Can I run chrome os from a portable usb stick?

Nvidiaguy07

Platinum Member
Feb 22, 2008
2,846
4
81
Long story short, the school I work at has a ton of computers that are broken (I'm guessing bad hard drives). Last year I brought a few ubuntu live cds so that at least the computers would be able to be used for some basic things like web browsing. Tech didn't like it too much because they "don't support Linux", but they weren't doing much supporting of anything anyway.

Our school has started to adopt Chromebook and chrome boxes, so I can see them having less of a problem with using either chrome os running from a live cd or usb drive. I searched around, but didn't see much info on this.

Anybody have any info on if this is possible?
 

lxskllr

No Lifer
Nov 30, 2004
60,147
10,612
126
Just about anything is possible with a Linux based O/S, but looking around, it appears to be non-trivial to get setup on your own device. It looks like you'd have to compile it from source, or use a pre built live image. Neither is particularly attractive due to keeping up with updates. Maybe updates wouldn't be an issue if you compile. Dunno how they work their repositories.

If it were me, I'd just use a "normal" distro, since you're using it to rehab broken computers, and IT doesn't support broken computers anyway.
 

Nvidiaguy07

Platinum Member
Feb 22, 2008
2,846
4
81
Just about anything is possible with a Linux based O/S, but looking around, it appears to be non-trivial to get setup on your own device. It looks like you'd have to compile it from source, or use a pre built live image. Neither is particularly attractive due to keeping up with updates. Maybe updates wouldn't be an issue if you compile. Dunno how they work their repositories.

If it were me, I'd just use a "normal" distro, since you're using it to rehab broken computers, and IT doesn't support broken computers anyway.

Yea before posting here I thought it would be an easy/common thing that people would be able to do. I would think that offering the chromeOS by itself would be a good idea to push the OS and get people invested in their ecosystem.

I searched around, and the best or easiest method that I may have found is this:
http://www.thewindowsclub.com/run-chrome-os-windows-pc

It gives you instructions on how to install to usb. The only thing im a little confused about is that the builds linked (the only ones I can find anywhere), and pretty old. The latest "nightly" build is from April 20, 2013. Is this gonna be horribly outdated compared version of chromium OS compared to the version of chrome OS that people are using on chromebooks now?

I really wish they would make this into a live cd, i think a lot of people would find it pretty useful.
 

lxskllr

No Lifer
Nov 30, 2004
60,147
10,612
126
I don't know how outdated it would be after a few months. It depends on how fast development is going. It's a young project, so it could be greatly different than shipped versions.

I think you're starting off with the wrong premise. A hacked together ChromeOS should be expected to be supported as much as any other O/S, which is to say, not at all. If you aren't running it on an official device, it can't really be supported since you're dealing with an unknown quantity. It sounds like you're setting things up with you being the support. If that's the case, I'd use something more mature, and more "normal" for common installation. One of the *buntus would be a decent choice. I'd probably go with Xubuntu.

Trying to install and support a development O/S on unsupported devices for other people is asking for headaches. I also don't see the benefit. You're just getting the branding, and dealing with an unfriendly project at this point. I don't think Chromium is generally intended as an end user product. It can be built as such, but it's more a collection of raw materials. It'll take a little time to see if people want to make it into a full distro.

Edit:
If you wanted a "cloud" oriented O/S, Peppermint might be a good choice. It ships pretty lean, but you still have the software available in Ubuntu's repos. You could load it up as you like, then clone the image to all the machines. Make a business out of it, and sell thumb drives to the students with the O/S installed.

http://peppermintos.com/#
 
Last edited:

Nvidiaguy07

Platinum Member
Feb 22, 2008
2,846
4
81
I don't know how outdated it would be after a few months. It depends on how fast development is going. It's a young project, so it could be greatly different than shipped versions.

I think you're starting off with the wrong premise. A hacked together ChromeOS should be expected to be supported as much as any other O/S, which is to say, not at all. If you aren't running it on an official device, it can't really be supported since you're dealing with an unknown quantity. It sounds like you're setting things up with you being the support. If that's the case, I'd use something more mature, and more "normal" for common installation. One of the *buntus would be a decent choice. I'd probably go with Xubuntu.

Trying to install and support a development O/S on unsupported devices for other people is asking for headaches. I also don't see the benefit. You're just getting the branding, and dealing with an unfriendly project at this point. I don't think Chromium is generally intended as an end user product. It can be built as such, but it's more a collection of raw materials. It'll take a little time to see if people want to make it into a full distro.

