terwergeghts
New Member
I have 128mb ddr ram. intel pentium 4 at 1.3ghz. 32 gb hdd. and a geforce4 mx420 Floppy disk tray. I'm trying to install but pc crashes and gets very hot what do i do. Currently runs windows xp fine.
Can my PC run linux mint?
- Thread starter terwergeghts
- Start date
OP
terwergeghts
New Member
Got any distros you'd recommend for my system?
Antix would work.
Here is a debian "manual" for 32 bit installation:
It's a lengthy but comprehensive document that is likely to answer most questions that arise for a 32 bit system.
In the section entitled: "3.4. Meeting Minimum Hardware Requirements" it indicates that 256 megabytes of RAM is needed for an installation, but also notes that it may be less. Hence, if there is less such as on the machine mentioned, it's a matter of trying to install to see what is possible.
It recommends a window manager instead of a Desktop Environment. Window managers include: icewm, openbox and fvwm2. There are numerous others, but these I know work well.
If by chance you are able to satisfy your computer usage without a graphical user interface (GUI), that is, using only text based applications, then this old small system may be able to run relatively well. For example, if you used text browsers to access the internet. These include the programs: lynx, elinks and w3m, which all run well. There are also ways of displaying images in the terminal without GUI applications. Of course, you could install X (and that would be necessary to run window managers), but I think any modern web browser would not function without issues with such a small RAM component. If you could increase the RAM, it would make a difference all round.
It's a lengthy but comprehensive document that is likely to answer most questions that arise for a 32 bit system.
In the section entitled: "3.4. Meeting Minimum Hardware Requirements" it indicates that 256 megabytes of RAM is needed for an installation, but also notes that it may be less. Hence, if there is less such as on the machine mentioned, it's a matter of trying to install to see what is possible.
It recommends a window manager instead of a Desktop Environment. Window managers include: icewm, openbox and fvwm2. There are numerous others, but these I know work well.
If by chance you are able to satisfy your computer usage without a graphical user interface (GUI), that is, using only text based applications, then this old small system may be able to run relatively well. For example, if you used text browsers to access the internet. These include the programs: lynx, elinks and w3m, which all run well. There are also ways of displaying images in the terminal without GUI applications. Of course, you could install X (and that would be necessary to run window managers), but I think any modern web browser would not function without issues with such a small RAM component. If you could increase the RAM, it would make a difference all round.
Brickwizard
Well-Known Member
128mb ram limits even 32 bit offerings to
Slax
Void
Sparky
Alpine
and the ubiquitous Puppy in various breeds
wendy-lebaron
Active Member
Welcome to the forums.
You're better off staying with WindowsXP because you just don't have enough RAM to run one of the "big" Linux distros. Brickwizard proposed a few but they have their particular weirdnesses and you will feel left out while "everyone else" talks about Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Fedora etc.
I'm not saying this to discourage you. If you can, get another computer with at least 2GB RAM. The more RAM you can get, the better. Because 32-bit systems are steadily being phased out. At this time, a 32-bit computer with the same CPU as yours might be able to run Debian, for example, if it's classified as "i686". Any earlier 32-bit processor is out of luck at this time except for Mageia, Slackware and a few others that could still deal with "i586" classification.
Do not listen to anybody who tells you to check out Sourceforge. There are many distros found there which were abandoned, or not maintained for many years. They might not be updatable. With Debian in particular, anything older than v11 "Bullseye" is out of luck. Ubuntu "Bionic Beaver" v18.04 LTS went EOL earlier this year, and anything which is earlier than that cannot be supported sensibly.
antiX might work but very slowly, might have to create a large "swap" partition and otherwise it should get at least 1GB RAM. Cannot run web browsers or any memory-intensive applications like that.
It is hard. That's why with your computer, it's better to remain on Windows because the "famous" Linux distros have now becoming too big.
You're better off staying with WindowsXP because you just don't have enough RAM to run one of the "big" Linux distros. Brickwizard proposed a few but they have their particular weirdnesses and you will feel left out while "everyone else" talks about Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Fedora etc.
I'm not saying this to discourage you. If you can, get another computer with at least 2GB RAM. The more RAM you can get, the better. Because 32-bit systems are steadily being phased out. At this time, a 32-bit computer with the same CPU as yours might be able to run Debian, for example, if it's classified as "i686". Any earlier 32-bit processor is out of luck at this time except for Mageia, Slackware and a few others that could still deal with "i586" classification.
