[plug] Old 486 advice

[Craig Ringer]

>
>
>How much RAM would you sugest to run X? if at all?
>
32MB for XFree86. I beleve there are "thinner" X implementations out 
there but I expect they'll cost, and if you had money you wouldn't be 
using a 486.

>which Window Manager?
>
Try WindowMaker. It's pretty thin, but still decent features.
 Use fwvm2 (?) or even twm if you think you can stand it.
Blackbox is an alternative, but not one I've tried personally. Some rave 
about it.
Finially, xfce is pretty minimalist with semi-destkop-environment 
features. Again, some rave - but personally I hate it. Worth a try.

Just don't let kde or gnome anywhere near it. I'll probably hear the 
pitiful dying whine from here *grin*

>which software for a gateway\firewall?
>
You won't need anything that isn't built in to the kernel and basic 
networking support of the distro you choose. (iptables/ipchains, route, 
ifconfig, etc).

>other important software eg an office suite compatible with Word 97\2000?
>
Sorry, but you have not a snowflakes chance in hell of running an office 
compatable word processor on a 486. Well, ok I speak of StarOffice and 
there might be other leaner ones, but I haven't run into any yet. I'd 
suggest using AntiWord to convert your existing word docs to plaintext 
and going from there. That is, if you don't need embedded 
pix/formatting. Otherwise - ideas, anybody ? Does AbiWord support msword 
.doc files?

>which distro and has anyone you know got it and will lend it to me :-)?
>
I'd suggest debian. It'll be a learning experience (read - brick wall at 
first) but its the most compact "full featured" distro around. I can fit 
a debian install into a lean 100mb and still have a pretty full featured 
system (sans x) where I have trouble getting redhat/mandrake to install 
in <450mb

>How much HD space would I need? I've got 1.7 + 100
>is this feasible or just a waste of time?
>
Perfectly reasonable - I hope you mean gigabytes for the 1.7 :-)
(I _have_ seen a removable platter 1 mb harddisk on a CP/M machine!).

>which kernel version would peopel sugest?
>
Your choice really. 2.2 comes with debian potato, and it doesn't like 
being upgraded to 2.4 much (you need to install your own modutils, etc - 
ick). If you go with debian, you can move to woody (the testing version, 
pretty stable since debian-testing tends to equate with everyone else's 
releases) and use a 2.4 kernel if you need netfilter etc. Of course 
netfilter uses more RAM because of its stateful connection tracking...

>
>thanks in advance!
>