Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

VectorLinux 4.3 - Rocket Fueled Slackware

Posted by michael on from the vroom-vroom dept.

SilentBob4 writes "Mad Penguin has the first review of the latest VectorLinux release. Vector is based on Slackware Linux, but is built on a newer 2.6.7 kernel (Slackware 10 was still built on a 2.4 kernel with the option of using 2.6) and is optimized to run well on older hardware. Even old Pentium PCs run well on this distro. Complete review with screenshots."

21 of 174 comments (clear)

  1. VL by k31bang · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I've been using VectorLinux(3.2) on my 760 series thinkpad for about a 8 months or so. Installing it was made easier by first installing Smart Boot Manager, which allows booting from a cd when the BIOS is too old to know how. Then, just to be a wiseass, I setup ICEwm to look exactly like windows XP(wall paper and all). Nothing like running xp on a 166. ;-)

    --
    -+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+ *** http://www.mountainfort.com *** +-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-=-+-
    1. Re:VL by timeOday · · Score: 3, Informative
      RTA. VectorLinux isn't about patchsets or compile options:
      Whenever possible (which is most of the time) in cases where there are two or three good applications to perform a specific chore, they would choose to include the most lightweight one out of the bunch for inclusion into the final release. This is what makes VectorLinux what it is, and always has been.
      Can you take any linux distro and hand-pick all the lightweight software for an old box yourself? Sure, with enough elbow grease. Or you can use VectorLinux, because they already did it for you.
    2. Re:VL by antiMStroll · · Score: 3, Insightful

      It's always interesting to see an AC comment modded up when it bears no correlation at all to the parent post. BTW in case you haven't noticed, distros vary on which supported features and optimizations are enabled when compiling binaries and some distribute custom kernel patches. Saying you can replicate any of them given enough time is at best a non sequitur.

  2. Not in the FAQ by Stevyn · · Score: 5, Funny

    Does VectorLinux still follow the right-hand-rule?

  3. SOHO by gid13 · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've used Vector Linux 4.0 (SOHO version) for a while, and I have to say a couple of things.

    1. Judging it by the same apps (firefox, for instance), it was STUNNINGLY fast compared to XP Pro and all other Linux distros I've tried (Fedora, Mandrake, Arch, even Gentoo).

    2. It sorely lacks a good dependency-handling package manager. Two exist that I'm aware of (Swaret and Slapt-get), and unfortunately they both just aren't that good. If this was remedied, well... just... wow.

    1. Re:SOHO by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 4, Interesting

      I agree completely.

      When I started with linux, I used mandrake, just because of its rep as a newbie distro. I found unusable slow. I was disappointed. People had told me online that "linux was faster than windows". I felt like I had been lied to. (I was upgrading from win98, they were comparing to XP)

      I switched to vector for speed alone. I was impressed. Even KDE was snappy! But, I wasn't able to install a single package.

      I've switched to debian based distros exclusively, just so I can get stuff installed. However, I still miss vectors speed. I wish someone would make a distro compatible with the debian archive that had vector caliber speed, if that's possible.

    2. Re:SOHO by TheKidWho · · Score: 3, Informative

      You could always try out gentoo, it happens to be very easy to install apps with portage, and it is very speedy too.

  4. Re:Why bother with old hardware? by BluhDeBluh · · Score: 4, Funny

    Presumably some sort of ancient bacteria. With this in mind, they'll probably find primitive 386s on Mars in 20 years...

  5. No package system... by dark-br · · Score: 4, Informative


    no dependency control, no thanks.

  6. Um.... by StickMang · · Score: 4, Funny

    Apparently he was running his mysql server on dinosaur hardware!

    --
    StickMan
    www.rageagainst.net
  7. Vector is the shizzle by CestusGW · · Score: 5, Informative

    I've had the chance to use vector before, and I have to say it's the cleanest distro I've ever come across. No bloat, no extra features, no bizillion things starting at system boot.

    --
    Too much repetition my too much repetition!
  8. Linux and Environmentalism by QuantumFTL · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I believe that linux distributions like this that cater to older hardware encourage responsible environmental behavior among computer users. Honestly, for many purposes a 6 year old machine is just fine. I find it really convenient to have access to an always on, personally reconfigurable server that I can use for everything from a database to a small dynamic website. Most things that we do with computers nowadays don't really push our CPUs.

    I also think it's fantastic that they are using new the new kernel - cutting edge software is a great way to reinvigorate older hardware. I really hope that this leads to more computer reuse by geeks and maybe eventually nongeeks.

    A lesson people seem to have forgotten since the great depression survivors have moved on is "waste not want not". I for one think this world would be a better place with a little more of that attitude.

    Besides, it's fun to think that our "favorite" OS could be helping keep the world a safe, clean place for our children.

    Cheers,
    Justin

  9. Runs well on Pentium PC (== P1) with KDE 3.3? by lonesometrainer · · Score: 3, Interesting

    I have not tested Vector yet, but my experiences with KDE 3.3 on Gentoo and SuSE on my Homebox (a PIII-866 with 384MB) haven't been too well.

    It looks nice, offers plenty of features. But EVEN if you turn off all eyecandy, care for running kde services (plug-ins, snap-ins whatever) 3.3 still feels sluggish.

    I just don't want to test that on a P1-166 with 128MB RAM, should feel like running OSX on PearPC on a Centris.

