Vector Linux 4 Reviewed

SilentBob4 writes "On October 7th, the developers at Vector Linux released the latest version of their lightweight Linux distro, version 4. Vector has always been built upon the Slackware Linux framework and this time around it is based on Slack 9.0. The interesting thing here is that there was quite a delay between releases from the Vector camp, so as they were readying version 4, Pat Volkerding was releasing version 9.1 of his Slackware distro. This past Friday, the first review of Vector Linux was released (Distrowatch.com posted a link to it today). It was a pretty good review for the most part, but the interesting thing about it was that they actually benchmarked it against Slackware 9.1 and posted the results. I'll spoil the ending right now and tell you that Vector Linux won, but you should check out the findings. There are some pretty interesting numbers obtained from the two distros. The reviewer has published three PDF documents detailing the results. Everything was tested from the kernel to filesystem performance. It is interesting to say the least. Even if you don't have to time to read the whole article (it's two pages long), do check out the benchmark results. "

Comments

Okay, "stupid question" time

[Illbay]

Being software-illiterate, will someone please explain to me how this really matters?

A Linux "distribution" is (or so I have always thought) the kernel, plus system support files, plus all the tools (typical "GNU") that go into making a working OS. So how is it that you can have significant differences between distros in "performance"? And how does that matter if you build the system on your own hardware (a la Gentoo)?

Is this just another example of irrelevant Geek pissing contests, or is there some actual significance here?

Re:Okay, "stupid question" time

[Anonymous Coward]

The significance is this: I just installed Vector 4 on a 233MHz machine with 32 meg of RAM that I bought for 1 (One pound sterling) from my employer who was chucking it out. I will use it for word processing and other basic tasks and it will be just fine. It has the speed of Windows 95 (which was previously on board) but it's a modern operating system with all the capabilities that implies. I am well pleased.

Re:Okay, "stupid question" time

[fdawg]

I agree, what really sets this distribution apart from any other distribution besides the obvious bootup and daemon start up tweaks?

Most of the benchmarks on this review are all kernel dependant. Wouldnt it be safe to say that the same numbers can be found in any modern distribution if they use the same kernel patches/optimizations?

This leads me to my next question. Its true not all distributions are created equall and all distro maintainers do their own black magic to tweak their kernels. But, rarely do I see these optimizations published; as in a list form or even a howto. I am a longtime Slackware fanatic (circa slack2.1 to present) and have always swore by it if for nothing more than the fact that its kernels are straight vanilla with no patches. Now here comes VL which is said to be "faster". How? If i were to remove all running daemons that I dont use (which I do upon a knee-jerk reflex response after a fresh install anyway), wouldnt I get the same speed ups? What did they do to their kernels? How do I find out?

I switched from Slackware to Debian last week (oh how painful it was...really) on my desktop and I am keeping slack on my laptop. All my development is done on the laptop and Id rather not have to figure out why code I wrote last week no longer wants to work because of some strange header problem between distros. First thing I did was install a vanilla kernel since I really dont trust any distribution's kernel unless I KNOW its vanilla. Anyway, I notice no speed difference. What does the slackware world think about this? Am I missing out by using the vanilla sources? Are there some optimizations that the rest of the world swears by that may increase my speed somewhat?

Re:Okay, "stupid question" time

[dollar70]

Why don't you just shell out on a decent computer?

Oh, that's an easy one! I love buying new computers. This computer that I'm on now is a "Belchfire" computer with GHz to spare, and the one in the other room is an amazing little devil with a lot of spunk. But down in the basement is where my "server box" is. This is a computer I don't want to have to touch. I just want it to quietly do its job 24/7. The fact that it is an older technology doesn't prevent it from performing exactly the same as when it was a new technology.

Do I need to spend another $500 for yet another full featured PC when all I really wanted was a box that took care of a rather menial webserving task? No. I want a cheap reliable OS with staight-forward tools that will do their job in the dank darkness of my dungeon while I enjoy the cozy comfort up here in my living room.

Another point is that modern computers come with bells and whistles to entice consumers. These things can get in the way of straight forward tasks where a person isn't going to be there to respond. (Pop up dialogs, commercial offers, etc...)

And remember: There's no such thing as a stupid question. Only stupid people asking needless questions. ;-)

Re:Okay, "stupid question" time

[Cloud K]

"Why don't you just shell out on a decent computer?"

A fair enough question.

My answer: I work for a charity. They can't afford to shell out on a decent computer. Heck at the moment they even struggle buying inkjet cartridges.

Currently we're running a PC refurbishment scheme where, older systems (e.g. currently a lot of K6-2/300s for some reason) which would've been on their way to landfill are donated to us. I then install Linux onto them and either sell them on cheap to support the charity's income (for members of the public who simply don't need anything more) or give them away to disadvantaged people and families through referral schemes.

It's a fairly new project, and I've been through a good few distros (Slackware, Gentoo, Peanut...) looking for one that's both simple to use for the target audience (everyday people) and runs smoothly on this older hardware. Obsolete versions of RedHat didn't really appeal to me. Peanut has been the choice so far, but Vector definitely sounds right on the mark.

Great distro

[Beek]

Runs comfortably on my P133 with 48 MB of RAM.

Although I am curious what other modern distros will run on such a machine?

Good

[d-Orb]

Vector Linux is good because there are still loads of P2-2xx/3xx around. While you can always run XFCE on them, dillo and so on, they do have hardware limitations which might be difficult to overcome in order to have something normal people can use. If you get a distro that runs a modern desktop (KDE, GNOME) with some response (this is what the reviewer says; what he means is anyone's guess), then you can effectively extend the life of these older machines, save money, and so on. While many gamers may not be aware of this, people in small/family-run companies could definitely use something like vector for these purposes.

Unfortunately, I think that most of the people who would benefit most from things like Vector will never hear of it, and if they do, they will probably be overwhelmed by difficult installers and so on. If the VL people could come up with their distro packaged so that it effectively is a domestic distro (put CD in, wait, enjoy), then they would have a great product that many SMEs would use. They might also want to get some other software (accounting and that sort of stuff), but there is definitely a niche there for them to occupy. I wish them well :-)

I am rolling it out in a school

[codepunk]

I was approached by a private grade school that had a bunch of old gear and no money to upgrade software much less the hardware to run the latest windoze. I had them buy a single poweredge server and loaded up mandrake. Turned on XDMCP and are currently loading the clients with Vector Linux. It works really nice on old hardware and boots quickly. So for the cost of a single server they get to use the old gear plus all of the open source software they could ever want. Kudo's to the vector linux developers they saved this schools 50 workstations.

For those who do not want to build their own

[the_crowbar]

Reviews highlighting a distro built for speed are useful for those who are unable/unwilling to build their own Linux system.

Recently I bought a mini-itx system to put in my car. At that point, I wanted something lighweight (runs on VIA C3 Proc) and fast. I ended up building a Linux From Scratch system, but if I did not have the skill or inclination for something like that a distro optimized for slower hardware would be a great choice.

Even though I built a LFS system, I could have saved a bit of time by installing a binary distro. LFS took me several days of steady compiling to complete. (I did most of the build work on my desktop and simply copied the files over, but still.)

the_crowbar

packages?

[Danathar]

Is vector compatibile with packages designed for slackware 9.0?