• Welcome to Overclockers Forums! Join us to reply in threads, receive reduced ads, and to customize your site experience!

fastest boot or most stripped down distro

Overclockers is supported by our readers. When you click a link to make a purchase, we may earn a commission. Learn More.

Stratus_ss

Overclockix Snake Charming Senior, Alt OS Content
Joined
Jan 24, 2006
Location
South Dakota
and dont say gentoo!
lol, but seriously though, taking gentoo out of the question (because I dont want to compile source) what do you think the best distro is for boot time.

Functions required:

file serving- so samba and nfs
maybe internet surfing... maybe
ssh, vnc
K3B
A torrent program
MAYBE Mplayer



I would prefer a deb distro as that is what I am partial too... I will consider an rpm distro if that is the best route.

Guides are welcome, I dont mind tinkering a bit but I want to avoid building from source on this particular machine and I currently dont have another computer readily accessible to compile for me.
 
and dont say gentoo!
lol, but seriously though, taking gentoo out of the question (because I dont want to compile source) what do you think the best distro is for boot time.

Functions required:

file serving- so samba and nfs
maybe internet surfing... maybe
ssh, vnc
K3B
A torrent program
MAYBE Mplayer

I would prefer a deb distro as that is what I am partial too... I will consider an rpm distro if that is the best route.

I would have to say Debian, or ubuntu/xbuntu server. Any thing not provided by the default installation could be apt-get'd.
 
Another vote for Debian. But remember to install only what you want and need. Also your filesystem will have an effect on boot time. I'd user reiser or xfs.
 
I'll say that if you want to stick to a Deb distro go debian, and install as little as you can. Run it on a sata drive (preferably solid state or CompactFlash)
 
I went with debian and xfce for those times that I need a gui for something.

total install size 790 megs. Not bad

has
ktorrent
samba
openssh
k3b
firefox


my only thing with this is that my computer doesnt seem to like the tty's.
If i do ctrl alt f1 nothing happens but a blank screen.
Are tty's a package that i need to install?
 
It's not debian, but TinyMe would be another alternative. It runs well on limited systems, but it also uses RPMs (but it also uses apt). Oldest system is a 586 (or Pentium 1).
 
www.archlinux.org

You won't find anything faster.

I was thinking of installing the new 8.10 Xubuntu\Ubuntu once it comes out in a few weeks. Getting rid of Vista!

How much faster, better or different is Arch linux compared to the xubuntu distro's? I just noticed it looks like its a command line install? I guess the main benefit of this is to be able to choose which components and desktop gui to install?

Thanks
 
CLI vs GUI install is only for the install.
A CLI install is the same as a Win98 install (text and blocked background), the GUI install is like a Vista install; mouse cursor, windows, etc.


Give Arch a try, if you don't like it go with Xubuntu/Ubuntu.
 
For a server I don't think boot time should be your main criteria when you pick a distro . It should be stability and the ability to meet the needs of your server. Boot time shouldn't be an issue because theoretically most servers shouldn't need a reboot except in a few certain circumstances.
 
CLI vs GUI install is only for the install.
A CLI install is the same as a Win98 install (text and blocked background), the GUI install is like a Vista install; mouse cursor, windows, etc.


Give Arch a try, if you don't like it go with Xubuntu/Ubuntu.

I have installed a few things in Linux plus a Linux firewall so I should "survive" ... :cool:

Thanks for the suggestions...I will keep looking into Arch over the next few weeks and decide what to do. I think I will test it out on my old laptop..:beer:
 
For a server I don't think boot time should be your main criteria when you pick a distro . It should be stability and the ability to meet the needs of your server. Boot time shouldn't be an issue because theoretically most servers shouldn't need a reboot except in a few certain circumstances.

i suppose i was trying to zero in on trimming out the bloat. Boot time is way way down when I dont have a 2 gig base install with stuff i dont need and want starting up.

Also for a home server so if I am doing things remotely I would like to take it down and have it come back up in a short order.

Generally I would agree with you, I just have special interests in this particular case
 
Not Linux, but the bsd's are very fast.

Also slackware is minimalist and fast.

I like debian but i've never considered it a fast booting distro... but some work on the kernel and the init scripts could speed things up a lot.
 
If you want a fast Linux distro then your going to want Arch Linux. You DO NOT want ubuntu (or variant) if you want speed. Ubuntu is filled with so much crap that you dont need that it slows it all down.

Arch is the best distro i have seen so far. You just need a little more linux experience to use it compared to ubuntu.
 
If you want a fast Linux distro then your going to want Arch Linux. You DO NOT want ubuntu (or variant) if you want speed. Ubuntu is filled with so much crap that you dont need that it slows it all down.

Arch is the best distro i have seen so far. You just need a little more linux experience to use it compared to ubuntu.


I know all about ubuntu and its crap-filled manifest which is difficult to down-size :)
As for experience, I gain daily at work though we use CentOS. I just prefer the deb based distros compared to all those i have used.

I downloaded Arch just in case I do something to my debian install but for now I am holding off
 
One warning on Arch is that it is only i686+ (Pentium Pro, Pentium 2, or Athlon works, or higher, but not lower... i.e. not P1 MMX or K62/3). Less and less of a problem as time goes on. I'm assuming there is a 64 bit build out but I don't know. Maybe it's still all 32 bit i686.
 
Back