Search Results for 'boot from iso'

[Member Xecure]

If the firmware packages are the biggest group, how big would antix21-core be?

anticapitalista wrote:

Once again, antiX-21-base, using exact same apps as antiX-19.4, no longer fits on a cd (antiX-19.4-base is under 700MB).
It is about 780MB.

Is this the same packages listed in the current Build-iso repo for a21 (COMMON + base + base-AND-full)? If so, I think I could provide statistics for:
* Group A: Percentage in ISO that is only firmware packages (free and non-free).
* Group B: Percentage of xserver-xorg and xorg-video-modules
* Group C: Percentage that is web-browsers (seamonkey+dillo+links2) and internet related clients (torrent, email, shares).
* Group D: Percentage that is WMs (and defaults and themes) + FMs (and defaults) + desktop-session (and complements, like menu-manager, desktop-menu-antix, etc.) + decorations (icon themes, system fonts, gtk themes).
* Group E: Other graphical related apps
The percentage left would be core and cli programs + indispensable + dependencies.

I Think this could give us an idea of what each group weighs in the total and maybe find a place where to reduce (please confirm this list is the same and I will make the statistics).

Firmware is indispensable (as core also includes the firmware, base would make no sense without the same firmware packages).
Would it make a difference if it was only 1 Window Manager and 1 File Manager (and only leafpad and no geany) without any web browser (maybe only dillo and links)?
The same script that is being developed for installing localized packages could be used for selecting an “upgrade” path to antix21-full with a bit more control on what packages (WM, editor, web browser, etc.) to add/remove.

This way, antix-base is an antix-core + graphical interface (only one WM and FM) + minimal desktop-session control (the biggest problem for people trying to start from core) without the GUI installer (or any QT5 dependent app, like repo-manager, antix-viewer or smtube to reduce dependencies) and only cli-installer (now that it supports EFI install). The yad script could be launched from the desktop to install stuff to “upgrade to full” on live before installing or after installing on next reboot.

Note: I am not saying this as “some great idea for the dev team to follow”. If the effort is appreciated, I can also spend some free time to make this script (and path) possible and give the list of packages to remove from base-and-full (so that they can be moved to the list for the “full” Template in build-iso).

• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by Xecure. Reason: Edit to add some qt5 examples

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

Once again, antiX-21-base, using exact same apps as antiX-19.4, no longer fits on a cd (antiX-19.4-base is under 700MB).
It is about 780MB.
So it’s time to decide its fate.

1. Make it the same as 19.4-base even if it no longer fits on a cd.
2. Since stripping it to what is included on 19.4 in order for it to fit on a cd no longer works, add back apps removed between 19.3-base and 19.4-base.
This will probably make the iso about 900MB (IIRC).
3. Make it libre – no contribs/non-free apps on the iso. This mostly removes non-free firmware. (User can always add them if they wish). However, this means that many wireless devices will not work out of the box. It may also mean some amd boxes needing amd-firmware might fail to boot.
I can get the iso to well below 700MB if this option is chosen.
4. Install some firmware that we know is needed for many/most boxes and sacrifice others. eg include firmware-iwlwifi, but not broadcom-sta-dkms.
With some clever cherry-picking, we might be able to keep the iso below 700MB.

Other ideas? Thoughts?

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Anonymous]

also like to have a customized installation

After having used “dd”, if you are livebooting (have not installed to hard drive), the O/S is a non-writable “CD on a USB stick”.

You can install to hard drive, then add / remove programs to customize, then use the “isosnapshot” tool to create a customized ISO file…
or
from liveboot, you might add/remove to customize, then use the “live-usb-maker” tool to create a “full-featured” liveUSB on another pendrive.

antiX-base or antiX-core

Opinions differ regarding which edition provides a better starting point.
I suggest starting from base (or even Full) edition, and remove undesired programs.
I recommend against starting from core edition b/c only expert users will “know, in advance” which components will need to be installed in order to have a properly functioning graphical login ~~ non-experts wind up back in the forum posting 20+ help requests “No joy. which packages am I (still) missing?”

https://antixlinux.com/the-most-extensive-live-usb-on-the-planet/

a “dd” live-usb [only] copies the read-only iso9660 file system from the iso file so few of our special live-usb features will work since those features try to take advantage of read-write capabilities of usb flash drives.

If you have already made a “dd” live-usb […] The live-usb-maker tool offers “clone mode” which will copy your currently running antiX or MX live system to a new usb stick without a copy of the iso file.

