Search Results for 'boot from iso'

[Member seaken64]

Anonymous wrote:

I found how to fix my problem
Since in the beta version there was a choice where to put the bootloader, namely, root, mbr on disk 0
And in the release version, the bootloader can ONLY be installed on the USB disk from which the antiks are installed
So, now I did it, and now I can boot into this Linux!
and the flash drive is no longer needed, so in my Windows bcd boot utility allows you to add a Linux partition to the boot
that is, by default, Linux cannot be installed on a disk, with a Linux system
disk 0, third partition
There is only a choice in the installer, on the disk from which Linux is installed
and if you try to reinstall grab2, then the system does not boot

I’m glad you found a solution. But to me, your written explanation does not make any sense.

For onlookers, make sure you do the integrity tests if you are having problems. And make sure your USB is cleanly formatted prior to using for the antiX iso file. Consider using LiveUSB maker to make your antiX Live USB bootable. And consider using Grub instead of the Windows bootloader.

Seaken64

Hi antiX community,

Are there any docker users here? Today I noticed that, the docker daemon was unable to start on my antiX 21 environment. I wonder whether any docker users here can share your experience on docker + antiX21.

The steps below are how I encountered (and reproduced) the issue on my antiX 21 live CD/USB. I believe I used the same steps at 1+ year ago when I was using antiX 19.3 and it was successful at that time.

1. Start afresh, by booting a VM with the official antiX 21 full iso.
2. Follow step 2 & 3 here in the official Docker installation guide on “Set up the repository”. (Its step 1 seems unnecessary.)
3. I did NOT continue with the “Install Docker Engine” steps from the official docker installation guide (shall I?). I switch to use antiX’s “Synaptic Package Manager”, “Reload” its content, and then I can search “docker-ce” and install it successfully.
4. After the installation, the docker daemon is – I don’t quite remember – either already automatically running in the background, or your can simply do “sudo service docker start” to start it.
5. And then you can use “docker” command the way it should be.
6. At this point, I want to make an ISO snapshot with my current system. (FWIW, I did add 3 more minor CLI software, but they shouldn’t make a difference to the docker behaviors.)
7. When I reboot my VM with the new ISO CD, everything else works as expected, but the docker daemon is not running. Manually runs “sudo service docker start” or “sudo dockerd”, and the result is the same:

...
failed to start daemon: rename /var/lib/docker/runtimes /var/lib/docker/runtimes-old: invalid cross-device link

Searching online, some info said it was relative to the use of the overlay filesystem. That hypothesis perhaps makes sense, as antiX’s live CD or live USB does use overlay filesystem. But the thing is, I remember that I could to the same step 1-7 successfully when I was using antix 19.3. I currently still have such an antiX 19.3 snapshot ISO, whose docker works.

I hope some other docker users here can shed some light here.

Regards,
Ray Luo

• This topic was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by anticapitalista. Reason: solved

[Member rayluo]

I’m writing to share a workaround.

In my setup, both my guest OS and the host OS are antiX. When I attempted the “Insert Guest Additions CD image…” operation, it failed with an error

Unable to insert the virtual optical disk /usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxGuestAdditions.iso into the machine ...

Could not mount the media/drive '/usr/share/virtualbox/VBoxGuestAdditions.iso' (VERR_PDM_MEDIA_LOCKED).

Result Code: NS_ERROR_FAILURE (0x80004005)
...

That error was the same as this post, which also mentioned a possible reason “VERR_PDM_MEDIA_LOCKED, means something already resides in the drive and is locked so you can not add another until you remove what is there already”. That is likely the case, because my Guest OS was not a fully-installed antiX, I was merely booting the VM from an antiX CD iso for some quick experiment. That forum post was very long. I did not dig deeper. I ended up with a simpler alternative.

The alternative:

1. Verify that the guest OS can do “ssh your_username@the_ip_of_host”
2. Now, use the gFTP client which is shipped with antiX full version, connect to your host OS’s IP, and choose “SSH2” (instead of the default “FTP”) as the protocol.
3. There is no step 3. Now the gFTP already connected your host and guest. The file transfer speed between them feels equally fast as ftp!

