Will Tahrpup run in an Intel Atom with 1 GB RAM?

[Tsla]

Tahrpup 6.0.5 on old machine, what do you guys think?

CPU~Single core Intel Atom N270 (-HT-) speed/max~1333/1600 MHz Kernel~4.10.0-38-generic i686 Up~5 min Mem~237.4/986.0MB HDD~120.0GB(5.6% used) Procs~166 Client~Shell inxi~2.2.35

1 GB DDR2 ram 533 Mhz

[WoodLark]

I have run it on a Dell Mini 10 with those specs. It was quite slow though.

[mikeslr]

Hi Tsla,

Any reason not to use a newer Puppy which is known to work OK on resource-limited computer?

For example, dpup-stretch, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic.php?t=115604; Busterpup, viewtopic.php?p=4070#p4070; precise-light, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 83#1048883.

[mikewalsh]

Tahrpup was my very first fully-working Puppy on ye anciente Dell lappie. 'Twas the first that ran, OOTB, without ANY messing about. At that time, the Dell was running a 2.2 GHz single-core "NetBurst"-gen 'Celery-stick' CPU, and 1 GB of DDR1 RAM. This was an original Inspiron 1100 from 2002, well-known for display issues with its awful, "Brookedale"-cored Extreme Graphics integrated chip.....although with the graphics issues ironed-out - by means of a BIOS upgrade, and different settings in same, along with a kernel-line mod - it still gives a lovely, sharp display. Intel graphics have come on a long way since those days, when Intel threw the VESA 'rule-book' out the window and declared they were going their own way!

Tahrpup ran everything perfectly, if somewhat sedately, from a 16 GB SanDisk Cruzer 'Fit' USB stick; the Dell was one of the very first to make use of the then-new USB 2.0 standard, and Dell, in their 'wisdom' ( ), had seen fit to set those USB 2.0 ports as bootable in the BIOS, thereby stealing a march on much of the rest of the market. Many other manufacturers were a full 3 or 4 years behind Dell in implementing this functionality.

I see no reason why Tahr shouldn't run on your Atom just as well, though it WILL be "sedate" (read SLOW). It'll certainly be functional, but t'other Mike's suggestions are definitely worth following up. 'Vanilla' Precise 571 may be worth a look, too; PipzDex has shown just what that's still capable of, with a 5-series kernel/glibc-2.2.7 'upgrade', as well as upgrades for Dbus, libcrypto/libssl and the NSS/GTK libraries. Take care of that little lot and you'll have a lightweight Puppy that'll run modern, up-to-date browsers.....though I'd recommend lightweight variants like Palemoon or the original Puppy 'default' browser, SeaMonkey (this one having the advantage of a built-in email client and also a development package, thereby obviating the need for separate apps for those).

You have plenty of choices available for that little netbook, that's for sure..!


Mike.

[Tsla]

Tahrpup was my very first fully-working Puppy on ye anciente Dell lappie. 'Twas the first that ran, OOTB, without ANY messing about. At that time, the Dell was running a 2.2 GHz single-core "NetBurst"-gen 'Celery-stick' CPU, and 1 GB of DDR1 RAM. This was an original Inspiron 1100 from 2002, well-known for display issues with its awful, "Brookedale"-cored Extreme Graphics integrated chip.....although with the graphics issues ironed-out - by means of a BIOS upgrade, and different settings in same, along with a kernel-line mod - it still gives a lovely, sharp display. Intel graphics have come on a long way since those days, when Intel threw the VESA 'rule-book' out the window and declared they were going their own way!

Tahrpup ran everything perfectly, if somewhat sedately, from a 16 GB SanDisk Cruzer 'Fit' USB stick; the Dell was one of the very first to make use of the then-new USB 2.0 standard, and Dell, in their 'wisdom' ( ), had seen fit to set those USB 2.0 ports as bootable in the BIOS, thereby stealing a march on much of the rest of the market. Many other manufacturers were a full 3 or 4 years behind Dell in implementing this functionality.

I see no reason why Tahr shouldn't run on your Atom just as well, though it WILL be "sedate" (read SLOW). It'll certainly be functional, but t'other Mike's suggestions are definitely worth following up. 'Vanilla' Precise 571 may be worth a look, too; PipzDex has shown just what that's still capable of, with a 5-series kernel/glibc-2.2.7 'upgrade', as well as upgrades for Dbus, libcrypto/libssl and the NSS/GTK libraries. Take care of that little lot and you'll have a lightweight Puppy that'll run modern, up-to-date browsers.....though I'd recommend lightweight variants like Palemoon or the original Puppy 'default' browser, SeaMonkey (this one having the advantage of a built-in email client and also a development package, thereby obviating the need for separate apps for those).

