Search Results for 'packagecomp'

[Moderator BobC]

Possibly something didn’t get installed because I didn’t need it on the machine I was using.

PS: you could use my packagecomp run on another antix 22 runit 64 base on that same machine to see what packages are missing or added vs running from the iso on a machine that it will boot on.

• This reply was modified 5 months, 1 week ago by BobC.

[Member olsztyn]

BobC wrote:

I have limited web space that I can upload to, so I need to be economical with it. Unless anticaptialista posts new sid iso’s I will continue to work off what he posted, and build on top of it, based on my packagecomp analysis, as adjusted by fresh updates in the repos.

Thank you BobC!
Your work is greatly appreciated…

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

[Moderator BobC]

I have limited web space that I can upload to, so I need to be economical with it. Unless anticaptialista posts new sid iso’s I will continue to work off what he posted, and build on top of it, based on my packagecomp analysis, as adjusted by fresh updates in the repos.

At the moment, I have fixed the seamonkey setup since for base it is the default web browser, updated the 131 packages, and fixed the broken firmware package problem.

I have also added the liquorix 6.0 kernel but left the 4.9 kernel. Sorry, I don’t know how to make the 4.9 the default, but I’m testing on a Core II from 2007, so it should be good for many older 64 bit machines.

Once I get it to where I’m happier with it, I’ll upload another .iso. Hopefully sometime this weekend.

At the moment, I’m working on IceWM, and I’m just going to try to make it look and work the way I would want to see it on antiX 23. I will start with just the medium sized new theme and leave just the medium sized Blue Day theme to compare it with. Changes for the new one include enabling edge switching with 4 workspaces, disabling the memory monitor, adding the CPU temp to the CPU monitor, and reducing the frequency and width of the monitors to minimize performance impact and still provide good info. The actual end result will I’m sure be decided by anticapitalista, but I’ll hopefully provide him some options and ideas.

I’m also planning to tweak the login screen I did for slimski to reduce it to where I can read it with glasses but not need a 5x magnifying glass on my 4k or 1080p video, which should reduce it by 1/3 I’m guessing, and look much more normal (better) on the older low resolution systems. Testing on a 2007 laptop, which probably is pretty normal for antiX makes it easy to see why people complained about the size. It was my fault, so I’ll fix it.

Should I leave Firefox-ESR installed? Base doesn’t normally come with it…

[Member olsztyn]

BobC wrote:

Please look at the packagecomp so you can see that I’m literally figuring out what packages are missing from the one system to the other, and adding all the missing ones in my attempt to duplicate the system, but with the newer sid apps…

Thanks again @BobC…
I downloaded your SID ISO. Thank you for sharing.
Now this gets really interesting:
– This ISO (SID Runit) fails to boot on my both machines I was using for SID (Thinkpad X61) but boots fine on Thinkpad T410. Failure to boot on my X61 machines appears referring to some segmentation fault but the screen flashes quickly due to apparent re-trying so I am not able to notice the exact wording of the message. Looks like my issues were possibly related to this hardware as well…
– The fact it boots fine on Thinkpad T410 machine makes it good for me to work from there. Looks like lots of groundwork you have done to make it a great Base approximation. I will look at your packagecomp later to figure out next steps.

I will try to figure out the issues with booting on the older X61 machines, but in the interim:
How did you originally set up this Live SID? Did you start from Core ISO as published by anticapitalista and installed packages to arrive at Base or you upgraded originally to SID by switching repositories from stable to sid? I see that at this time there are 131 packages due to upgrade…

In any case thanks much for sharing. This seems good representation of SID base. I will try to identify issues with boot on X61 machines as a separate project. The important thing is that it boots on Thinkpad T410 and I will test Thinkpad T520 and X220 shortly. I could not easily recreate the ISOs I was using on Thinkpad T410 for comparison because I was using traditional installation rather than Live as yours. Live makes it easier to test on multiple machines…

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

[Moderator BobC]

olsztyn wrote:

BobC wrote:

After I installed Firefox-ESR, I created an .iso and uploaded it.

