Debian, every time. Now is a good time since they just released a new
"stable". Last stable I installed took 10MB of memory with a normal
non-gui boot, with bash loaded up and everything. Good enough for me.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Sean Howard <silver_AT_callysto.com> wrote:
> I use OpenBSD. It can grow quickly if you want it to, and it can be
> run on a VAX if you want it to.
>
> What performance need do you have that makes OpenBSD not worth it?
>
> When I am going to be throwing a system together without OpenBSD then
> I tend to use Debian.
>
> --Sean
>
> On 11 February 2011 13:34, Benoit Chesneau <bchesneau_AT_gmail.com> wrote:
>> Hi all,
>>
>> I've started these days to use wmii on ubuntu, previously I was using
>> cwm on openbsd,but for some technical reason (smp, & performance need)
>> I need to choose another OS. I would like to use this weekend to
>> rethink my system and remove most of the tools i don't need but I'm
>> undecided. What would you choose for a really minimal OS?
>>
>> In my min come netbsd, debian, minimal ubuntu, freebsd? I'm curious to
>> know what you are using?
>>
>> - benoît
>>
>>
>
>
Received on Fri Feb 11 2011 - 20:08:31 CET
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Feb 11 2011 - 20:12:02 CET