Edit I got the title wrong. It is Linux Mint and not LMDE. Them both got created
2011 so I thought them was the same. I am slow most of the time sorry.

old text
No criticism at all. I am not only a Newbody I am a persistent Nooby that fails
with most in life. Even to tie the shoelaces at times __{{emoticon}}__

Okay. d4p at Puppy forum suggested this to work for frugal install using grub4dos.

It works fine internal/external Hd

title Bodhi_1.2.1.iso
find --set-root --ignore-floppies --ignore-cd /bodhi_1.2.1.iso
map --heads=0 --sectors-per-track=0 /bodhi_1.2.1.iso (0xFF)
map --hook
root (0xFF)
kernel /casper/vmlinuz file=/cdrom/preseed/custom.seed boot=casper persistent iso-scan/filename=/bodhi_1.2.1.iso quiet splash --
initrd /casper/initrd.gz

Wow I have to test I thought and as expected it totally failed to boot.

Now usually I have to do something else for a fortnight to lick my wounds of bad self image.
but this time by poor luck I had a whim. Why on earth has he the map and hook there.

So I did d for delete and kept the first one so it looked like this

It works fine internal/external Hd

title Bodhi_1.2.1.iso
find --set-root --ignore-floppies --ignore-cd /bodhi_1.2.1.iso
kernel /casper/vmlinuz file=/cdrom/preseed/custom.seed boot=casper persistent iso-scan/filename=/bodhi_1.2.1.iso quiet splash --
initrd /casper/initrd.gz

Whoa it just booted and not only that it allowed me to see the internal ntfs hdd and to edit the
menu.lst and to save the changes which AntiX totally fails to do for me.

So I tested to boot AntiX with this code instead of the old one. Sadly that booted but still
did not allow me to edit any text files.

Okay so now I had Bodhi Linux booting what about Peppermint Linux? Yes that booted too.
Ubuntu 100.04 booted too. And the best of all LMDE 11 also booted and that one had all the codex
I needed and it allowed me to save edits to the menu.lst like the otehrs also do.

So the easy way to get AntiX to boot frugally using iso boot in grub4dos is
to look how them did this for the other Debian compatible linux distros.

Oops correction to above.

Debian and Ubuntu are different enough that this does not work.

Linux Mint is almost an Ubuntu while Linux Mint Debian Edition
is 100% compatible with Debian and thus does not boot as
per the code above.

Now comes the surprising things.

1. SickGut who made a variation of Debian that he name Pussy Linux
that one boot easily but like all Debians it does not allow one to save
on the drive that one booted from. Not on my level as user even as root.

But it booted which I failed to do with LMDE. So SickGut does something right there!

2. Debian Developers when SickGut talked to them over IRC told him that it
can take a long time before Debian get the code needed to boot in the way
I gave example of here. Them work on it now and then but it has low priority.

so time will tell.

I guess I have to stick to Linux Mint and other such distros Netrunner works okay.

Puppy is my kind of distro though. No offence just sharing friendly views.

No offence

No biker gangs here nooby so no offence taken(hmm, is it offence or offense __{{emoticon}}__ ).

rokytnji wrote:

No offence

No biker gangs here nooby so no offence taken(hmm, is it offence or offense __{{emoticon}}__ ).

He SAYS"no biker gangs", but that doesn't mean NO BIKES! Rocky loves bikes - look at some of his wallpaper backgrounds - some very nice bikes among them.

Spelling wise, words like that - I spell it offense - are sometimes spelled with an s in the USA and a c in the UK - not sure if that is the case here or not.

Linux Mint does tend to get a lot of things right and it might make a good distro for someone who doesn't care it is running all free stuff, and is not too concerned about the amount of resources used. When it comes to resources - especially memory - used, I find PCLinuxOS and Linux Mint, while both easy to use for novices, among the least efficient of the ten -twenty most popular distros. If you start with antiX base or antiX core, you can come out in the top five (and maybe even on top, depending what you choose to install), plus it will work with relatively old hardware. Moreover, with the potential to use MEPIS, Debian, or Liquorix kernels and smxi to select them, as well as graphics drivers, it's possible to get some pretty problematic hardware working by tweaking with combinations of kernels and graphics drivers - Puppy has a number of different kernels and graphics drivers, and is also light, so for those needing light stuff, antiX and Puppy are two of the best. Mint, MEPIS, and PCLinuxOS are three of the best when it comes to simple user setups.

Hope that is a useful summary. Those are generalizations, but they tend to be reasonably accurate ones.

I would disagree with you on the PCLinuxOS part. Using PCLinuxOS LXDE I found it light and swift on an old Celeron 2.0 wit 1 Gb ram. The KDE version was not as swift, I'd agree with that - probably on par with Mepis. They even have a e17 install (not a fan of e17 so I don't know about the performance of that one). I have a PCLinuxOS IceWM beta going as my main install on that machine and that is snappy indeed.

I do agree on the Mint part. Good distro - not for the old PCs .

I got so fond of IceWM that I am looking for another distro who might use it well - hence my presence here. Like what I see so far. __{{emoticon}}__

It may be because my current implementation of PCLinuxOS is based on the"Full Monty" edition (which came out about a year ago - I do run all the updates). The"Full Monty" installs an awful lot of stuff and configures just as much, so way too many daemon processes and other stuff is always running on mine, so even"light" window managers are nearly as heavy as KDE on my implementation of PCLinuxOS. Granted, I could"lighten it up" considerably, but that is the way that it came. Can you imagine LXDE consuming in the 200-300 MB range after opening, and over 400 MB of memory used with just Firefox going? That's what my PCLinuxOS consumes. It's not bad, and for some, it is undoubtedly handy, but that is not my idea of light. I will grant you that a build with JUST LXDE and not a lot of extraneous stuff would probably be twice as light, just as it is on antiX - LXDE runs really lightly here, especially if you build it from BASE or CORE with no extra frills.

Yeah - the Full Monty is what it says it is - everything with all bells and whistles. I wouldn't dare to put that on me old box ...

As you say - much easier to work from a light base and build up than work from a monster and try to reduce. You always miss something or take away too much ... well - I do anyway. __{{emoticon}}__

If you insist on KDE - they have a barebones version of that as well - calle MiniMe. Anyways, not here on an advertising campaign for PCLinuxOS - should anybody wonder - just mentioning ... __{{emoticon}}__ __{{emoticon}}__

longtom wrote:Yeah - the Full Monty is what it says it is - everything with all bells and whistles. I wouldn't dare to put that on me old box ...

As you say - much easier to work from a light base and build up than work from a monster and try to reduce. You always miss something or take away too much ... well - I do anyway. __{{emoticon}}__

If you insist on KDE - they have a barebones version of that as well - calle MiniMe. Anyways, not here on an advertising campaign for PCLinuxOS - should anybody wonder - just mentioning ... __{{emoticon}}__ __{{emoticon}}__

Yeah, the"Full Monty" edition of PCLinuxOS caters to a COMPLETELY different audience than antiX BASE or CORE, but a MiniMe, Fluxbox, or LXDE edition of PCLinuxOS would be much more comparable, and for some people, a bit easier to handle. For me, antiX BASE and CORE are"just right"! __{{emoticon}}__