distros (Debian, Slackware, Ubuntu, Red Hat and derivates) into a lightweight system.

Wow thanks for all the help :). What do you mean by making distros lightweight? Im liking puppy linux so far even thug jwm is kinda boring.

Way back in the dimdarks, you'd have to compile the kernel yourself. There was a 'make config' where you selected the target hardware and other kernal things to customize the kernel to your particular hardware and needs. Then you did your own selection of services and applications for your system after you got the kernel going.

That is pretty much what a lightweight distribution does for you. It has been put together with a lot of basic system customizing for a particular environment and includes just those services and applications that target a particular need. That serves two purposes. One is that it keeps the system small so can run better in a constrained memory and storage environment as well as provide a complete installable solution that is reasonably small. The other is that it tends to be more efficient at doing what it is designed to do as it doesn't include a lot of other stuff not needed for its goals.

Ubuntu, for instance, might be called a middleweight system as its goal has been to provide a generic utility system that will fit on one CD. It includes the drivers to run on very many processors and hardware environments and the services and applications that most folks find useful. By that scale, some of the distributions that need a DVD might be called heavyweight ...

The advent of package systems, such as deb and rpm, and the I'net for easy access to repositories has made it very easy to start with a lightweight system and enhance as you need. The key to keep in mind is that using such a system for general purpose needs might mean having to do some hardware configuration and application and service adding that larger systems help users avoid.

Well, windows is driving me crazy on my old desktop its so darn slow. What would you recommend for a lightweightdistro for a beginner? And shoo you have any tips for the transition

First, the easiest way to make your old computer faster is to upgrade your hardware. This will make your computing experience faster whether you are using Windows *or* Linux. Old computers can often be sped up by opening them up and cleaning out the dust bunnies, max'ing out the RAM, replacing a failing hard drive, installing a decent video card, etc. Or just recycle it and replace every few years; hardware improves exponentially (Moore's law) so it is past the point of diminishing returns to keep old hardware running past its expiration date.

Second, you mentioned Debian Xfce, and I think this is a great choice! You can test drive it today (no permanent changes to your current system) as a Live CD: http://www.debian.org/CD/live/

Third, you haven't told us your computer's specs/components, so I can't make a specific recommendation for your hardware.

Fourth, Windows does tend to get bogged down over time. There are ways to make it faster without doing something drastic like switching to Linux necessarily...

Which distro I would recommend depends on the hardware that you have, mostly CPU, amount of RAM and videocard.
You can find the first two easily with making a right-click on the "My Computer" symbol and choosing Properties in the menu. The name of the video-card can be found with right-clicking on an empty place on your desktop, choosing properties and looking at the last tab in the dialog.
Alternatively you can use programs like Aida32 or something similar to get this information.

Well from the looks if it its a dual core cpu because it provides two clock speeds of about 2.66ghz and my ram is at 960 mb

As you can see from the link I posted in my post #2, your computer easily exceeds the hardware requirements for Debian.

Are there any other distros for a computer with my specs?

Of course! You can discover more distros at distrowatch.com and each distro should have hardware requirements listed on its homepage. Debian is what I use personally so that is my recommendation. :)

Could I use the gnome or kde versions and how do you like it?

There is a tool called a "Live CD" you can use to test drive Debian Xfce, Gnome, or KDE on your computer:

http://www.debian.org/CD/live/

As I mentioned in posts #2 and #12, your computer exceeds the minimum requirements to run Debian.

960MB of RAM is an usual amount of RAM, so I assume that you have 1024MB, but 64MB of it are used by an onboard videocard.
Depending on the type of the videocard you may have problems running Gnome 3, maybe you would also have to disable some effects in KDE.
Gnome 2/MATE should run fine on such a machine, so Debian or Linux Mint Mate would be a good choice.
If you want something faster you could still try the XFCE or LXDE desktops, they should fly on such a machine.

I've made tons of live cds. Anyway thanks for all your help and a earth welcome.

Did the Live CD's work? What's the verdict?