You have plenty of choices available for that little netbook, that's for sure..!


Mike.

hi mike. thanks for detailed answer, what do you think about BionicPup32 8.0 ? maybe it could give me better performance

[mikewalsh]

@Tsla :-

With those specs.....running UPupBB32? I wouldn't even go there. You won't have a very enjoyable experience.

From humble beginnings, when Puppies truly were very 'lightweight', as the years have passed, so even Puppies have inevitably got larger.....much of which has been necessary to ensure online security, and dependency-compatibility with newer apps & stuff as it's released. We seem to have an entire generation of 'lazy' coders nowadays. Gone are the days when resources were limited, and the idea was to make code run as efficiently as possible, to make the most of those limited resources.....16-32GB RAM, ultra-powerful CPUs, and terabytes of storage are the 'norm' nowadays, and the attitude seems to be, "Well, it's there....let's USE it." This, of course, immediately puts at a disadvantage anyone who has older hardware with limited resources, because the software has been written with the express belief that EVERYONE runs that level of hardware.....

---------------------------------------------------------

Ask yourself this.....what is the one thing that everybody wants to be able to do nowadays?

Answer? To get on-line. (I'm not talking here about professionals, that NEED stuff like Photoshop, Lightroom, Final Cut Pro, for their livelihood.....I'm talking about your average Joe Bloggs. He wants his FaceBook/Twitter and his NetFlix, yes?)

Most of Puppy's apps have been selected, over the years, to be small but feature-packed. We've all been brought up, across years of Windows use, to believe we MUST have the newest version of everything, ALL the time.....for security. That perceived "security" is far less necessary on this side of the fence; malware/ransomware is almost all written for Windows, and the robust Linux permissions system will see off 99.9% of anything that thinks it's got any kind of 'right' to make itself cosy in your system, wreaking havoc as it sees fit. In the case of Puppy, if it still works, and does what you want it to, there's really no need to update it...

But even we need to keep our point of contact with the web - our browsers - up-to-date for security reasons.

----------------------------------------------------------

In your case, because of the nature of your hardware - low-powered, low-resources - you have to respect those limitations, and to use software which is sympathetic to the abilities your hardware DOES possess. This will inevitably mean running an older OS.

Trust me, I respect & understand the desire to run as new an OS & software as possible.....but it's a different mindset this side of the fence, with a different set of values, and different ways of approaching things. What you want to end up with is a lightweight OS that will not tax your limited resources, yet at the same time will make the most of what it CAN do.....while allowing you access to t'internet with a modern, secure browser, yet still leaving your machine reasonably sprightly. So; we concentrate on keeping the browser up-to-date, along with its 'support mechanisms' & dependencies that permit it to work, while leaving most of the rest of Puppy as the builder intended.

And UPupBB32 is going to be too 'heavy' to give you a decent experience. I have nothing but respect for peebee's boundless enthusiasm and his seemingly tireless efforts; he's one of our current most talented developers, and comes up with some truly amazing stuff.....but even he would be the first to admit that UPupBB32 would be too much for that little netbook.

I still say a variant of Precise 571 or its derivatives would be the kind of 'vintage' you want to be aiming for.


Mike.

[mikeslr]

I'll 2nd t'other Mike's recommendation of seamonkey as web-browser. Puppy Devs have been packaging Palemoon as builtin. I'm not complaining. Both my Desktop and Laptop happily run Palemoon which I assign the status of "default" browser. But on remasters I employ one of MIke's SeaMonkey-portables http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 03#1024826. Either version will do. These require even less RAM than palemoon. Being portable, MIke's Seamonkey sits on my /mnt/home --available whenever I want it. I just don't bother with creating a menu entry.

In remastering, I locate the SeaMonkey folder in /opt. Once the Puppy is deployed and a SaveFile/Folder created, it's simple to drag the SeaMonkey folder from /opt to /mnt/home and symlink it back. Mike's portables are constructed to locate profiles and web-cache within their own folder rather than being hidden files under /root. Under /root they (a) require Saves to preserve changes but more importantly (b) having web-cache in /root means always using RAM for static files. With Seamonkey on /mnt/home neither of those conditions exist.

Thanks to 666philb's discovery, http://murga-linux.com/puppy/viewtopic. ... 21#1020121 (almost) all the legacy firefox addons which can't be installed into firefox-quantum become available, [albeit you may have to do some experimentation to figure out which version of an addon will work.