Frugal or not?

Prev

http://damnsmalllinux.org/cgi-bin/forums/ikonboard.cgi?;act=ST;f=5;t=10638

> I want to install DSL to my hard drive, should I be using frugal or not?
> What exactly does Frugal do that the normal mode doesn't?

Frugal:

Takes up less space (only 50MB or less) for the OS because it's a compressed image just like the LiveCD.
Is not a writeable file system, just like the Live CD, therefore is less prone to corruption.
Because it's less prone to corruption, you can restore to a workable state by simply deleting your backup files in most cases.
Does not read and write to your media drives except on backup and restore, or when swapping. If you use toram, then everything is done in RAM with no writing to disk during processing. This saves your disk, which is very important to the disk life of flash memory drives, for example.
You can find more info in the documentation:

documented on: Jan. 05 2006, doobit

Frugal or not?

I would highly recommend the frugal install. Having used a traditional HD install with Feather (Debian), I ran into dependency hell when trying to install new apps. Not that frugal is perfect, but I've found to be very usable with few problems.

larkl

Frugal or not?

Frugal is the way to go.

with frugal and persistent opt and home you can easily upgrade your DSL to any version you wish and if you dont like the update its as easy as booting from the dsl version disk of your choice dsl 2, mke2fs -j hdx, and then frugal_install.sh and your back up and running with wichever version was on the cd you booted from.

Also when you decide to have dsl packages load on bootup just symlink the files into the /cdrom directory off the root directory, this is NOT the same as the /mnt/auto/cdrom…

so symlinks to your DSL extensions go in:

/cdrom

and compact disks go in:

/mnt/auto/cdrom

documented on: Jan. 09 2006, starcannon