Installing Linux

[pritch]

I got my old PC which has been laying around for a long time up and running today after a psu and mobo battery swapout. It runs win 98se currently but I would like to see if I can put Linux on it instead, for educational purposes as I've never used Linux before.

Specs;

Celeron 333mhz
13.9GB HD
192MB RAM
ATI Rage Pro 8MB

What I need to know is, 1) given the age and spec which distro etc. do you think I could go for, given that I'm a novice.

2) How should I best go about the install? Plz be detailed as I'm noob :)

[leileilol]

Damn Small Linux

[Remilia Scarlet]

My first real distro was Slackware Linux. To this day, I still swear by it and believe it to be one of the best. It's both noob-friendly (I got my mom on it, no problem), and good for when you like to tinker. Plus it'll run on a 486. Personally, I've ran it on a P2 233mhz with 64mb ram, a 1 or 2mb video card, and a 2gb HD.

With the install, you'd just put the disk in and go. Unless you have another OS, like Windows, on the HD. In that case, you'd first partition it. If it's an NTFS drive, try to get a copy of Partition Magic or something. If it's fat 32, I think there are other free utilities...but if you only want Linux on it, just use the install program. It's very straight-forward.

[CODOR]

What DJ_Haruko said. I'm still using a Slackware 3.2 install from 1997 on my file server.

It's pretty low on graphics (until you get X running, at which point you can use the usual window managers and desktop environments) and relies mostly on editing the configuration files rather than using a GUI, but if you're used to DOS then you might want that...

And if you're going to use the whole drive for Linux (erasing Win98), then there's nothing to worry about in the remote chance something goes wrong with the Linux install the first time.

Slackware Linux Essentials would be a good read, too: http://www.slackbook.org/

[ducon]

Every distribution may fit you, but not every window manager.
Check distrowatch.com and xwinman.org.

[Lord FlatHead]

I have FreeBSD on my other computer, all this Loonixery looked pretty daunting at first but pages like this one helped a lot. I don't know much about other distros, but I guess even with the super user friendly ones (if any such thing exists) it's not a bad idea to read up on linux/unix basics a bit before jumping into it. Know your song well before you start singing.

[Opulent]

If it was me, I'd download RH8 for that age system.
reason to go with RedHat is that it has more support and help than any other flavor.

[Infinite Ammunition]

in the way of installing it, i've heard ubuntu makes the process quite easy and suse even moreso, although suse runs the resource-heady kde out of the box so it may not be fit for your comp until you figure out how to make it run something else

[exp(x)]

You may want to try xubuntu instead of the regular one or kubuntu as its GUI is a lot lighter.

[Hobbs]

I'd say put Xubuntu if you don't want to worry about how to set it up, how each and everything works, etc. If you dont mind finding everything out about your system when you install the thing, Slackware is an excellent choice.

Unlike Windows most Linux OS's are still functional on comuters of that age, though some, like SuSE and Mandriva, can still be quite resource hungry (192 MB of RAM would be cutting it quite close using the "standard" install of those distros). Also note that there are literally hundreds of Linux distrobutions out there, so theres bound to be one that will fit you.

[Revenant]

Infinite Ammunition said:

although suse runs the resource-heady kde out of the box so it may not be fit for your comp until you figure out how to make it run something else

I use SuSE 10.0, and when I installed it, it gave me the option to use either KDE or GNOME.

My copy came on CDs, so you might not get that option if you're installing from a download, or if you're installing a different version.

[exp(x)]

Yeah, but gnome isn't much nicer resource-wise than kde.

[Revenant]

Out of curiosity, are there any that are?

[aca]

Buy a faster computer on ebay or something. They're a dime a dozen and mad cheap as well. I have a computer just like that and everything runs like shit on it, especially if you try to use X. You'll be turned off linux for a while.

[spank]

Devin: XFCE, {Black,Open,Flux}box, WindowMaker, Ratpoison (:))...

[ducon]

And Sawfish. No bar, no bell, no whistle: just a solid color background.

[LexiMax]

I ran Debian Linux on a 300mhz G3 and a 400mhz G4. It ran quite well on the later and acceptably on the former.

However, getting it set up in this kind of environment kind of assumes you know what packages you need. The base install is easy enough to do with a sarge netinstall CD, but past that, you don't want to install ANYTHING from the main installer. From there, you have to edit the /etc/source.list file and change the lines from stable to testing, load up aptitude and get the packages for programs you need, and essentually try to keep the install as lean as possible, as the normal debian install is bad about installing lots of crap that you don't really need if you pick the "Desktop" installation, and Ubuntu is doubly guilty of this. Obviously this form of installation requires some familiarity with Debian itself, so unless you're willing to do some googling to follow what I'm saying, or if you can install a text IRC client through aptitude and PM me for help, I wouldn't bother.

However, anythings better than Windows 98 SE, and most other distributions will be either soul-crushingly slow or boring as all getout.