Damn Small Linux 2024 based on antiX 23

Forum Forums General Other Distros Damn Small Linux 2024 based on antiX 23

  • This topic has 13 replies, 8 voices, and was last updated Feb 1-9:06 pm by anticapitalista.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #131561
    Member
    punranger

      Damn Small Linux 2024 has been released, and appears to be heavily based on antiX 23. I have not tested it yet. A few quotes from https://www.damnsmalllinux.org/ :

      “The New DSL 2024 has been reborn as a compact Linux distribution tailored for low-spec x86 computers. It packs a lot of applications into a small package. All the applications are chosen for their functionality, small size, and low dependencies. DSL 2024 also has many text-based applications that make it handy to use in a term window or TTY.”

      “As with most things in the GNU/Linux community, this project continues to stand on the shoulders of giants. I am just one guy without a CS degree, so for now, this project is based on antiX 23 i386. AntiX is a fantastic distribution that I think shares much of the same spirit as the original DSL project. AntiX shares pedigree with MEPIS and also leans heavily on the geniuses at Debian. So, this project stands on the shoulders of giants. In other words, DSL 2024 is a humble little project!”

      “Unlike the original DSL, this version has apt fully enabled. So if there is anything you feel is missing, it is very simple to get it installed. I also made an effort to leave as much of the antiX goodness enabled as possible. However, it must be said that DSL is a derivative work but also a reductive work. Some things from antiX may be broken or missing. If you find a bug, it is likely my fault.”

      antiX linux: The best way to revive an old computer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCTaUAP6sSg

      #131568
      Member
      marcelocripe

        Hello punranger.
        When did “Damn Small Linux” or DSL come back?
        When was your last ISO?
        I think it was in 2012, according to https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall0.

        – – – – –

        Olá, punranger.
        Quando foi que o “Damn Small Linux” ou DSL voltou?
        Quando foi a sua última ISO?
        Eu acho foi no ano de 2012, segundo o https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall0.

        #131574
        Forum Admin
        rokytnji

          Looking at DSL site on the download page. Looks like alpha release is all that is offered.
          I like his candor

          Some things from antiX may be broken or missing. If you find a bug, it is likely my fault.

          DSL 2024 Download

          Home Download DSL 2024 DSL Forums Support DSL Historic DSL

          Thank you for downloading and testing DSL 2024. Please remember that this release should be considered “alpha”. You will be among the very first to take it for a spin. Please test away and leave some feedback on the forums. You can also contact me directly — John@DamnSmallLinux.org.

          I am working on reestablishing the mirror account at Ibiblo, meanwhile I will be hosting the iso locally on this server.

          This alpha release is i386 compatible.

          Download Links:
          dsl-2024.alpha.iso
          dsl-2024.alpha.iso.md5.txt

          Think I’ll grab it for my 3tB storage drive. Kinda curious. Edit: @marc. Distrowatch is kinda slow. Took a few days for them to publish my review.

          • This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by rokytnji.

          Sometimes I drive a crooked road to get my mind straight.
          I don't suffer from insanity. I enjoy every minute off it.
          Motorcycle racing is rocket science.

          Linux Registered User # 475019
          How to Search for AntiX solutions to your problems

          #131588
          Member
          anti-apXos

            Very cool to see the return of Damn Small Linux.

            Though it may seem comparably ridiculous that 700MB is small in 2024 when DSL was 50MB in 2002,

            I dub it “Sorta Damn Small Linux”

            #131592
            Member
            olsztyn

              Just downloaded and made ‘bootable’ usb stick using antiX live-usb-maker. It fails to boot with message that config file (syslinux) is missing. No wonder – syslinux folder is empty… Well, it is alpha after all, so has the right to not boot…
              Ones it is made bootable, what would be differentiating from antiX, which has already JWM and Fluxbox?

              Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
              http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

              #131593
              Member
              olsztyn

                Just downloaded and made ‘bootable’ usb stick using antiX live-usb-maker. It fails to boot with message that config file (syslinux) is missing. No wonder – syslinux folder is empty… Well, it is alpha after all, so has the right to not boot…
                Ones it is made bootable, what would be differentiating from antiX, which has already JWM and Fluxbox?

                Edit:
                Tried to make it boot by copying syslinux related files to syslinux folder. Now it complaints about UI config…
                My question however remains: If DSL is based on antiX, how exactly it is different, to make it ‘Damn Small’?
                – Init services would be inherited from antiX – no memory footprint savings.
                – Removing Pipewire would save just a little memory memory footprint savings.
                – Not much else can be removed to further save memory footprint.
                – Making ISO smaller by not including larger apps (browser, etc.) is irrelevant to memory footprint and in general pointless…

                Looks to me, if DSL is based now on antiX then antiX itself is already DSL!

                • This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by olsztyn.

                Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
                http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

                #131597
                Member
                anti-apXos

                  Just downloaded and made ‘bootable’ usb stick using antiX live-usb-maker.

                  You used the dd mode or the writeable mode? It should work with dd.

                  Making ISO smaller by not including larger apps (browser, etc.) is irrelevant to memory footprint and in general pointless…

                  Isn’t it pretty obvious from the announcement that the goal is to have an ISO that can be burned on a standard CD-ROM? Maybe that’s pointless for you, but definitely not for everyone.

                  #131599
                  Member
                  olsztyn

                    You used the dd mode or the writeable mode? It should work with dd.

                    I used writeable mode. I will redo with dd.

