Search Results for 'boot from iso'

[Member delix02]

I’m going to install the new 17.2 .iso on an old Wyse thin client with a 2GB SSD drive on a chip….
Guess, rob’s work would be an excellent option for that machine.
However, the thin client cannot be booted by Grub, so I had and have to use the extlinux/syslinx package.

For antiX 16 (based on Debian Jessie) these packaged had been removed. It was a specific bug in Jessie as the warning was never removed even when the original problem causing it was solved. Are they included in 17.2 again ?
As I remember, the earlier versions of the cli-installer had an option to use extlinux instead of Grub as bootloader.
Did you bring back this option in 17.2. ?
Actually, I know how to install and run extlinux on the client, but having this option in the cli-installer would be much more convinient.

Great work anyway.

[Forum Admin rokytnji]

32 bit bios on a 64 bit mainboard.

Sorry. I got nothing for you. This set of circumstances makes it very hard to install 64bit linux .
I would try the full 32 bit iso myself and see what happens.

Edit: I admit I replied before looking at your screenshots. That boot screen / slim login screen I am guessing.

Which begs the question. Was a md5sum done before making the install usb drive. To make sure you received good iso download.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 7 months ago by rokytnji.

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

I had couple of posts on the old Forum.

At the moment I have a problem of frequent crashes, the story is as follows:
I received HP-ProBook-4410s Laptop from my employer in Feb 2010 with Windows XP. I installed Ubuntu 10.04 LTS and subsequently Ubuntu 12.04 LTS on it and both were running well. I had also used antiX on it and posted on the old forum.

In Dec 2014 I bought personal Laptop Lenovo G50-45 and installed Ubuntu 14.04-1 in dual boot with Windows 8.1. This Laptop was UEFI and I tried antiX-15 (Killah P) for checking UEFI in July 2015.

The Lenovo Laptop is now broken and I am forced to use HP-ProBook-4410s once again.

Since Ubuntu 12.04 LTS no longer supported I am trying Ubuntu 14.04, Ubuntu 18.04 etc but it crashes and no key combination works.

I downloaded antiX-17.2_386-full.iso and running it Live from USB and was not crashing.

Encouraged I did hard disk install of antiX-17.2 it is crashing.

Now I am running antiX-17.2 Live plus Static root persistence with files on hard disk and it is not crashing and I hope it won’t.

I think the crashes are related to Linux Kernel 4.x since Ubuntu 12.04 had Linux Kernel 3.x

Kamalakar

[Member robb]

Running AntiX from the first / top option (.iso), that appears when booting from the dvd

[Member DaveW]

Thank you… live-kernel-updater was not installed.
I installed it and went through all the motions, but I think persistence was not functioning, because all changes were missing on reboot. I read somewhere that some variations of Antix 16.2 had a problem with persistence. (The iso file was downloaded in the first few months of 2017, but I seem to have lost it now.)

After making an Antix 16.3 liveUSB, installing new 4.4.151 kernel, and remastering, the system rebooted into an unfamiliar desktop. I did find a terminal and attempted to run live-kernel-updater, but it could not find a component, and would not run. I thought I would rollback on reboot, but did not locate the way to do that.

However, I was able to update to the 4.9.123 kernel, on liveUSB running Antix 17.1. Since I have already installed 17.1 on the harddrive of one computer, I think I will stop fussing with Antix 16, and use liveUSB as a backup of the installed system.

With appreciation for your help… and patience,
DaveW

All,
I am trying to create a linux version on a small x86 module to use as an audio server.

I downloaded the base and loaded it on both the SD card thinking it was an iso ready to go but when I boot it looks for linux on CD/USB.

So then I put it on a USB Stick thinking maybe it’s an installer and I get the same message.

I don’t need graphics, only SSH from my host system to configure it. So which distro should I be using and how to install it?

Thanks,
Gordon

[Member Jesse]

I can’t answer all of your questions, but I think I can help with a couple.

1) There should be no issues using the live-usb on multiple systems. That is one of the main benefits of the persistent usb system; you can carry your OS in your pocket and use it with any (well, almost any) computer you encounter. The only thing I can think of that might be a problem would be some settings for specific hardware (video card settings, etc.), but that is just something you might have to tweak as you move from system to system.