[Member sybok]

Hi,

thank you for more information.
0) I assume it is the “default” sysvinit (not ‘runit’) version. Still missing more information about the hardware.
1) Hard to know without checking explicitly; I ran into failure to install once and it was due to corrupted download.
2) It seems that you may already have a lot of partitions with so many systems.
Could you post list/screenshot of partitions and partitioning type (e.g. GPT)?
3) If the choice where to install bootloader “does not seem right”, then perhaps testing integrity of the downloaded ISO might be worth a try after all.
4)

not loaded into the system there is an error like “system not found”

Does it mean that antiX’s bootloader is the default and that the option selected by default starts to boot and the boot fails with the aforementioned error?
Did you try to select other options available in the “table” with variants to boot into?
If yes, then was the error the same or were you able to boot?

Is it unique? Not sure. I know some people had issues with too old/new HW due to new/old kernel or corrupted system.
Also, there were some issues with graphic card no longer supported by Xorg.
(That’s why providing information about the HW is repeatedly brought up when someone reports a problem of this kind.)
Have you tried to search in the forum for similar problems? You could try ‘fail to boot’ or whatever reasonable description of the error.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by sybok. Reason: Graphics mentioned

[Member sybok]

Hi,

Please answer the below suggestions/questions and be patient and more constructive about solving your problem (i.e. less emotional outburst; we understand your frustration, most of us have been there in the past, but the complaints provide very little information to start solving your problem with).

0) Specify exact name of the ISO, e.g. ‘antiX-21_x64-base.iso’.
If you could provide more information about your machine such as output of ‘inxi -Fxz’ (from Live-USB) or at least data from windows, more experienced forum members may provide help.

1) Did you check integrity of the downloaded ISO using check-sums?
2) Do you install with UEFI/legacy (+secure-boot) enabled in BIOS?
3) Information about bootloader installation (your choices when setting up the installation):
Did you install it to MBR (warning: will override Windows’ bootloader)?
Did you choose or set up (incl. prior to the installation, see e.g. 2)) *anything* differently when compared to the antiX-21 beta?
4) It gives an error:
When, how, what’s in it? You can take a picture of the error message.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by sybok. Reason: Added no. 4)

32-bit computing beyond the P-III 1Ghz with 512MB

For several years I have been experimenting with an old Pentium-III and Linux to see if I could keep the old machine useful. I have written about it often on this forum. This exercise has not been so much about doing serious work as it has been a hobby and having some fun trying to shoe-horn an old machine into the modern world. For the most part I have been able to keep this old machine doing useful things, even browsing the web. The most success has been with the antiX Linux distribution. It has been amazing to me that I can still use a P-III 1Ghz with only 512MB of RAM, which was first used in the year 2000, all the way into 2021, and soon into 2022.

Over the years I have acquired several more old computers through our normal upgrade procedures in our business. As we upgrade to new computers the old computers are sent out to pasture, many of them coming into my lab where I enjoy my hobby of playing with old computers. Last year I retired our last Pentium 4, which was holding on as a backup file server in my office.

I now had several Pentium 4 32-bit computers that I could experiment with. I decided I wanted to see what I could do with these 32-bit computers that were somewhat more powerful and capable than my favorite Pentium-III. I had been able to keep my P-III alive with only 512MB of RAM. What could I do with these P4‘s with from 1GB to 3GB of ram?

I had already learned that the old P-III would not handle cloud computing on sites like Google Docs. It also choked on the Firefox browser and a lot of my exercises were about finding alternate browsers that would work better than Firefox on this old equipment. Now I wondered if I could get better results with these P4‘s with more RAM. I embarked on an experiment to find out what these P4‘s could do on the modern web.

I chose my four best P4 computers and set them up with progressively more RAM and then I performed a series of tests to compare these machines. The four P4 machines are as follows, in progressive order from lower specs to higher specs.