Not sure yet. Now that i know my system i can make a befter decision

Pretty lightweight 64bit release
 

I am running AntiX 64bit Testing which is a base Iso install. It flies on this IBM m57 desktop.

http://antix.freeforums.org/viewtopic.php?f=6&t=3943

Pretty lightweight and

runs fluxbox wm and is getting updated to final release eventually. Flash works out of the box full screen and I am listening to streaming radio in xmms. Everything opens instantly on here. Inxi shows ram usage while posting with multiple tabs open in Iceweasel with conky and xmms running. Not too bad.

Dont make that assumption. It could be a 'hyperthreaded' Pentium 4 (with 960MB/1024MB RAM, I'd guess it is a P4). Hyperthreading makes 1 core appear to be 2 to the OS. Recent versions (like on the newish iX series) of hyperthreading are OK, the older versions in P4s could make things slower.

There are a few free, simple windows tools that will show you the hardware you are running, e.g. belarc advisor, CPU-Z, sandra.

http://www.cpuid.com/softwares/cpu-z.html

Thanks guys!

Has anyone tried Puppy lInux? I have and I'm kinda leaning toward that.

Puppy should run fine on your system. Just keep in mind that it has an unusual approach that is not common in the Linux/Unix world: The user is always root.
My personal opinion about that: Fine for a rescue system, but I wouldn't run something like that for everyday use. I would rather go for Slitaz or Tincore for that, they are proper multi-user systems that run from RAM.

I'm looking to do a memory upgrade soon. What type of memory would a old desktop use ddr1? With more ram i could use pinguy which is my favorite but it runs slow now

Search for your specific computer model on a site like crucial.com and they will recommend the correct RAM.

I tried Puppy once but was not a fan of the always-root policy.

It depends. Assuming this is a Pentium 4 or a Pentium D, which is very likely, it may be possible that this is either a Socket 478 system, which would need DDR1, or a Socket 774 system, which would need DDR2 RAM. It should be easy to find out which RAM you use with the program lshw on Linux or programs like AIDA32 or Sandra on Windows. Or just look into the case and search for the motherboard model.

I used the crucial.com scanner it says i can use ddr pc 2700 and ddr pc3200 what does that mean?

That means you need DDR1 RAM, PC2700 will run with 166MHz (333 effective), PC3200 will run with 200MHz (400MHz effective).
The slowest RAM in the system will determine the speed for all other RAMs. So if you have the choice go for PC3200.
Keep in mind that it may be unreasonable to spend much money on such old systems, you will get faster machines relatively cheap.

It said ddrddr

---------- Post added 10-17-12 at 07:25 PM ----------

Could i run ddr?

What said that? Is that the complete output?
Remember that we don't sit in front of your computer with you, so you have to be verbose about what you do and what results you get.

The online scan. It said DDR PC 2700 or DDR PC 3200

I don't know how reliable these online scans are. The only way to really know which hardware you need is to open the case, look for the motherboard model and post it here.
But usually I would say if that scan says that you need DDR then DDR is the one to go.

The scan was recommend by another user here. And another scan provided the same results.

http://www.asus.com/Motherboards/Int...specifications

here is the website for my specific motherboard

In that case you need DDR1, your motherboard is somewhat weird to me, I have never seen socket LGA775 boards with DDR1.

I'm a bit suprised by that TobiSGD, there is a lot of LGA 775 systems with DDR1. Intel 910GL, 915GL and 915PL chipsets which were fairly common with low end 775 systems are DDR1 only. VIA and SiS also did some low end 775 chipsets which were DDR1 only as well.

I changed to LGA775 relative late (used AMD for years, before) and didn't work in the hardware department at that time, so I totally missed that.

Funny, but I only own 1 LGA 775 system, and I was given that. I'd say 'thanks sis and brother in law!' for the LGA 775 system, but they thought it was borked, one debian install later it runs 100%.

Apart from a very few times in the workshop, most of the DDR1 LGA 775 systems I've seen have been 'kerbside collection' (local council junk pickup).

But the website says ddr not ddr1

DDR and DDR1 is the same thing.

Well computer has certain set of limited resources like CPU power and available memory and graphics card. The purpose of the computer is to run applications. Those applications need OS to run on. So lightweight OS is the one that does not consume all the available resources offered to keep itself running but leaves enough available for applications as well.

For Core i7 with 8GB RAM, Windows 7 is lightweight OS. For 486SX 25Mhz with 4MB RAM, Windows 95 would be heavy weight OS.