antiX-bullseye-a2-runit_x64-full.iso available

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

@calciumsodium – new builds of 4.4 and 4.9 kernels should now be available in the repos.

Newly named to 4.4.0-264 and 4.9.0-264 so the libc6 ‘bug’ should now be ok.

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member calciumsodium]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Thank you @Dave and @anticapitalista
Success. Using the 4.9.0-264-antix.1-amd64-smp kernel, I was able to overcome the libc6 limitation and able to install wine. Please see output below.
It is good to contribute to development.

Setting up libwine:i386 (4.0-2) …
Setting up wine32:i386 (4.0-2) …
Processing triggers for initramfs-tools (0.133+deb10u1) …
update-initramfs: Generating /boot/initrd.img-4.9.235-antix.1-amd64-smp
cryptsetup: WARNING: The initramfs image may not contain cryptsetup binaries
nor crypto modules. If that’s on purpose, you may want to uninstall the
‘cryptsetup-initramfs’ package in order to disable the cryptsetup initramfs
integration and avoid this warning.
I: The initramfs will attempt to resume from /dev/sda3
I: (UUID=468658bc-0a91-40df-a70a-af6d735d2001)
I: Set the RESUME variable to override this.
Processing triggers for wine (4.0-2) …
Processing triggers for libc-bin (2.28-10) …
jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$ uname -r | sed ‘s/\([0-9]*\.\)\{1,2\}\([0-9]*\)\(.*\)/\2/’
0
jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$ uname -r
4.9.0-264-antix.1-amd64-smp
jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$

[Member calciumsodium]

Helpful

Up

0

::

The only caveat is the following:

I was testing on a dual boot system. The main system that contains the grub configuration file has the antix-bullseye-a2-runit already installed with the latest 5.10.27 kernel. The other system was the freshly installed antix 19.3 with the 4.9.235 kernel. So I installed the 4.9.0-264 kernel on the antiX 19.3 system.
I went back to the main system to sudo update-grub, s0 that grub would recognize the newly installed 4.9.0-264 kernel.
For the antix 19.3 system, grub does not pick 4.9.0-264 kernel over 4.9.235 kernel even though I installed 4.9.0-264 over 4.9.235. So in grub, I had to go to advanced options for antix 19.3 to pick 4.9.0-264 kernel. Grub listed 4.9.235 over 4.9.0-264. Perhaps because 235 is bigger than 0.

This may be a problem for users.

[Member calciumsodium]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I wanted to study this grub issue some more, so I did the following experiment:

I have a single linux boot system with antix 19.1 loaded with the 4.9.261 kernel. Then I installed 4.9.264 kernel. I then installed 4.9.0-264 kernel. Upon reboot, the main/default kernel that grub picks to launch was 4.9.264 even though 4.9.0-264 kernel was the last kernel to be installed. If one goes to the advanced options in grub, 4.9.264 was listed first, then 4.9.261 was listed second, and 4.9.0-264 was listed third (last). I supposed grub picks the highest number to be first/default. So 264 is bigger than 261, which itself is bigger than 0-264.

In terminal, the list of all installed kernels this experiment was:

jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$ dpkg -l | grep linux-image | awk ‘{print$2}’
linux-image-4.9.0-264-antix.1-amd64-smp
linux-image-4.9.261-antix.1-amd64-smp
linux-image-4.9.264-antix.1-amd64-smp
jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

calciumsodium wrote:

I wanted to study this grub issue some more, so I did the following experiment:

I have a single linux boot system with antix 19.1 loaded with the 4.9.261 kernel. Then I installed 4.9.264 kernel. I then installed 4.9.0-264 kernel. Upon reboot, the main/default kernel that grub picks to launch was 4.9.264 even though 4.9.0-264 kernel was the last kernel to be installed. If one goes to the advanced options in grub, 4.9.264 was listed first, then 4.9.261 was listed second, and 4.9.0-264 was listed third (last). I supposed grub picks the highest number to be first/default. So 264 is bigger than 261, which itself is bigger than 0-264.

In terminal, the list of all installed kernels this experiment was:

jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$ dpkg -l | grep linux-image | awk ‘{print$2}’
linux-image-4.9.0-264-antix.1-amd64-smp
linux-image-4.9.261-antix.1-amd64-smp
linux-image-4.9.264-antix.1-amd64-smp
jakersfan@jakersfan:~
$

Yeah, if you really want the 4.9.0.264 kernel to show up first, you have to remove the other ones yoo prefer NOT to use.

I’d try out the different kernels, decide on one or two to keep and remove the other linux-image and linux-headers packages for the other kernels once you have your preferred kernel; then you won’t have this conflict. Just make sure FIRST that what you decide to keep functions properly for you.

--
Brian Masinick

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I DID get rid of kernels I wasn’t interested in using any more and I’m happy with the result.

--
Brian Masinick

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I just checked my current kernels; I retained the vmlinuz-4.9.0-264-antix.1-amd64-smp and vmlinuz-5.10.22-antix.1-amd64-smp kernels.

I have my boot loader currently managed by MX Linux; when I select antiX and use the Advanced menu I get three entries; the 4.9.0-264 shows up first, the default boot kernel is second and the 5.10.22 kernel is third. I didn’t obtain any other kernels for the purposes of this test, though in the long run I may use a Liquorix kernel; they work well for me.

In any case, this new 4.9.0-264 kernel works well and it’s easily accessible from the Advanced kernel menu. I may check later to see if this kernel is also listed first in the standard boot or not; it definitely works nicely in antiX 21.

--
Brian Masinick

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

4.9.0-264 kernel is exactly the same as 4.9.264 kernel.

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

anticapitalista wrote:

4.9.0-264 kernel is exactly the same as 4.9.264 kernel.

