Ultra light install?

Question: noticing how exceptionally bare bones Void is, and for that matter a base Arch install (w desktop).

What can really be unchecked in the net installer and still get a bootable system with lightdm and grup2 OS prober?

Quick thoughts: web browser, screenfetch, mplayer for base.

With Xfce as desktop: gnome-packagekit?

My €0.02 here :smiley:

1 Like

If you are using only Ethernet, you can get rid of everything involved with WiFi, DSL, and god forbid 56K dial up phone connection.
broadcom-wl-dktms ipw2100-fw ipw2200-fw wireless_tools rp-ppoe
wireless-regdb wpa-supplicat wvdial ppp

pptclient – Client for the proprietary Microsoft Point-to-Point Tunneling Protocol, PPTP. ??

Just go to the Arch Linux home page, click on “packages” then go down the list of base install options, type it into the Packages window and decide if you need that or not.

I can say, that what you eliminate wont amount to a hill of beans in regards to the size of today’s storage devices. It probably wont amount to much as far as RAM usage either. But eliminate one package that shouldn’t be eliminated and it will buy a person much grief.

Pudge

4 Likes

if you use KDE as install you can start keep out gvfs , but only know what your doing offcourse never do it blindly :stuck_out_tongue:

1 Like

It’s easy to stare at the numbers, but it is a little annoying that Endeavour as well as any Arch based Xfce I have used, uses about 600 Mb to start Xfce. I don’t recall how much an actual manual Arch install uses with Xfce on top, but if I recall just around 400Mb. But maybe that’s systemd?

Void is much leaner, basically a bare bones install with JUST the xfce4 + firefox packages on top of it, and it boots in at 270Mb. But it uses runit, not systemd which is few magnitudes bigger. And also from the start I think it only has three or four services running.

You compare it with the same applications that messures ram ?

just free -m

May I ask, how much RAM does your machine ship?

Oh I definitely don’t need to fret. I have 16 Gb. I run W10 with heavy games on it daily.

What I am more interested in is the “why” and the “how”. What is it that makes Void only boot up at that little (also, MX uses less memory than Arch at startup but that too uses another init than systemd). And I am not becoming a “boycott systemd” person. I am just wondering if there are services running that are definitely unnecessary for a home-non-network workstation.

Edit: as a side note, the one thing that DOES impress me with Void is the package manager, actually. I have only toyed with it for a day, but it seems both better, faster, and more modular than pacman. And up to now pacman has been by far the best package manager I had ever encountered. (Part of that is Arch’s decision to have huge packages that cannot be split combined with a lot of dependencies pulled in that might not be necessary).

1 Like

arch does not have huge packages… is i think also a trend of things… solusos also uses the same compression… rest also follow… systemd is complicated is also designed for servers also in this modern world you need also a modern init system and thats just te point general. inits must be smarter is also to secure the servers etc… but at the end users might like it or not some types going very qouickly to a certain camp is nothing wrong with it… people gona believe what they believe at the end and not in reverse :slight_smile:

2 Likes

With “huge” I mean “bundled together”.
Compare Arch and OpenSuse:

The same programs (say EndeavourOS Xfce and OpenSuse Xfce with the same configs and addons): Arch / Endeavour installs somewhere around 800-850 packages. Suse? Somewhere around 2000 packages. Because they are much more split up.

Sometimes that’s good.It’s easier to not miss a dependency (either when it comes to removal or add). Sometimes it’s annoying. Some distros, for example, let you install only the parts of Libreoffice you actually use, which for most people are Calc and Write. Arch? You have to install the complete package or nothing.

Pacman is also very stubborn with dependencies and pulls down a lot of stuff “just to be sure”. It also have no flag for cleaning up your home directory, which after trying Void’s package manager seems like a huge oversight: Pacman leaves all dotfiles behind and doesn’t do a good job cleaning as it goes. Void’s package manger has flags you set and it will clean up not only the package, unused dependencies / orphans but also dotfiles, leaving your home directory nice and tidy.

1 Like

@Beardedgeek72

Ehm… please don’t leave us… We have a purple logo, instead of the usual Linux green…

4 Likes

Im sure arch dont put depencies for judt incase, there is also distro probabbly give way less. You keep inmind questions of depencie missing comes moree the. You think generaly also depencies not direct needed is always optional

1 Like

It’ll be okay. Going to spend the evening reinstalling EndeavourOS :slight_smile:

As I said I reorganized my partitions yesterday and backed up everything. See you tomorrow :slight_smile:

2 Likes

Here’s my xfce running just about 400 MB.

3 Likes

I like Void, I use it as an experiment in how the alternative tech over there works (MUSL C library, runit and their xbps package manager, which I like better than Pacman). So far in my testing it runs very well and has been a stable rolling release alternative to Arch but the community and package repos are small, so it is a little less practical for real world usage. it’s a great hobby OS but not necessarily ready for mass use. Needs a fair amount of tinkering to get right as well. But I really like how minimal it is. I use it with Enlightenment DE and it is really tight both on disc space and system memory.

Several folks have suggested a server/no-DE install option for Endeavour. I think that is a great idea - even though I like a DE we’ve seen a fair amount of comments on the board pushing toward more minimalism. Having a no-DE install is probably easier than installing a minimal DE and trying to trim all the DE things out.

1 Like