76
submitted 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago) by GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml

I need some help finding a distro for a very old machine.

It's my family's old desktop with 2001 components (bought in 2004) and a Pentium CPU that is NOT i686. I checked the exact model and architecture once but I don't remember it now. The only thing I remember is that it's not i686 so 99% of modern 32 bit distros don't work on it (stuck right after grub).

The machine has 1 Gb of DDR1 RAM though so I think it may be useful or at least fun to play around with.

Now it's on Windows XP that runs quite well but doesn't support modern SSL certificates so it can't browse the internet (idk how to fix it ok?).

A long time ago I tried to run multiple distros in live mode on it and got only one (Puppy) to work. Display, sound, ethernet and pretty much everything worked fine. GPU seemed to be an issue though because NVidia and I couldn't install the driver (it was skill issue and I think it's possible to do). But now it doesn't work for some reason.

Are there any Linux distros or other operating systems (preferably not deprecated) that I can install on it? And btw it does have bootable USB support.

EDIT: There are way too many answers and a lot of ones that don't mind the architecture limitations. I'm grateful to everyone who replied but I have to close this discussion now and I will not reply to further answers. I have received enough information and I cannot physically read so many replies.

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[-] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 9 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Perhaps openbsd or netbsd? They're probably less likely to drop hardware support for your device in the near future than any linux distribution

Freebsd is also an option but you would have to compile it yourself as the prebuilt binaries are currently 686 despite it having support back to 486

[-] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

BSD is an option but I heard it's slower and idk anything about how it works and how to install it

[-] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 3 points 5 months ago

I've never noticed BSDs being much slower, and if you're already used to minimal linux distros like arch it's not that hard to set them up unless you like need linux-only software.

[-] GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago

I meant slower in terms of any rendering (web, 3D or anything else). And I'm only used to graphical DEs. I installed Arch via archinstall a few times and had a minimal Debian server with nothing except ssh working but that's about it

[-] turbowafflz@lemmy.world 2 points 5 months ago

You definitely can install a graphical desktop on whichever BSD, you'll just have to follow instructions online somewhere instead of running a premade script.

If you want something really easy to use graphically right out of the box there's also Haiku, it's a completely independent OS that's sort of an open source clone of BeOS but a lot more unixy than BeOS was. It's really lightweight and has maybe my favorite desktop GUI out of every operating system I've used. The only real downside to it is that there isn't an amazing web browser for it yet, the built in WebPositive is a little lacking in support for modern sites and GNOME Web, which you can install from HaikuDepot was a little unstable last time I tried it. If you don't need to use the web a ton though (which is probably the more pleasant option on your particular system regardless of browser), it's really nice.

[-] hagar@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 months ago* (last edited 5 months ago)

Your mileage may vary for performance. It really depends what OS and what hardware. In my experience saying all BSDs are slower at rendering would be too broad a statement.

If you've done Arch and Debian server installs, you'll be fine installing a major BSD. Just answer prompts and you are done, particularly if you are using the default disk partitioning scheme. Consider NetBSD. It's known for its wide hardware compatibility. X is pre-installed, just "startx".

[-] Pacmanlives@lemmy.world 1 points 5 months ago

Not sure where you have heard they are slower. Most of my experience has they are faster but I will say BSD kind of sucks on a laptop.

I would see what’s supported and then run something like Fluxbox as your WM

this post was submitted on 17 Jun 2024
76 points (95.2% liked)

Linux

48457 readers
454 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS