LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Software
User Name
Password
Linux - Software This forum is for Software issues.
Having a problem installing a new program? Want to know which application is best for the job? Post your question in this forum.

Notices


Reply
  Search this Thread
Old 05-16-2003, 04:10 PM   #16
jailbait
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Mineral, Virginia
Distribution: Debian 8
Posts: 7,893

Rep: Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339

----------------------------------------------------
Sheesh!

Yes, I lived in Canada for 17 years and I should know
better than to recycle stale jokes.
----------------------------------------------------
More software thoughts:

The software that you have selected so far has committed
you to using Gtk+. You might be able to avoid using Qt
by adding non-Qt to your selection criteria.

So, looking at the various editors using the criteria
that they must be small, fast, easy for a newbie to
learn and not use Qt here is what I come up with:

Word processor: abiword, kword, and open office all
are very similar in functions and ease of use. abiword
uses Gtk+ and is by far the smallest and fastest of the three.

GUI text editor: gedit is probably the best Gtk+ based
text editor. It's interface is similar enough to abiword
that having learned one of them the other comes naturally.
gedit is about the size and complexity of kwrite or perhaps
slightly smaller.

Command line text editor: Here we run into a problem.
The most popular command line text editors are vi and emacs.
Both are difficult to learn and there is no carryover between
learning vi or emacs and learning a GUI editor. There
are smaller and faster command line editors but most are
based on the vi command set.

I went through all of the command line editors about a year
ago and discovered mp. http://www.triptico.com/software/mp.html
mp is a GUI command line text processor. It can be compiled
into either gmp, mp, or both.

gmp is a Gtk+ based text editor of about the complexity of
kate. It can be run in a gnome-terminal.

mp is gmp without a mouse. You navigate around the screen
using the arrow keys. It can be run in bash regardless
of whether or not X is running.

If a newbie has learned abiword and/or gedit then gmp
and mp are intuitively obvious.

So for editors I would recommend either of the two combinations:

abiword, gedit, mp

or

abiword, gmp, mp
 
Old 05-16-2003, 04:17 PM   #17
jonr
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Kansas City, Missouri, USA
Distribution: Ubuntu
Posts: 1,040

Rep: Reputation: 47
Opera banner ads don't display in full-screen mode. ;-)
 
Old 05-16-2003, 04:19 PM   #18
jailbait
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Mineral, Virginia
Distribution: Debian 8
Posts: 7,893

Rep: Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339
more software thoughts

accidently posted twice

Last edited by jailbait; 05-16-2003 at 04:23 PM.
 
Old 05-16-2003, 08:21 PM   #19
Steve Cronje
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Ubuntu, Mepis, Debian
Posts: 158

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 31
You might be able to avoid using Qt
by adding non-Qt to your selection criteria.


Perhaps.


Command line text editor: .....I went through all of the command line editors about a year ago and discovered mp.


What about mc, it's part of most distros already, and most users would only want to do CL editing on system files etc, so its internal editor should do OK. I kinda like it, so I guess that is why I am biased that way.

As far as editors go, my current leanings are:

Abiword, Gedit (That was a great idea), MC

Steve
 
Old 05-16-2003, 10:18 PM   #20
jailbait
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Mineral, Virginia
Distribution: Debian 8
Posts: 7,893

Rep: Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339
MC

I prefer the MC style file manager screen. In KDE I have set up kfmclient with my own variation of a MC style screen layout. In Gnome I don't think that Nautilus has the ability to look like MC. So I went through several of the Norton Commander clones and settled on Gentoo (not to be confused with the distribution also named Gentoo). Gentoo does not have an associated editor.
When I test drove MC I did not try the editor.

So my answer is that I think including MC on a Gnome desktop is a good idea. If the MC editor is easy to learn then the MC editor is an excellent idea.
 
