Which antix version will "fly" in this PC configuration ?

worktowork · posted: 2014-11-04 08:28

Dear ,

inxi -F
System: Host: mx1 Kernel: 3.12-0.bpo.1-486 i686 (32 bit)
Desktop: Xfce 4.10.2 Distro: MX-14 Symbiosis 27 March 2014
Machine: Mobo: N/A model: SiS-661 Bios: Phoenix v: 6.00 PG date: 02/26/2005
CPU: Single core Intel Celeron (-UP-) cache: 256 KB
speed: 2940 MHz (max)
Graphics: Card: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] 661/741/760 PCI/AGP or 662/761Gx PCIE VGA Display Adapter
Display Server: X.Org 1.12.4 drivers: sis (unloaded: fbdev,vesa)
Resolution: 1024x768@85.0hz
GLX Renderer: Gallium 0.4 on llvmpipe (LLVM 0x209)
GLX Version: 2.1 Mesa 8.0.5
Audio: Card Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] SiS7012 AC'97 Sound Controller
driver: snd_intel8x0
Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture v: k3.12-0.bpo.1-486
Network: Card: Silicon Integrated Systems [SiS] SiS900 PCI Fast Ethernet
driver: sis900
IF: eth0 state: unknown speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full
mac: my mac adress
Drives: HDD Total Size: 200.1GB (17.0% used)
ID-1: /dev/sda model: WDC_WD1200JB size: 120.0GB
ID-2: /dev/sdb model: WDC_WD800BB size: 80.0GB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 72G used: 30G (44%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sdb1
ID-2: swap-1 size: 2.17GB used: 0.01GB (0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sdb2
Sensors: System Temperatures: cpu: 55.0C mobo: N/A
Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: N/A
Info: Processes: 101 Uptime: 1:29 Memory: 298.1/469.4MB
Client: Shell (bash) inxi: 2.2.15

Which antix version will"fly" in this PC configuration ? Also soft will work quick (fly)
Now I use MX 14 RC in this PC configuration. I want to use geogebra , but I can`t use it -slow and not work. Qupzilla work good , but some site you are using old safari , please upgrade your browser, also sometimes qupzilla loading not quickly then another times , I don`t understand why?.Opera +adblock (ABP) is slower than qupzilla.

dolphin_oracle · posted: 2014-11-04 12:11

i would use antix 13.2 on that machine. its too RAM limited for MX really. I modern web browser would throw you into swap pretty quick and that may be why you see the random slowness on web pages. swap is much slower than RAM.

Jerry · posted: 2014-11-04 12:18

Qupzilla work good , but some site you are using old safari , please upgrade your browser, also sometimes qupzilla loading not quickly then another times , I don`t understand why?.Opera +adblock (ABP) is slower than qupzilla.

Are you running the latest QupZilla in the MX repos (1.8.2, may still be in one of the testing ones)? Won't take care of all your problems, but it is a significant upgrade.

rokytnji · posted: 2014-11-04 13:13

Just wondering.

antiX-13.5_386-jwm-alpha2.iso 161.8 MB 2013-12-07 08:44 24

I remember one member here running this. The name escapes me. I am a bit under the weather (sick)

rust collector · posted: 2014-11-04 15:36

I guess it depends on what you"need"
This is 13.5 alpha with jwm replaced with dwm, running on a 128mb of ram machine:

post33896.html#p33896

My p4box looks similar to yours, 3ghz.
The fastest feeling install I had on that, was arch, on a raid0 setup

But, I think the trick is to not start stuff you don't need running.
Do you need to start cups/ssh/transmission/dbus/bluetooth/such every time you start your machine?

worktowork · posted: 2014-11-04 16:19

Jerry wrote:
Qupzilla work good , but some site you are using old safari , please upgrade your browser, also sometimes qupzilla loading not quickly then another times , I don`t understand why?.Opera +adblock (ABP) is slower than qupzilla.
Are you running the latest QupZilla in the MX repos (1.8.2, may still be in one of the testing ones)? Won't take care of all your problems, but it is a significant upgrade.

In stable repo qupzilla v.1.6.5.

dolphin_oracle wrote:i would use antix 13.2 on that machine. its too RAM limited for MX really. I modern web browser would throw you into swap pretty quick and that may be why you see the random slowness on web pages. swap is much slower than RAM.

Can I remove xfce with all components and install dwm or jwm with antix useful soft (which you recommend for me and how? Will it quick in my PC ? Is this will identical installing antix from image .iso ?

rust collector wrote:I guess it depends on what you"need"
This is 13.5 alpha with jwm replaced with dwm, running on a 128mb of ram machine:

My p4box looks similar to yours, 3ghz.
The fastest feeling install I had on that, was arch, on a raid0 setup

But, I think the trick is to not start stuff you don't need running.
Do you need to start cups/ssh/transmission/dbus/bluetooth/such every time you start your machine?

I don`t need to start cups/ssh/transmission/dbus/bluetooth/such every time you start my machine.I need to writing in russian , tatar and english languages.
P.S. Today I can write reply

rust collector · posted: 2014-11-04 16:41

Yes you can, I did. I had mx14 with xfce purged, and used a window manager in stead. I am not sure how much difference it makes to just using antix?
You do get the stuff you are used to, so that is good, I guess.

I think I would try 13.1 base, and fix the daveserver repo, update/upgrade
Then run sysv-rc-conf, and stop anything you don't need to start.

worktowork · posted: 2014-11-04 17:25

ctrl+alt+F4 then apt -get remove ... after this I don`t know which soft I must remove and install for changing to jwm or dwm .Can you help me ?
Or first install dwm or jwm , and then remove xfce with their components ?

rust collector · posted: 2014-11-04 17:33

iIrc, what I did was

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get remove --purge xfce4 && sudo apt-get install jwm

I do not use a login manager, I don't remember which one/how mx14 does that (to set it to start the new window manager)

Jerry · posted: 2014-11-04 21:52

MX uses lightdm for login management. I seem to remember that when more than one is installed (happens when switching to a new one), Synaptic/apt-get will ask which one to use.

worktowork · posted: 2014-11-05 16:17

rust collector wrote:iIrc, what I did was

sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get remove --purge xfce4 && sudo apt-get install jwm

Can`t find xfce4 , so can`t remove.Installing from antix image will better.

Which antix images will better core , base or full ?

rust collector · posted: 2014-11-05 16:31

That really depends on what you want. core really is core, no x or anything. If you want to set up everything as you want it, this is the way to go.
Base is nice, Imo. It has x and fluxbox, and I think jwm? iceweasel and such. but not much more
full is a bit much, if you want something that flies, imo, but it will probably be pretty quick, and you will not be missing much.

About xfce, try: apt-cache policy xfce and see what it says, I think it is just getting the wrong version number or something

fatmac · posted: 2014-11-05 16:53

I agree with 'rc' - try 13.1 base.

worktowork · posted: 2014-11-08 10:47

I have tried antix base 13 , I dislike installation and after upgrade linux (debian to ver.7) my pc become slow.

fatmac · posted: 2014-11-08 12:53

Just checked out GeoGebra, it is computationally heavy as it is 'maths', you need plenty of ram & a fast processor for this kind of application to 'fly'.