On Fri, Mar 19, 2004 at 10:54:55AM -0600, Rodolfo J. Paiz wrote: > At 10:25 3/19/2004, you wrote: > >I was feeling masochistic last night so I tried an install on a > >machine with 32MB of ram. What a disaster. It depends on the speed of > >the processor but I would not install FC1 on a machine with less than > >256MB of ram, and I don't care what the requirements say. > > You cannot make generalizations like that about Linux and not expect to get > shot down for it, since they simply *are not true*. It just depends on > matching the software to the hardware to the user. You were trying to load > a GUI, a graphical browser, and office apps on 32MB of RAM... please find > *ANY* operating system released within the last five years which will run > on that hardware and then come back to complain. > > For example: I have 8 servers now running Fedora Core 1 on Pentium/166 > chips, with 32MB of RAM, and 1GB hard drives. The smallest network has > three clients and the largest has about 30 clients. In all cases, the > server provides firewall/masquerading/gateway services, DHCP, DNS, NTP, > printer sharing with CUPS, and master browser/Netbios name resolution > service via Samba (no actual file sharing). Two or three of these servers > will also soon provide VPN connectivity to branch offices. Very useful > boxes, these... very successful implementation of the most up-to-date Linux > distro around on ancient and obsolete hardware. > > Why does it work? Text mode (runlevel 3), minimal installs, all unnecessary > cruft removed, all possible services shut down save what is truly necessary > (kudzu, gpm, and others are shut down too), tight configuration, and... > most importantly... requirements which make sense. > > You can make an excellent operating system, but it won't work miracles. > Expecting a 2004 operating system with a full load of applications, > including Evolution, Mozilla, and OpenOffice, to run on 1994 hardware is > just silly. That OS, and those applications, have been built and tuned for > what users require today, and most of those users have much faster > processors, better graphics adapters, more RAM, etc. and thus want more > features, more simultaneous tasks, and more eye candy. > > Match the requirements to the hardware, and Fedora Core will do you right. > Ask a stupid question, get a stupid answer. I agree with what is said above except that I made it clear I was talking about systems with everything installed. In my experiment I cut down on the installed packages and services it will work. But let talk about how long did the install on a 32MB machine will take. In my case about 8 hours. I agree it depends what you are doing . But the general answer is that 64 MB is not sufficient to run fedora with its improvements. -- ------------------------------------------- Aaron Konstam Computer Science Trinity University One Trinity Place. San Antonio, TX 78212-7200 telephone: (210)-999-7484 email:akonstam@xxxxxxxxxxx
