Search Results for 'boot from iso'

[Member olsztyn]

Xecure wrote:

mroot wrote:
I think the the separate DE iso should also have all of the window managers that are included in a normal release in addition to the DE

I understand what you mean, mroot, but I believe that will not work.

If I may voice my opinion I do agree with Xecure. Whatever DE edition is published it should be decisive and focusing just on the newly adopted desktop. It should be efficient, well done and compelling…

Xecure wrote:

Before the DE edition, I would like to know if it is possible to unify the Boot menu, so that Legacy (syslinux) and UEFI (grub)r have the same appearance, functionality and options. If we can get good menus on grub2, could it boot from both? I have been looking at what is possible with grub2, but I barely understand anything. For example, easy2boot now includes a1ive grub2-filemanager, that boots in UEFI and Legacy.

Completely agree as well. Boot menus could be streamlined, whether syslinux or Grub.
To me Grub2 is a mess in itself and forcing this mess on distros.
Perhaps something can be done such as resorting to better way of doing this. This is what Intel’s Clear Linux did. They dropped Grub altogether and are using syslinux…

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

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

I’d really like to find out why booting fails to get to X.
Does this happen on all the antiX isos you have tried?

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member deadbrain]

Thanks for being so supportive,unfortunately none of these isos is able to boot and to run Xorg server….
I have already tried :
antix 10.2 + runit + sid
antix 19.2.1
antix 19.2 + runit buster

None of them work for me…..
Thanks again

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Hmm – I though you wanted a net/sid install.

If you have the inclination, could you see if any of these runit isos boot to X? Thanks.

https://sourceforge.net/projects/antix-linux/files/Final/antiX-19/4.19_kernel/

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member Xecure]

Better ignore my last comment.
antiX 19.2 runnit sid x64 core edition comes with kernel 5.5, so no need for using any other version.

If you can use the LUM on another distro to burn the sid ISO to a USB (see https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-8y_mL2Sctc), boot in your laptop, select persistent option, download and install kernel 5.6, save state, remaster, use live USB kernel selector/updater (all can be done from antiX-cli-cc, Live tools), and reboot, you should be able to then install xorg, wm, antix minstaller, then startX and it should work.

I cannot guess anything else, except if I am able to build an ISO from doing it here on my PC.
Can I build an ISO (based on the live system) from cli without a gui?

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

[Member Xecure]

mroot wrote:

I think the the separate DE iso should also have all of the window managers that are included in a normal release in addition to the DE

I understand what you mean, mroot, but I believe that will not work.
First, people don’t care about the old. “The old is bad, only the new stuff is good”. You can see this for every and any thing ever created. Old people like to live remembering the good old times, but young people reject the past and are only centered on “what’s new right now”. A visit to any social media, be it twitter, reddit, facebook… People love all that is new, they live sharing and discussing the new stuff, and the things that are a month old are already no good, already forgotten. Your mobile phone is 6 months old? Ha! I just got the aphone SWX pro! Applo releases a new machine? My 2 years old machine is obsolete. I better sell it and get a new one. Tradition has become “stupid customs”, and new science and technology “is the future”.
Second, people will not care about the window managers comming with it. Look at MX Linux. How many people who use it know that it also includes MX fluxbox? How many care? How many call it bloat? They are already killing MX for being “uggly”, if they discover it also has a “very old, non tiling WM”, they will make it even more of a joke.

I agree that a barebone DE edition will be rejected if the look and feel isn’t a bit customized. Including a wellcome screen explaining that it is a “DE ready but no apps for you to make it your own, from the package installer” would be the best idea, and let people add their favourite software. It’s main purpose is being a showcase for people who want the live-USB tools, that makes antiX (and MX) stand out from the rest. “Use linux without installing, directly from your USB stick”. “Don’t worry about your Windows system; you can test linux without changing your working computer. No risks!”. “Bring linux wherever, whenever”. Stuff like that.

Before the DE edition, I would like to know if it is possible to unify the Boot menu, so that Legacy (syslinux) and UEFI (grub)r have the same appearance, functionality and options. If we can get good menus on grub2, could it boot from both? I have been looking at what is possible with grub2, but I barely understand anything. For example, easy2boot now includes a1ive grub2-filemanager, that boots in UEFI and Legacy. This is used to boot ISOs, but I would guess we could learn something about how to use it to create grub2 menus. One can change Language, keyboard layout… Why not be able to select parameters instead of them cascading in the current UEFI menus?

Anyway, the last paragraphs are off-topic. I believe it is better to have separate ISOs for WMs and DE editions.

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

Hi all Antix gurus,
I’ve reccently bought a beautiful System 76 Lemur Pro. This laptop has no BIOS but works with CoreBoot.
I would like to setup an install with fresh software (SID) with Runit or OpenRC and dwm or i3 as WM.
I would like to know if trying the 19.2 runit sid ISO is a complete non sense or if it may works…
I have 2 SSDs so I may install on the 2nd hard drive….. But README say that is not compatible with UEFI and this sentence is confusing
for my mind. Does it imply that it does not support UEFI (CoreBoot BIOS replacement) or that I cannot use a GPT/UEFI layout (/boot/efi) ?

Thanks for any pointers or answers.
Best regards

[Member Xecure]

BobC wrote:

Xecure, here was someone with another distro, same issue solved, but its too advanced for me…
https://forum.peppermintos.com/index.php/topic,5761.0.html

The problem here is that they don’t list the driver for the card, but they do for the Display.

Graphics:  Card: VIA CN700/P4M800 Pro/P4M800 CE/VN800 Graphics [S3 UniChrome Pro]
           Display Server: X.Org 1.18.4 drivers: vesa (unloaded: fbdev) Resolution: 1024x768@0.00hz

For marcelocripe, the driver for the graphic card does not load.

Graphics Device-1: VIA CN700/P4M800 Pro/P4M800 CE/VN800 Graphics [S3 UniChrome Pro] vendor: Micro-Star MSI driver: N/A
           Display: server: X.org 1.20.4 driver: fbdev,modesetting,vesa unloaded: openchrome tty: 128×48

marcelocripe, you could try as BoBC suggests. Boot an antiX 19 live system, and try adding the boot parameter
xorg=vesa
Or even
xorg=openchrome
If nothing comes up, please try booting an antiX 17.4.1 live system (adding the same boot parameter) and see if a graphical environment loads properly.

I suspect your system is UEFI Bios, but just in case I will explain the steps for both.
On Legacy BIOS, antiX will boot with an interface that has at the bottom many “Fn” Options. It looks something like this:

In the middle, there will be a line containing the boot options. Add the xorg=vesa parameter at the end of the line and hit Enter

On UEFI BIOS systems, antiX boot menu will look something like

Hitting ‘e’ you can see the boot parameters (example below, don’t copy)

In the same line as “menus”, before it, add “xorg=vesa”. Then hit F10 to boot and see if it works.

Looking at BobC’s linked thread, I can see two main differences between their system and marcelocripe’s system:

marcelocripe: Server: X.Org 1.20.4, kernel 4.9
theotherguys: Server: X.Org 1.18.4, kernel 4.8
If Xorg version is not the problem, it could be a kernel problem. Probably kernel 4.4 in the repos could fix the problem (if it is kernel related). I tried to build an iso with 4.4 to share here but my computer doesn’t boot with it, so I cannot test if it would work.

Let us see how this evolves once marcelocripe has time to test these out.

If it is too much of a bother, we can stop after testing BobC’s xorg=vesa suggestion. All these tests take time and sooner or later will drain oneself of energy. We are not trying to pressure you to do more than you are willing to do, marcelocripe.

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

Hello forum. This is my first posting here so please excuse (and educate) me if I “transgress the unwritten laws” of the forum.
I am trying to build a command line based system using antiX-19.2_386-core. To this end I have been trying to install antiX-19.2_386-core as a V.M. in Oracle virtualbox, Version 6.1.10 r138449 (Qt5.11.3). I am using MX19.2 (conscientiously updated) as the host machine.

The live load process stops/hangs after displaying “live-restore-services: restoring service links”. The quotation marks are mine. A screenshot of the offending item is attached, possibly I am a forum novice.

To try and resolve this issue I have tried the following:-
Confirmed all the md5sum’s are correct for all downloaded ISO’s.
used the 32 bit version from a Spanish and British mirror.
used the 64 bit core iso (from two mirrors).
Used the 32 and 64 bit core iso’s from Sourceforge

All to no avail. The ISOs all boot from a usb drive and I currently have antiX-19.2_x64-full installed and working in Oracle V.B. on the same host machine.

So…………..am I being stupid and missing anything obvious?

Thanks in advance of any constructive responses.

• This topic was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by IAMSOANGRY.
• This topic was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by IAMSOANGRY.
• This topic was modified 2 years, 10 months ago by IAMSOANGRY.

Attachments:

1. 

   Screenshot-1.png
   

[Member Xecure]

patpat wrote:

Today a good Linux distro produces ISOs that can be easily network booted/installed without adding extra stuff.
RHEL/SUSE/UBUNTU/Debian/ etc…

I understand what you mean, but you cannot compare a one-man project to a company with many workers or even one with hundreds of thousands in donations.

patpat wrote:

The website I quoted before includes PXE support for current and old versions of famous distros.
Unfortunately antiX (and MX) needs extra stuff to be PXE booted. It would be really nice
if antiX natively embrace PXE in future versions.