ECS P4VMM2 P4 w/ 1GB RAM
2.4Ghz Northwood, 1GB DDR1, 80GB IDE, BIOS 2003

HP d220 MT P4 w/ 1.5GB RAM
2.67Ghz Northwood, 1.5GB DDR1, 80GB IDE, BIOS 2005

IBM ThinkCentre 8189MUD P4 w/ 2GB RAM
2.8Ghz Northwood, 2GB DDR1, 300GB IDE, BIOS 2004

Intel 915GEV P4HT w/ 3GB RAM
3.2Ghz Prescott, 3GB DDR2, 120GB IDE, BIOS 2006

After I started the tests I decided to add some more systems that fell somewhere between the P-III 1Ghz w/ 512MB and my best P4. I also added one system that is newer than my best P4. The added systems for this experiment are as follows.

Compaq Deskpro EN P-III w/ 512MB RAM (this is the P-III already spoken about above)
1Ghz Coppermine, 512MB SDRAM. 100GB IDE, BIOS 2000

Dell Dimension 4300 P4 w/ 512MB RAM (this is the earliest P4)
1.7Ghz Willamette, 512MB SDRAM, 40GB IDE, BIOS 2001

Dell Dimension 2400 Celeron w/ 1GB RAM
2.4Ghz Northwood. 1GB DDR1, 48GB IDE, BIOS 2003

HP zv5000 P4 w/ 1.25GB RAM
1.6Ghz Athlon XP 3000+, 1.25GB DDR1, 55GB IDE, BIOS 2004

Dell Dimension E521 w/ 2GB RAM (earliest 64-bit dual core, step up from P4HT)
1.9Ghz Athlon 64 X2 3600+, 2GB DDR2, 240GB SSD, BIOS 2007

This makes a full lineup of nine computers. Will any of these old computers allow cloud computing using Google Docs? If so, what will be the minimum requirement? We already know the P-III 1Ghz w/ 512MB won’t work with this task. What do we need to move up to to make this a usable application? Are any of these old computers capable of standing in as a daily driver?

The metrics used for this experiment included the following:

Time to boot from the Grub menu
Initial RAM used after startup
Disk space used after initial install and setup
RAM used for Firefox and a single tab on Google
Time to load Google Drive page ready for editing
RAM used on Google Drive with two tabs and editing single doc
Time to load single doc for editing
RAM used on Google Drive with three tabs and editing two docs
Time to load second doc for editing, two open docs
RAM used with Google Drive open with 2 docs and Local document open in LO/Abiword
Is the system snappy? or sluggish? Poor, Fair, Good?
Time to shutdown

I experimented with several distros, including antiX, MX, Debian, Q4OS, Bunsenlabs, Sparky, LMDE, Bhodi, and OpenSUSE Tumbleweed. On all of these computers there was no comparison to antiX in terms of RAM used. And overall snappiness was always good with antiX, even on the oldest computers and with the least amount of RAM. Some of these computers also run other distros very well, such as MX XFCE or Tumbleweed on the P4HT w/ 3GB of RAM. But after all was considered I have used antiX as the basis for a fair comparison between all of these machines. While some can run other distros fairly good they can all run antiX.

Here is a brief review of each of these nine computers, after which I will make a judgment about which systems, if any, could fill in as a daily driver in 2021.

[Note – as all but one of these machines is 32-bit I am using Firefox ESR as my browser for supporting Google Workspace. I use Chromium on 64-bit machines for Google Workspace but Chromium is not supported on these 32-bit machines. Google Workspace also does not like browsers like SeaMonkey or Otter-Browser, which are my usual browsers on these old machines]

1. Pentium III 1Ghz w/ 512MB
This is the computer I already know very well. I already know that this computer is not capable of being used on the cloud with Google Workspace. It cannot run Firefox good enough for Google Workspace. As a general computer, not including Google Workspace or other web centric applications it runs “fair”. Not snappy, but usable.

