antiX-19-b1-full and tsplash tests needed.

[Member eugen-b]

Helpful

Up

0

::

The likes of Picasso and van Gogh are typically “difficult” fellows. 😉

[Forum Admin BitJam]

Helpful

Up

0

::

seaken64 wrote:

[…] when I used Alt-F1 to switch to show the boot messages it didn’t work like expected. It started to show the text boot messages but then changed back to the splash screen. Once I hit Alt-F1 I want it to stay on the text scroll, not go back to the splash.

I have this mostly fixed. It works rather well and the switch to tty1 is remembered on shutdown (from X windows) which is cool. For a “normal” boot where no input is needed from the user then we stay on tty1 after you .

The exception is when I have pre-programmed switches back and forth, such as for user input via text menus or selecting the size of persistence files. In these cases I will switch back to the splash screen after the user input is completed. I think this will be fine but we’ll see. If you disable tsplash by not using the “splasht” boot parameter then we always stay on tty1.

Perfect is the enemy of good.

Context is worth 80 IQ points -- Alan Kay

[Member seaken64]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Anonymous wrote:

We’ve got antix 32 & 64-bit.

Those are two completely different concepts.

32-bit should have been prohibited by the law 10 years ago. No computer made in the past 10 years is 32-bit only.
32-bit antiX is made for ‘junkputers’ with 256 ~ 512 MB RAM which should also be prohibited by the law.
32-bit is MADE 4 FUN and nothing but the sole fun of fiddling with something that’s dead.

64-bit antiX is for any computer made in the last 10+ years and it’ll come with, at least a dual-core processor and 2+ GB RAM.

NoClue, you’re very opinionated. But that does not make you right. 64-bit is a progression from 32-bit as 32-bit was from 16-bit, and as 16-bit was from 8-bit, etc. Not completely different concepts. You speak as if your words are the end of the conversation. But you often choose the wrong words.

You may be speaking in jest. But your comments about outlawing 32-bit are just plain arrogant and mean, and wrong.

I still use some 16-bit machines to do useful work, as do a lot of businesses. We don’t throw out useful tools while they are working. I use 32-bit machines every day in my business. Projects like antiX improve on the previous software available for those machines. Other “vendors” no longer support their software and force us to choose alternatives. Linux usually fits the bill.

roky’s comments also ring true for me. The world is a very wide place and $25 is hard to come by in some sectors and if they have a working computer they will spend that $25 on something more important than a computer upgrade. Your callous comments about the value of $25 or $30 dollars further down in this thread is disgusting to me.

Fun is not the only purpose of an older computer. You’re being an elitist.

Seaken64

[Member seaken64]

Helpful

Up

0

::

BitJam, I look forward to the final release. Personally I don’t care if I see scrolling text or a splash screen. I was just trying it out and reported the results.

Thanks,
Seaken64

[Forum Admin BitJam]

Helpful

Up

0

::

seaken64 wrote:

I was just trying it out and reported the results.

I’m glad you did! That is what alpha and beta testing should be about. You caught an embarrassing error and gave us a chance to fix it before the final release.

Also, in support of what you said, antiX is designed to keep older computers running. From our home page:

antiX is a fast, lightweight and easy to install systemd-free linux live CD distribution based on Debian Stable for Intel-AMD x86 compatible systems. antiX offers users the “antiX Magic” in an environment suitable for old and new computers. So don’t throw away that old computer yet!

It seems that almost every year upstream makes it harder and harder for us to support older computers and to have them get to a decent desktop environment on the first live boot. But we keep trying to do it anyway. OTOH, I think we lagged a bit in the look and feel department. Our current devs can’t spend much time on that now so if someone has come up with an improvement that keeps with our “lean and mean” philosophy then I really look forward to seeing it.

This is actually a very exciting time because we are starting to get “outside” help. The new MX devs fehlix and AK-*7 have been a big help on antiX as well. There are also new people including JayM who are helping out in the MX forums. While our big sister, MX Linux, tops the DistroWatch page hit charts by a wide margin, antiX has been climbing up slowly but surely. We really needed some fresh blood. I assure you that without this new help, especially all the help from fehlix, I would not have been able to make nearly as much progress this year.

I’m not speaking to you in particular but I hope we can all get along and play well with each other. I’m a quirky guy and hard to get along with but I’ve found a home here in antiX.

