antiX I've used this before on an old laptop (also an atom and 2gb RAM) and it's very lightweight. It just doesn't have defaults that I prefer but if you tweak it enough, it should be fine.
this post was submitted on 28 Aug 2023
63 points (97.0% liked)
Linux
48352 readers
880 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
Might be overkill (or underkill), but Tiny Core Linux is the most lightweight I know. While having an up to date kernel (6.1.2) and glibc (2.3.6).
What are the minimum requirements? An absolute minimum of RAM is 46mb. TC won't boot with anything less, no matter how many terabytes of swap you have. Microcore runs with 28mb of ram. The minimum cpu is i486DX (486 with a math processor). A recommended configuration: Pentium 2 or better, 128mb of ram + some swap
Okay, yeah that's a bit much lol
I want to daily driver this for fun for a while. Only problem, just installed Arch, so I need to wait a bit
Also, I'll just mention that it all means nothing as soon as you open a browser window. Then all your RAM is gonna be used up anyway.
Can I introduce you to Lynx?
Sure, play your youtube videos on Lynx.
We all know that's one of the main things people use browsers for, that's not work, these days. ;)
I oftentimes play youtube videos in mpv.
Honestly, I don't even use Lynx
I'd go for Alpine Linux in such case.
You can do a really slim install of Debian that should work. For DE I recommend LXQT.
If you're feeling adventurous, Alpine might be slightly lighter. It's a good distro.
Those specs are not going to get you a terribly fast experience, but my laptop runs Debian ok and it's in the same ballpark.
As other have already alluded to, any distro with a lightweight desktop environment should work on that laptop. However, we don't know if it would work out for you; simply for the fact that you haven't given any other information.
Debian with XFCE or LXDE.
Isn't LXDE basically discontinued? It got combined with RazorQT or something back in the day and became the LXQT we know today if I'm remembering right.
Seems like you're right, I just remembered trying it a while ago and thinking it was quite decent.
Yeah it was a good middle of the road option. There's much lighter, but it gets a lot more involved at that point.
A request was made to sticky it
I checked this yesterday, but could not decide. So had to ask.
Then download random live iso, test DE for 10 minutes and install it if there is no major hurdles.
I've heard Puppy Linux is good, never tried it myself however.
Debian stable or testing, with MATE or XFCE or something crazy like WindowMaker (wmaker)!
If you want to take it to the extreme, Alpine is probably one of the best options.
It's not worth it. Ram is dirt cheap, you can get 8gb for like $30. For $150-$200, you can find an used Thinkpad that will perform 1000x better.
I would only use such a machine for playing with old software like Windows 2000 or XP, old Linux distros.
You can use whatever distro you want that you can install on it (btw it is a eeepc?), just avoid to install heavy programs and/or DE.
IIRC there should be a Debian derive distro for atoms, I used it on a eeepc, don't know of still a thing
thank you, I will check it.
With the Atom processor, I had "best" result with Puppy linux whether from USB or actually installed to hard drive. I could run Lubuntu, MX, etc., Tiny core, for me, was a little too little and certainly not "fit and forget". When I bought a new (to me) laptop with more RAM and later chipset, I still stayed with Puppy. There's very little that can't be done with it.
In my personal experience void linux ran the smoothest on all my old laptops (compared to stuff like arch and antiX, I defo didn't try everything).
I'm running it on a dual core 2.5ghz with 1800MB of ram, no complaints!
Any modern browser will probably kill your setup anyway.
If it's 32-bit, your options dwindle somewhat.
Armbian is lightweight, and has an x86 version.
What would you use this laptop for?
I've dealt with similar hardware, using Qtile over a Manjaro base, but had to mostly use CLI/TUI apps. Anything related to web browsing is a pain.
Not sure. But I have other primary laptop. And this laptop is just sitting so I wanted try something with it.
If you just want to play around with it, I highly recommend some arch based distro (because you can find plenty of obscure TUI apps in the AUR) with a window manager (be it tiling like Qtile or stacking like Openbox).
If you want something preconfigured, I've recently found instantOS, which seems to work fine for that usecase.
I use this small laptop mostly for ebooks (using the excellent epy) and music, using one ot the TUI YouTube frontends.
Yes I can use it for reading. thank you for the suggestion. I will try instant os.
I was on the same boat few days ago, I pulled out my 2010 CR48, Atom processor and 2GB ram.
I end up with Archlinux with xcfe DE, a tad slow but completely workable.
Arch, with a lightweight desktop environment. If you have time and dedication, obviously.
I've been using Peppermint on my garbage laptop and it made it usable again.
If you're new to Linux, try Lubuntu. If not, then try BunsenLabs.
I’ve tried Lubuntu on my old laptop from around 2008 and it works fine. It had more ram (4gb), but I don’t think it was using all of it.
Yeah it should be fine. But the OP needs to understand that even with a light OS setup, 2 gb of RAM really isn't much. First Firefox tab or two is going to kill that poor machine. That's why I added BunsenLabs as a lighter option. Still won't be great, but it'll be a bit better at least.
If you enjoy using older, less powerful computers, it's important to find a Linux distribution that can accommodate the limited resources. While extremely stripped-down distributions like Tinycore might seem appealing, they often lack the functionality and ease of use that come with more comprehensive distributions.
Instead, I would recommend learning how to use a window manager and forgoing a desktop manager. This approach allows you to maintain a lightweight system without sacrificing too much functionality.
When it comes to choosing a distribution, some are more bloated than others, so it's crucial to find one that offers a degree of flexibility during the installation process. In this regard, Debian is a great choice.
You can install Debian as a server, which will provide a minimal base system. From there, you can install a window manager and only the essential packages you need. This way, you can keep your system lean and efficient, perfect for older, low-powered computers.
Surprised Void Linux has not been recommended. I suggest giving it a try.
DietPi is always a good option. It's designed for raspberry pi, but you can absolutely run it on a laptop and install your desktop environment (XFCE etc)
AntiX or MX, both should work
I've heard good things about Peppermint, and I personally think Bodhi is neat.
I've heard Debian and Alpine are good lightweight distros
I think most distros will run fine on most hardware though (please correct me if I'm wrong) it's the software you run on it (as in, going with a GNOME desktop environment is going to be much more demanding than xfce for example)
arch with i3
view more: next ›