2. Pentium 4 1.7Ghz w/ 512MB
What about moving up to a Pentium 4 but with same RAM as the old P-III? Will that be enough to use Firefox and Google Workspace? No. The only advantage this machine has over the P-III is that it supports SSE2 and thus the current SeaMonkey version. This makes it a slightly better general use computer than the P-III but it still can’t do Google Workspace.

3. Celeron 2.4Ghz w/ 1GB
This Celeron is a crippled P4 and does not perform much better than the P-III. Even with 1GB of RAM it cannot be used with Google Workspace. It takes more than 2 minutes to load Google Drive and another 7 minutes to load a Google Doc for editing. Even as a general computer it is only slightly better than using the P-III. Like the first P4 it supports SSE2 and with more RAM than the P-III it is a little better than both the P-III and the first P4. But not enough to be impressed.

4. Pentium 4 2.4Ghz w/ 1GB
This machine is only slightly better than the above Celeron. Google Workspace can barely be used. It takes nearly a minute to load the Google Drive and an additional 1:30 to load a document for editing and another 2:00 for the second document. That’s between 4 and 5 minutes to load two Docs for editing. Way too slow to be productive. And the RAM used is over 800 so not much room left out of 1024. As a general computer it is better than the Celeron and it is a better choice over the P-III. But not good enough for Google Workspace.

5. Athlon XP 3000+ 1.6Ghz w/ 1.25GB
This machine is almost capable of running Google Workspace. It takes 0:31 to load Google Drive and another 0:33 to load the first document. RAM use is about 800 with these two tabs open. Another 1:07 to load a second doc in the third tab and RAM is over 900. With 1.25GB of RAM this does not allow much more room. It is better to do one thing at a time. Maybe you could edit one document. But it is not very productive. As a general use computer it is more snappy – not great but fair to good.

6. Pentium 4 2.67Ghz w/ 1.5GB
This machine is slightly better than the Athlon XP above, taking a few less seconds to load and the RAM used is over 900. With 1.5GB there is enough headroom in RAM. It is better than the P4 with 1GB of RAM and a little snappier. It is still not a great machine for Google Workspace but it is more bearable with this 1.5GB of RAM. It takes over 2.5 minutes to load two docs which is a little more than the Athlon XP but there is a little more RAM to work with. As a general machine it is also fair to good.

7. Pentium 4 2.8Ghz w/ 2GB
This machine is close to allowing using Google Workspace at an acceptable pace. It takes about 2 minutes to load two Google docs and the RAM used is about 942. The pace is about the same as the two machines immediately above but there is more RAM to work with. The general feel is also fair to good. This machine can also run more distros due to the larger RAM. It runs most other distros at “fair”, not snappy – but they run.

8. Pentium 4HT 3.2Ghz w/ 3GB
I have had this machine setup in my lab for several years. It is my best Pentium 4 and has Hyper Threading so it runs like a Dual Core and with the 3GB of RAM it can run most distros. I usually use MX XFCE on this machine. I also have Q4OS and Tumbleweed on this machine. This machine can run Firefox and Google Workspace at a comfortable pace. It takes about 1.5 minutes to load the two Google Docs and uses about 845 of RAM with antiX. As a general computing experience, including Firefox and Google Docs, it is a “Good”. It is snappy in antiX and close to snappy in MX and Q4OS.

9. Athlon 64 X2 3600+ w/ 2GB
This is the only machine in this line up with a dual core and 64-bit processor. It runs Google Workspace comparably to the P4HT above. I also tested 64-bit Chromium and it had the best results, taking about 1:18 to open the two Google Docs and using about 1024 of RAM in antiX 19.3 64-bit. It was about the same using Firefox in antiX-21 32-bit. This machine is snappy in antiX and rates “Good” as a general use computer.

So, what did my experiments reveal?

Will any of these old computers allow cloud computing using Google Docs? If so, what will be the minimum requirement?

Yes, a Pentium 4 with at least 2GB seems to be the minimum requirement for making use of Google Workspace. The single core P4 is still a little sluggish but with 2GB or RAM it is possible to use Google Docs and have a “fair” experience.