Context is worth 80 IQ points -- Alan Kay

[Anonymous]

Helpful

Up

0

::

@seaken64

I’m not ‘very opinionated’ — I’m 100.001 % right (as mostly — experience shows but yes, you can’t know that and so, you’re excused).

About old computers, (lack of) 30$ and energy efficiency …

Many years ago, I had a gaming PC that was consuming some 450 W during gaming.

Modern DESKTOP PC with ONBOARD graphics an 45 W that replaced it, is much better performer (for those ultra-old games an overkill on performance) — much speedier and efficient too.

All the electrical energy that a computer uses eventually ends up as heat, and most of it heats up the room in which it’s running (which, during summer months, is increasing air-conditioning costs too!). Also, older PCs are typically less energy-efficient than modern ones. That energy efficiency is not only depending on HW but, it also depends on SW!

“A typical desktop computer complete with fan, mainstream CPU and a graphics card can easily use 150 watts of power even when it is idle. For most home server applications where the machine isn’t allowed to go to sleep you can multiply that by about 9,000 hours in a year. That means the apparently innocent machine stuck in the corner is consuming well over 1,000 Kilowatt hours per year. Depending on the situation that may be over 10% of your total electric use. If the machine is tricked out with high-end graphics cards it may be even more. Depending on your rates that can mean as much as $200 per year in extra electricity costs.”

https://www.extremetech.com/computing/97763-is-your-old-computer-costing-you-more-than-you-think

Just try to compare a ‘cheapo’ from the supermarket, some Pentium Gold (Atom Successor), 6W TDP with its 2~4 cores and 4GB RAM with some ancient 166 MHz, 256 MB RAM and 95W monstrosity.

You gain nothing by using it. It’ll be slow, it’ll be inefficient … and NOT using it would buy you a new ‘cheapo’ very soon.

That ‘supermarket toy’ will blow away your ‘junkputer’ in just about any use case scenario.

Quick-Tipps on saving energy:

“The resulting savings range from $10-100 per computer annually.”

https://www.stateelectronicschallenge.net/pdf/sec_computer_power_management_guide.pdf

[Member eugen-b]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Have you stopped moderating here in antiX forum?! @noClue, there is https://www.antixforum.com/forums/forum/kafeneio-chats/in-a-greek-kafeneio/ for such off-topic discussions. There you would get replies to your arguments also from people who don’t want to flood a development and testing topic.

[Anonymous]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I’m sorry for that but, it’s a direct answer on (#23450) a derailing comment it this thread. 🙁

[Member eugen-b]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Which was an answer to your post https://www.antixforum.com/forums/topic/antix-19-b1-full-and-tsplash-tests-needed/page/2/#post-23282 which had nothing to do with the topic. tsplash != 32bit

[Anonymous]

Helpful

Up

0

::

It depends …

tsplash is a splash
plymouth is a splash

Plymouth might never get included but, it would make antiX 64-bit much more attractive.

[Anonymous]

Helpful

Up

0

::

@noClue: People have 32-bit PCs for various reasons like they have 32-bit OSes, there’s no need to throw away stuff that works, and unnecessary waste is how you harm to the environment. Let’s just drop it, this is ridiculous.

I think Anti made a wise decision not to include plymouth, isn’t really for antiX, and if you want plymouth there’s nothing stopping you from installing it yourself.

Now, about tsplash (IIRC what this thread is meant to be about): it works brilliantly in VirtualBox and I love it. It also has “antiX” written all over it (metaphorically speaking) so I’m all for it even on 64-bit systems. I’d quite like to see it on MX Linux too (at least as an option). Nice work BitJam!

[Anonymous]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Let’s just drop it, this is ridiculous.

Agree.

I think Anti made a wise decision not to include plymouth …

It’s not on me to decide, however, the fact is that it’s better looking.
Proposal on that matter doesn’t/shouldn’t hurt anybody.
If it’s rejected — it’s rejected. End of story.

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

BTW – Plymouth needs systemd.

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member olsztyn]

Helpful

Up

0

::

anticapitalista wrote:

BTW – Plymouth needs systemd.

Thank You! If needs systemd then No/Nein/Οχι to Plymouth.

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

[Anonymous]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Thanks. Didn’t know that.

That makes the things appear in another light.

[Author]

Posts