Linux for pc with 256 MB ram
 

Hi;
We have some very old pcs with 256 mb ram and 1.5 Ghz CPU. What distribution I can use for them? I need them to have KDE desktop and tools (kedit,...)
I wanted to use PClinux 2009 but I couldn't find its download link.
They currentlu have Redhat Seawolf. Is it possible to upgrade without formating?

Join the club, all my "playboxes" have something of this... :D

I have Kubuntu on a box, pretty nice...
Xubuntu (not KDE) works great on a box like that
if you're tech and can spare the time/energy/resource, I'd go with Arch Linux, there, you install what you want, and in the end, you'll end up with a system that is "yours", be warned though, there is a STEEP learning curve, and the surrounding community can (will at times) be impatient and sharp ;)
If you can however spare the extra time, Slax should be a safe bet, though the install is not automated, Slax is (AFAIK) not really meant to be installed. Slmooth look great to play/work with...
There is a Mint with KDE, but at a price of 1Gb memory, it's out of the picture... :D

Umm, anything is possible, but you'd have to start with the Kernel, and al the development tools (make, compiler and so on) that it seems more practical to backup the user data and start over...but it can be done. I did that in the very beginning. And I had to upgrade the packages to compile a new kernel, had to configure and compile the kernel, then I could pick&choose packages...not fom repo though, as the repo was (for the distro I used then) long gone...
You will be stuck without repo support...

Luck!

Thor

You arent going to get KDE 4.X running well on 256MB machines. KDE 3.X/trinity should work a little better on 256MB systems.

Most of the major distros will not even install on 256MB. I'd try somrthing light like antix.

I really doubt it will be possible to upgrade Red Hat 'Seawolf' from 2001 to a current version. If you want to pay Red Hat for support though they might help you figure it out. If you dont want to pay Red Hat, dont use it.

I'll bet you dont have kubutnu running on 256MB. Xubuntu will install and run on 256MB, but its far heavier than some other Xfce distros.

Arch isnt worth it for that IMO. Slackware is just as configurable and less of a pain IMO. I'd doubt that anyone who is running a Red Hat version from 2001 is interesting much in arch or slackware anyway.

Thanks for that insight...I'd have to look at Slack in the near future, I guess.
Kubuntu is running on an Archos 9 tablet...yes, the piece of junk I'm still trying to get to work...everyone needs a humbling factor in his life, I guess... :)