Do not listen to anybody who tells you to check out Sourceforge. There are many distros found there which were abandoned, or not maintained for many years. They might not be updatable. With Debian in particular, anything older than v11 "Bullseye" is out of luck. Ubuntu "Bionic Beaver" v18.04 LTS went EOL earlier this year, and anything which is earlier than that cannot be supported sensibly.
antiX might work but very slowly, might have to create a large "swap" partition and otherwise it should get at least 1GB RAM. Cannot run web browsers or any memory-intensive applications like that.
It is hard. That's why with your computer, it's better to remain on Windows because the "famous" Linux distros have now becoming too big.
Well, that's a pretty 'naff' statement to make...and by saying such you're automatically assuming that everyone WANTS to run a "big, mainstream" distro. Why?
I've been running 'Puppy' Linux exclusively for almost a decade. Believe me, I don't feel the slightest bit "left out" during "big" Linux discussions. Why should I? There's still enough points of commonality between all distros for me to be interested, regardless of the distro under discussion......and frankly, discussing the finer points of carrying out any given operation in any specific distro/DE combo, literally step-by-step, bores me to tears.
I'm all for helping folks.....but to my way of thinking, we should be helping them to help themselves. Not keep them coming back here, just expecting every time to get a 'hand-out' of step-by-step instructions, as though we're some kind of free help-desk. Yes; point them in the right direction with a few well-chosen suggestions by all means.......and add a gentle hint that it would be greatly to their advantage if they did what research they were able to for themselves. In the short term, it benefits the individual - it gives them more practice in how to effectively use a search-engine, for one thing.....and in the longer term, it can only benefit the whole community.
Self-sufficiency is beneficial for everyone. I never ask for help on anything until I've exhausted every possible avenue of information for my problems. I enjoy the research, and at the end of the day, there's a great feeling of satisfaction to be derived from knowing that you've "fixed it" yourself.
And you're then far better placed to assist others in your turn, if you feel you want to...
~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
My first laptop, back in 2001, had almost identical specs to the OP's; a Dell Inspiron 1100, with a 2.2 GHz 'NetBurst' Celeron, 128MB DDR1, a 20 GB 4200 rpm Hitachi 'Travelstar' HDD.......and Intel's dreadful graphical offering at the time, the 'Extreme Graphics' adapter integrated into the 82845 chipset (I swear Intel tore up the VESA rulebook & threw it in the trash when they built that thing, 'cos there was nothing 'normal' about it at all!) XP ran like a slug on it. How it ever managed to install SP3 I will never know.....it took almost 5 hours, red-lining all the way, and running so hot the exhaust port was doing a fair approximation of a hot-air paint stripper. In fact, I couldn't figure out how XP managed to run on there AT ALL.....though of course, the page-file was in constant use and the Travelstar was thrashing like crazy.
Even Puppy refused to behave herself till I stuck at least a gig of RAM in there. Manufacturers like Dell ought to have been ashamed of themselves for foisting such woefully under-powered machines on an unsuspecting public, but......what can you do?
Nowadays, with a much newer, far more powerful machine which has ridiculous amounts of resources, I could run literally anything I wanted to. I stick with Puppy by choice; I know what I'm doing with her, I've pretty much mastered all her wee 'quirks', and I happen to really like her. She'll do everything I could ask of her.......I'm satisfied with MY choice. Thankfully, my distro-hopping days are a long way behind me; I've found "the one for me", and have no desires to look elsewhere.
I will advise the OP to try and get some more RAM. Machine specs would help here, too; make & model would let us do some basic research and see what's what, AND if the OP's wasting their time. If it's a flat bust from the outset, there's little point sugar-coating the pill.
Mike.
Last edited:
No. I could only supply a link to lightweight distros (which I'll do). I have no modern experience with this. We have great helpers who do have experience with this and I leave you in their more-than-qualified hands.
My promised link:
Light-weight Linux distribution - Wikipedia
Condobloke
Well-Known Member
Welcome to Linux.org
You could start by telling us your correct age.
We/I can often make recommendations/give advice depending on just that....your age
For example, if you are 13, then we will instantly recognize that you have no income and are probably unable to afford another laptop/pc
On the other hand, if you are 73, we would make a judgment (with your help) if this is a necessity, or simply a project you are trying to get working as a challenge.
