A "green" distro of Ubuntu?

Richard Owlett rowlett at pcnetinc.com
Sat Jul 2 21:02:35 UTC 2011

Rashkae wrote:
> On 07/02/2011 10:49 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)
> You can install the Minimal install cd,

The "Minimal install cd" is *where* and *how large* ?

> then add packages that you want
> for GUI etc. But I think your expectation of being smaller than 3.1 (let
> alone significantly) is going to be disappointed. My modules folder
> alone, (which comes with a full kernel install) is over 100MB. You'll
> need specialty micro distros with stripped down packages (ex, kernels
> with as few modules compiled as possible) and probably no package
> management to achieve that.

More information about the ubuntu-users mailing list