The P4 with Hyper Threading is the best 32-bit computer for Google Workspace. Of all the Pentium 4‘s in this lineup it is the best, and it is comparable to the true Dual Core Athlon 64-bit X2.

Are any of these old computers capable of standing in as a daily driver?

Yes, both the 32-bit P4HT 3.2GHz w/ 3GB and the 64-bit Athlon 1.9Ghz w/ 2GB are good enough to use a daily driver. They both run antiX very good and they both also run well with MX or Q4OS.

It is my opinion that you need to be able to work with cloud computing on your computers these days. Services like Google Workspace and Office 365, and others, allow you to collaborate and synchronize your efforts with a team or allow you to shift your work progress from one place to another. Yes, there are other ways to collaborate and synchronize. But cloud computing really makes it especially good for business people to get the most out of their office computer systems.

If your work routine is primarily office applications you can make it work with Linux and an older two threaded computer, even a 32-bit Pentium 4. If you can, you should try to secure at least a Dual Core 64-bit machine. But if all you can get is an old Pentium 4 don’t worry. Just put more RAM in it and use antiX or MX and you’ll be able to get your work done.

Seaken64

[Member Xecure]

https://download.tuxfamily.org/antix/docs-antiX-19/FAQ/boot-params.html#_other_live_options

toram Copy the entire linuxfs file into RAM. This takes up RAM. The amount of RAM used will be about the same as the size of the .iso file used to create the LiveCD or LiveUSB. It will also take some time when you first boot to copy the file into RAM. But after this, the system will run very fast. You can also eject the LiveCD (or remove the LiveUSB while the system is running.

https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters#Load_to_RAM

antiX Live system enthusiast.
General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.

[Member sybok]

Hi,

1) Did you verify integrity of the downloaded ISO using check-sum(s)?
2) Would you care to try to boot with antiX-19 and see whether the problem is there as well.
3) antiX-21 should have two different kernels to easily service both old and new HW.
Were you able to select one of the kernels prior to reaching the “Christmas” lights?
4) Also, I searched the forum for ‘Acer Aspire’ (narrowing down ‘Acer Aspire One’ did not seem to have the desired effect) and there were some results.
E.g. user ‘shloz’ reported he ran antiX-19/21 on another Acer Aspire One [D257] model and had some issues with antiX-21.
https://www.antixforum.com/forums/topic/reboot-issue/
That’s where my suggestion 2) comes from.
I did not go through all the stuff but it is possible some tips might be there.
5) Since antiX is based on Debian, I search web for ‘fail boot debian “Acer Aspire One”‘:
It yields a link to Debian wiki which contains some troubleshooting. Probably worth a try.
https://wiki.debian.org/InstallingDebianOn/Acer/AspireOne

Tip: Replacing ‘debian’ by ‘ubuntu’ (in the search string) might produce some other results of relevance.

Hope that helps at least a bit.

[Member OldLap03]

Hello all again. Sorry for the delay in replying. I don’t get much free time to experiment with Linux and I have spent hours trying to find the CDs that I used to test the laptop and desktop computers, so far without success. Clearly I have put them “somewhere safe” but not yet remembered where that was!

I have some answers:
 As best I can remember I used Verbatim CD-R for ISOs that would fit and Verbatim DVD+R for larger ISOs.
 All of the discs that I made worked on either the laptop or the desktop but not all on both PCs. So for example, the antiX 19.3 Base disk worked with the desktop but not with the laptop. That tells me both the disk and the optical disk reader on the desktop were ok.
 The earlier Puppy versions (5.7.1 and 6.0.51) on CDs which I made from downloaded ISO files worked with the laptop optical disk reader as do other commercially made DVDs.
 All my testing was with “Live” versions. I have not tried persistence or installing to HDD yet.
 When I tried antiX 19.3 Base with the R40e laptop. It tried to start but I can not remember seeing any text message or similar before it stopped at a blank screen. Had I been able to find those disks I would have tried again and given a better answer.

@PPC Thank you for the suggestion I try the antiX Xecure version. I have downloaded it but not yet burnt a disk to try it out.