Thank you BobC. I will download your ISO shortly and install. This will hopefully shed some light what I am missing in my install process from the current distribution SID ISOs…

Please look at the packagecomp so you can see that I’m literally figuring out what packages are missing from the one system to the other, and adding all the missing ones in my attempt to duplicate the system, but with the newer sid apps…

[Moderator BobC]

olsztyn wrote:

BobC wrote:

If you had a matching antiX 22 (ie sysvinit or runit with same architecture 32/64) installed, you could try my packagecomp utility

Thank you BobC…
I am not yet at the point of being able to start X, using Runit SID ISO. About to redo the same process using Sysvinit to see what makes the difference…

I converted antiX 22 sid runit core to antiX 22 sid runit base last night and have it completely running. I just wish I’d setup the core userid as demo 🙂

[Member olsztyn]

BobC wrote:

If you had a matching antiX 22 (ie sysvinit or runit with same architecture 32/64) installed, you could try my packagecomp utility

Thank you BobC…
I am not yet at the point of being able to start X, using Runit SID ISO. About to redo the same process using Sysvinit to see what makes the difference…

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

[Moderator BobC]

If you had a matching antiX 22 (ie sysvinit or runit with same architecture 32/64) installed, you could try my packagecomp utility to find out what packages you are missing and it writes an install script that you just copy/paste and run. I think its setup for geany, but you could change that to mcedit or other editor that doesn’t require X. I’ve never tried it for core or base, but don’t see any other reason it wouldn’t work. I’ve been using it a few years now.

https://www.antixforum.com/forums/topic/upgrading-from-antix-19-to-antix-21/#post-85438

After I did it, it didn’t finish dpkg, which I found out when trying to reinstall a package. I had to reboot and complete the dpkg run. Once that completed, I ran adduser to create another user, and it created the correct menu etc. So if I was doing it again, I would install core as a dummy user, and then add my real user in the adduser step at the end, unless I knew an easy way to get everything in my /home directory the way it should be after the fact.

I used antiX 64 runit base and antiX sid 64 runit core for my test.

• This reply was modified 5 months, 1 week ago by BobC.

[Moderator BobC]

Setting up antiX 21 is a 15 minute task on my machine. Just thinking aloud. I used my packagecomp utility, but it can be tricky trying to decide what should be reinstalled vs not. Here is a generic sequence of steps. But I don’t know your system or its mods.

1. Backup any program or configuration mods, make a list of programs that you need to reinstall
2. Backup /home
3. Create a new volume for antiX 21
4. Create a new volume for /home
5. Use Gparted to copy old /home to new /home
6. Boot from USB
7. Install antiX 21 to the new volume
7a. When setting up the disk, remember to make the new /home set for PRESERVE
8. Reboot into the new system
9. Install missing programs, redo all program and configuration mods
10. Reboot into the new system. All should be good, now
11. If not good, reboot into the old system which was left alone, learn from problems encountered, and try migration again when resolved.

[Moderator BobC]

I’ve been using this method since antiX 17. I created a packagecomp utility to do a lot of the work. I have a lot of things customized, and my system is setup the way I like it, functionally, and usually I want to preserve my customizations unless the never version has improvements to those same areas that I like better. It takes testing the new version to sort out what I want to carry over from my old system.

I backup my old root and /home system using live-usb-maker in personal mode onto a flashdrive.

I install a package called Aptik and Aptik-GTK to makes the backup and restore process for my /home directory easy, space efficient, and reliable, then I run it under root to make a /home backup.

I create a separate partition with gparted and install the new system to that separate partition.

I make a list of packages from my old system and compare it to the list of packages on the new system, and decide which I need to add.

I add the missing packages including Aptik and Aptik-GTK on the new system.

I make a backup copy of the clean /home directory on the new system to refer to in case my /home restore causes problems,

I restore the /home directory backup to the new system with Aptik-GTK under root. When I think its all correct, I reboot into the new system.

