Get the new PortableApps.com Platform 12.0.5. Better, stronger, faster, and prettier. Download Now or Buy on a Flash Drive
Instant access to over 300 free and legal portable apps (over 9GB) including the new Solfege (Aug 30, 2014)
PortableApps.com needs your help: Please consider making a donation today

Best Portable Linux

silentcon's picture
silentcon - October 27, 2008 - 9:21am
Share on Facebook

So far, i know xubuntu,damn small linux,puppy linux. Which of the portable linux are the smallest,fastest and has the most features?What is the minimum flash drive capacity for it to fully work?


( categories: )

...

Can't speak for the others, but I know that DSL is specifically designed to fit into 50 MB, so any drive should be sufficient.

Except for making it

Except for making it bootable, which is like another 25 mb. Sad

The coloring of it is depressing as well.

Too many lonely hearts in the real world
Too many bridges you can burn
Too many tables you can't turn
Don't wanna live my life in the real world

sadly DSL is dead the dev

sadly DSL is dead

the dev moved onto tiny core.

Here.

I haven't gotten to look at this article myself yet, but perhaps it may be helpful:

Lifehacker Article

BlueFlopps. it is smaller

BlueFlopps. it is smaller than DSL. IT FITS ON 2 FLOPPY DISKS DOOD 8D and it comes with a VERY basic GUI and loads of nifty goodies that one would not expecty on a 2 floppy distro of linux Laughing out loud

Personally, I prefer nimblex.

Personally, I prefer nimblex. Its 200 mb installed (I think) and you can create ISO images on the websites with different modules. It uses the KDE enviroment, but I'm not exactly sure what all it gets with it. Perl is in there, so is firefox. I haven't really been able to play with it except in virtual machines.

Too many lonely hearts in the real world
Too many bridges you can burn
Too many tables you can't turn
Don't wanna live my life in the real world

PUPPY LINUX!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

I love puppy linux but most people I know like ubuntu. I haven't tried ubuntu out yet because it has errors when using qemu with it.

The only think I don't like about puppy linux is that it has seamonkey instead of firefox installed by default. Sad

And I can't figure out how to change the display settings after first time configuration. Sad

But Still I think Puppy Linux his the best linux distribution.

P.S. It's only 80 mb.

Siggys waste bandwidth... that's why I have one.

Hum...

I don't like Puppy a lot for a few reasons:

  • What you said, no Firefox by default
  • Incredibly small and outdated repos that are not compatible with any other thing
  • Runs in root by default
  • Incredibly bad choice of Apps
  • Stupidly incomplete GTK theme and icon theme
  • Incredibly incompatible specs

For me to choose it as a daily OS it would need:

  • To provide Firefox or Seamonkey 2alpha as default
  • To provide repos with updated apps and be compatible with apt or yum packages
  • Run on a limited user and provide su or sudo to make root tasks
  • Provide better apps (come on, ROX file manager sucks, I would go with PCManFM or Thunar instead)
  • Provide a GTK theme that styled more than just buttons, a simple theme that relied on a simple engine would work. And I know Puppy has a very complete support for GTK themes. And provide an icon theme that styled toolbar buttons too. I don't think it would make Puppy too heavy to come with Tango Icon theme and Clearlooks.
  • It wouldn't harm to make the apps settings to be compatible with other distros, seriously, so I could make something the same on every distro. For example, I know where are the Applications menu entries on all gnome distros, it is the same place everywhere, on Puppy I don't know

Puppy is, though, still a better choice than DSL, that the last time I tried it had no decent support for typing diacritical marks.
Also, I don't think Puppy should loose its small size, I just think a better apps selection would make it even smaller and nicer.

#tuna { color: silver; smell: delicious; }

In my opinion Ubuntu is the

In my opinion Ubuntu is the fastest, smallest and the best portable Linux. I would like to recommend it for domain hosting as it provides better facilities when compared to others. Hope this reply will help you Smiling

which version?

>Ubuntu is the fastest, smallest <

dont know which version you are talking about, but fastest and smallest is certainly not valid for Ubuntu of current version, which takes in its standard format often more space then a windows installation, runs only on very new hardware and needs lot of resources. It is designed for modern desktop use and all portable versions are just kind of experimental 'prove of concept' rather then very useful.

