[Date Prev][Date Next] [Thread Prev][Thread Next] [Date Index] [Thread Index]

Re: Small xorg?






----- Original Message -----
> From: Joel Roth <joelz@pobox.com>
> To: debian-user@lists.debian.org
> Cc: 
> Sent: Saturday, July 14, 2012 4:40 PM
> Subject: Re: Small xorg?
> 
> On Wed, Jul 04, 2012 at 06:29:55PM -0700, Patrick Bartek wrote:
>>  Any recommendations for a small, compact version of X (limited features OK) 
> for an old Thinkpad 240X -- max RAM 192MB (design limit.  won't take more. 
>  tried.), 500MHz P3, 800x600 screen--to install Squeeze on?  I'm running 
> Etch and XFCE on it currently.  Want to see if I can install a supported version 
> of Debian with a small window manager without the bloat of a full size X.
> 
> Patrick,
> 
> For my dad, I used Linux Mint, a Debian-based dist, to 
> setup a similar-spec Toshiba laptop with 128MB.
> 
> X works fine OOTB. I set him up with icewm with custom
> menus for the few apps he needs. 

X works here, too--Debian Etch + XFCE--but the System eats up almost 70% of the 192MB of RAM leaving only about 55 to 60MB free for the user.  Almost 100MB is used for the GUI!  (Only 33MB is used in Terminal only mode--no X, no GUI.)  And I've leaned the system out as much as I can.  Nothing is running that doesn't need to be.

Haven't looked at Mint, but just tested Vector Linux Light, the lightest "standard" distro I know of, in VirtualBox set for the same RAM and hard drive sizes as the Thinkpad.  Even using its smallest Minimal option install, after booting, it uses 178MB.

Distros like Damn Small and Puppy, I've rejected as they don't satisfy important requirements of mine.  Although, I am studying how Damn Small (v3) when installed to the hard drive as "standard" Debian (4, I think) has such a small RAM footprint--only 55.6MB!  This kind of RAM usage is what I'm looking for.
 
> Unless you *know* that you need a specially compiled X, why 
> bother? Whatever parts of the compiled xserver aren't being
> used will just swap out anyway, IIUC.

Custom compiling X can greatly reduce its size "in RAM," I've read.  Get rid of the fat!

Currently, I'm looking at DirectFB, a fairly sophisticated framebuffer, and XDirectFB, a very small companion X "emulator" or "translator" that runs "on top" permiting standard X applications to run transparently on DirectFB without alteration.  (You can even run a window manager to add features to the combo.)  But both are source code only. <sigh> :-(

> Good luck,

Thanks.

B


Reply to: