antiX-bullseye-beta1 iso files available. 64 bit only

Forum Forums News Announcements antiX-bullseye-beta1 iso files available. 64 bit only

  • This topic has 110 replies, 14 voices, and was last updated Jun 20-10:00 am by Xecure.
Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 111 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #61297
    Forum Admin
    anticapitalista

    We have 2 versions for experienced users to try. One using SysVinit, the other runit.

    antiX-bullseye-b1-x64-full is a beta quality release for experienced testers of antiX to test and provide feedback.
    Do not use this as your main OS.

    * 4.9.0-264 and 5.10.27 kernels on the live iso. Please try both in your tests.
    * grub/UEFI live boot changes
    * no virtualbox-guest packages

    The implementation of runit in this edition is closer to how runit works on Void and Artix linux.
    Sysvinit has been replaced with various antiX runit scripts and our much smaller sysvinit package.

    Please post any feedback at antiX forums and state if you are testing live, frugal, in a virtual machine or on bare metal.

    Files here: https://sourceforge.net/projects/antix-linux/files/Testing/

    Edit 11 June 2021 – Note the newly uploaded SysVinit version that fixes a bug in the repos.

    • This topic was modified 1 week, 3 days ago by anticapitalista. Reason: added more info

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

    antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

    #61298
    Moderator
    ModdIt
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Many thanks, will setup runit edition tomorrow, been running the previous alpha with very few issues.
    Great work, many thanks to all who made and continue to make antiX such a fantastic OS.

    #61309
    Member
    skidoo
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    The “sysvinit-utils-antix” package
    may benefit from adding this recent patch, titled “Handle libcrypt moved to /lib”:
    https://salsa.debian.org/debian/sysvinit/-/blob/master/debian/patches/libcrypt-lib.patch

    #61325
    Member
    skidoo
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    as mentioned previously, the fluxbox eco-green style has poor (terrible) contrast, so it should be culled

    .

    #61327
    Member
    skidoo
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    reminder:
    https://gitlab.com/antix-contribs/contribs-goodies/-/blob/master/debinstaller
    stands as a ready replacement for 15MB+ gdebi (“gdebi” + “gnome-icon-theme”)

    #61337
    Member
    calciumsodium
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Concerning booting from a live USB, for me on on this test computer (Satellite 655-B5300), the 5.10.27 kernel boots much faster than the 4.9.0-264 kernel. I start my time from when I press enter on the grub menu to start the antix-bullseye-b1 OS and I stop the timing upon the appearance of the mouse cursor in the middle of the screen:

    
    OS                                    boot time
    
    b1-sysvinit with 4.9.0-264 kernel     43 s
    b1-runit with 4.9.0-264 kernel        44 s
    b1-sysvinit with 5.10.27 kernel       30 s
    b1-runit with 5.10.27 kernel          30 s
    

    The difference is between 13-14 seconds.

    Incidentally, when I tested the boot time in antix-bullseye-a2, the best boot time I ever got was 40 seconds. So there is a 10 second improvement in boot time since a2.

    #61388
    Member
    chrispop
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Testing runinit on a UEFI machine. Set up Live with persist-all. Swapped kernel from GRUB. All works as expected.

    Chris

    #61364
    Member
    calciumsodium
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    I get an error when trying to install wine in the antix-bullseye-b1-sysvinit with the 5.10.27 kernel using live USB.

    This is the error that I get:

    demo@antix1:~
    $ sudo apt update
    [sudo] password for demo:
    Get:1 http://deb.debian.org/debian bullseye-backports InRelease [37.0 kB]
    Get:2 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye-updates InRelease [40.1 kB]
    Get:3 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye InRelease [150 kB]
    Get:4 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/main amd64 Packages [8,190 kB]
    Get:5 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/main i386 Packages [8,129 kB]
    Get:6 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/main Translation-en [6,249 kB]
    Get:7 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib amd64 Packages [50.4 kB]
    Get:8 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib i386 Packages [45.3 kB]
    Get:9 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/contrib Translation-en [46.9 kB]
    Get:10 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free i386 Packages [76.9 kB]
    Get:11 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free amd64 Packages [93.9 kB]
    Get:12 http://ftp.us.debian.org/debian bullseye/non-free Translation-en [91.5 kB]
    Fetched 23.0 MB in 10s (2,228 kB/s)
    Reading package lists… Done
    Building dependency tree… Done
    Reading state information… Done
    4 packages can be upgraded. Run ‘apt list –upgradable’ to see them.
    demo@antix1:~
    $ sudo apt install wine wine32 wine64
    Reading package lists… Done
    Building dependency tree… Done
    Reading state information… Done
    Some packages could not be installed. This may mean that you have
    requested an impossible situation or if you are using the unstable
    distribution that some required packages have not yet been created
    or been moved out of Incoming.
    The following information may help to resolve the situation:

    The following packages have unmet dependencies:
    libdbus-1-3:i386 : Depends: libsystemd0:i386
    libeudev1 : Conflicts: libudev1:i386 (< 232:246:3.2.9.1.0antix4) but 247.3-5 is to be installed
    libpulse0:i386 : Depends: libsystemd0:i386
    E: Error, pkgProblemResolver::Resolve generated breaks, this may be caused by held packages.
    demo@antix1:~
    $

    I don’t recall getting this error when I successfully installed wine on the antix-bullseye-a2-runit last month.

    I still have the installed antix-bullseye-a2-runit partition. The same command to install wine on the antix-bullseye-a2-runit with 5.10.27 kernel installed system works just fine:

    jakersfan@jakersfan:~
    $ sudo apt install wine wine32 wine64
    [sudo] password for jakersfan:
    Reading package lists… Done
    Building dependency tree… Done
    Reading state information… Done
    wine is already the newest version (5.0.3-3).
    wine64 is already the newest version (5.0.3-3).
    wine64 set to manually installed.
    wine32:i386 is already the newest version (5.0.3-3).
    0 upgraded, 0 newly installed, 0 to remove and 201 not upgraded.
    jakersfan@jakersfan:~
    $

    #61392
    Forum Admin
    anticapitalista
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    What if you do the upgrade before installing wine?

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

    antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

    #61393
    Forum Admin
    anticapitalista
    Helpful
    Up
    1
    :D

    I get an error when trying to install wine in the antix-bullseye-b1-sysvinit with the 5.10.27 kernel using live USB.

    $

    I see the problem.
    The antiX bullseye repo is disabled.
    Enable it in /etc/sources.list.d/antix.list then do sudo apt update

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

    antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

    #61395
    Forum Admin
    anticapitalista
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    New SysVinit version uploaded to fix the repos issue.
    Thanks to calciumsodium for finding the bug.

    I added an edit to the original post.

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

    antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

    #61400
    Member
    calciumsodium
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    New SysVinit version uploaded to fix the repos issue.

    Thank you @anticapitalista,

    I was able to successfully install wine on the updated antix-bullseye-b1-sysvinit OS with the 5.10.27 kernel.

    • This reply was modified 1 week, 3 days ago by calciumsodium.
    #61403
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    I grabbed antiX-bullseye-b1-x64-full in SysVinit form and physically installed it, but I also have the image on USB.
    Been busy, so I barely got it installed and ran out of test time.
    I’ll provide a report on as many scenarios as I can run in the upcoming days (probably 1 at a time).

    Brian Masinick

    #61406
    Member
    Xecure
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    First, I must say WOW! What a fantastic job on the Boot menus! Really, a fantastic menu for Grub boot! People (me included) will no longer need to use the text menus or the bootcodes (memorized by heart) to change language, keyboard layout, etc. Fantastic work! I have played around a bit on UEFI boot and it is fantastic, and you can change things around a lot and it remembers it!
    I also tested the Legacy_BIOS boot and I also liked the change, but the Grub boot menu really impressed me.
    Last release I was also impressed by the multi-kernel boot options. Now they are even better, with easy switch and possibility to assign persistence to any of them without playing around with the code or boot files.

    I will have more time to test tomorrow and come up with a list of the changes I can find, so we can compare all the changes and amount of work that has gone into this.

    Now, on the issue I reported on the previous a2 related to ncurses interface cli programs.
    The clicking issues are also present here. I have tested different terminal emulators and can report that it works as expected on them. The easiest way to test is:

    1. On a pristine antiX 21 b1, launch roxterm and run htop. Click on anything and it will start “activating” things not related to what you are clicking (same for ceni).

    2. Replace roxterm-gtk2 for roxterm-gtk3 or install a different terminal emulator (like lxterminal). Launch that terminal and run htop. Clicking anywhere in the ncurses interface does as expected.

    So, using roxterm-gtk3 instead of roxterm-gtk2 would be a possible solution for anyone who prefers mouse input even on CLI.
    I assume that some gtk2 library was removed (or something different was updated that no longer works properly with gtk2) in bullseye and now roxterm-gtk2 doesn’t work properly with ncurses’ click input method. Just guessing here. Anyway, they (CLI interfaces) still work properly with keyboard input.

    Programs that didn’t work properly for me on roxterm-gtk2: htop and ceni (both act crazy with mouse input), sysv-rc-conf (ignores mouse input). But mc works properly.

    I also don’t think roxterm-gtk3 is the best solution, but a good compromise. It always launches in an extremely small window (and programs that require bigger terminal space just error out). Another example, mc has some rendering issues (on a VM, not tested bare-metal yet), and bpytop (tested it just looking for other cli interfaces) has a lot of issues in roxterm-gtk2 and gtk3.

    No other issues with roxterm-gtk2 (and we could argue that people should use keyboard input for cli programs, which is the usual).

    My congratulations to anticapitalista and everyone who contributed to this release.

    #61408
    Moderator
    Brian Masinick
    Helpful
    Up
    0
    :D

    Nice feedback Xecure! I can hardly wait to go through my own in depth exercise; sounds like it’ll be a pleasure, even if there are a few items to fix; this will be an EXCELLENT release!

    Brian Masinick

Viewing 15 posts - 1 through 15 (of 111 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.