Does this work with 32bits? If this is added to all ISO versions, could it break something? Will they still work with any computer? Can this be disabled/uninstalled if someone doesn’t want it/wants to save space? Doe the developer have to upgrade/fix this packages in the future adding more extra work for building each version/edition?

You seem to know what this is and how it works, but most of us are a bit “illiterate” about this technology. Answering these questions and explaining how to do all this could help a lot in deciding if this is cost (as in time) effective and if it is worth it for the main developer. After all, it is nice to ask for someone to do stuff, but it is their time that will be used for getting this done.

Maybe, having someone in the MX Team (more people there) be interested in this and do this part, and antiX including their work, could also be a possibility.

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

[Member patpat]

Please take a look at PXE boot/install (network boot/install):
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Preboot_Execution_Environment

PXE has been around for long time now.
Today a good Linux distro produces ISOs that can be easily network booted/installed without adding extra stuff.
RHEL/SUSE/UBUNTU/Debian/ etc…

With network/boot install you put the distro ISO content on a PXE Server and
a network connected PC booting in network mode can boot/install any OS from the PXE server
w/o needing any physical media present at the booting PC, everything comes trough the Ethernet cable.

I see 1/2/3 GB distros deciding to remove network support from their initrd in order to save ~20MB;
meager saving and they become not PXE bootable.

The website I quoted before includes PXE support for current and old versions of famous distros.
Unfortunately antiX (and MX) needs extra stuff to be PXE booted. It would be really nice
if antiX natively embrace PXE in future versions.

Let me know if I was not clear at some point.

antiX 19.2 PXE boot, see here:
https://www.vercot.com/~serva/an/NonWindowsPXE3.html

It would be great adding native PXE support to antiX boot ISO

[Member Xecure]

marcelocripe wrote:

After installing antiX-19.2_386-full.iso and restarting correctly, I needed to remove the offboard video card and use the onboard video card, after removing the offboard video card, antiX no longer loads in graphics mode. How do I get the operating system to load graphics mode again?

First you will need to see what the graphic device is, and if the driver is loaded or no.
In terminal, do:
inxi -G
This should give us info about the grafic card and info.

An example of a system with a graphic card but no grafic driver:

inxi -G
Graphics:     Device-1: NVIDIA GT-218 [GeForce 8400 GD Rev. 3] driver: N/A
              Display: Server: X.org 1.20.4 driver: nouveau, vesa  unloaded: fbdev, modesetting
              tty: 102x38
              Message: advanced graphics data not available in console. Try -G --display

The important part, driver: N/A, meaning, no driver is managing the graphic card, so it cannot load the “gui interface”.

If you share the same problem, and you graphic card is also nvidia, you could enable the opensource graphic driver for nvidia (nouveau) to start at boot.
As above recomendation, edit /etc/default/grub, serach for the line containing GRUB_CMDLINE_LINUX_DEFAULT, and add an extra boot option
nouveau.modeset=1 to force this driver to load during boot.

If this isn’t your case (you are not using a nvidia card), please share with us your inxi -G information and we will try to help you further.

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

[Anonymous]

anticapitalista wrote:

uxer wrote:

After installation still in live mode I couldn’t relaunch firefox-esr.

What do you mean by this?

1. boot from .iso into live mode
2. launch firefox-esr from first level of icewm menu
3. start installation of antiX to HDD
4. quit firefox-esr
5. finish installation of antiX to HDD, untick autoreboot, quit installation master
6. try launch firefox-esr from first level of icewm menu – no luck

I selected ukrainian locale before booting into live

1. F7 in GRUB2 of antiX-19.2_x64-full.iso doesn’t offer my screen’s resolution of 1280×800
but option ‘ask’ with consecutive booting and pressing Enter offered more modes, with my resolution present.
I happily gained glorious 128×40 tty resolution, which carried over to installation to HDD.

2. I’ve installed proprietary nvidia driver version 340.108 (with troubles, but finally yes, almost yes)

$ inxi -G
Graphics:  Device-1: NVIDIA G98M [GeForce 9300M GS] driver: nvidia v: 340.108 
           Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.4 driver: nvidia resolution: 1280x800~60Hz 
           OpenGL: renderer: GeForce 9300M GS/PCIe/SSE2 v: 3.3.0 NVIDIA 340.108

and now my tty resolution dropped to scrimpy ubiquitous default of 80×25.
I’ve tried some recipes:
https://askubuntu.com/questions/18444/how-do-i-increase-console-mode-resolution
nomodeset xforcevesa vga=361
which I don’t quite understand and may have omitted something important. GRUB itself has made it back to 128×40, but tty is still 80×25.

1. How can I restore 128×40 tty resolution working with nvidia driver?
2. Can I have even higher resolution, say 160×50?
3. Can I set number of rows & columns manually, separately for rows and separately for columns?