slackware-friendly netbook
in [Slackware]
|
Prev: Slack 13 breaks ss
Next: What's the point?
From: Theodore Heise on 4 Apr 2010 08:17 On Mon, 29 Mar 2010 10:05:53 +0200, Giovanni <lsodgf0(a)home.net.it> wrote: > On 03/29/10 02:44, Handover Phist wrote: > >> And I've run Slackware on an old 486 laptop with 20 meg of ram. >> I believe that was either 10.2 or 11.0, but I would be willing >> to bet it would still go on old hardware with little ram. > > There are any problem if you do not use X. I started with 10.0 > and right now I'm running 12.1 on a 33Mhz 486DX with only 8 > MByte RAM. Its only purpose is as tape server for backups but it > works perfectly. Just out of curiosity, was there a reason you *needed* to upgrade from 10.0 to 12.1 to run a tape server--or was it more because you wanted to? Not meaning to criticize, really just wondering. Seems 10.0 would be fine for this purpose, but of course I'm still running my mail/news/web server PIII on 10.2. -- Theodore (Ted) Heise <theo(a)heise.nu> Bloomington, IN, USA
From: Giovanni on 4 Apr 2010 12:39 On 04/04/10 14:17, Theodore Heise wrote: > > Just out of curiosity, was there a reason you *needed* to upgrade > from 10.0 to 12.1 to run a tape server--or was it more because you > wanted to? Not meaning to criticize, really just wondering. > > Seems 10.0 would be fine for this purpose, but of course I'm still > running my mail/news/web server PIII on 10.2. > You're right, 10.0 was OK but I upgraded to 12.1 all machines in my home network so also the tape server had to be upgraded. I like to keep a local repository of the distribution current on my boxes and therefore I try to have all boxes with th same release. Ciao Giovanni -- A computer is like an air conditioner, it stops working when you open Windows. < http://giovanni.homelinux.net/ >
From: Theodore Heise on 6 Apr 2010 10:05
On Sun, 04 Apr 2010 18:39:03 +0200, Giovanni <lsodgf0(a)home.net.it> wrote: > On 04/04/10 14:17, Theodore Heise wrote: > >> Just out of curiosity, was there a reason you *needed* to >> upgrade from 10.0 to 12.1 to run a tape server--or was it more >> because you wanted to? Not meaning to criticize, really just >> wondering. >> >> Seems 10.0 would be fine for this purpose, but of course I'm >> still running my mail/news/web server PIII on 10.2. > > You're right, 10.0 was OK but I upgraded to 12.1 all machines in > my home network so also the tape server had to be upgraded. I > like to keep a local repository of the distribution current on > my boxes and therefore I try to have all boxes with th same > release. Makes good sense--thanks for humoring me, Giovanni. -- Theodore (Ted) Heise <theo(a)heise.nu> Bloomington, IN, USA |