[Anonymous]

proceeded to make a bootable USB stick using: sudo dd if=/home/hector/Downloads/antiX-bullseye-b1-runit_x64-full.iso of=/dev/sda1 bs=1M status=progress

The dd command is “wrong tool for the job”

Please read this instructional page: https://antixlinux.com/the-most-extensive-live-usb-on-the-planet/
with special attention to the page section titled “The live-usb-maker Tool”

[Member calciumsodium]

I would like to report on comparison of slim and slimski with respect to RAM usage.
For the purposes of testing, I installed slim and slimski on the same B2-runit system.

Slimski:

3.9 MiB +   1.4 MiB =   5.3 MiB	slimski

After initial boot using slimski, the total ram was 164 MiB using the rox-icewm desktop. Then I logged out and logged back into the rox-icewm desktop. The total ram went up to 175 MiB.

I then switched to slim and rebooted.

Slim:

3.8 MiB +   1.6 MiB =   5.4 MiB	slim

After initial boot using slim, the total ram was 168 MiB using the rox-icewm desktop. Then I logged out and logged back into the rox-icewm desktop. The total ram went up to 178 MiB.

Based on these data, there is not much RAM usage difference between slimski and slim. If anything, there is a slight better RAM usage with slimski. But it is very small.

[Forum Admin rokytnji]

Maybe try a different usb stick is all I can think of.

Boot order is fine? Right iso downloaded, < 32 bit or 64 bit > , for your processor? Can’t find fault with your other steps. I know we are hybrid iso so it should took and booted.

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

Hello:
Following a suggestion from Fungal, I downloaded antiX-bullseye-b1-runit_x64-full.iso and its corresponding .sha file. Duly checked the integrity of the .iso and proceeded to make a bootable USB stick using: sudo dd if=/home/hector/Downloads/antiX-bullseye-b1-runit_x64-full.iso of=/dev/sda1 bs=1M status=progress. So far so good. The idea is to install and test AntiX in an old HP Mini (which is my backup/testing laptop) before replacing Debian 10.7 in my Dell XPS13-9350.

The HP Mini also has Debian 10.7 installed but I want to replace it completely with AntiX. Unfortunately, the machine refuses to boot from the USB stick and doggedly restarts Debian every time. Needless to say, I had previously changed the boot order, so at this point I am completely baffled. Am I missing something?

Any help you can provide will be much appreciated. I’m anxious to sample a systemd-free OS and enjoy its speed with my favorite WM: Openbox. No DE for me!

Thanks a lot!

[Anonymous]

It is totally possible bad ssd or iso.
In gparted could try creating a new partition table with gpt for the uefi
device >> create partition table
and setting the esp partition with the bootable flag under
partition >> manage flags
in the gparted menu
Your initial inxi post showed the drives as mbr scheme, that is for legacy boot
in the bios settings.

from initial inxi post:
Local Storage: total: 3.85 TiB used: 2.40 TiB (62.3%)
ID-1: /dev/sda vendor: SanDisk model: SDSSDXPS960G size: 894.25 GiB
speed: 1.5 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: T0RL scheme: MBR
ID-2: /dev/sdb vendor: Crucial model: CT256MX100SSD1 size: 238.47 GiB
speed: 6.0 Gb/s serial: <filter> rev: MU01 scheme: MBR
ID-3: /dev/sdc type: USB vendor: Western Digital
model: WD My Passport 0827 size: 2.73 TiB serial: <filter> rev: 1012
scheme: MBR
ID-4: /dev/sdd type: USB vendor: SanDisk model: Ultra size: 14.91 GiB
serial: <filter> rev: 1.00 scheme: MBR

also checksum the md5 on the downloaded iso

[Member PenguinGuy]

Xecure wrote:

On UEFI systems you need to mount the fat32 ESP partition to store the antiX .efi files (so that they are detected at boot time).
On the new installer, I think you have to select that partition before continuing. If it doesn’t exist, you will need to create it with Gparted.

UPDATE SOLVED: So basically after getting the new 19.4 from Sourceforge, preformatting with g-parted, + (the most important part) was checking the option ‘Check for bad sectors’. This SSD has barely been used other than the bunch of formats I recently did to install antiX — not quite sure why it is worn out or damaged.

NOTE: Also I tried making a USB live install of the antiX b1.iso (beta) & ran that first, but it kept telling me to remove the disk & wouldn’t boot (maybe the iso was corrupted somehow?).

Old text….
——————————————————————-
After installing ESP at 112MB & 99MB with the older 19.4 it still wouldn’t boot.

I downloaded the new 19.4 x64 iso directly from Sourceforge, but now it keeps erroring out “Failed to format the required partitions.” my SSD at about 1 or 2% (even if I use g-parted to preformat or pre-delete + reboot the antiX Live to make sure the drives are properly formatted): https://i.postimg.cc/wqZ7Zgv3/screenshot.jpg

Pretty confused now. Also, this newer Antix iso also seems to not mount my other USB drives randomly at start.

Never had any of these problems with the older Antix 19.4 iso.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by PenguinGuy.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by PenguinGuy.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by PenguinGuy.

Hello. Noob here, very first post/thread; though I already read all the docs (or most of them) and searched the forums.

I come from Slitaz Linux using as live system, but since this one went already obsolete in kernel and packages, and devs are struggling with its revival, I had to search for other options, and finally read about Antix.
Since I was looking for a live system as “minimal” as possible, able to work entirely on RAM, yet with a graphical desktop out of the box, I went for Antix base ISO, and burnt it into a DVD (I really wanted to try it the “old/purist” way first before trying on USB, but I didn’t have blank CDs, only DVDs).

My rig is UEFI, so I have to hit the ‘e’ key and add these additional parameters:
toram hwclock=local desktop=icewm
The hwclock option is because I’m booting the live system on a laptop with Windows 10 installed on hard disk.

So everything seems very nice in general, even though I have to customize quite some things first to adjust to my preferences; except for some few things, which I’ll better describe in different threads and this being the first.

I use SpaceFM for default. Perhaps I’m just ignorant, but I noticed no CD/DVD of any kind can be mounted as regular user, only as root. Any optical disk I try inserting and wait for it to be mounted, it always fails with an error graphic pop-up saying “File not found: /live/boot-dev”, because the system always tries to mount /dev/sr0 (or any number) to /live/boot-dev. And whole /live directory is owned only by root.
No other method works as regular user: neither through Control Center (same result) nor manually mount to another directory (“only root can do mount”).
At very least, after failing to mount any CD/DVD, it lets me eject it from SpaceFM -> Devices with no problems for some reason.

Other distributions such as openSUSE and Slitaz itself don’t have this issue; they just read sr0 and automatically mount it without root or any kind of change.

Is this actually “expected” in any Debian-based distribution? Or am I actually having a bad issue?
Could this behavior be “rightfully” changed, without going insecure or the like?
If I’m having a bad issue, could someone help please?

Thanks very much beforehand.

Today I had boot my core i5 Thinkpad with 4 GB memory in to windows 10 Pro,

What a user experience, windoze turns my othwerwise fast laptop in to something
that feels like being caught in a black hole influence where everything is
slowed to near standstill.

In comparison antiX is in warp drive.

Normaly I only use windoze to update my car diagnostic system, this time round I am trying
to fix my Transcend 64 GB USB stick, first a full format then try to fix/update the buggy
controller software with the trancend online tool. If nothing works it goes in the
recycling bin. Not at all impressed with trancend quality and longevity.

• This topic was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by ModdIt.

[Forum Admin SamK]

When tested here it works correctly i.e. as shown in the video by dolphin_oracle and the guide in the antiX FAQ.

Tentative conclusion; something locally is contributing to the symptoms described.

.
.
Perhaps following the same method might reveal some clues.

Test Preparation
• Using antiX version prior to 21, set up 1-to1 Assistance on 2 live USB systems (establishes a known working baseline)
• Note: Do not use 19.x. It does work but a packaging issue makes it fiddly to install.

• antiX-21-b2-runit_x64-full.iso downloaded and integrity checked
• ISO put on USB via Live USB Maker
• Laptop booted in live mode, no persistence, toram (ensures clean, known environment at each boot)
• antiX not updated/upgraded i.e. running as shipped (avoids potential issues with user installed software)
• 1-to-1 Assistance installed via apt-get install (allows easy reporting of installation problems)

Test Strategy
• Within antiX-21… run 1-to-1 Assistance on a single machine, once in receiver mode, once in provider mode
• Within the known good live USB (prior to antiX 21) use 1-to-1 Assistance in the opposite mode
• Repeat each test twice in receiver mode (1 x resize, 1 x unchanged)
• Note: After each test exit (close down) both instances of 1-to-1 Assistance and restart for the subsequent test

Tests
• Boot antiX-21 live USB
• Start 1-to-1 Assistance using menu item 1-to-1 Assistance
• Select Provider mode

• Boot the known good live USB (prior to antiX 21)
• Start 1-to-1 Assistance using menu item 1-to-1 Assistance
• Select Receiver mode

Outcome: Receiver desktop shown on provider desktop (for both resize and unchanged)

• Repeat both tests employing the alternative mode on each system

Outcome: Receiver desktop shown on provider desktop (for both resize and unchanged)

[Anonymous]

To me bloat is including only the big-ram hungry apps so the distro needs a dual-core cpu with
4gb ram just to run a desktop and browse the web. it is a catch 22 as mentioned already.
my main tower runs antiX-full with icewm and fluxbox. usually core and base builds on my others
where I put only what that machine needs on it.

—- as far as slim vs slimski. slim hasn’t been updated in 8 years and slimski is currently
maintained by it’s author skidoo. more secure moving forward is why I like it and am putting on
my machines.

Some people see the menus as bloated or confusing because of options as they are used to seeing only a few big
popular apps. I like the fact antiX showcases some less known ones that work just as good if not
better.
For example — Mirage is great for cropping and resizing photos, but is not in other distros
on the iso image, some popular image viewers can not do this. And it boots to low ram usage on the desktop.
The new option of having both new and old kernels is really great for new and old hardware
support. some will call that bloat too.

[Member Kjellinux]

christophe wrote:

@Kjellinux – If your goal is still the same – seeing what runs well on old hardware – using a live USB:

1. boot with that live-cd you made earlier.
2. use antiX to make a live-usb with Live-USB-Maker (under applications > antiX) – choose fully-featured, and use the defaults.
3. Reboot with USB from now on – when you boot, choose persistence option (F5) p_static_root; then choose F8 to save the configuration, so each time it will keep that default until changed.
4. During boot it will ask for a persistence file size – choose something like 3 GB, if using that 16GB stick. It will then offer to make a swap file – go ahead and let it.

See how you like that – That’s test #1.

Tell us how it goes….

@christophe

Here is how it went…

1. Worked fine, just like before.
2. Took a while to realise i needed to chose the option “Clone running live system“.
3. Went with “p_static_root” (your first post stated f_static_root).
4. Accepted suggested 4GB file size. No offer to make swap file. On next boot tried custom option and 3GB file size. Now I was offered to create a swap file. (I guess you have to choose custom.)

Betwen steps 2 and 3, I decided to change to the previously created USB with 64 bit full, so as to be able to evaluate as many functions as possible.

There have been many recommendations to use the Live USB Maker. This does indeed appear to be a convenient tool, but not until you are already running antiX. Before that, I find it to be a bit of catch 22/hen and egg situation. Most people today don’t have optical drives, which leaves you with finding some utility to flash the .iso file to a USB (or other type of flash memory). I have tested a few, and all the ones I tested overwrote the preconfigured swap partition. Fortunately I managed to insert a swap file after the .iso was flashed to the USB. I suspect there might be a better/more correct way to do this, but until I find out how, I’ll settle for having a working live USB that allows me to test the system.

One practical problem I encountered was the limitation of having only 512MB RAM. Running antiX base from the CD, I tried to download antix 64 bit full, but the system froze/crashed. My guess, without knowing for certain, is that it ran out of RAM.

From my testing so far, I conclude that antiX performs well enough, running from a live USB on my test rig, for me to find it useful to do further tests. These further tests will include minimising needed hardware requirements, adapting antiX to make it as “Windows user friendly” as possible and a few other things. If (or rather when) questions arise in connection with my furhter testing, I will create new threads.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by Kjellinux.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by Kjellinux.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 8 months ago by Kjellinux.

[Moderator BobC]

Did you check the SHA256 or MD5 sums on the file you burned?
https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/checking-integrity-of-downloaded-iso-files/
https://mxlinux.org/tag/md5/

If that was good, then I wonder if the CD burned ok? Try booting it in a different PC and check the CD using the options on the boot menu

 F4: Miscellaneous Options

You can only select one of these options. If you want more than one then you will need to type some of them in manually. Normally checkfs, savestate, and nosavestate are only useful on the LiveUSB or a frugal install.

checkmd5 ... Check integrity of the install media.
checkfs ... Check integrity of the LivUSB and persistent file systems.

If it booted ok on another machine, and the checks said the CD was good, Then is the reader is reading it ok? Listen to the CD drive for it retrying…