You could start by telling us your correct age.
We/I can often make recommendations/give advice depending on just that....your age
For example, if you are 13, then we will instantly recognize that you have no income and are probably unable to afford another laptop/pc
On the other hand, if you are 73, we would make a judgment (with your help) if this is a necessity, or simply a project you are trying to get working as a challenge.
I'd go here and create an account and ask this question.
forum.puppylinux.com
I'd go here and create an account and ask this question.
If its been done it's been done by someone on one of the forums or both of the forums.
Puppy Linux Discussion Forum - Index page
forum.puppylinux.com
I'd go here and create an account and ask this question.
If its been done it's been done by someone on one of the forums or both of the forums.
128MB is tiny.
I recall doing some QA on devices with only 384MB of RAM, but not smaller. I no longer have any pentium 4 hardware (recycled as September 2020 was the last release of Ubuntu for that hardware & I didn't see reason for it any longer).
I still have an ancient device (pentium MMX) with only 64MB on which Puppy 5.3 (Wary) resides, but it exists for a specific purpose and is kept offline (as I recall there are 3 GNU/Linux systems on that box; but I found Puppy friendlier than DSL/Damn Small Linux etc)
You'll need to avoid live systems for the most part, unless you're using a very old stack (like what I use on my 64MB box though mine is ancient more than old) or stick to simple window managers (not full desktops).
I'll like others recommend you upgrade RAM to 1GB or more, a look back at my QA list of hardware shows I used 1GB-3GB for my later pentium 4 QA of modern systems, with the 384MB a decade+ ago.
I recall doing some QA on devices with only 384MB of RAM, but not smaller. I no longer have any pentium 4 hardware (recycled as September 2020 was the last release of Ubuntu for that hardware & I didn't see reason for it any longer).
I still have an ancient device (pentium MMX) with only 64MB on which Puppy 5.3 (Wary) resides, but it exists for a specific purpose and is kept offline (as I recall there are 3 GNU/Linux systems on that box; but I found Puppy friendlier than DSL/Damn Small Linux etc)
You'll need to avoid live systems for the most part, unless you're using a very old stack (like what I use on my 64MB box though mine is ancient more than old) or stick to simple window managers (not full desktops).
I'll like others recommend you upgrade RAM to 1GB or more, a look back at my QA list of hardware shows I used 1GB-3GB for my later pentium 4 QA of modern systems, with the 384MB a decade+ ago.
If you don't have an optical drive, you could use the PLOP bootloader from your floppy drive to install a distro from a pendrive.
You would likely need to create a swap partition, to help your limited ram.
SliTaz &/or TinyCorePlus would be my recommendation on such a machine as yours, although you could likely get AntiX running on it.
www.plop.at
www.tinycorelinux.net
You would likely need to create a swap partition, to help your limited ram.
SliTaz &/or TinyCorePlus would be my recommendation on such a machine as yours, although you could likely get AntiX running on it.
Plop Boot Manager 5.0 - Download
Tiny Core Linux, Micro Core Linux, 12MB Linux GUI Desktop, Live, Frugal, Extendable
Welcome - Tiny Core Linux
www.tinycorelinux.net
wendy-lebaron
Active Member
There is one more reason why I would recommend you stay on this path.
You could use Puppy Linux to see if it's good enough for you. Otherwise if you are very accustomed to messing around in
C:\Program Files or C:\Windows, deleting system files, mingling them with your own files, using bad-behaved installers that force you to manipulate files in those areas etc. -- you will not like mainstream Linux distros!I don't know if you have any knowledge about what goes on in Windows Vista or later, or if you have an account on WindowsXP and have to enter your password to go into the desktop. On Linux you will have to enter your password much more frequently for certain things. If you want to do something to a protected system area, or if you think you need to put your files away from your home folder... you will be frustrated.
You don't have to worry about any of that on Puppy Linux. But it's so easy to make one mistake which takes down the whole system. Must do backups to try to avert it.
This would be too much for the topic starter who originally asked for Linux Mint, but apparently doesn't have enough computer memory for it.
Whatever a user screws up in a Puppy Linux session can be fixed 100% by doing a system restart which loads a fresh new image into ram.
Welcome to the Forum.
Linux Mint is 64bit now and with 128MB of Ram...I wouldn't try to run anything...it's time for a new computer.