@rokytnji Thank you for your two links which I will follow up. If my memory is correct in suggesting I did not see any screen messages before it stopped with a blank screen would I have had an opportunity to try a vesa boot option? I don’t have any experience of installing Linux to inform me!

@punranger Thanks for your advice.
 For the reasons given below I think both my disc reader and the discs I made from downloads are OK.
 If I manage to get a useful to me Linux OS working I am likely to run it for some time and will use persistence
 Thanks for your comment re WiFi on antiX 19 and 21.

I was going to ask about their relative strengths and weaknesses because having taken on board the advice I received here and elsewhere about the difficulty with browsers in older machines and having experienced myself web sites that say “Load an up to date browser”. I have just bought a newer Dell desktop PC with a wiped HDD that I need to choose an OS for.

This newer device is a Dell Vostro 3650MT – i3-6100 @3.7GHz – 500GB HDD – 8GB RAM. Released in April 2017. It will replace my Dell GX270 desktop.

I am looking for a Linux OS with a light footprint easy to install and requiring no command line interventions.
Ones I have in mind include:
 Linux Mint 19.2 – Xfce – Obvious choice but not so lightweight. 20GB disk space
 Zorin OS, preferably Lite – WinXP like. 10GB disk space for lite
 antiX 19 or 21 – Good reviews. It ran live on the desktop PC without any problem. Needs 3GB disk space.
 MX-21 KDE x64 – Good reviews but some reservations about installer and configuration tools. Can not find disk space but I assume needs 10GB minimum?
 Q40S Gemini, Trinity – WinXP like. Lightweight, only 3GB disk space
 And of course Puppy of some variety as it just appeals to me

This doesn’t mean I have given up on re-purposing the Thinkpad R40e. It runs word 97 and other period software quite well enough on Win XP. Most youtube and similar videos run ok but videos on some commercial sites cannot be viewed. A few videos start ok but the image can freeze or break up intermittently. I guess the basic Intel graphics processor in the motherboard is struggling to keep up.

I will have to try whatever alternative browsers that are available with the Win XP it is running now to see if any work better than Firefox.

[Member ModdIt]

Interesting is if you are on Arch or Arch based the argument against AUR is stability, same as put to discussion here.
The big but is Installing software form other sources or self compiling are user choices.

Note what you install, better not a big bundle of unsupported applications at once, that makes finding troublesome packages a pain.

Get desktop freezing, do you have ungoogled chromium installed, common culprit due cache or config corruption. Libreoffice Fresh and Debian Java. Debian java is buggy (known lt devs fixed next release) and not in the LO approved list it can cause hard to diagnose issues. LO approval maybe after a bugfixed java release.

As blur 13 wrote trade offs, user choices.

PPC gave a number of links for appimages, Personal opinion is if software can be downloaded from the original source as a deb it is better to do so. Firefox, all versions portable from Mozilla, plus debs from repos. Opera, Vivaldi, debs available. Libreoffice Fresh Backported debs or if java is really important from LO org. Deb packages easily installable with dpkg. Softmaker, packet installer or direct from softmaker site, debs and instructions available.
For packages which are only available as appimage and have checksums, I like to look in the package then try them on an isolated system before using on my main device.

An equivalent to AUR, I would certainly use it knowing the advantages can be outweighed by problems. Big but there is we have a fantastic live system on a stick available, best playground or testing area possible.

I used AUR quite a lot, had way less less trouble than with systemD, crazy waits for shutdown, sticking boot process and non recoverable update fails which were a plague for a while. Not to mention that if you wanted to remove some seemingly unimportant application like a music player the d madness would also wipe out your desktop. Real experience, it was, i guess still is lunatic.

[Forum Admin rokytnji]

Can you boot a live dvd or usb of full iso and post back the results

sudo parted -l

I have had dying hard drives also that exhibit these same symptoms.

Maybe

inxi -Fxz

won’t hurt to be posted in this thread also. Good luck.

Sometimes I drive a crooked road to get my mind straight.
Not all who Wander are Lost.
I'm not outa place. I'm from outer space.

