Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

AJones · 2010-09-04 07:55:43

Hi Folks:

I am exploring installing a Linux Distro with a Small memory footprint and a bare minimum system. Does Arch Linux fit the profile. I am currently using Debian Squeeze. Debian GNOME consumes so much RAM. I am not a newbie to Linux, but to Arch Linux I am. I am fairly experienced with command line. Will Arch linux have a small memory foot print on my Pentium 4 , 1GB RAM computer.

Thanks,
Alan

Ogion · 2010-09-04 08:01:21

After the normal install, it is very basic. Not even a normal user yet, only root, no X, etc.
What you do with that afterwards is up to you. So yes.

As an example, on my EeePC1000H with 1gig of ram, running a normal session for me with firefox and various cli apps and stuff like that, in a tiling wm (i3):

ogion@Gont ~ % free -m
                     total       used       free     shared    buffers     cached
Mem:             995        948         47          0         67             504
-/+ buffers/cache:        376        618

Ogion

yabasta · 2010-09-04 08:03:02

a bare minimum install will give you no desktop environment whatsoever. arch can be as slender or as large as you choose to make it. having said that, i have 1 gig of ram too, i use openbox window manager and my system at startup needs 120 meg of ram. i'm using 64bit arch though, and from what i've read (though i may be wrong here) 64bit uses more memory than 32 bit. like i said, it's really up to you, spend some time reading the beginners guide on the arch wiki, it's a great help.

tomk · 2010-09-04 08:06:24

GNOME consumes RAM - using Arch instead of Debian won't change that significantly. I guess your definition of "a bare minimum system" differs from mine, but I would not use GNOME, or any other DE - just a light window manager on its own.

zenlord · 2010-09-04 10:00:02

I consider my laptop-system 'lightweight, but usable to show off other OS-users':

X.org + lxdm + Compiz standalone + avant window manager.

At this moment, using only firefox, I'm using 847 MB of ram.

My mediaserver uses ca. 130 MB without any active tasks (only sshd session)

It's up to you to make your system as lightweight as you wish. IIRC on my previous laptop, I used openbox and no bling whatsoever to get my RAM after login to X as low as ca. 130 MB.

AJones · 2010-09-04 10:43:11

Hi All:

Thanks for your replies. I just want LXDE with Arch. I will install it on a spare HD. I have Debian on my First HD. My bare minimum criteria was that a minimal kernel with drivers only for my particluar machine. Which is possible with Debiain with Kernel-Package also I guess with Gentoo. Compiling the Kernel for just my machine. Then the OS wont load all the drivers that are not needed. Does Arch Linux come up with a Stock Kernel like in Debian that caters to all drivers for all machines?

Thanks,
Alan

litemotiv · 2010-09-04 10:46:57

AJones wrote:

Does Arch Linux come up with a Stock Kernel like in Debian that caters to all drivers for all machines?

Yes, but it uses autoloading so you will not load any drivers that you don't need.

See: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Udev

shemz · 2010-09-04 12:33:32

Arch can give you what you want (so can Debian and Gentoo), but the two most important criteria for a lightweight system are: 1: install and load only what you want, and 2: when you have an option, go for the less resource hungry solution (MPD vs Amarok, for example).

P.S.: I use both a custom kernel and the stock kernel on my netbook. Both load with same ram usage (as only required modules are loaded by udev), just the install size vary as the custom kernel is stripped down for the modules that I really need. What makes the difference is not kernel really, but what you load afterwards. My netbook loads xorg, openbox and some lightweight eye-candy like conky, wbar, etc immediately after booting up, the ram usage at the beginning of session is ~60 megs (only!).

hume's doona · 2010-09-04 12:42:28

I use awesome WM, and start up consumed ram is similar to shemz' above.

Having said that, I kinda like my bloat, so after running a while, I'm using 2.5gb even in awesome [I have gimp, vimperator etc all open]

As light, or heavy as you like.

Debian can be similar with a minimal install, I use arch for the package manager and config/script/init style/system... you may prefer debian minimal.

it's all up to the user

AJones · 2010-09-04 13:10:34

Thanks All:

I think I will give Arch Linux a try.

Thanks,
Alan

Last edited by AJones (2010-09-04 13:10:58)

Arch Linux

#1 2010-09-04 07:55:43

Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#2 2010-09-04 08:01:21

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#3 2010-09-04 08:03:02

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#4 2010-09-04 08:06:24

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#5 2010-09-04 10:00:02

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#6 2010-09-04 10:43:11

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#7 2010-09-04 10:46:57

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#8 2010-09-04 12:33:32

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#9 2010-09-04 12:42:28

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

#10 2010-09-04 13:10:34

Re: Does Arch Linux have a Small Memory Footprint

Board footer