• This reply was modified 10 months, 1 week ago by BobC. Reason: added .zip file of the utility I use

Attachments:

1. packagecomp-20200318.zip

[Moderator BobC]

Just to document what I did, I left my 19.4 volume alone so I can still boot from 19.4 as it was if I need to. Migration was from 19.4 full x64 Sysvinit to same version of 21. I’m not suggesting others try this, just saying how I got it to work for mine. If I have problems with the upgraded one, I will do a fresh reload of 21 and use my packagecomp migration script to migrate as I did before with the 21 beta (as a test to a test machine).

1. Upgraded 19.4 volume so all up to date
2. Rebooted with 19.4 USB
3. Used gparted to copy 19.4 volume to larger new volume for 21
4. Used gparted to generate a new UUID for new volume for 21
5. Mounted and chroot into new volume for 21
6. Ran update-grub under chroot so new volume for 21 could boot under 19.4, then exit
7. Rebooted to new volume for 21 (still 19.4 copy at this point)
8. Change repo lists from buster to bullseye
9. Update and remove fbsplash-antix
10. Run apt -f dist-upgrade many times, needed to remove faq docs (I forget the package name) to get it to finish, autoremove, and rerun apt -f dist-upgrade till clean
11. After reboot it looked like Wifi was working but couldn’t access internet, tried rfkill, and eventually turned off wifi and used the Control Centre switch program to change to ceni, then back to connman, then ran connman and it worked. Now running similar to original on 21

[Moderator BobC]

Yes, I was looking and my packagecomp utility doesn’t know that CB-metapackage won’t be available in the new system and doesn’t make a list instead of what comprised it, and thinks that openbox for example will be automatically pulled in by some other top level package, but it isn’t, and neither are many other of the reccomends.

I guess before I put too much time into it, I need to figure out if I like crunchbang enough to try to duplicate it.

PS: maybe my logic is wrong and while on the original system, I should record all packages installed and account for what package caused each of the ones appearing as not manually installed to be installed in case that package doesen’t exist on the system being migrated to. It has worked on different antiX versions but it falls down on things not found in the reppo list. Obviously I’m not handling those missing packages well enough.

• This reply was modified 2 years, 3 months ago by BobC.

[Moderator BobC]

Koo, I think the thread’s Op has been doing the same kind of thing where he makes the distro his own, and then new things get added, which he wants, but don’t work with the release he worked with, and he finds out that upgrading it to the next release is the best way to get those new features, but it’s huge work to get there.

I’ve had it happen to me a bunch of times, too, with many OS’s and Linux distros, and each time I was spending a week or two getting migrated to the new release. That was why I created the packagecomp, because it turned that week into an evening’s work, and has been reliable at doing it without causing many problems. I need to make my changes within constraints to make that an easy thing to do, but the constraints are very livable.

[Moderator BobC]

1. I use a program called aptik and its GUI frontend to backup /home and users. It is in the MX repos.
2. I also copy anything that I changed anywhere else.
3. I then install the new system
4. Install other programs
5. Install aptik
6. Copy in my changes
7. Use aptik to restore what I saved from /home.

I have done it from 64 to 32, but not from 32 to 64.

If you have installed other programs, they probably need to be installed, too?

You might be interested in a script I use to figure it out called packagecomp. I use it to make a working list of packages I want, but it takes knowing why you installed different things, and deciding if you want them on the new install also, which might be tricky decisions. If nothing else, you can use it to make a list for you.

https://www.antixforum.com/forums/search/packagecomp/?gdpos=power-search-request

[Moderator BobC]

I’ve never tried my packagecomp with a Debian based distro, nor from a core based or 386 based distro, and never tried runit.

I may run into the “many points of failure” scenario.

So far, I’m doing ok. I have a system booting into the antiX 386 runit core, and got the dwmx home and etc copied in to a holding area. I may cheat and hard wire it for now…