Also not a joke: XFCE on 39Mb

Since we’re on the subject of eyeball-popping lightweight desktops, here’s another one for you.

And no, your popped eyeballs do not deceive you: That is an XFCE desktop with the standard array of controls and gizmos, running on an astounding 39Mb of space.

Very little in the way of outside software is installed, but only htop is running. Plus scrot and xfce4-terminal, of course. :)

Not Debian this time — although Debian could probably put up a fight when compared to this. No, this time it’s Alpine Linux, which you may or may not have heard of. Until a few weeks ago, I hadn’t.

As I understand it this is intended for embedded systems, which might be part of the reason why I hadn’t run across it sooner.

With much of the distro anchored in uClibc and BusyBox, it shouldn’t surprise anyone that the desktop needs a paltry 39Mb to get started.

Having said that, actually putting this into place took a little effort, if typing a few commands can be called effort. Arch users will think it trivial; Ubuntu users will develop a look of shock and fear on their faces. ;)

There is (was?) a skeletal tutorial on the Alpine Linux web site that got me started. I did run into a few obstacles.

After you boot the 2.1.2 ISO, you can arrange the system with setup-alpine and then install it to an internal disk with setup-disk.

But after reboot you need to add the online repositories to the /etc/apk/repositories file. In short,

echo "" >> /etc/apk/repositories

or your attempts to install things via apk add will fall short. Use apk update to refresh your package lists, and then add xorg, xfce4, sudo and so forth, plus the xf86-video-vesa driver. And maybe even xf86-video-fbdev.

For the record, the xf86-video-intel driver wouldn’t run for me; X complained about kernel modesetting.

One more thing: Run X -configure to get a workable xorg.conf file, then edit it for the vesa driver. And I had to reach way, waaay back to 2008 for that AllowEmptyInput setting, or I got the infamous dead desktop that I hated so much.

That’s more or less everything you’d need, given that your hardware plays well with the Alpine superstructure. I’m lucky to have Intel-based network and video, so short of that video card problem I mentioned, everything was fine out of the box.

Start times are electric, jumping to the login prompt in a meager 13 seconds on my core duo. With Midori as a browser I rarely see the entire memory profile arc over 92Mb, even with two or three tabs open at a time. Firefox is overrated, you know.

But like I said, it shouldn’t surprise anyone — least of all me — that an embedded Linux does such a fantastic job keeping itself lean and trim. That is, after all, the point.

And even if this technically isn’t intended for ancient hardware, but you can probably guess what my plan is next. … :twisted:

P.S.: PekWM is in the repos. Jump for joy! :D

About these ads

17 Responses to “Also not a joke: XFCE on 39Mb”

  1. 1 ricky 2010/12/02 at 8:03 AM

    XFCE is usually my choice on barebones installations such as Arch Linux / NetBSD etc.

    Even though i have 3gigs of ram, i’d still prefer XFCE. On my computer a typical OS running XFCE weighs in at 70mb memory with a x86_64 base, leaving a whole lot of room for ram eaters like firefox.

    I’m pretty surprised to hear it boots to 39mb though.

    Its good stuff. ;)

  2. 2 raymond300 2010/12/02 at 9:13 AM

    I’m guessing it’s either LXDE, or openbox :D.

  3. 3 TL 2010/12/02 at 11:19 AM

    Don’t know if you’ve seen this, but Debian in 40Mb

    • 4 CountDuckula 2010/12/05 at 7:01 PM

      Gotta try that Debian build – he’s even running Conky too which runs up the memory usage!

    • 5 anon 2010/12/09 at 8:18 PM

      Got it down to 25 MB with PekWM and XFCE panel. That’s with several xterms, irssi, ace of penguins, and netsurf.

  4. 6 yoshi314 2010/12/02 at 6:15 PM

    i was actually looking for something uclibc based and usable.

    gentoo can do it, but it’s not easy.

  5. 7 anon 2010/12/02 at 8:34 PM

    u :3 xfce and pekw especiallt together. Definiately on my must try list.

  6. 8 anon 2010/12/03 at 4:14 AM

    as for your raeg towards intel driver, intel appearantly went on an obsolete binge. I Do know that ubuntu doesn’t support the 82845 GFX card once you update, which before worked fine in maverick, even the normally always broken plymouth worked perfectly.

    and if alpine had a mode that didn’t run from ram I’d like to run that. I like my ram running distros, but tinycore dominates that. but I’d still give it a shot.

    • 9 CountDuckula 2010/12/05 at 7:06 PM

      Couldn’t get my Intel 830 graphics chipset to fire up X under Alpine Linux no matter what I tried but anyway was still impressed that it only took 8MB of RAM to boot up the console – who needs a GUI :)

  7. 11 Armor Nick 2010/12/05 at 2:30 AM

    Ah, Xfce. The last (ancient) environment following the traditional desktop paradigms. It’s comforting to know that there’ll always be a old-style desktop left :D

  8. 12 CountDuckula 2010/12/08 at 6:00 AM

    Just FYI, I did three distro installs on my dual core desktop last night. These were base installs, no X or any other garbage and following is their memory usage after a reboot,

    Alpine Linux: 21MB
    Arch Linux: 27MB
    Debian: 24MB

    So, Alpine is the winner but not by a screaming margin. Was surprised that Arch was the worst performer based on the above readings. On an older machine the results may be different…

  9. 13 James 2011/03/20 at 7:45 AM

    I’ve just tried this distro for a particular project. Alpine looked promising for my project because an older machine will be in use (P3 with only 128 MB RAM). Alpine ran pretty well and I didn’t find it terribly hard to set up–though I am a fairly seasoned Linux user. But in the end I couldn’t make use of Alpine. As you might expect it’s something of a crippled distro: the one application I really needed to run–vlc–was compiled to run without a gui (remote control mode), which was NOT going to work for my project. You see, I have clueless users who need pretty pictures in order to interact to some degree with the computer. And I’m not going to get involved in attempting to compile a complex program like vlc on this hobbled distro–sounds like an exercise in extreme frustration to me. A bit sad I couldn’t use it since it seemed just right for the job in all other respects.

  1. 1 No joke: A full Gnome desktop on 105Mb « Motho ke motho ka botho | Don Bishop's Blog dweb98 Trackback on 2010/12/02 at 1:38 PM
  2. 2 Links 2/12/2010: Red Hat Climbs 6.28%, Linux Mint 10 Receives High Marks | Techrights Trackback on 2010/12/03 at 7:55 AM
  3. 3 Three mediocre attempts « Motho ke motho ka botho Trackback on 2010/12/06 at 11:24 PM

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s


Visit the Wiki!

Some recent desktops

May 6, 2011
Musca 0.9.24 on Crux Linux
150Mhz Pentium 96Mb 8Gb CF

May 14, 2011
IceWM 1.2.37 and Arch Linux
L2300 core duo 3Gb 320Gb

Some recent games

Apr. 21, 2011
Oolite on Xubuntu 11.04
L2300 core duo 3Gb 320Gb

Enter your email address to subscribe to this blog and receive notifications of new posts.

Join 405 other followers


This work is licensed under the GNU Free Documentation License. Please see the About page for details.

Blog Stats

  • 3,958,625 hits



Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.

Join 405 other followers

%d bloggers like this: