A "green" distro of Ubuntu?

JD jd1008 at gmail.com
Sat Jul 2 16:13:00 UTC 2011

On 07/02/2011 08:51 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
> JD wrote:
>>   On 07/02/2011 07:49 AM, Richard Owlett wrote:
>>> Though Kermit might disagree, the subject line is ONLY slightly
>>> "tongue in cheek".
>>> I'm a Windows(tm) user tired of *BLOAT* who remembers vacuum tubes and
>>> 026's. An internet acquaintance knowing my needs and perspectives
>>> pointed me to Ubuntu as an appropriate version of Linux. I downloaded
>>> the .iso of a 'live cd' (10.?) which I found "bloated". The user
>>> experience was ok, though I'm not sure if the good features I saw were
>>> Ubuntu specific or due to Debian heritage.
>>> A *major constraint* is I'm restricted to dial-up access. I understand
>>> that connectivity using a USB modem will have it's issues, but that is
>>> one time problem. I have very limited access to a wide-band connection
>>> at another location with my laptop.
>>> The desired distro shall only have:
>>> kernel
>>> GUI
>>> minimal browser
>>> simple text editor {notepad suffices for >90% of my needs}
>>> what's required to download/update apps
>>> the *minimum* of other software to make an operable system
>>> The result should be significantly smaller than Win 3.1 {most of which
>>> I never used)
>> Have you tried DSL (DamnSmallLinux)?
>> See http://www.damnsmalllinux.org/download.html
>> and scroll down for download sites.
> No indication that it's Debian based or compatible.
> 50 MB is not really small.

In that case you could always go back DOS version 0.0.1
It could fit on a 360KB floppy.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list