  10. Actually a *big* problem by dark-br · · Score: 3, Insightful

    Occasionally, when I build something from source, it complains something is missing, I download it, build it as well, then continue. This takes almost no time (sometimes the build takes time, but that is unavoidable if there are not binaries, regardless of the system).

    And then you end up with a system fully loaded with files you don't know the source, what are they needed for, if they are still needed, if they have any kind of security hole etc.

    That the real problem, it's not getting stuff to work, is getting rid of it when it's not needed anymore.

    1. Re:Actually a *big* problem by ThJ · · Score: 3, Interesting

      I've been a Slackware user since the mid-to-late 90's and I would not trade it for anything else. I tried Debian once, maybe twice. Didn't like it. dselect and tasksel were horrible... Then someone on Undernet #Linux said "Don't use dselect, then. :)" and a lightbulb switched on... I hadn't realized that the base system is all you need to get going. You can completely customize the thing after doing that. I was amazed, it was the distribution I had been dreaming about. It's similar enough to Slackware to satisfy my geek heart but it makes cleanups so much simpler... Actually, they make them possible at all. It's damn impossible to clean up anything in Slackware unless you use it's package system, for which almost no 3rd party packages are available. When I switched to Debian recently, I decided on a nazi regime for software installation. I said to myself "NEVER install anything from source" and hoped I would be able to survive on .deb's and apt alone... and it worked. My Slackware server just got cracked. I caught the cracker red-handed and threw him out. It's too much work to keep packages updated on a Slackware box where things are compiled from source and you hardly know what you have installed. I'm going to install Debian on it as soon as I can. On that point: The server is several thousand miles away and I don't want to bother the dude at the colocation facility with the re-install. Can I somehow install Debian on that box via SSH?

    2. Re:Actually a *big* problem by 13Echo · · Score: 4, Informative

      Why's it too much work to simply download updated packages from Slackware-Current and run "upgradepkg"?

      Pat keeps the thing up to date at all times, and all critical exploits are practically always fixed in current. He updates practically every few days.

      http://www.slackware.com/changelog/current.php?c pu =i386

  11. It'll even run on old Pentiums! Woo hoo! by Not_Wiggins · · Score: 3, Funny

    FINALLY, I can stop using my old P75 as a very efficient doorstop, install this distro and crunch one SETI packet every 2 years!

    --
    Diplomacy is the art of saying, "Nice doggie!" until you can find a rock.
  12. Re:Why bother with old hardware? by zakezuke · · Score: 4, Insightful

    If you sunk $150 into the old hardware and upgraded it to new, you'd have a quicker machine and wouldn't have to sacrifice functionality and features just to get that old dinosaur PIII to crawl from its own ashes again.

    Assuming you have the cash, skill, time, and a desktop then yes. $150 could easily get you into an amd 1700+ cpu, motherboard, and 256megs of memory.

    But then you have this old dinosaur PIII motherboard laying about. What happens to it esp after you decide to upgrade the hard drive and video?

    A more Eco-friendly solution would be to slap your spare parts in a case and sell / donate / give it to someone else, and now we are back to square one, still having an old clunker in need of an operating system.

    --
    There is no sanctuary. There is no sanctuary. SHUT UP! There is no shut up. There is no shut up.
  13. Nothing Unique About Gentoo Optimizations by reallocate · · Score: 3, Insightful

    There's nothing Gentoo offers regarding configuration and optimization that I can't do in Slackware.

    Except, that is, lose 36 hours waiting for my machine to be usable again.

    What's the value of waiting hours for the Gentoo build to optimize some app I will never use? I can do a complete Slackware install, download, config and compile kernel source in just about an hour. That makes a difference. Waiting for Gentoo to "optimize", say. 14 different text editors is a waste of my time.

    --
    -- Slashdot: When Public Access TV Says "No"
  14. Strange quote by r3m0t · · Score: 3, Insightful
    "As time pushes onward, the computer word grows exponentially in size, accomplishments, features, advances, and of course... system requirements."

    It's always fit into a char[8] for me. I've been able to take advantage of the computer word for a long, long time.

  15. What to run? by steveha · · Score: 3, Informative
    I already described how to set up a lean Debian system. But I would like suggestions on what would be the best system to run on a desktop computer with old hardware.

    Here is what I think I know about this. A while ago I tried several systems on a Pentium 233 with 64MB of RAM.

    GNOME -- if you can install enough memory (I recommend at least 256 MB) then this is actually a reasonable way to go, even on an older computer. But if you have a computer with limited RAM and no convenient way to upgrade it, stay away. (Maybe if you like GNOME 1.x, and can find it somewhere... no, I don't think so.)

    Xfce -- getting better. Smaller, faster than GNOME. But when I tried it, it was still slower than I wanted.

    IceWM -- actually, pretty nice! But IceWM itself is a window manager, and you need more than just that. So I suggest combining IceWM with ROX.
    I used ROX filer a few years ago, and I loved the speed. The whole ROX system looks pretty slick, and it's fast!

    ROX is complicated enough to install (only old packages for Debian; they want to you use a new system called ZeroInstall now) that I didn't do a full-on install test of it. But if I had an actual need to run a desktop system on old hardware, I'd definitely use ROX plus IceWM.

    But if you know something even better, please add a comment about it!

    steveha

    --
    lf(1): it's like ls(1) but sorts filenames by extension, tersely