- This topic has 203 replies, 24 voices, and was last updated Jul 7-11:37 am by Anonymous.
-
Posts
-
Anonymous
@devs
The repo manager has a typo when it sets the “/etc/apt/sources.list.d/antix.list” file.
the line is missing the backslash between antix and buster.
http://la.mxrepo.com/antix/buster
was like this.
http://la.mxrepo.com/antixbuster
after changing the list file “apt update & upgrade” worked as should.On my install here 19b1-32bit.
I did the install from iso and first boot hooked to my ethernet cable
then on the first boot, I did an “apt update & apt upgrade from the root
terminal and rebooted. Afterwards connman seen my wifi and let me set it up.
Now it works everytime no need to stop and start it again.
eugen-b
I got a curious issue, I attached the live USB (created with antiX live USB maker, persistance) to a different USB port (USB 2.0) than that which I used when I created it and it cannot boot, Grub doesn’t show up. I hard to hard shutdown. Then I attached it to the USB 3.0 port and Grub appeared but the boot hang up with
“not severe error. fsck interrupted on sdb1.
c = continue …”
I press c, get a similar message
” … cannot enable root! persistence”.
I pressed c several times and the boot hang up here as well.- This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by eugen-b.
PPC
Quick question – should we still include ceni on the iso?
I don’t understand much about the inner workings of any OS, but if all the problems with connman (that seemed to be fixed with restarting its service) are ironed out, there will be no point to including ceni, shaving some kb from the installation iso.
I can see only one reason to maintain ceni in antiX 19- if a user really wants to set up network connections using ceni, he/she can do so, first removing connman and then using ceni (without entering a loop where the user does not have a network connection, for example, if connman can’t set up a network connection and the user wants to remove it and use ceni- in that case the user would have no way to get to install ceni because there would be no network connection).P.
eugen-b
Maybe adjust Ceni to kill connmand demon before starting any operation?
I got a curious issue, I attached the live USB (created with antiX live USB maker, persistance) to a different USB port (USB 2.0) than that which I used when I created it and it cannot boot, Grub doesn’t show up. I hard to hard shutdown. Then I attached it to the USB 3.0 port and Grub appeared but the boot hang up with “not severe error. cannot fsck. cannot enable root! persistence”. I pressed c several times and the boot hang up here as well.
My netbook, for some reason, really can only boot from one particular USB port, if I try a different one it does not even detect the USB device, just boots from my hard drive. But my netbook has always worked that way- does this issue happen if you try to use a different version of antiX live USB?
P.
eugen-b
My netbook, for some reason, really can only boot from one particular USB port, if I try a different one it does not even detect the USB device, just boots from my hard drive. But my netbook has always worked that way- does this issue happen if you try to use a different version of antiX live USB?
P.
The other port works for a live USB created with dd.
It might be a bad shutdown which damaged the persistence file, I’m investigating. UPDATE I applied fsck from the working dd made live USB https://www.hastebin.com/ocomenujiy.sql Let’s how it works out. UPDATE 2: No, it simply stops in the middle of the boot process at
switch_root: can't execute '/usr/bin/env': Input/output error.
I think it is filesystem corruption.UPDATE 3: The antix-live-usb-maker made live USB boots now on all USB ports, but it hangs with the above error error message even if I remove persist_all from the kernel command line.
- This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by eugen-b.
- This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by eugen-b.
- This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by eugen-b.
There are many weird combinations (and problems caused through it) possible.
BIOS/UEFI settings, USB/USB2/USB3 ports and sticks, incompatible chipsets …
You could easily spend the rest of your lifetime reading about it but, if
it’s booting on one port, that’s perfectly fine (maybe even intended so).eugen-b
A different issue: In German menu of all sessions Control Centre translates into “Kontrollzenter” which is not the correct Word. In Transifex everywhere it “Kontrollzentrum” which is correct and I cannot find the resource in https://www.transifex.com/anticapitalista/antix-development/ where the wrong string is.
anticapitalista
A different issue: In German menu of all sessions Control Centre translates into “Kontrollzenter” which is not the correct Word. In Transifex everywhere it “Kontrollzentrum” which is correct and I cannot find the resource in https://www.transifex.com/anticapitalista/antix-development/ where the wrong string is.
thanks – fixed for next beta
Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.
antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.
eugen-b
Referencing this screenshot
https://www.antixforum.com/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/heeelp-gear-invasion.png
I think some antiX applications could go without a menu entry since they are available from the Control Centre. Some don’t make any sense as standalone menu items, some do. I mean you did it MX that you added NoDisplay=true to most of the .desktop files of such applications. antiX has a menu which coplies to the Freedesktop standard, it should work here, too.+
Xecure
I think some antiX applications could go without a menu entry since they are available from the Control Centre. Some don’t make any sense as standalone menu items, some do. I mean you did it MX that you added NoDisplay=true to most of the .desktop files of such applications. antiX has a menu which coplies to the Freedesktop standard, it should work here, too.
I don’t agree here. I sometimes find it easier to go to Synaptic package manager through the menu instead of opening the Control Center (and I prefer using the Control Center to get to ArandR, for example). Having different ways to reach the same application shouldn’t be seen as a disadvantage. I have even tuned my menu so I have some of the Control Center apps in a Control center submenu, reducing the amount of finger movements on a touchscreen.
- This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by Xecure. Reason: Fixing orthography
antiX Live system enthusiast.
General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.eugen-b
I either wouldn’t suggest to hide Synaptic, but some single purpose and not frequently used applications. It’s kinda standard to hide some programs in settings managers, XYZ Suites, etc. and avoid unnecessary entries in the main menu.
My suggestion is a bit weak, because I don’t name any particular applications which should get hidden, but I didn’t take the time to think about it and is more suitable for a separate discussion topic, maybe.- This reply was modified 3 years, 10 months ago by eugen-b.
During antiX17 betatesting, wnen anticapitalista asked, we forum longtimers urged him to “yes, show all in menu, even if available via controlCenter. Give those l’il gems more exposure, make ’em more easily discoverable”.
^—- which was a reversal, compared to antiX 15
Now, choo choo… the flipflop train is again pulling into the station.
The SystemTools submenu seems too crowded for my taste in the antiX19beta, so I would hope its content could be redistributed across (SystemTools and SystemHickeys?) separate menus.
Two selling points in favor of “not hiding some from menu”:
1) the last flipflop, toward showall, was motivated by seeing repeated “how do I…” help requests regarding items available via ControlCenter but not shown in menu.
2) casual youtoob reviewers are usually favorably impressed by overstuffed desktop menus. They eagerly spend many minutes trippingly exploring the desktop submenus, while repeatedly gushing “omigosh, lookit all the great stuff preinstalled”.
- The topic ‘antiX-19-b1-full (64 and 32 bit) available’ is closed to new replies.
