smallest distro?
 

What is the smallest Linux distribution that is very stable? I have a laptop with hardware issues needing an OS. The DamnSmallLinux thread doesn't appear popular (no recent postings).

TinyCore is a very basic (12MB) system, Slitaz is 36MB. You would need to post some information on your hardware and intended use of the computer to get more detailed suggestions.

Oh man, another Michiganean :)
Have you tried Slitaz http://www.slitaz.org/en/

The bottom line for a GUI, full internet access, and a modern word-processor is 128MB. If you've got that, you can use AntiX, Bodhi, or Swift:
http://www.linuxquestions.org/review...page/15/sort/7
http://www.linuxquestions.org/review...page/15/sort/7
http://www.linuxquestions.org/review...p?product=2149

AntiX is the most stable, as it's now based on the Debian Stable reppository.

Tiny Core is more of a kit for assembling your own system, and more suited to setting up a kiosk or a server than to a home PC.

You can always take the time to Roll your own linux.

http://www.linuxfromscratch.org/

Thank You yancek, TroN-0074, and David McCann for your prompt help.
The machine is a Gateway M685-E laptop, about 7 years old, purchased cheaply without a HDD. I mounted a hard drive (320Gig, 7200RPM), and began installing from an Ubuntu 10.1 disk I had. I left it alone for the installation, and returned to find it shut down with a VERY hot cover over the CPU. Thermal overload I presumed.
The CPU cooling fan starts on initial power, but stops immediately during POST. I can't figure out how to rectify this (never done a BIOS update--would that do it?) and thought a small OS that might give me some control would help. Hopefully this will be my desktop replacement with several Linux flavors to use.

That laptop will do just fine with Arch linux.

https://www.archlinux.org/

Processor type Intel Core 2 Duo T7400
Processor speed 2160.0 MHz
Memory size 1024.0 MB
Memory type DDR2 SDRAM
Memory speed 667.0 MHz

szboardstretcher, Arch is what I was looking at just now, that I will try 1st.
And showing the stats of my laptop was impressive, thank you.
I like this place already.
I'll load Arch and see what can be done, and report back in the hardware forum.

Here is the link of an article on how to install Arch.
http://lifehacker.com/5680453/build-...in-the-process

You can also read the beginners guide at arch wiki https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners%27_Guide

Unfortunately, that article is antiquated. I do not recommend using it at all. In fact, I do not believe anyone should use an arch installation guide that isnt on archlinux.org!

The Arch community keeps an up to date installation manual at: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Installation_Guide

The installation process of arch evolves constantly.

I hope you have more luck installing Arch than I did the last time I tried it! And more time to spend on it.

How anyone can recommend Arch to a beginner is completely beyond me. Yes, you can use it to create your own minimal system, but why bother when other people have taken the trouble to create minimal systems that are ready to use?

Repair or replace the malfunctioning hardware. Software cannot magically repair broken hardware. :)

Are you kidding? A Gateway M685-E can run any modern Linux distribution. The laptop I'm typing this on is older than that and runs Debian with Gnome perfectly. You need to fix your hardware issue before you mess around with installing some stripped-down Linx, that will probably turn out to be nothing but a big pain anyway. Those tiny little minimalist distros are for pre-Pentium III systems and micro-computer experimenters, you should never need one on a Core Duo.

DSL is updated but it will only do so much. It is meant for older hardware, can't change that.

As above, the choice are antix, to vector. You have to decide.

I do question the hardware but I'd worry more about ram amount. That amount would help narrow down how small a system you would need to try. A gig of ram would be wonderful. 24M would be bad.

I guess the smallest distro would be one of the old floppy based ones.

Trying, failing, trying, reading, asking questions, understanding, learning, etc... is the way a beginner becomes better. In college, lets say a long time ago, I used LFS to build a linux system. I had never used *nix before, and it took a lot of work and reading and bbs'ing to get it to work. But once I did I had a strong understanding of how it worked, and now i'm a systems admin and instructor.

I believe its kind of the same advice for learning a new language. The fastest way to learn it is to be thrown into it fully. So that's why i suggest Arch.

But it's really up to the user,.. if he/she doesn't want to spend the time, then there are plenty of great posts listing alternatives here in the thread. If he/she wants to get down and dirty and learn a bit, then Arch is my suggestion.