Update of the minimum requierements

Thu Nov 28 20:14:51 UTC 2013

This is an old computer that I had rotting in a corner, so using it to help testing and improving Xubuntu is a pleasure. I must thank to all the team behind this great system.

Reducing the amount of RAM that the graphics takes is possible. I will update my test this weekend. Gonna reduce the shared ram and will try booting the live cd with the "only ubiquity" option, which I guess, should require a less memory than the full live session.

In the meanwhile, I have tested in virtual box with 256mb of ram, 1 core processor and booted the Ubiquity session without problems. The system installs and boots ok, just a little slow.

This different results between testing with a real machine vs a virtual one, has lead me to believe that Virtualbox should not be an accurate reference in the hardware requirements of the system. Running Virtualbox in a host with DDR3 memory, and a i7 processor; even reducing the resources of the virtual machine, will be much faster than a real system with DIMM memory and 1 core processor at 1.6 with a 133 bus.

On Thursday, November 28, 2013 11:52 AM, Will Partridge <willp789 at gmail.com> wrote:

Do you think you could go into BIOS and change the amount of RAM the graphics is gobbling down to 4-8MB?
Maybe the old BIOS won't support this feature, try it anyway... It
    may help with your issue.

Will

On 28/11/2013 12:45, Inti Alonso wrote:

Im testing in a desktop with an AMD Duron 1.6, 256mb of ram (minus 64 from integrated SIS graphics).
>
>
>Xubuntu 13.10 Live CD keep loading for ever, I waited for 30 min and the live sesion never showed. I guess 256mn of ram is not the minimun for the live cd. 
>Lubuntu 13.10 Alternate CD: Boots and install without problems, run a little slow but is tolerable.
>
>
>I think that Xubuntu should keep building the Alternate images, at least for the i386 architechture, which I guess, are the slowest system that may need Xubuntu.
>
>
>
>On Thursday, November 28, 2013 4:03 AM, Pasi Lallinaho <pasi at shimmerproject.org> wrote:
> 
>On 28/11/13 09:28, Elizabeth Krumbach Joseph wrote:
>> On Fri, Nov 15, 2013 at 12:21 PM, Richard Elkins
>> <richard.elkins at gmail.com> wrote:
>>> Will,
>>>
>>> Not to discourage you .....
>> Uh oh, no response, I fear we may have scared him
                off :)
>>
>>> Performance test plan?
>>>
>>> Goals/design
>>> Individual tests
>>> What do you intend to hold constant and what
                will you vary?
>>> VM host machine environment E.g. hardware
                CPU/GPU/chip-sets, Linux kernel
>>> video module, X-Windows video driver
>>> VM settings to be used (chipset, EFI, display,
                etc.)
>> These are very good points so in an attempt to move
                this along...
>>
>> I'll start off by saying that we do now recommend a
                user have 512M of
>> RAM once it's installed, which might be OK.
>>
>> Also worthy of note, we offer 32 and 64-bit
                versions. 64-bit tends to
>> take more RAM so we'll want to pay attention to
                that.
>>
>> Now, I'd like to propose the following testing plan
                that it would be
>> great to see results from a few folks for to test a
                random smattering
>> of CPUs and other factors:
>>
>> Test 1: 12.04 Alternate CD, 32 & 64-bit
>>
>> Our website claims you can install 12.04 Alternate
                on 64M of RAM, I'm
>> skeptical but we should start here :)
>>
>> Use the 12.04 Alternate CD installer on a VM with
                64M of RAM and a
>> single CPU - I suspect the installer will finish
                but will it even
>> boot?
>>
>> If not, add RAM by increments of 64M of RAM until
                you get a system
>> that boots and you can log in to.
>>
>> Report results (remember, we say 512M once it's
                installed, so if it's
>> slow that might be ok)
>>
>> Test 2: 12.04 Live CD, 32 & 64-bit
>>
>> Our website claims you can install 12.04 standard
                on 256M of RAM, this
>> may be possible - let's try! Same methodology as
                above.
>>
>> Test 3: 13.10 Live CD, 32 & 64-bit
>>
>> Did 12.04 work on 256M? Can 13.10 as well? Let's
                try! Same methodology as above.
>>
>> These tests will take time, so if you want to just
                do one of these
>> tests - great, reply with your results of that one
                test and enjoy your
>> week! Every test done will be helpful in
                determining where we stand.
>>
>> Thanks everyone.
>>
>
>Ultimately we might want to see what the requirements
                for the installed
>"core" system would be once we progress with that.
>
>Cheers,
>Pasi
>
>-- 
>Pasi Lallinaho (knome)                      » http://open.knome.fi/
>Leader of Shimmer Project and Xubuntu      » http://shimmerproject.org/
>Graphic artist, webdesigner, Ubuntu member  » http://xubuntu.org/ 
>
>
>
>-- 
>xubuntu-devel mailing list
>xubuntu-devel at lists.ubuntu.com
>https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/xubuntu-devel
>
>
>
>

________________________________

   This email is free from viruses and malware because avast! Antivirus protection is active.  
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.ubuntu.com/archives/xubuntu-devel/attachments/20131128/1eb91235/attachment.html>