Brennan Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I am looking for a distro of Linux (preferably with a GUI) to run on a really old computer I know it has 32MB RAM and around 300Mhz CPU I wanna turn it into a web server! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nicatronTg Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 DSL Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeoneE1se Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 do not put a GUI on it, just install something simple and learn the command line. I like debian but it's not newbie friendly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaKo Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Yeah, loose the GUI, you will save space and resources that would otherwise be wasted. I like FreeBSD myself, but Debian would be nice to. Neither of these are point and click installs but they would work rather nicely. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeoneE1se Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I love aptitude too much but freeBSD (once you get it installed) is very solid Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Brennan Posted March 22, 2008 Author Share Posted March 22, 2008 alight I will try freeBSD hope it supports all my hardware Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MBP Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 so if i had a computer with a 3.0gh/z cpu 512 ram what OS would you recommend Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ls Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 so if i had a computer with a 3.0gh/z cpu 512 ram what OS would you recommend ubuntu (server)Â it has the foundation of Debian and an user friendly gui Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeoneE1se Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 I hope to god Ubuntu server doesn't come with a GUI! Friends don't let friends install ubuntu! my recommendation for the high end is the same for the low end Debian! Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaKo Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 And mine is still FreeBSD; simple, effective, dependable and fast. Seriously, on a *nix server you do not want a gui at all. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonlit Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Seriously, on a *nix server you do not want a gui at all. QFE. Also on low spec machines too, though that's already been said. If you really *must* have a GUI, I'd definitely skip Gnome and KDE in favour of something a little lighter, xfce for example, or perhaps fluxbox. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ls Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 maybe ubuntu isn't the best choice but i'm satisfied with my ubuntu and i would recommend it to everybody but probably there will be better distro's Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonlit Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Ubuntu is a good choice if you haven't a clue where to start. However, it's not nearly "the deep end" if you wanna get stuck in. Of course, it is still Linux based, no-one can dispute that, so it still does everything it should, it's just a bit more bubble-wrapped than... almost every other distro ever. On the plus side, you can generally install drivers easier due to Canonical (the guys who distribute Ubuntu) allowing closed source drivers to be installed with a couple of button presses. It's not, however, a good choice if your machine is lacking in power (and specifically RAM), it'll curl up and die on any machine with a lower spec than it thinks it needs at any given time. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ls Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Ubuntu is a good choice if you haven't a clue where to start. However, it's not nearly "the deep end" if you wanna get stuck in. Of course, it is still Linux based, no-one can dispute that, so it still does everything it should, it's just a bit more bubble-wrapped than... almost every other distro ever. On the plus side, you can generally install drivers easier due to Canonical (the guys who distribute Ubuntu) allowing closed source drivers to be installed with a couple of button presses. It's not, however, a good choice if your machine is lacking in power (and specifically RAM), it'll curl up and die on any machine with a lower spec than it thinks it needs at any given time. this is completely true for a server debian is probably better than ubuntu but maybe if it's your first server ubuntu is a better choice than debian but ubuntu will not work on a computer with 32 mb ram and 300 Mhz cpu Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeoneE1se Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Ubuntu is a good choice if you haven't a clue where to start. However, it's not nearly "the deep end" if you wanna get stuck in. Of course, it is still Linux based, no-one can dispute that, so it still does everything it should, it's just a bit more bubble-wrapped than... almost every other distro ever. On the plus side, you can generally install drivers easier due to Canonical (the guys who distribute Ubuntu) allowing closed source drivers to be installed with a couple of button presses. It's not, however, a good choice if your machine is lacking in power (and specifically RAM), it'll curl up and die on any machine with a lower spec than it thinks it needs at any given time. this is completely true for a server debian is probably better than ubuntu but maybe if it's your first server ubuntu is a better choice than debian but ubuntu will not work on a computer with 32 mb ram and 300 Mhz cpu but debian-from-scratch would happily Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ls Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 yes but that's not really userfriendly Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeoneE1se Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 yes but that's not really userfriendlynot even close... but it runs Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonlit Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 yes but that's not really userfriendly User friendly generally means less secure and more bloated. This is far from ideal in a server environment, you need security and speed. If you can't work it out without a pretty GUI and you can't compile stuff yourself, I wouldn't advise putting up a public server. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ls Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 yes but that's not really userfriendlynot even close... but it runs and that's where linux is for , it just works :D Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SomeoneE1se Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 and that's where linux is for , it just works :D you've never use linux before linux is the last thing I'd label at 'Just works' Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
moonlit Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 yes but that's not really userfriendlynot even close... but it runs and that's where linux is for , it just works :D On the contrary, unless you know its quirks and how to get around already, Linux can be a major, and I mean MAJOR, pain in the ass. Compiling drivers, manually editing .confs without a GUI, error messages worthy of BSoD-level user friendliness... If you want easy, I'd stick to OSX or Windows. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
ls Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 and that's where linux is for , it just works :D you've never use linux before linux is the last thing I'd label at 'Just works' well i'm used to work with ubuntu and that works on all my computers without major problems , unless windows Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
VaKo Posted March 22, 2008 Share Posted March 22, 2008 Well in reality nothing is going to be that happy on a 300mhz CPU with 32mb of ram, my phone has more kick than that. If I'm honest, I'd suggest throwing that machine away. You can find Pentium 3 and 4 based systems people are chucking so why waste your time on something that outdated? As for OS choices, you don't want a gui here, so the whole binary blob driver argument is pointless. All you need is support for the NIC so you can use SSH. I don't know how linux behaves at the very low end of computers, but I suspect it will run, in a fashion. It just depends how its configured out of the box. I do know that a minimal install of FreeBSD with a tweaked kernel will run however. I don't know how sticking apache and mysql on the box will fare, but my money is on terribly. At the very least max out the ram, but seriously think about just throwing the thing away and getting a newer system. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
sc0rpi0 Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 Although I don't have much experience to speak off, I like ubuntu with a xfce interface. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
AeroZeppelin Posted March 23, 2008 Share Posted March 23, 2008 I have a similar situation. I have an early P4 machine with 256mb of SDRam. I was thinking ubuntu but the GUI seemed to only work with the live CD but not when installed on the hard drive. Should I try another distro or just upgrade the memory which isn't a big deal to do. Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You can post now and register later. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.