best distro for old laptop
in [UK Linux]
|
From: Lyn David Thomas on 2 Jul 2007 17:20 steve(a)jackass.woolacombe.lnx wrote: > Hello all, > > trying to reduce my leccy consumption . > Current box + monitor ~=220w , 15 hrs/day -> ~3kwh / day . > > So as part of the economy drive , I thought I might be able to use > my wifes old toshiba satellite pro 430cdt ( *32MB* ram, 1.2GB hdd , > 120MHz pentium) laptop (has floppy and a cdrom attached) , > as an economical (in power terms ~= 20w) work station where I can > code , maybe compile and debug the simpler bits of my project . > In the heavier coding bits on my normal box , I have 4/5 virtual > screens with 6 xterms each and one screen for googling ... so > clearly this laptop wont get anywhere near that , any idea what > it would support ? > (currently has win98se installed) . > > I have booted with tomsrtbt ok and mounted the cdrom (just to test it). > > Anyway I have distros going way back , and the first CD version I have > is a slackware set from 96 which says requires 4-8MB ram, and 12MB hdd > and is kernel 2.0 . Clearly in terms of vintage and box spec, this > matches quite well, but would it be best to use this or a less vintage > version of slack, (8.0,9.0,10.2 or my latest 11.0) or something else ? Normally I'd suggest Vector Linux, the standard edition has lighter weight aps - if that is too resource hungry then I'd suggest Deli Linux, a very good Slackware derived distro, with very lightweight aps. Look them up on distrowatch.... -- Lyn David Thomas "Windows [n.] A thirty-two bit extension and GUI shell to a sixteen bit patch to an eight bit operating system originally coded for a four bit microprocessor and sold by a two-bit company that can't stand one bit of competition." (Anonymous USEnet post)
From: Anonymous on 5 Jul 2007 08:58 Hello , Many thanks to all who responded . Lots of interesting suggestions. The spec is probably comparable with the first box I ran linux on (cant actually remember) but have a hard job remembering how slow tasks were , and how that affected the way I used it . The ram is 32MB and the max is 48MB but (unsurprisingly) they dont seem to make it anymore. There is also the cost of this , my guess of the value of this laptop as was with win98se on it , maybe 30 gbp ? Almost any upgrade would cost more than it is worth in itself , but some of this is an more an investigation as to whether it would be usable . Took a look at freecycle but they wanted an essay on why I want to join :-) My main concern with a new or old distro is the size increase in everything over time . Years ago I worked thru the boot/root howto and got it all working (satisfying) , but at next upgrade the libc increased and could no longer fit on a floppy :-( I took the advice to use a modern distro and went with slack 10.2 (which I had) and first attempt filled up the disk , second left me with ~290MB free , so investigated the suggested distros and deli linux is targeted at old machines (486) and their test machine is a 486 laptop with 16MB ram - seemed like the ideal match (never heard of it before). Had several problems but is now installed : uses 346MB and 763M free ! Now need to see how usable it is and how I can or will use it. Need to find a space to use it ... currently balanced on top of the radio . fwiw, I have gone back and remeasured the power usage , but this time have separated out the box and monitor (thought I had before but clearly didnt). Power measurement by a maplin mains power meter. box power (a7v333 mobo 1G ram , athlon xp1800 , ati 9600, kernel 2.6) idling 126 w xine 132 w (windowed or full screen) 100% cpu 150 w Why does 100% cpu use more power ...I thought that the idle was done as a tight loop , so that it would use full power (the kernel has acpi compiled in but did not think it would have any effect) . The monitor is a 17inch ctx run at 1600x1200 and I normally run it at 60% brightness and contrast . plain b&w text ie console : 62 w X 6 xterms 72 xine full screen 66 xine ! full screen 70 at 90% for both : X 6 xterms 80 xine fs 67 xine ! full screen 78 ie ~8w max change for extra brightness and that with white xterms + black print. So there is far more power than I thought used on the monitor , and maybe that should be a sensible so normal typing stuff takes 72w + 126w -> ~ 200w . Have also bought a mobile athlon cpu from ebay but waiting for a new cpu cooling fan ordered from novatech (been due in tomorrow for 7 days so far) ... dont know what to expect of that (assuming it works). fwiw, one problem I had, was that I can not get the laptop to boot off the cdrom. I found on the slackware rootdisks section that they have a smart boot manager that can stuff on a floppy , and will boot from the floppy and offer a choice of bootable sources including the cdrom . Thanks for the help and the suggestions, Cheers, Steve -- currently steve at houseman demon co uk web : http://www.houseman.demon.co.uk/
