oh dear i thaught we had gotten past this!

please stop bickering!

i tried antix on my ex-dsl pc. well, it is good on low end PCs but IMHO its not really that much better than a cut down and tweaked version of debian stable.

This statement still holds true as far as I can see. You strip down OS components, it uses less system resources, and as a result it runs faster. I think TheNNS's point was that it's not much different than Xubuntu or Debian because it's got less "stuff".

I don't think so. TheNNS was not aggressive, he did not say that MEPIS was worse than another distro, and he did not attack MEPIS. He simply stated a fact about it that seemed to make mepnoob fly off the handle.

>please stop bickering!
It's not possible to bicker when the opponent has left. And by the way, discussion is a completely different thing than bickering.

i do agree though, its no faster than a tweaked debian

as it's been said before, it's only faster because of the low system requirements, and it really doesn't make a difference, i'm sure antix is great just like debian and a bunch of other light weigth distros.

Well, coming from a person who's used MEPIS since version 2003.06, (me) I'd say that MEPIS getting faster isn't going to help much. It's one of the slower distros I've tried. Yoper, PCLinuxOS, Arch, and a handful of others are much quicker :/ I'm using boot speed and general operation.

synaptic repositories aren't much of a concern for me...I schedule updates in the middle of the night so I'm not too worried about doing them when I'm sitting at the terminal.

i think its because Mepises HDPARM defaults suck. They are set to be safe and not use DMA or 32 bit access. This is a good idea for stability and older h/w but it makes it slowwwwwwwwww

Tweaking hdparm makes it about the same speed as most other distros

jbennet,

It's also the arch it is compiled for. It's compiled i386 which doesn't take advantage of many modern processors. If you look at yoper and PCLinuxOS, both are i686 arch. My boot time in PCLOS is 32 seconds average over 10 boots. That's speed. Synaptic has been updated in the testing repos and from testing, I've found that it is much quicker...that should filter out into the main repo soon.

Overall though, use what Linux works for you! As long as we're all using Linux, we win

the number of enabled services also matters.

a debian testing install with no server services, no X or anything takes under 10 seconds

>Overall though, use what Linux works for you! As long as we're all using Linux, we win


I agree, as long as you use linux, you're a winner.

that comment is likely to upset the BSD and Hurd crowd....