                    Isn’t it pretty obvious from the announcement that the goal is to have an ISO that can be burned on a standard CD-ROM? Maybe that’s pointless for you, but definitely not for everyone.

                    I must have missed the point that the only objective for DSL is to make it fit on old standard CD…
                    Old DSL used to run in very little memory as it had very small memory footprint. If the new DSL is just antiX, trimming fatter apps just to fit on old CD, then what id the differentiating factor from antiX itself, where these can be trimmed as well to accomplish the same fit on CD?
                    I am still missing the point. I applaud the idea to base DSL on antiX perhaps but where is the differentiating factor that it would be considered separate from antiX? Or it is just an antiX respin to fit ISO on CD?
                    I am just trying to understand the objective to be accomplished, do not mean to sound just critical up-front…
                    Edit:
                    I am re-doing with dd. Curious to test memory footprint after boot…

                    Edit2:
                    – Booted DSL to Fluxbox. Works just fine so. The initial footprint is 126M before starting any apps, but after connecting to WiFi. So, the intial memory footprint seems about in line with antiX with Fluxbox on the same machine.
                    – Typing this from DSL using included BadWolf browser. Here it is a significant memory footprint saving. BadWolf with no Java script enabled is a big memory saving. Running BadWolf without Java scrip makes total memory footprint just 271M! This makes me think installing BadWolf on antiX…

                    • This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by olsztyn.
                    • This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by olsztyn.

                    Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
                    http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

                    #131606
                    Moderator
                    Brian Masinick

                      Sounds like a fun project. I may grab it later and try it on one or two of my oldest systems where it might be more handy. Don’t see much need, other than the fun of it to use it anywhere else.

                      Meanwhile the antiX 23.1 testing and the s6-66 testing is going really well and that’s my main area of interest at the moment.

                      --
                      Brian Masinick

                      #131609
                      Member
                      olsztyn

                        Sounds like a fun project. I may grab it later and try it on one or two of my oldest systems where it might be more handy. Don’t see much need, other than the fun of it to use it anywhere else.

                        I am doing this DSL testing for the fun and curiosity. It seems no smaller than antiX in terms of memory footprint but an interesting thing is that it is using BadWolf as browser, which with javascript disabled is very lean. Of course not many sites work without javascript but antixforum does.
                        After enabling javascript memory footprint goes up significantly – to over 400M. I used to play with BadWolf some two years ago until it froze antiX WMs at that time, except DWM. DWM was the only one that was immune to BadWolf. All other antiX WMs – IceWM, JWM and Fluxbox gave in to BadWolf. Herbstluftwm kind of survived though, but not conclusively.
                        This must be a new version of BadWolf, so I would like to give it a chance on antiX again…

                        • This reply was modified 2 months, 1 week ago by olsztyn.

                        Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
                        http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

                        #131611
                        Member
                        entropyagent

                          I have the idea that a significant part of the earlier DSL’s space saving was due to its use of busybox in place of (and not alongside) many GNU programs? This is quite an appealing idea, in many ways, but a _lot_ of work. It seems unlikely that this arangement is being used for new DSL?

                          On a completely unrelated note, I also have the idea that a modern product that bears the name of an old product, _might_ not have much else in common with the older product.
                          If it has some people in common, that might be some nice continuity.

                          #131612
                          Member
                          punranger

                            Hello punranger.
                            When did “Damn Small Linux” or DSL come back?
                            When was your last ISO?
                            I think it was in 2012, according to https://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=damnsmall0.

                            Hola Marcelo! It just says “2024”, so I don’t know the exact date. I became aware of it on Reddit, and just thought it would interest people here since it was based on antiX. I checked on DistroWatch, and there was no announcement there. I don’t know when the last release was either, sorry!

                            Based on other comments here, it looks to me like this perhaps would better be described as an antiX respin.

                            I gave the ISO a try in VirtualBox, and it booted just fine, although boot time seemed slower than antiX, which was strange. I suppose I really should try it on an old laptop.

                            antiX linux: The best way to revive an old computer - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=JCTaUAP6sSg

                            #131613
                            Moderator
                            Brian Masinick

                              I have the Lenovo X201, an old Thinkpad 510 and an HP d5000 series desktop, I think that the exact model is S5737 or something like that.

                              All three of them would be a good place to run this antiX – DSL image so when I get some extra time I will give it a try.

                              Meanwhile our usual antiX versions, antiX 23 runit, antiX 23.1 runit and antiX 23.1 diversity init s6, runit and sysvinit all work well. That’s what I have been testing today.

                              --
                              Brian Masinick

                              #131614
                              Moderator
                              Brian Masinick

                                I just took a quick look at the site and the project sounds interesting.

                                The guy doing it is clear that it is an early effort, he’s utilizing code and skills from “the giants” and acknowledges that he is no great computer scientist, just someone who wants to resurrect a light system while realizing that a lot has changed over the years.

                                I think it is worth looking at for an old system though I think the serious user might be able to put something as good or better together using one of our images. Still it’s an interesting little project.

                                I hope I get the time to try it out this week.

                                --
                                Brian Masinick

                                #131619
                                Forum Admin
                                anticapitalista

                                  My take is that it is a huge compliment to antiX that DSL openly states that it is based on antiX (and that we are ‘giants’).
                                  DSL is a legend in itself.

                                  antiX development from its inception was inspired by distros such as DSL (among others).
                                  The general goals are very similar – keep older hardware up and running as much as possible.

                                  I wish the new DSL success.

                                  Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

                                  antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

                                Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 15 total)
                                • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.