Linux Registered User # 475019
How to Search for AntiX solutions to your problems

[Member PPC]

Please not that I only create a personalized ISO twice and never used encription, but this should apply to your questions:

Q: how to I safely remove the “Demo” account and boot into a new account?
A: Control Center > Maintenance > User Management > delete the “demo” account, add your default account. Reboot to test this change. If everything is OK, you can then create your new antiX ISO, selecting the option to keep your user data, etc.
Q:– how is it possible to just boot into the login screen and then choose the account you wish? (helpful for multi-user system)
A: Yes. Select if you want to automatically log in the the above Control Center option. You can change that setting in Control Center > Session > Automatic Login

P-

• This reply was modified 1 year, 4 months ago by PPC.

[Member Robin]

ahoppin wrote:

I don’t get any of that when booting with grub4dos, just the usual Linux-booting text-blizzard.

antiX uses syslinux/extlinux/isolinux boot manager when booting from USB or CD/DVD, not grub by default. So it’s expectable you won’t see this screen designed specially for extlinux when using a different boot manager for system startup.

ahoppin wrote:

Even though I don’t have persistence set, some things are being saved behind my back. Specifically, when I entered a static IP/DNS configuration, Antix remembered it on the next live thumb drive boot – again, without persistence being set.

Yes, you are true. There is a specific mechanism storing some basic information on the boot device for convenience if possible.
You will find everything what is stored within the folder
/live/boot-dev/antiX/state
and its subfolders on your boot device. It is partly machine specific.
If I remember correctly, there is a boot parameter to supress the saving of these state info. (Try F1 and search the help docs at antiX boot screen to find the corresponding boot code)

{ EDIT: Just noticed: Xecure (many thanks!) was more precise about this already. So you won’t need to look it up on your own anymore. }

ahoppin wrote:

I also wonder what would happen if I made sdb1 and sdb2 read-only.

For sure, it wouldn’t get saved anymore. This would be equivalent to booting from CD-ROM/DVD, where these convenience information can’t be stored also.

Windows is like a submarine. Open a window and serious problems will start.

[Member olsztyn]

Just an idea, I am not saying I know for sure:
In antiX 19 the boot process had one kernel to boot. In antiX 21 there are two kernels to chose from, from which to boot – 4.9 and 5.10.
I think the default is kernel 4.9, unless 5.10 is saved as default. In the Live composition, both kernels are in antiX folder – one as vmlinuz and the other is named vmlinuz1. I understand the state remembers which kernel is saved to boot, and if there is a mismatch, then you get the message you described.
I will try to re-create similar situation using Ez2Boot, which I think is using Grub4Dos, where I will set a kernel to boot as default, run ISO-Snapshot and add the resulting ISO file to /Linux folder in Ez2Boot as one to boot.
I am just a user, so antiX tech team might be able to provide a more clear answer…

Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

[Member ahoppin]

Something is clearly different about booting (or trying to) with grub / grub4dos.

When I boot from either the DVD or the thumb drive made with Antix’s official thumb-drive-maker, I get a menu that allows me to choose the kernel (old or new) and boot process (normal, safe video, failsafe).

I don’t get any of that when booting with grub4dos, just the usual Linux-booting text-blizzard.

Could it be that there’s some extra code in the DVD boot sector that’s not getting executed when grub4dos tries to boot the iso contents?

If so, would it be possible to somehow transfer that code to the thumb drive so grub4dos can execute it?

Or maybe grub4dos needs to launch some other executable on the thumb drive.

PS – I just discovered another interesting feature (?) of booting from an “official” thumb drive.

Even though I don’t have persistence set, some things are being saved behind my back. Specifically, when I entered a static IP/DNS configuration, Antix remembered it on the next live thumb drive boot – again, without persistence being set.

And stat /dev/sdb* (sdb is the thumb drive) shows for the thumb drive block dev a modification time which I think is the last shutdown.

I wonder what else is being saved without the user asking it to be.

I also wonder what would happen if I made sdb1 and sdb2 read-only.