Right; I believe this renamed kernel was created as a workaround to a libc6 issue that was affecting access to the Wine application for some users.

My comments are in response to those who are questioning the order in which various kernels appear in their boot menus.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Bullseye a2 runit, ntp configuration, time servers settings is sub optimal.

/etc/ntpdate
# The settings in this file are used by the program ntpdate-debian, but not
# by the upstream program ntpdate.

# Set to "yes" to take the server list from /etc/ntp.conf, from package ntp,
# so you only have to keep it in one place.
NTPDATE_USE_NTP_CONF=yes

# List of NTP servers to use  (Separate multiple servers with spaces.)
# Not used if NTPDATE_USE_NTP_CONF is yes.
NTPSERVERS="0.debian.pool.ntp.org 1.debian.pool.ntp.org 2.debian.pool.ntp.org 3.debian.pool.ntp.org"

# Additional options to pass to ntpdate
NTPOPTIONS=""

in /etc/ntpdate use ntp date is set to yes but timeservers are uncommented.

in /etc/ntp.conf, there is another set of timeservers active/uncommented

[Member Xecure]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Does anyone else experience HD continuous writing in antix-bullseye 21a2 runit (installed on HD)?

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

[Member calciumsodium]

Helpful

Up

0

::

This is what I get when I do htop:

See attached screenshot.jpg. Is this similar to what you get?

Attachments:

1. 

   screenshot-1.jpg
   

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I have also seen the continuous writing to disk using runit on a2.
Probably due to too many runit log files running.

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member calciumsodium]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I have been testing anti-bullseye-a2-runit with the latest 5.10.27 kernel for a while. I find that it boots up very fast, compared to antiX 19.X. It works well with Chromium, Firefox-ESR, wine, dosbox, and Kodi 19. Those are the major programs that I use. It is so functional and fast, that I prefer to use it over my main antiX 19.1 system.

I have some observations/questions about antix-bullseye-a2-runit:

1. At every boot, it shows
rootantix21: recovering journal
Normally I see this message in antix 19.1 when rebooting after a crash. But I think that I have successfully shutdown of all the times that I have used a2-runit so far. Does this recovering journal message mean that I have crashed every time I shut down in a2-runit or should I not be worried about it? I normally use the logout menu and choose shutdown. And the computer shuts down like in 19.1. But I always get the recovering journal message.

2. At every boot, it shows
not starting: portmapper not working (warning)

Is this expected in the a2-runit?

3. I am using a laptop to test the a2-runit. I used the battery status option in the .conkyrc file to check on the status of my battery. It does not seem to be working. It only shows
Batt: 0%
even though there is charge in the battery.
The code in the .conkyrc file for a2-runit is:

Battery: ${battery_percent BAT0}% ${alignr}${color8}${battery_bar 8,70 BAT0} # You may need to change BAT0 to BAT1 or add the same line again if you have more then one battery.

I noticed that this code is also in the .conkyrc file of antix 19.3. In my experience, the battery status also does not work in 19.3 using this code. It always shows Batt: 0%.

I went back to antiX 19.1 and use the following code, which works:
${execi 1000 acpi 2>/dev/null | grep -q . && echo “Battery: “}${execi 10 acpi -b 2>/dev/null | cut -d” ” -f3,4 | sed ‘s/,$//’}

Output would be something like:
Battery: Charging, 34%
Battery: Discharging, 34%

I added this code to the .conkyrc file in a2-runit and it works!

4. At every boot, I see

failed to connect to system bus: no such file or directory
failed to start up Daemon: no such file or directory

Is this expected?
To me, it does not see to affect performance. It does not seem to affect the performance of the programs that I normally use.

5. I had mentioned this earlier in a previous post and @skidoo had followed up with some more details.
The Default option at the bottom of the Themes menu, in my experience, produces 3 blank boxes at the upper right of the X windows without the icons. If one hovers on the left of these boxes, it says Minimize. The middle says Maximize. The right says Close. But the normal icons are not present in these boxes. I also saw this bug in antiX 19.3 in the Default option in the Themes menu. However, the Default option of the Themes menu in the antiX 19.1 works.

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Runit is very new to me, do we need some special magic to read logs if any are written.
Bullseye a2 runit /etc/sv status looks like below. Seems directory is accessed at minimum
once every every second.

/etc/sv# sv status *
down: acpid: 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
run: anacron: (pid 72754) 13359s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
down: bluetooth: 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
run: connman: (pid 5755) 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
down: cron: 14818s; run: log: (pid 5748) 14818s
down: cups: 14818s; run: log: (pid 5749) 14818s
run: dbus: (pid 5746) 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
run: elogind: (pid 5876) 14817s; run: log: (pid 5744) 14818s
run: getty-tty1: (pid 5742) 14818s
run: getty-tty2: (pid 5757) 14818s
run: getty-tty3: (pid 5774) 14818s
run: getty-tty4: (pid 5775) 14818s
run: getty-tty5: (pid 5787) 14818s
run: getty-tty6: (pid 5790) 14818s
fail: getty-ttyS0: unable to change to service directory: file does not exist
down: gpm: 1s, normally up, want up; run: log: (pid 651821) 1s
run: haveged: (pid 5795) 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
down: ntp: 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
down: ofono: 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
down: rpcbind: 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
down: rsync: 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
down: rsyslog: 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
run: slim: (pid 5826) 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
down: smartmontools: 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
down: ssh: 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
down: tlp: 14818s; down: log: 0s, normally up, want up
run: tor: (pid 5823) 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up
run: udevd: (pid 5834) 14818s
down: ufw: 14818s; down: log: 1s, normally up, want up

• This reply was modified 2 years ago by ModdIt.

[Author]

Posts