@Frankenstein I'm happy to explain further if it is really not clear to you why that question about RAM usage is pointless. I'll leave CPU usage out of it, since that is even more pointless. An idle system uses ~0-1% CPU period. It doesn't matter what distro it is. If it isn't doing anything, it isn't doing anything.

Anyway, why is it exactly that you think your buildroot system will have some advantage here that you want to verify? I'm not saying it shouldn't (it probably should) but I think there are more details you need to understand about what it is that occupies RAM on a baseline system before you can evaluate one.

I'll check this room later. If you're angry with me and don't want to bother with this, don't feel obliged. Note the room is public so it is open to others, if you would prefer it private I can make it that way.

I really appreciate you work in helping people here ... yes maybe the question is pointless but it should be somewhere to put opinion based question since it very usefull in order to not put and test every rpi distros or for other many important questions that got banned for this ....

it will be of course some advantages of using OS based on builroot for example my system doesn't have a GUI and i don't need it ... but don"t tell me that raspbian with the GUI and all stuff running don't made any difference in CPU usage and RAM consumption !

@Frankenstein Well of course using a GUI will add a fair bit of RAM. Neither you nor (hopefully) anyone else needs proof of that. A minimal window manager (w/ the Xorg server) will take 100-150 MB. But if you are not using a GUI, what is the point of that comparison? Why not then go to an Apple forum and start asking people what their RAM usage at boot is so you can compare apples to oranges to raspberries?

"should be somewhere to put opinion based question" -> Yes, just it isn't here. Discussion forums are usually open to that kind of thing.

The reason we aren't a discussion forum is not because (as far as I know) the designers of SE think discussion forums are stupid and pointless. The reason is to create a structure that is more conducive to something else. It is a different structure, and at least in terms of general programming, has proven to be very popular. In less than a decade, Stack Overflow pretty much took over everything from the

large array of programming forums that pre-existed it (many of which continue to exist, but probably with less activitly).

For a little more background/explanation of that, see my answer here:

With regard to the Raspberry Pi, the case has worked out a little differently. Although we've been here almost as long as the pi and the Foundation's own official discussion forum, I believe the discussion forum is a little busier.

I suppose this is because more people find that structure useful than do with regard to general programming questions. Keep in mind the goal here is not to compete with the Foundation forum and become as popular as possible. Of course we want/need users, but it is vital we stay within the bounds of the SE structure because:

1) That's not our decision to make. This site is monitored by SE paid staff who do have the power, in an extreme case, to pull the plug (as far as I know they've never done that) or, e.g., remove/ban moderators (I am sure they have done that at least a few times). Part of my role here is to make sure we follow the rules within reasonable limits.

Fortunately, the structure is one who's value I believe in (or I wouldn't be doing this), but this certainly does not mean I think discussion forums are stupid, pointless, etc. and that SE should take over and replace the entire internet. We are one of a number of different forms of "technical information sharing resource".

2) I kind of explained at the end of #1, lol. The reason for the rules isn't arbitrary. I spent more years daily on programming discussion forums before I joined SE ~4.5 years ago, so I am not unfamiliar with what tends to go on. People like me flocked here because we got sick of some of that. I don't think that is mean, since we are not campaigning to have discussion forums banned from the WWW. We would just like somewhere different to deal with things in a different way.

The idea wasn't mine, of course, but again, it has proved so overwhelmingly successful that it is hard to deny a lot of other people feel the same way about it, and part of my role as moderator is to protect that.

Otherwise, people are demanding the opposite: "We want to replace your thing with a discussion forum". No. There are already discussion forums and there is no need for them to take over the entire internet either.

Finally, our main chat is something that gets used regularly:

Sometimes it is busy, sometimes it is quiet for days. But if you have casual survey type questions you want to put to people, that is not a bad choice either.

ok thanks for your explanation ... the comparaison is just to make sure my system is fine .... i was talking about the GUI as an example but there is much more things like services and background stuff