Edit:
If you wanted a "cloud" oriented O/S, Peppermint might be a good choice. It ships pretty lean, but you still have the software available in Ubuntu's repos. You could load it up as you like, then clone the image to all the machines. Make a business out of it, and sell thumb drives to the students with the O/S installed.

http://peppermintos.com/#

Well in the past, I was having them use live ubuntu CD's, which were great, but tech threw a shit fit because "they dont support it", even though there was nothing to support, and it made computers that had broken hard drives usable, that have been broken for a long time with little chance of them being fixed anytime soon.

I was thinking since we actually do use chromeOS that they might have less of a problem with it for whatever reason. (They cant say they dont "support" it)

So since i think the chromeOS idea is out, besides peppermint, what else is as lightweight as possible that I can run from a live cd/usb stick?

Im basically looking for something as barebones as chromeOS. Doesnt need to have anything installed except for chrome/chromuim and whatever addons that chrome apps and websites need to run stuff. I know lubuntu is pretty lightweight, but im looking for even less if thats possible.
 

lxskllr

No Lifer
Nov 30, 2004
60,147
10,612
126
If all you want is a browser, you could go with TinyCore, SliTaz, or DSL. They aren't much to look at, and aren't the easiest to deal with* as a full time O/S, but you'd have a hard time getting much smaller for an O/S with a gui.

*corners have to cut to make the O/S light, so you don't get the user friendliness of fatter distros. For someone technically inclined that has a half hour to devote to learning the quirks, it shouldn't be a problem.

For something heavier, but still lighter than the *buntus, Puppy is nice. It comes with more stuff, but it's easier to work with, and still a quarter the size of Peppermint.
 

Nvidiaguy07

Platinum Member
Feb 22, 2008
2,846
4
81
If all you want is a browser, you could go with TinyCore, SliTaz, or DSL. They aren't much to look at, and aren't the easiest to deal with* as a full time O/S, but you'd have a hard time getting much smaller for an O/S with a gui.

*corners have to cut to make the O/S light, so you don't get the user friendliness of fatter distros. For someone technically inclined that has a half hour to devote to learning the quirks, it shouldn't be a problem.

For something heavier, but still lighter than the *buntus, Puppy is nice. It comes with more stuff, but it's easier to work with, and still a quarter the size of Peppermint.

Are all those capable to be live cd's? That would be the easiest option for people to use.

What kinds of corner cutting would be noticeable? Once its all set up would it be any less featured than chromeOS?
 

lxskllr

No Lifer
Nov 30, 2004
60,147
10,612
126
They all can run live. I've never used ChromeOS, so I don't know everything that's required, but all the above should be able to run Chromium and it's addons fine. Since you're using a live environment, the "friendliness" won't matter. Sounds like all you need is a desktop with a Chromium button, and all interaction after that would be in the browser.

I'd download all the above I listed, and try them out in a vm, and see what you think. All of them together are less than 300mb, so it isn't a big commitment. You can add the software you want, and create a new image to distribute.
 

MrMaster

Golden Member
Nov 16, 2001
1,235
2
76
www.pc-prime.com
Getting chrome OS to run from a usb drive is actually quite challenging. I've played around it without last month on an old laptop that overheats on me. There was just too many things that didn't work that should have.
 

kommisar

Member
May 21, 2012
87
2
71
So since i think the chromeOS idea is out, besides peppermint, what else is as lightweight as possible that I can run from a live cd/usb stick?

Im basically looking for something as barebones as chromeOS. Doesnt need to have anything installed except for chrome/chromuim and whatever addons that chrome apps and websites need to run stuff. I know lubuntu is pretty lightweight, but im looking for even less if thats possible.

You could try debian. They have live images that can be burned to USB sticks, CDs or DVD. The LXDE desktop with libre office, firefox, the installer, non-free drivers and gimp weighs in at 955 MB. Here is a link to the iso that includes the non-free drivers:

http://live.debian.net/cdimage/release/stable+nonfree/amd64/iso-hybrid/

Including these non-free drivers in the image is important because debian excludes them on the vanilla isos for political reasons. Having these drivers should make support as easy as the 'buntu since no tinkering will be necessary to enable the non-free repositories. Its possible that debian stable will cause less trouble than the 'buntu because it is extensively tested and works on a lot of different hardware.

You could also make your own custom debian live iso using the debian's live build package. See link to documentation here:

http://live.debian.net/manual/stable/html/live-manual.en.html

I have made debian live isos with the lxde desktop, abiword & gnumeric instead of libre office, chromium, non-free drivers, without gimp and the installer that weigh in at 593 MB using this live build package. I'm not sure how small you want to go but the live build package lets you determine what packages get placed on the iso so you can have any configuration that is supported by debian.
 
Last edited: