[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]

Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?

To: seul-edu@seul.org
Subject: Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?
From: "Ralph M. Deal" <deal@kzoo.edu>
Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 14:20:39 -0500
Delivered-To: archiver@seul.org
Delivered-To: seul-edu-outgoing@seul.org
Delivered-To: seul-edu@seul.org
Delivery-Date: Wed, 13 Feb 2002 14:24:13 -0500
References: <Pine.LNX.4.43.0202112204330.12281-100000@pilchuck.reedmedia.net>
Reply-To: seul-edu@seul.org
Sender: owner-seul-edu@seul.org

"Jeremy C. Reed" wrote:
> 
> On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Ralph M. Deal wrote:
> 
> > will run in RH 6.2 which I've chosen for its size.
> 
> Does a recent version of Red Hat Linux really take up more space or
> resources?
> 
> It seems like if you install the same packages, then it will be similar in
> size (with better performance and security with the more recent release).

Seems reasonable but I'm following the advice of one of the active
officers of
our local LINUX users' group who is packages new versions of the latest
RH and
other LINUX versions onto CD's for us.  He seems in a position to know.
However, I'll ask again.

	Best,  Ralph

Follow-Ups:
- Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?
  - From: Michael Shigorin <mike@lic145.kiev.ua>
- Re: [seul-edu] Which version of Linux to use?
  - From: Art Petrzelka <art@complum.com>

References:
- Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?
  - From: "Jeremy C. Reed" <reed@reedmedia.net>

Prev by Date: Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?
Next by Date: Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?
Prev by thread: Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?
Next by thread: Re: [seul-edu] Best wm for tiny slow computers?
Index(es):
- Date
- Thread