Old 05-17-2003, 02:26 PM   #21
Steve Cronje
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Ubuntu, Mepis, Debian
Posts: 158

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 31
Re: Setup on (low-power) to-be-donated computers

Quote:
Originally posted by Steve Cronje
I was also thinking that it would be best to provide all the above on a CD, or two. Unfortunately, the HDDs are too small, I would think, else Knoppix would be a great way to get this up and going.
Quoting myself ... sad

I have downloadded Morphix Lite-gui version. It's around 200MB, so there is a lot of room left on a CD. It is a live cd, and is preconfigured to allow an automagic HDD install, ala Knoppix.

Default is IceWM, and it comes preconfigured with significant software.

I have not done the HDD install, but if it is anything like Knoppix, it then becomes a Debian unstable distro, which means that updating and installing is a cinch for the enduser, and re-installing from the CD is pretty simple, too.



Things are looking good, for a lazy person like me!

Steve
 
Old 05-17-2003, 03:14 PM   #22
jailbait
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2003
Location: Mineral, Virginia
Distribution: Debian 8
Posts: 7,893

Rep: Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339Reputation: 339
How are you going to install?

It is not clear to me as to how you intend to install Linux. Do you intend to give the end user a bare machine and some install CDs? Or do you intend to install Linux on a machine and then give the end user a running machine and throw in an install CD in case the end user ever needs it?
 
Old 05-17-2003, 03:29 PM   #23
Mega Man X
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: ~
Distribution: Ubuntu, FreeBSD, Solaris, DSL
Posts: 5,339

Rep: Reputation: 65
Lightbulb Older Distros maybe...

If I were you, I'd give a chance to an older distribution like RedHat 6.2. I use it in a very old computer of mine which has about the same speed of the low end machine you're trying to use. It's relatively fast and you can use apt-get with it... It's installation takes very few megas of HD and the distribution is only one CD and a lot of cool stuff to learn.... Maybe it's just me who likes older RedHat distros though
 
Old 05-17-2003, 04:06 PM   #24
Steve Cronje
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Ubuntu, Mepis, Debian
Posts: 158

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 31
Re: How are you going to install?

Quote:
Originally posted by jailbait
do you intend to install Linux on a machine and then give the end user a running machine and throw in an install CD in case the end user ever needs it?
That one. And then I thought I could throw some .debs on the remaining space on the CD, in case they did not have internet access, etc.

Steve
 
Old 05-17-2003, 04:13 PM   #25
Steve Cronje
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Ubuntu, Mepis, Debian
Posts: 158

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 31
Re: Older Distros maybe...

Quote:
Originally posted by Megaman X
If I were you, I'd give a chance to an older distribution like RedHat 6.2. I use it in a very old computer of mine which has about the same speed of the low end machine you're trying to use. It's relatively fast and you can use apt-get with it... It's installation takes very few megas of HD and the distribution is only one CD and a lot of cool stuff to learn.... Maybe it's just me who likes older RedHat distros though
I'm not sure why the older distro. Do you mean that it will be faster than a newer distro? I thought the main reason to use older distros was to conserve space, and the fact that some of the newer distros did not adequately recognize the older H/W.

Did you say that RH6.2 only used a couple of megs of HDD?

Steve
 
Old 05-17-2003, 05:43 PM   #26
Mega Man X
LQ Guru
 
Registered: Apr 2003
Location: ~
Distribution: Ubuntu, FreeBSD, Solaris, DSL
Posts: 5,339

Rep: Reputation: 65
Hi

I think RedHat 6.2 feels faster because it uses older versions of both KDE and Gnome (just a guess and I don't remember which of them). But I've in my old computer Gnome and some others programs that I need for about 280 Megas used from the HD, which is about 3.2 Gigas. (could be less, I always get tired of read what I'm installing after a while and take away after the installation, newbie me..) That gives me still lots of space to play around with other stuff. But remember, this is a really small distro, comes with only one browser (Netscape) and no instant messengers as gaim or licq. I never used either apt-get for it, but I'm pretty sure it's as cool as for newer distros. Check out this:

http://apt.freshrpms.net/

There you see apt-get is supported even for that old version. Would save you a lot of time getting programs and updating those machines. I use actually that machine only for printing texts files.
Another good reason to use RedHat in an old machine is that you still can have a nice desktop as Gnome in a low memory machine. I like blackbox the most, but Gnome is great for starters, as you said it would be machines for newbies, they would like the classic clicking here and there to make things happens.