3 (and maybe a bit of 2) http://download.tuxfamily.org/antix/docs-antiX-17/FAQ/persistence.html

the basic persistence differences:

1. the non-static versions load the rootfs persistence file into ram at boot. this is faster in operation at the tradeoff of a minor hit at boot time and shutdown.
2. with rootfs in ram, the changes during a session (like installing packages) are sync’d back to the rootfs at the end of the session in automatic or semi-auto mode.
3. there is also a manual save mode
4. while having the rootfs persistence file loading into ram is faster in operation, you do have to have the ram to support it.

5. static versions run with the rootfs mounted off the usb stick.
6. changes to the root file system (like installing packages) are recorded as the happen, just like a standard installed partition.
7. since the root filesystem is not loaded into ram, static modes can be friendlier for ram-strapped machines.

8. “to ram” boot option actually loads the linuxfs file into ram. this is the basic file system supplied by either the released isos or by a remastered or snapshot system.
9. to fully load a root filesystem into ram, you need to use the non-static persistence options plus “toram”.

10. the homefs persistence file, if created, is always mounted statically.

11. the remaster system can combine the rootfs peristence file back into the linuxfs base file, creating a new linuxfs file. this is especially usefull after an initial flurry of installing packages and updates, as you get to make a new blank rootfs filesystem after that.

12. I’ve heard the default kernels aren’t too bad these days in terms of latency. you can use live-kernel-updater to update your live usb to another kernel if you wish. I’ve got antiX videos on this, and its identical on MX.

4) this one I’m not sure.

Someone more knowledgeable on these matters will likely swoop in and lay down the facts in case I am mistaken.

rainydayshirts.bandcamp.com | Audio
rainydayshirts.deviantart.com | Visual

Xubuntu 12.04 to antiX 16.2

OUTLINE: my attempt at using systemd, why I reject it, how I selected antiX, minor snags I overcame, my conclusion

WHY I HAVE TRIED TO AVOID SYSTEMD
Sometime in 2015 I tried either fedora or some other distro using systemd on a old (2003) laptop and it wouldn’t work properly even though the old laptop had been running fine previously with various distros. Having read comments by other folks about how buggy systemd was, I didn’t try to use it again.

One of the big advantages of using linux has been that it didn’t need the latest and greatest hardware to perform well. That is no longer the case since Lennart Pottering & Kay Sievers foisted systemd (lennartkayx) into the kernel for Redhat. They promoted it as a new init system that speeds up booting; it was said to be a replacement for SysVinit, Upstart, OpenRC, runit; but they did not say that it does so much more, such as having logs be binary.

I do not like this. Some people do. I compare this to the vi vs. emacs controversy but I can not think of a distro that doesn’t offer both.

wikipedia
contains a multi-color chart showing that the systemd so-called “init” program does a lot more than just starting the OS and waiting for state change or shutdown.

That wreaks havoc with traditional rapid debugging.

Since systemd provides more than other init’s, I think the default should be a simpler init, with an option at boot time to boot with systemd or other init program, rather than have default of systemd and force user who neither needs nor wants it to figure out how to get rid of it. With init as default, older hardware could run newer distros, not just the few available without systemd now. The most popular without systemd are probably slackware based, antiX based, and some of the puppy family. I expect devuan, constructed by former debian developers to eventually become most used.

MY SELECTION

So when the xubuntu 12.04 I was using was coming to end of long-term security support, I had to choose what new distro I would hop to that didn’t use systemd. Looking at the list of distros on “without-systemd.org” and trying some I hadn’t heard of that looked promising, I determined that my temporary choice would be antiX with the hope that devuan would be the basis for it soon. Slackware, gentoo, pclinuxos, puppy, etc. were all possibilities but I settled on antiX for several reasons. Being a distro-hopper, I wanted 32-bit OS so that I could try live on my EEEPC901 netbook before installing 64-bit OS on my 64-bit box. I wanted good support; the friendly forum provided such. I wanted a development team, not just a one person show even though anticapitalista in Greece does the heavy lifting.

PRACTICALITIES

I had my home directory on a separate partition for years. Not only did this make previous distro upgrades easier but it really proved worthwhile now since xfce configuration was stored there.

