what is a system require ment for ubuntu?
- Status
rocket357
Security freak
*doc.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/install/i386/ch02.html
Now that that's out of the way, I'd imagine your machine should be fine...you said you clicked on "install", meaning the Ubuntu CD booted properly and you were using the desktop link to launch the installer?
You could try the alternate install CD (installs the same exact stuff, only the installer is lighter so it doesn't take so much RAM during the install process).
Now that that's out of the way, I'd imagine your machine should be fine...you said you clicked on "install", meaning the Ubuntu CD booted properly and you were using the desktop link to launch the installer?
You could try the alternate install CD (installs the same exact stuff, only the installer is lighter so it doesn't take so much RAM during the install process).
Desi-Tek.com
In the zone
installing ubuntu on system with 256mb ram is a nightmare but once you manage to install it it will run perfectly but you may not be able to use certain software like eclipse as it will slow down your system.
better get more ram
better get more ram
Desi-Tek.com
In the zone
another suggestion is install in safe graphic mode under resolution of 800/600
it will take less memory or borrow some ram from friend to install ubuntu
it will take less memory or borrow some ram from friend to install ubuntu
rocket357
Security freak
Ubuntu = Linuxmak1012 said:
True
Linux = Ubuntu
Not entirely True (Ubuntu is not representative of the entire Linux community)
Linux can be run in as little as 8MB of RAM (less if you really have a need for pain and don't mind recompiling EVERYTHING). Does that mean Ubuntu (the "luxury" distro amongst user-friendly Linux fans) can do it? Not a chance in hell...too much "ease of use" code running on top it.
Distros like DSL, Gentoo, Slackware, etc... can all run comfortably on low-end systems. Do you get eye candy? Nope. Do you get the latest auto-configuring stuff? Nope. Do you get a stable, reliable system? Yes.
Remember, Linux is just the kernel...the distros can add whatever they want (and Ubuntu seems to run like a typical commercial OS vendor...install as many services as possible and run them all suid root...doh?)
Edit - you can, however, create a swap partition and use that during the Ubuntu install to give you a bit of breathing room =)
Last edited:
SOFTWARE CAN NEVER REPLACE HARDWARE.mak1012 said:
If you expect that then you will always be disappointed.
I fail to see how a 700 MB cd, that uncompresses to around 2GB, then run other processes on it, will be able to have enough RAM left for installation from a live cd environment.
Get the alternate installer, that should work.
And yeah, use XFCE instead of GNOME, it's much lighter but as easy to use.
rocket357
Security freak
praka123 said:actually the alternate installer though curses based is much stabler than ubiquity.becoz alternate CD uses Debian installer
Agreed here, too. Ubuntu has had a history of installer issues, particularly with Intel graphics chipsets. I don't know why, but I know that you can google it and turn up quite a few threads with people complaining that it installed just fine on this machine or that...but their machine and Ubuntu weren't getting along. 9 times out of 10 an intel chipset is to blame (well, the installer shouldn't care what chipset is used, so really it's an installer issue), and I find that ironic.
At any rate, whether it's an intel chipset issue or a low RAM issue, Ubuntu offers the alternate installer (using as praka said the Debian installer) for just such occasions. =)
- Status