On some older hardware, like we have here some laptops over 5 year old, the current ubuntu will not even start up so resource hungry it is.

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

I think toms is just spamming

I think toms is just spamming the forum - check out his link - it has nothing to do with the thread/post and is a commercial site.

yes

I am gruftie and so little bit slow thinking....Eye-wink

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

In the following order are my

In the following order are my favorites:

1) Puppy
2) Knoppix
3) Pendrive
4) DSL

DSL is the smallest, but I have yet to get it configured properly.

Hey! Where'd it go?

Tiny Core is the new

Tiny Core is the new smallest. The Developer of DSL is now working on it. Thats why DSL hasnt seen a update since november of 2008.

in other words DSL is left to be developed by one developer(the original owner) when it was developed by two previously (Owner and another Developer).

I'll have to check Tiny Core

I'll have to check Tiny Core out, I guess.

In my list, DSL was the smallest, but I'll take your word on Tiny Core.

Hey! Where'd it go?

even then its not the

even then its not the tiniest. there is TBRST which is a 1.4MB distro (no GUI) and BlueFlopps is 2.88MB.

Y'know, you're really

Y'know, you're really starting to piss me off. Laughing out loud I can't use VirtualBox to check all of these out. Are TBRST and BlueFlopps complete distros, or just some hacker messing around with the kernel? Tiny Core even says that it's not a complete distro, are the other two technically incomplete?

Hey! Where'd it go?

what you mean by incomplete?

If you have kernel and few things to make human input and output sligtly comfortable then it is complete.

A floppy with DOS on it is also complete and so is any linux bootable floppy or similar media if it does the same thing.

Some people mean by complete 20Gb of games and similar, so this is difficult to decide.

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

I didn't mean as in unfinished.

It is not a complete desktop nor is all hardware completely supported. It represents only the core needed to boot into a very minimal X desktop typically with wired internet access.

Tiny Core says, in the second sentence that it is not a complete desktop. So, does the same apply for the other two minimal OSes Mir was talking about?

Hey! Where'd it go?

Desktops... so DOS isnt a

Desktops... so DOS isnt a operating system just because it doesnt look prutty like windows Vista? well if thats the case lets get rid of the underlying core of XP/Vista/7 which is NT. Linux Kernel is the OS. from there you can build it to whatever you want it to look like. these so called "complete" ones you speak of are nothing more than precompiled goody bags of programs and eye candy like COMPIZ (shudders) or even a X windows desktop.

They are meant for recovery and older systems. people think that the smaller the distro the faster it will be. then they go into a support channel asking for help on why their install isnt working.

On another note what the *%*& is this complaint i see about people not getting their linux to install via PXE. What the *&$^! is this PXE %*#&^!

pxe

preboot execution environment

this is in general meant to do sort of install via network without actually running any operating system locally installed.

Operating systems can be so run from a central server and not be installed on each client computer. This is how present day large and physically scattered networks are built up.

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

if you talk of linux

then the desktop has different meaning. It has nothing directly to do with the operating system. No linux has desktop included. Desktop under Linux is simply an additional application, needing some windows manager (nothing to do with windows operating system) and this application will then run with the help of the windows manager. There are many windows manager subsystems and many applications providing graphical user interface. The actual operating system does not provide any of those functions. This is different to the microsoft windows.
The closest similarity to linux and ms operating systems can be somewhere with older windows systems like w3.1 or w95 or w98 where operating system was dos (having no GUI) and the GUI was kind of an add on to the dos.

So talking of linux without GUI as not being finished or complete is not that much clear. Also asking an operating system to support all hardware, well this is a dream which never will happen probably. While new kernels support more and more relatively new hardware, the support for older hardware was dropped from the main kernel.

Otto Sykora
Basel, Switzerland

Well said!

Well said!

Slax is User Friendly Customisable

Slax is a Slackware-based portable Linux operating system, designed with a modular approach. Despite its small size about (200mb,) Slax provides a wide collection of pre-installed software for daily use, including a well-organised graphical user interface and useful recovery tools for system administrators.

I have to change my vote.

I have to change my vote. Nimblex never worked for me. Go with Antix Smiling

Too many lonely hearts in the real world
Too many bridges you can burn
Too many tables you can't turn
Don't wanna live my life in the real world