Joined: Feb. 2007
||Posted: Dec. 20 2007,23:25
| I run P2-300 laptops with low RAM as thin-clients so I think this type of install is the best way to leverage my hardware.|
If you intend to upgrade frequently, I would strongly recommend frugal install. At some point you'll appreciate the difference between leveraging hardware and leveraging your time.
FWIW, I've run DSL in various configurations on various machines. I also run DSL from USB-HDD.
I presently have one computer (400mhz Celeron, 128MB RAM) with hard drive install. Barring a power outage in the next five hours, it will have 38 days uptime today. That machine ran for a very long time on DSL 2.1b and completely skipped DSL 3+ (edit: I would probably *still* run DSL 2.1b on it if I hadn't installed FreeBSD and used the whole drive). It's now running 4.0-release. It will not get an upgrade until I'm convinced that it's worth the hassle of backing up files and going through the process of reconfiguring everything on that drive. If you're going to the hassle of putting /home on a separate partition, go ahead and put /opt there as well so you needn't set up funky scripts to circumvent the way UCIs are supposed to work.
I also presently have DSL installed frugal on the following computers:
- 200 mhz Pentium Pro, 64 MB RAM
- 200 mhz Pentium MMX, 64 MB RAM (rescued this week)
- 266 mhz Pentium Pro, 32 MB RAM
I don't know what you consider low RAM, but frugal works very well on the above machines. I've mixed hard drives with different installs -- frugal, hard drive -- between these and faster computers for testing various things. The difference in performance between hard drive install and frugal is insignificant on the P2xx boxes above.
You might want to try it before you dismiss it and instead create a lot more work for yourself than DSL is intended to be.
"It felt kind of like having a pitbull terrier on my rear end."
-- meo (copyright(c)2008, all rights reserved)