Suggest a USB-installable Linux distro to try on a 256MB RAM PC

Kernel_Sanders

I have been passed an old PC on which I want to try various Linux distros as I don't want to buy more RAM for it. I don't really want to install to the HDD just yet, so I was hoping to run them (one at a time!) from a USB drive. I need to be able to use a 3 Mobile broadband dongle on it and also install software for a Lexmark X1150 printer/scanner. I can't run anything from within Windows on it.
I am proposing to use http://www.pendrivelinux.com as I haven't installed from a USB before, but there are dozens of distros to choose from, so, any suggestions please?

GunJack

puppy linux will run fine on 256 ram, and off a usb. create one with xboot

Kernel_Sanders

GunJack wrote: »

create one with xboot

That looks ideal for testing several distros. Can other stuff be on the USB at the same time?
I don't understand this bit of the tutorial on http://dottech.org/freeware-reviews/20053/ :

XBoot will prepare and copy the various ISOs onto your USB drive; you don't have to do anything except wait.
On the other hand, creating an ISO is a bit more simple than a USB drive; there is no bootloader to pick nor drive to select. If you select Create ISO, Xboot will do its thing and automatically create the ISO file

Surely the ISO has already been created when you have downloaded it.

GunJack

^^^ yes it has, you just need to load up xboot with the ones you want on the usb and xboot will create the usb with a menu for you to pick which to boot up each time The create ISO function is for stuff that isn't already in that format, or has multiple elements (like hiren's for example)

On my USB I've got puppy linux, hiren's bootCD, and the avira rescue system

Kernel_Sanders

I've had a read about Puppy and will try it first on the basis of this 2-y-o review. Would you agree with all of it?

Submitted by sputnik on Sat, 03/20/2010 - 2:42am
Puppy Linux packs more functionality in 100mb than most distros that i have tried have packed in 700mb. it is the only live distro that i know of that can handle Adobe Flash without downloading anything. getting updates is easy, using synaptic/puppy package manager. With Puppy linux, everything is easy. it is a valuable tool, especially if your hard drive dies. and it is easily customizable/expandable, so you can do whatever you like. compare its functionality with a ~700mb distro like fedora12 or knoppix 6.2 SPOILER: Puppy wins. just saved you an hour or so of downloading!

I have a problem opening the xboot file. A pop-up says I need .net Framework (I'm currently using XP). Should I just download it from here?
http://www.softpedia.com/get/Others/Signatures-Updates/NET-Framework.shtml

esuhl

My favourite distro, Arch, can be installed to a USB stick (although I installed it to hard drives, so I'm not familiar with the USB installation process). See here: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Installing_Arch_Linux_on_a_USB_key

It's a good choice for an old PC as you start with a very minimalist setup and just install the components you need...

GunJack

don't get .NET framework from softpedia, get it from MS via windows update - you may need to check the Custom option if going via IE > Tools > Windows Update. I'm suprised you've got this far without it, tbh.

spakkker

Not played with this stuff for a while but I found that these small O.S still like a fair bit of ram - like XP.
It seems more so when you don't install to hdd.
Old ram seems cheaper than ever -look on ebay.
What spec is the pc ?

Kernel_Sanders

GunJack wrote: »

don't get .NET framework from softpedia, get it from MS via windows update - you may need to check the Custom option if going via IE > Tools > Windows Update. I'm suprised you've got this far without it, tbh.

That last comment prompted me to check the spec (of my regular PC) and it seems I have 'lost' SP3 (for the second time!) I'm not sure how this happens, but I'm presuming this update is part of it.

spakkker wrote: »

Not played with this stuff for a while but I found that these small O.S still like a fair bit of ram - like XP.
It seems more so when you don't install to hdd.

That'll be because they actually use the RAM to run in.

tombruton87

its a really open ended question, cu there are so many distros that are ideal for differnt ppl, stuff like ubuntu and mint are really good for beginners. U will want to tone down the interfaces on them tho from the looks of it. Or somthing like arch is fantastic cuz u start with pretty much nothing and just install wat u want! However when I used it you just had a command line at the begining duno if its still like that. You have things like fedora really pushing what linux can do. The latest one removes alot of the HAL improving performance, pretty stables but not as stable as somthing like redhat which can be real good for if u wanted to turn it into a home server. However id probs go with ubuntu server edition and customise it to make sure its secure if ur allowing it out onto the web

esuhl

tombruton87 wrote: »

Or somthing like arch is fantastic cuz u start with pretty much nothing and just install wat u want! However when I used it you just had a command line at the begining duno if its still like that.

Yeah - a standard Arch installation leaves you with a terminal prompt. From there, you install whatever you like. It might sound daunting, but the wiki guides you through every step, and it's worth doing because you get to know how everything is set up, and it just performs so well ('cos it's not being slowed down by stuff you don't need).

My favourite desktop manager, XFCE, would be a good choice on older machines too. I suppose it's a bit like the XP interface -- it does everything you need it to without looking particularly fancy. I found that distros that use Gnome or KDE tend not to perform so well on old machines. (And of course, with Arch you don't start with a "default" desktop manager -- you can install the one that's right for you.)