low end linux
in [Linux Help]
|
From: philo on 24 Jan 2010 11:37 J.O. Aho wrote: > philo wrote: >> I had posted a while back concerning setting up some low-end Linux >> machines.I now have several p-II 333mhz with 128 megs of RAM >> >> They will be for a non-profit organization short on funds. The machines >> will be used by the members >> strictly for "surfing" the net insure the "work" machines do not get >> tampered with. >> >> I've tried Damn Small Linux and it does the job... >> except it did not survive an important test: >> What happens if someone turns the power switch off while the machine is >> running? >> >> >> Even if using ext3 (rather than ext2) the system >> fails to boot and fsck must be run manually. I tried it a number of >> times to confirm and have decided that this will not be a satisfactory >> solution...and got the same results with Puppy Linux. > > There are other file systems to use, I do recommend reiserfs (version 3.6), > which has been the most crash resistant file system I have used. > I have used rfs for one of my own machines and it did indeed work fine... the puzzler for me is that in general I've never had a problem with ext3 on any of the "full" Linux distros...\just the simple ones like DSL > >> I did try xubuntu and it recovers fine from a bad >> shut down...but the machines are too low end to run it properly. > > You can switch to another window manager, one of my favorites is ctwm. > It may require slightly more configuration from your side, but it's stable and > fast. > > >> The closest I've come so far to getting something that works right is >> Vector Linux... >> not sure if the members will like logging in manually ...plus >> the only way to shut the machine down is by >> logging in as root or "sudo" from the command line. > > You could try to install another "login manager", or check the settings for > the login manager to enable shutdown by normal users. > I'm working on that. Not only do I want to keep things simple for the users... I am trying to keep things simple for myself!
From: philo on 24 Jan 2010 11:39 Dan C wrote: > On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:30:39 -0600, philo wrote: > >> I had posted a while back concerning setting up some low-end Linux >> machines.I now have several p-II 333mhz with 128 megs of RAM >> >> They will be for a non-profit organization short on funds. The machines >> will be used by the members >> strictly for "surfing" the net insure the "work" machines do not get >> tampered with. >> >> I've tried Damn Small Linux and it does the job... except it did not >> survive an important test: What happens if someone turns the power >> switch off while the machine is running? >> >> >> Even if using ext3 (rather than ext2) the system fails to boot and fsck >> must be run manually. I tried it a number of times to confirm and have >> decided that this will not be a satisfactory solution...and got the same >> results with Puppy Linux. >> >> I did try xubuntu and it recovers fine from a bad shut down...but the >> machines are too low end to run it properly. >> >> >> The closest I've come so far to getting something that works right is >> Vector Linux... >> not sure if the members will like logging in manually ...plus the only >> way to shut the machine down is by logging in as root or "sudo" from the >> command line. >> >> Suggestions welcome > > Perhaps you could set up a LTSP server, and use the low end boxes as > simple "dumb terminals". Often used in schools and similar organizations. > > More info here: > > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Linux_Terminal_Server_Project > > and here: > > http://www.ltsp.org/ > > I am sure that would work but the logistics would be too difficult... the machines will be spread out over a 4 story office building. Either a wired or a wireless setup would be impractical
From: EOS on 24 Jan 2010 11:42 philo wrote: > > I had posted a while back concerning setting up some low-end Linux > machines.I now have several p-II 333mhz with 128 megs of RAM > > They will be for a non-profit organization short on funds. The machines > will be used by the members > strictly for "surfing" the net insure the "work" machines do not get > tampered with. > > I've tried Damn Small Linux and it does the job... > except it did not survive an important test: > What happens if someone turns the power switch off while the machine is > running? > > > Even if using ext3 (rather than ext2) the system > fails to boot and fsck must be run manually. I tried it a number of > times to confirm and have decided that this will not be a satisfactory > solution...and got the same results with Puppy Linux. > > I did try xubuntu and it recovers fine from a bad > shut down...but the machines are too low end to run it properly. > > > The closest I've come so far to getting something that works right is > Vector Linux... > not sure if the members will like logging in manually ...plus > the only way to shut the machine down is by > logging in as root or "sudo" from the command line. > > Suggestions welcome making you're own distro on a basis of SLED or openSUSE http://susestudio.com/ -- EOS www.photo-memories.be Running KDE 4.4 RC1 / openSUSE 11.2
From: J G Miller on 24 Jan 2010 12:04 On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:30:39 -0600, philo wrote: > Even if using ext3 (rather than ext2) the system fails to boot and fsck > must be run manually. Why does it have to be run manually? There should be a check in the mount script that if the filesystem was not cleanly unmounted then fsck will be executed. The only problem is if the fsck repair is so serious that "y" needs to be entered to the prompted question, although you could edit the file to force a "y" response. This however is often the only solution except for "forensics" recovery, ie do not attempt a repair to the filesystem, dump it to a good disk, and then try to repair the copy. Only if the fsck fails should the session go manual and drop down to an interactive "login as root" session.
From: philo on 24 Jan 2010 12:42
J G Miller wrote: > On Sun, 24 Jan 2010 09:30:39 -0600, philo wrote: > >> Even if using ext3 (rather than ext2) the system fails to boot and fsck >> must be run manually. > > Why does it have to be run manually? There should be a check in the mount > script that if the filesystem was not cleanly unmounted then fsck will be > executed. > > The only problem is if the fsck repair is so serious that "y" needs to be > entered to the prompted question, although you could edit the file to > force a "y" response. This however is often the only solution except for > "forensics" recovery, ie do not attempt a repair to the filesystem, > dump it to a good disk, and then try to repair the copy. > > Only if the fsck fails should the session go manual and drop down to an > interactive "login as root" session. > Looks like the damage was pretty bad anyway I've moved on an went with Vector Linux 6 if does all I require plus has add'l features I may end up using |