topic title: System running beautifuly
Posts: 630
Eino
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
#1
This is what I'm running, I had some bumps in the road, getting it comfigured just right.
I'm really happy with the way it is running.

Code: Select all

System:    Host antiX1 Kernel 2.6.36-1-mepis-smp i686 (32 bit) Distro antiX-M11-686 Jayaben Desai 01 May 2011
CPU:       Single core AMD Athlon 64 3400+ (-UP-) cache 512 KB flags (lm nx sse sse2 sse3) bmips 2003.9 clocked at 1000.00 MHz 
Graphics:  Card: NVIDIA C51 [GeForce 6150 LE] bus-ID: 00:05.0 X.Org 1.12.4 Res: 1024x768@75.0hz 
           GLX Renderer Gallium 0.4 on llvmpipe (LLVM 0x209) GLX Version 2.1 Mesa 8.0.4 Direct Rendering Yes
Audio:     Card NVIDIA MCP51 High Definition Audio driver HDA Intel bus-ID: 00:10.1
           Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture Version 1.0.23
Network:   Card-1 Realtek RTL-8185 IEEE 802.11a/b/g Wireless LAN Controller driver ndiswrapper v: 1.57 port de00 bus-ID: 03:0a.0
           Card-2 NVIDIA MCP51 Ethernet Controller driver forcedeth port f200 bus-ID: 00:14.0
Disks:     HDD Total Size: 750.2GB (3.3% used) 1: /dev/sda ST3750528AS 750.2GB 
Partition: ID:/ size: 686G used: 24G (4%) fs: rootfs ID:/ size: 686G used: 24G (4%) fs: ext3 
           ID:swap-1 size: 2.17GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap 
Info:      Processes 173 Uptime 7 days Memory 213.4/1960.2MB Runlevel 5 Client Shell inxi 1.4.95
Posts: 1,139
masinick
Joined: 26 Apr 2008
#2
I've been running two versions of antiX - a core implementation that I set up some time ago with a Debian Sid package archive list, and I've been oscillating between Base and Full for my other implementation that I frequently test. In addition to these setups that I use myself, I have installed THREE installations of antiX on other people's systems: 2 in my house on old equipment that my mom has used, and another that my neighbor across the street uses. I started with Base for all three of them, installed the multimedia and non free extensions, made sure that audio, image, and video worked, then set them up for auto login and populated their Web browsers with the sites that they use.

Both of them have been happy with the results; it's just a computer for them, and not something they are constantly using, but the mere fact that they can use it, even if someone else did install it for them suggests that there could be a much more sizable population using antiX.

I'd suggest that when any of us hear about old systems, offer to show them something (live) that works better than their current system on disk. Find out what they actually use. The vast majority of older system are relegated to browsing the Web and very little else, based on the admittedly small sample size that I've found.

I also ran antiX on a friend's computer to determine whether some files still existed on a system that refused to boot Windows XP (a couple of important DLL files were missing). Turns out that antiX could boot and I could load the file system, see that the files were still there!

Note that antiX is good for detective and forensic work too; Jason Hsu, author of Swift Linux, WAS using antiX a year or two ago for that purpose, though he's now moved on to something that's a cross between antiX Base and Mint with a light window manager. The fact that some of the underlying antiX technology REMAINS in that distribution, even though he looked elsewhere for convenience features, still speaks well for our distribution!
Posts: 630
Eino
Joined: 12 Oct 2012
#3
A lot of my tools that I use to dignose hardware, on computers that will not boot are Linux based ISO disks.
I have used a Fedora based ISO disk to repair Windows computers in the past. I might just look in to"Swift Linux". It sounds like it mightt do a betters job, than the Fedora based ISO I use now.