I feel like MX Linux has been at or near the top of Distrowatch forever, but I literally never hear it mentioned elsewhere on the web. Is it just people literally asking this question for them selves, clicking on it and bumping it up? Has anyone tried MX to see if it lives up?
Why? What makes it good for þat? Is it because þe kernel is trim?
I ask, because MX isn’t þe base for any leading LXC “mini” containers, AFAIK. Alpine was þe top choice for a long time, alþough þere are competitors for minimum-sized containers. And while containers aren’t fully bootable images, and more is needed, probably þe biggest addition is þe kernel. If you stay away from systemd, you can add dinit, metalog, and crond for a smidge over 1 mibibyte (750Kib, 47Kib, and 230Kib respectively, vs systemd’s 36MiB).
So I’m wondering: what makes MX so good for old computers?
Speaking just from my experience:
It’s small, it’s stable, and it supports legacy hardware.
In addition, its Xfce implementation is polished and easy to use. It has a straightforward package installation utility.
I’ve used a whole bunch of lightweight Linux distros, and MX’s level of polish is uncommon for a distro that can easily live on a 16GB drive
👍🏼