By default, antiX lets one choose rox-fluxbox, space-fluxbox, fluxbox, herbluftswm, rox-icewm, space-icewm, icewm, rox-jwm, space-jwm, jwm by hitting F1 to cycle to your choice when logging in.
Some of the features I wanted to carry over that weren’t in default antiX were
1) XFCE4 desktop environment, 2) alpine mail client, 3) virtualbox that would pick up previous work

1) though xfce4 was not listed in the login choices, I could install it and its dependencies with synaptic package manager after I logged in.

Then, “sudo mount /dev/sdnx /home” where n is device and x is partition.
“logout”
“login” but cycle F1 until xfce is option
Grabbed my previous xfce4 settings from the old/new /home and I had almost exactly the desktop screen I had using xubuntu 12.04.
I did have to grab the xfce4-weather-plugin, put it on the panel, and let it find Seattle so that I could get temperature, weather, etc.

2) Trying to get alpine mail client via synaptic didn’t work immediately. After a little thought, I added “testing”

deb http://iso.mxrepo.com/antix/testing/ testing main nosystemd
to the repository list and grabbed alpine just fine. I could again use alpine for email.

3) virtualbox was the biggest problem. VB installed OK but wouldn’t read my previous machines usage. It finally dawned on me that since the virtualbox repository version was based on debian “stretch”, which uses systemd, that was the problem. My solution was to add the repository corresponding to xubuntu 12.04, “precise”, from virtualbox website. (When writing this, I realized that I could also have grabbed the virtualbox repository version corresponding to debian “wheezy”.)
So I uninstalled the “stretch” version and let synaptic install the “precise” version. Now there was no longer a problem accessing my previous VB machines; my computer worked as I wanted it to without systemd.

When I installed antiX-17.1 later, synaptic could grab alpine directly without having to add testing repository.

What about security you may ask. Since it uses debian (but I hope devuan soon),

deb http://security.debian.org/ stretch/updates non-free contrib main

“sudo apt-get update && sudo apt-get upgrade” solves that problem.

So although I am pleased now with my avoidance of lennartkayx (systemd) distros, I sincerely hope the devuan developers, and the antiX team, can continue modifying debian into devuan that effectively removes libsystemd dependencies.

[Forum Admin rokytnji]

You have so many problems I am guessing you got a corrupted iso download. So my question is. Did you md5sum check your iso before making a boot usb/disk and how was your bootable medium made?

Howdy and Welcome. Post this also in your next reply

inxi -Fxzr

I’ve seen corrupted iso installs do strange things as a team tester here. That is why I md5sum every linux iso I download off the net.

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

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

fungalnet wrote:

In my experience it is day and night difference, but it all depends.
When the same desktop configuration is based on about the same system with and without systemd the initial ram use is 1/2 to a 1/3 less than systemd. On a system with low RAM that makes a big difference in the amount of available ram. How many services and daemons are running and how are processes supervised is also CPU capacity related.
I have sysv, openrc, runit, and s6 systems with about the same rest of configuration (openbox, some conkies running, and the least I instantly and usually need running. I don’t even have cups running all the time, I start and stop the service when I need to print.). When I boot a similar system based on Debian, or Arch usually, with systemd it feels like a slug compared to all others. S6 and Runit in my experience beat them all.

Remember, systemd is not just an init system, it takes major substitutions to get rid of it all. So to be fair it is hard to really make a true comparison, but that is systemd’s fault, and eventually some things used by other systems are pieces chopped off of systemd that many other pieces of software depend on.

I’d rather use MSwindows7 or something than use systemd

I do not personally agree with the final statement; that is, I prefer to use any freely available software, including Debian with systemd, than I do to use proprietary, commercially priced software on my own personal equipment.

I love antiX and MX, and it’s GREAT that we have software that ensures our freedoms in many ways, including not being forced into using the systemd infrastructure hoisted into the free software community by Red Hat software engineers and then further backed and extended in more free software when it came into the Debian space. Devuan and antiX both worked together early and often to provide an alternative, an arguably more flexible, superior alternative, especially for those concerned with conserving resources. I just don’t go quite as far as you do in my disdain for systemd; I use it on my Debian systems and other distributions that work on my hardware, and I also use nosystemd – sysv software in antiX and MX; I prefer it too, but I’ll still take other FREELY available software before PAYING for my own copy of commercial proprietary software. I’ll use that, too, but only when an employer provides it to me. On my own systems, I prefer BOTH sysv (nosystemd) and systemd services to the commercial alternatives.

