Tiny server?

[Tim]

Tim:
>> But being serious, I think you may be on the wrong list for that sort of
>> thing.  You want an OS that's designed for efficiency (Damn Small Linux,
>> perhaps?), whereas Fedora seems to be the *big* Swiss Army knife with
>> razor sharpened edges - size being less important than features.

Timothy Murphy:
> I agree that I am not really on the right list,
> since my query was entirely hardware-related.

I didn't mean it in a "hardware's off-topic, go elsewhere" way, but that
efficiency doesn't seem to be a prime goal of Fedora, and other distros
have specifically aimed for it.  You might be better served by trying to
find which other distro would suit you better, than trying to sort out
how to shoehorn Fedora onto a little computer.

Fedora comes with a bit of baggage.  It's management tools are fairly
hefty (e.g. yum update/upgrade isn't a light task, etc.), compared to a
distro where you simply unpack a tarball from the originator of the
software (e.g. you get Apache from the Apache website, etc.).  It comes
with a plethora of things that it deems must be there (e.g. CUPS has to
be there, even if you don't have a printer).  Even just booting Fedora's
more of a chore than some other releases (e.g. a minute or so rather
than just a few seconds).

-- 
[tim at bigblack ~]$ uname -ipr
2.6.23.12-52.fc7 i686 i386

Don't send private replies to my address, the mailbox is ignored.
I read messages from the public lists.
________________________________________________________________