From: Anahata on 5 Jul 2007 09:23 steve(a)jackass.woolacombe.lnx wrote: > > Why does 100% cpu use more power ...I thought that the idle was done > as a tight loop , so that it would use full power The idle is a halt instruction for exactly the converse reason i.e. to use minimum power. Any event that causes the CPU to do something is started by an interrupt (even if it's only a timer interrupt) Anahata
From: Gordon Henderson on 5 Jul 2007 09:28 In article <9h6vl4-m13.ln1(a)jackass.woolacombe.lnx>, <steve(a)jackass.woolacombe.lnx> wrote: >My main concern with a new or old distro is the size increase in >everything over time . Years ago I worked thru the boot/root howto >and got it all working (satisfying) , but at next upgrade the libc >increased and could no longer fit on a floppy :-( That's progress for you! I think it's still possible to put a full router implementation in a floppy - maybe. It would have to be a damn tight system now, with a kernel compiled for your hardware exact needs, and little if nothing left over for anything else... I put a reasonably well featured system in a 32MB IDE Flash drive, but I've not tried hard to really fine-tune it (this is kernel, basic untilities, web server and asterisk phone server) It runs out of 48MB of RAM. >I took the advice to use a modern distro and went with slack 10.2 >(which I had) and first attempt filled up the disk , second left >me with ~290MB free , so investigated the suggested distros and deli >linux is targeted at old machines (486) and their test machine >is a 486 laptop with 16MB ram - seemed like the ideal match (never >heard of it before). > >Had several problems but is now installed : uses 346MB and 763M free ! >Now need to see how usable it is and how I can or will use it. >Need to find a space to use it ... currently balanced on top of >the radio . I'd now find some digital photo frame software and turn it into a .... digital photo frame ;-) >fwiw, I have gone back and remeasured the power usage , but this time >have separated out the box and monitor (thought I had before but clearly >didnt). Power measurement by a maplin mains power meter. > >box power (a7v333 mobo 1G ram , athlon xp1800 , ati 9600, kernel 2.6) >idling 126 w >xine 132 w (windowed or full screen) >100% cpu 150 w > >Why does 100% cpu use more power ...I thought that the idle was done >as a tight loop , so that it would use full power (the kernel has acpi >compiled in but did not think it would have any effect) . AIUI, idle in the Linux kernel sits on the HLT instruction and effectively waits for an interrupt to tell it what to do next, so that does a fairly good job of reducing power in the kernel. Try running cpuburn (eg. burnMMX) if you have it and then testing the power! >so normal typing stuff takes 72w + 126w -> ~ 200w . Think of it as 200W less heat you need to pump into the room in winter (or this summer )-: Gordon
From: unopened on 5 Jul 2007 18:45
On 2 Jul, 09:07, s...(a)jackass.woolacombe.lnx () wrote: > Hello all, > > trying to reduce my leccy consumption . > Current box + monitor ~=220w , 15 hrs/day -> ~3kwh / day . > > So as part of the economy drive , I thought I might be able to use > my wifes old toshiba satellite pro 430cdt ( *32MB* ram, 1.2GB hdd , > 120MHz pentium) laptop (has floppy and a cdrom attached) , > as an economical (in power terms ~= 20w) work station where I can > code , maybe compile and debug the simpler bits of my project . > In the heavier coding bits on my normal box , I have 4/5 virtual > screens with 6 xterms each and one screen for googling ... so > clearly this laptop wont get anywhere near that , any idea what > it would support ? > (currently has win98se installed) . > > I have booted with tomsrtbt ok and mounted the cdrom (just to test it). > > Anyway I have distros going way back , and the first CD version I have > is a slackware set from 96 which says requires 4-8MB ram, and 12MB hdd > and is kernel 2.0 . Clearly in terms of vintage and box spec, this > matches quite well, but would it be best to use this or a less vintage > version of slack, (8.0,9.0,10.2 or my latest 11.0) or something else ? > > Cheers , > > Steve Houseman > > -- > > currently : > steve at houseman demon co uk |http://www.houseman.demon.co.uk/ Damn Small Linux claims that it can "Run light enough to power a 486DX with 16MB of Ram" <URL:http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/> It fits into less than 50 Mbytes of disk space as well. I have used it. It is a little idiosyncratic, but may well suit what you are after. Regards, Sid |