• This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by Brian Masinick. Reason: got rid of the smily for my reply
• This reply was modified 4 years, 8 months ago by Brian Masinick.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member fungalnet]

In my experience it is day and night difference, but it all depends.
When the same desktop configuration is based on about the same system with and without systemd the initial ram use is 1/2 to a 1/3 less than systemd. On a system with low RAM that makes a big difference in the amount of available ram. How many services and daemons are running and how are processes supervised is also CPU capacity related.
I have sysv, openrc, runit, and s6 systems with about the same rest of configuration (openbox, some conkies running, and the least I instantly and usually need running. I don’t even have cups running all the time, I start and stop the service when I need to print.). When I boot a similar system based on Debian, or Arch usually, with systemd it feels like a slug compared to all others. S6 and Runit in my experience beat them all.

Remember, systemd is not just an init system, it takes major substitutions to get rid of it all. So to be fair it is hard to really make a true comparison, but that is systemd’s fault, and eventually some things used by other systems are pieces chopped off of systemd that many other pieces of software depend on.

I’d rather use MSwindows7 or something than use systemd 😉

anti-X - Adélie - obarun - systemd Free Space

Hi to all,
Antix 16 runs very well as liveUSB on my netbook (eeepc 900) and also a Dell D620.

However, I have not been successful at updating the kernel from 4.4.10 to 4.4.134.
I’m sure I messed up the process, on multiple attempts.
It would make it much easier (on my part, and other newbies), to have an updated ISO… especially since it is a security issue.

On the other hand, I suppose I ought to learn how to upgrade the kernel, because future changes are probable.
From what I have read on the forum, the process may be more straight forward, on systems installed to hard drive.
But I haven’t decided to go that route, yet. (Some features of the old Windows OS are useful.)

I tried Antix 17.1. The netbook doesn’t like it.
The D620 runs fine with 17.1. But after shutdown, it would not reboot from the USB stick.
The stick may have given up, or perhaps the boot system needs repair.

Thanks, in advance, for your thoughts.

[Forum Admin dolphin_oracle]

the basic persistence differences:

1. the non-static versions load the rootfs persistence file into ram at boot. this is faster in operation at the tradeoff of a minor hit at boot time and shutdown.
2. with rootfs in ram, the changes during a session (like installing packages) are sync’d back to the rootfs at the end of the session in automatic or semi-auto mode.
3. there is also a manual save mode
4. while having the rootfs persistence file loading into ram is faster in operation, you do have to have the ram to support it.

5. static versions run with the rootfs mounted off the usb stick.
6. changes to the root file system (like installing packages) are recorded as the happen, just like a standard installed partition.
7. since the root filesystem is not loaded into ram, static modes can be friendlier for ram-strapped machines.

8. “to ram” boot option actually loads the linuxfs file into ram. this is the basic file system supplied by either the released isos or by a remastered or snapshot system.
9. to fully load a root filesystem into ram, you need to use the non-static persistence options plus “toram”.

10. the homefs persistence file, if created, is always mounted statically.

11. the remaster system can combine the rootfs peristence file back into the linuxfs base file, creating a new linuxfs file. this is especially usefull after an initial flurry of installing packages and updates, as you get to make a new blank rootfs filesystem after that.

12. I’ve heard the default kernels aren’t too bad these days in terms of latency. you can use live-kernel-updater to update your live usb to another kernel if you wish. I’ve got antiX videos on this, and its identical on MX.

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

How about using Control Center > Session > Change Keyboard Layout for Session

Unfortunately, we use gfxboot and syslinux on the live iso, which does not allow us to use F keys in UEFI mode.
We tried to find a ‘fix’ this in the past without success.

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Anonymous]

using menu > applications > system tools > live-usb maker

Version 7.1 downloaded from Germany and Netherlands did not work past inputting the password demo.
Version 7 downloaded from Netherlands worked using password demo.

From booted version 7 (NL) created live with ISO 7.1 (DE)

When booting 7.1 live with persistence as made above, live-usb maker does not get passed the password.

using command live-usb-maker-gui-antix (requires sudo but does not request password)
Works in version 7
Works in version 7.1 live with persistence as made above
works in version 7.1 made with DD from ISO

BUT: The GUI is a totally different GUI in 7.1 compared to 7.

I guess ???
On 7.1 GUI of live-usb maker launched from menu > applications > system tools > live-usb maker fails because it looks for the 7 GUI and does not find it ?