1 |
On Wed, 29 Aug 2012 11:41:54 +0800 |
2 |
Andrew Lowe <agl@×××××××.au> wrote: |
3 |
|
4 |
> On 08/29/12 11:35, Michael Mol wrote: |
5 |
> > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 10:57 PM, Andrew Lowe <agl@×××××××.au> |
6 |
> > wrote: |
7 |
> >> Hi all, |
8 |
> >> Anyone got any suggestions for a lightweight server |
9 |
> >> distro for an old motherboard? I've got one of the VIA mini-ITX |
10 |
> >> boards, SP13000, and want to whack something light onto it. It |
11 |
> >> will be working as a file/media server and will be headless, hence |
12 |
> >> will be fiddled via ssh. Obviously there are the usual suspects, |
13 |
> >> debian, centos, but does anyone have any recommendations viv a vis |
14 |
> >> a stripped down distro, sort of like Lubuntu is to Ubuntu? |
15 |
> >> |
16 |
> >> Any thoughts greatly appreciated, |
17 |
> > |
18 |
> > Cripes, you're asking in gentoo-user. Of course someone's going to |
19 |
> > suggest Gentoo. |
20 |
> > |
21 |
> > Let it be me...and I'll explain: |
22 |
> > |
23 |
> > 1) You can put something like -Os or -O2 in your CFLAGS, whichever |
24 |
> > helps your performance case better. |
25 |
> > 2) You can target your CFLAGS to your exact processor, allowing |
26 |
> > generated machine code to be as efficient as possible on your CPU |
27 |
> > (which you'll need, if it's a low-power CPU!) |
28 |
> > 3) You don't have to compile on the mini-ITX board; you can |
29 |
> > cross-compile and use binpkgs to install. |
30 |
> > 4) You can use USE flags to strip out (virtually) any and every |
31 |
> > feature you don't use, reducing both your code size, load and |
32 |
> > execution time. |
33 |
> > |
34 |
> > If you want to do something lightweight, there's not much better you |
35 |
> > can do than with Gentoo. |
36 |
> > |
37 |
> |
38 |
> It had Gentoo on it for ages, and has not been updated in |
39 |
> ages. It takes "years" to do anything, with respect to compiling so |
40 |
> I'm just looking for a simple "point and click", binary download type |
41 |
> of thingy to keep it going. I've been down the cross compile route |
42 |
> also - once bitten twice shy and I don't care how many strides the |
43 |
> dev's have made in recent years, I'm not trying again on principle. |
44 |
|
45 |
There's also DamnSmallLinux but if you ask me that's going too far to |
46 |
the other extreme. Yeah, it fits inside 50M but cripes, it has to use |
47 |
weird package management to do it. |
48 |
|
49 |
If not FreeBSD, then something Arch-based is probably your best step 1. |
50 |
Arch is a bit like *buntu in many ways, once you've decided to go that |
51 |
route, there's not really much difference between all the variants. |
52 |
It's not the base that's resource heavy, it's KDE and Gnome. |
53 |
|
54 |
|
55 |
|
56 |
|
57 |
-- |
58 |
Alan McKinnon |
59 |
alan.mckinnon@×××××.com |