SlackwareThis Forum is for the discussion of Slackware Linux.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I'm grateful for the feedback and the stories each of you are sharing!
The larger hard drive is now a moot point. I long ago forgot that the key point was making the first 1024 cylinders available and from there the kernel will do fine with the remainder of the disk. I have larger spare drives that would provide sufficient swap space to overcome the meager 16 MB of RAM. With that perspective, installing Slackware or any distro is feasible ---running the system is another issue.
I'm wondering, however, what other's experience might be with running the 16MB in a dumb terminal (LTSP) rather than stand-alone machine. No hard drive necessary. Perhaps some of the previous answers were written within that perspective and I misread them. Would 16 MB be sufficient for a dumb terminal and basic window manager?
Quote:
Grab a binary copy of XFree86 3.3.6
I might look for an older version of Slackware and install. PV keeps previous versions patched for many years, therefore security is no issue. I think PV moved from Xfree to Xorg in version 10.0, therefore 9.1 would be the last release with Xfree.
If you really want a graphical desktop and the video card is too old for Xorg, I'll re-iterate the recommendation by others to try DeLi Linux: http://www.delilinux.org/
I actually tried it on a 1992 vintage Packard Bell 486 with Video7/Headland graphics and it worked fine once I dusted off the brain cells that once knew how to hand-edit the XF86Config file.
This PC isn't really a 90 pound weakling so much as an Ichthyostega in a land of wolves...
A juke box? Perhaps, although at 6 MB a song, along with the OS, a 512 MB drive will only hold a few dozen songs. Perhaps the BIOS supports an old 3.2 GB hard drive sitting on my shelf, but I'm not holding my breath. This is a vintage 1991 BIOS.
If I were to use it as a juke box, I'd probably just set up the system with a command-line media player, then have it ssh into a nearby system with a big hard drive full of MP3s and just play in the background. This begs the question, "Why don't I just use the other system in the first place?," but that kind of thinking just isn't adventurous. :P
Slackware 11's probably about as modern a distribution as it can realistically handle, unless you want to prove how monstrously insane you are by compiling a heavily tweaked, low-overhead Gentoo install and have a month or so to spend doing it.
If you must run X11, twm's probably your only safe bet.
Last edited by FreonTrip; 08-15-2008 at 10:24 PM.
Reason: Misspelled 'ichthyostega'
I find icewm-lite consumes a hair less RAM than twm, and it's far more usable. Even full icewm consumes less ram than fluxbox (depending on what theme you use).
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.