Oh yeah, the installation is as simply as new distros as well, with graphics or text install, mouse support and partitions tools . I think you should give a try with one of those machines and see it's performance and how good it identifies the hardware too...

Good luck. It's a nice attitude of you helping the needed ones. I hope someday I could do the same.
 
Old 05-17-2003, 06:09 PM   #27
Steve Cronje
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2003
Location: Canada
Distribution: Ubuntu, Mepis, Debian
Posts: 158

Original Poster
Rep: Reputation: 31
RH6.2

about 280 Megas used from the HD

Sounds good

apt-get is supported even for that old version. Would save you a lot of time getting programs and updating those machines.

I REALLY like apt-get, and similar. It makes things a lot simpler. Of course, I am not sure that everyone will have an internet connection, so it may only be helpful for me in setting up, etc.

I like blackbox the most, but Gnome is great for starters, as you said it would be machines for newbies, they would like the classic clicking here and there to make things happens.

I use Flux througout, but I also feel it is a little too different for the complete Newbie to Linux. Could be wrong!

the installation is as simply as new distros as well, with graphics or text install, mouse support and partitions tools .

I should check it out. What I like about live CDs with an install-to-disk option, is that it allows a fairly easy system reinstallation even for a raw beginner. And the self-setup of Knoppix / derivatives I find amazing.

Thank you for you helpful comments.

BTW, great sig!

Steve
 
Old 02-03-2008, 09:31 AM   #28
llewellyn
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: johannesburg south africa
Distribution: SUSE 9.3
Posts: 43

Rep: Reputation: 15
Small memory fix

Do have a look at DAMN SMALL LINUX they have already done all the thinking for you.
It runs well on old hardware and the people doing it plan to keep it suitable for the old slow small machines for all new versions.
 
Old 02-03-2008, 09:44 AM   #29
llewellyn
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2006
Location: johannesburg south africa
Distribution: SUSE 9.3
Posts: 43

Rep: Reputation: 15
More about small memory

I just posted about DAMN SMALL LINUX then realised I had something else usefull to pass you.
In South Africa we are very successfully doing internet using cell phones no modem needed.
My personal one uses a cable from the phone to USB but my grandson does away with that even by using a BLUE TOOTH dongle in the USB port connecting to the BLUE Tooth in the phone.
It is not Broadband but it is a damn sight fastter than a wired dial up

I often get down load speeds of 11 to 12 KBYte per sec.

The best program for ease of installation is KINTERNET which I am sure can run withour KDE. It is worth testing and most people have or can lay hands on a cheap cellphone. eg an old MOTOROLA V360

In SOUTH Africa the service provider MTN sell DATA bundels on a pay as you go basis. 500 megabyte costs R189 equivalent of USD 27. Five hundred meg gives lots of browsing and time on line is not a factor.

As I am sitting typing this slowly and painfully now it is not costing me. When I send it it will cost me only the data.
 
  


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
How much power do I need to run 23 computers? BrianK Linux - Hardware 3 07-14-2005 05:20 AM
Kismet on Zaurus SL-5600 with Socket Low Power WLAN card rodm13 Linux - Laptop and Netbook 1 05-07-2005 08:54 PM
low power machine suggestions? clockworks Linux - Hardware 2 07-23-2004 05:58 PM
How to do a low power server? jbuszkie Linux - Software 1 06-05-2004 02:31 AM
Ok I just donated.... but something came up Astro LQ Suggestions & Feedback 1 01-16-2004 02:44 PM

LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Linux Forums > Linux - Software

All times are GMT -5. The time now is 11:19 AM.

Main Menu
Advertisement
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
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration