Linked by Claus Futtrup on Mon 13th Jun 2005 18:12 UTC
Slackware, Slax I chose Minislack because of the low requirements (running fine on my Pentium II - 400 MHz with 256 Mb RAM, 32 Mb swap, on a 1.5 Gb harddrive partition - I recommend 2 Gb, though).
Permalink for comment
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Minislack : A noteworthy distribution
by Claus Futtrup on Sat 18th Jun 2005 04:55 UTC

>>MiniSlack *is* Slackware.
>No, Slackware *is* Slackware.
>>I switched to MiniSlack because it gave me a much smaller system without having to fuss with all the package selections
>You are kidding, aren't you? It requires a minute, two at most, to select your package install using the menu option of the full Slackware installation. This is a 'fuss'?

In my book, Minislack is based on Slackware (just like there are systems out there based on Debian etc).

If you want Slackware, use Slackware.

For a newbie like me it is nice not to "fuss" around with package selection because we don't know which packages goes with which (dependencies) and we don't know which are good or bad packages and applications (we are not familiar with any of this). That's why it is nice that someone has gone through it all, and selected a composition of packages.

Minislack is optimized in relation to Slackware, by using a very new kernel, and Reiser4 filesystem support etc. Someone said, it is Slackware on steroids, not all that wrong.

Minislack is not far from Slackware, but scaled down a lot, and with great options like OpenOffice (+ Firefox) etc.

Best regards,