Hello antiX community

[Member Pap]

Hello antiX community!
I was aware of antiX a long time ago, I even gave it a try in a virtualbox in the past, but since I am not a “distro-hopper” this is the first time I do have real antiX installations. I must say I am quite impressed.
I was always for lightweight distributions and desktops, but antiX brings the term “lightweight” to a another level. After setting up everything to my liking, antiX with a fully functional (and pretty) desktop starts by using ~90 Mb of memory, while the best I have seen so far using other lightweight distributions was around 140 Mb. The difference may seem small, but it’s not if you consider old machines with barely 1 Gb of memory… then every byte counts. Of course a bloated distribution would happily take over 500-1000 Mb of memory (or even more) before even running any application.
Not only that, but antiX was the only distribution that managed to deal with an old eee-PC equipped with the awful Intel GMA500 (“Poulsbo”) GPU. Literally every other distro I tried in that machine was “crawling” to the point of being unusable (and I tried many non-bloated distros). Even moving a window was dead slow, probably because of the lack of drivers for that GPU and/or incompatible kernel. Nevertheless antiX runs decently on that oldie, making it useful again. The only issue I had was startx failed after the first system update (I don’t use display managers so I uninstalled slimski). It didn’t take long to find a solution in antiX forums.
Furthermore, in other distributions I had to get rid of the crappy pulseaudio, which is used by default in most cases – and it is not always easy to get rid of it. With antiX, I didn’t have to bother.
All in all, a great distribution, full of features and yet easy on resources. I am surprised it is not more popular.

Last but not least, a humble (probably stupid) question: In the past, I used Debian “testing” for several years – until they introduced systemd. Back then “testing” was in fact quite stable (with rare, and never serious, issues). I’m not sure what is the situation nowadays, since I didn’t touch a Debian-based distro for more than 10 years. So I kept the default antiX repo configuration intact. Is this the “right”, official antiX way to go? I am asking because antiX gives me the option to add “testing” repos as well. There are some packages I would want up-to-date, and including “testing” repos will do that (nothing serious, no sid or controversial repos). I am ok with occasional issues caused by testing packages, but I also value stability, plus I don’t know how antiX behaves with testing repos in general. If issues are rather frequent, or outright dangerous with antiX, I’ll just stay on the default repos and compile/install the few packages I want up-to-date manually.

Official, dedicated, determined, fanatic systemd HATER since... its release.

[Forum Admin rokytnji]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Since we have systemd pinned. Also I am guessing you under stand ther antiX package manager and cli-aptiX as well as smxi,inxi,sgfxi .

I see no problem with running testing myself. I did for years . Just make sure to comment out debian multimedia repos when dist upgrading using testing repos.
In fact. My eeepc 701sd used to be famous on the old forums using testing repos with wbar, fluxbox, tint2, all ruuning.

Howdy and Welcome . 😀

• This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by rokytnji.

Sometimes I drive a crooked road to get my mind straight.
Not all who Wander are Lost.
I'm not outa place. I'm from outer space.

Linux Registered User # 475019
How to Search for AntiX solutions to your problems

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

At one time or another I have used Stable, Testing, and Unstable (Sid) versions of antiX.

I NEVER have more than one of those enabled on any particular instance of antiX, but on separate partitions or a different computer system I’ve had test versions and stable versions available.

If you want to do such things, make sure they are distinct systems; don’t mix repository instances on the same distribution instance.

--
Brian Masinick

[Moderator caprea]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hello Pap, welcome to antiX! The most critical moment when switching to testing is the first dist-upgrade after updating the sources. Therefore it is good to make this decision soon after the installation.The more packages are already installed the more have to go through this dist-uograde.Some prefer base for testing for this reason.
If you have overcome this hurdle, testing is actually quite calm waters on which you can sail for a few years quite relaxed(IMHO),if you followed the advices from above. And if there are problems, there is still this forum that is always ready to help.

[Member Pap]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Thank you all for the welcoming, information, and advises. I decided to keep the main “production” machine on antiX-stable, since I have already installed many development packages, and transition to testing will probably be problematic. I will install the few packages I want up-to-date manually from sources. However I will also try another installation with testing. If I understand well, the repo changes I have to make are:

…/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free is replaced by …/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
http://security.debian.org/ bullseye-security main contrib non-free is replaced by http://security.debian.org/ testing-security main contrib non-free
…/antix/bullseye/ bullseye main nosystemd nonfree is replaced by …/antix/testing/ testing main nosystemd nonfree

But what about the bullseye-backports and bullseye-updates, which are also included by default? Shall I remove them in testing?

rokytnji wrote:

Also I am guessing you understand the antiX package manager and cli-aptiX as well as smxi,inxi,sgfxi.

I actually liked cli-aptiX; neat and simple, does the job done. I like it more than aptitude, which was the tool I used in the past. I never used Synaptic, won’t do it 10+ years later either. Not familiar with the *xi tools you mentioned, but I am about to learn about those.

Brian Masinick wrote:

I NEVER have more than one of those enabled on any particular instance of antiX, but on separate partitions or a different computer system I’ve had test versions and stable versions available.

Makes perfect sense. Mixing repos from stable and testing or sid smells trouble.

caprea wrote:

The most critical moment when switching to testing is the first dist-upgrade after updating the sources. Therefore it is good to make this decision soon after the installation.The more packages are already installed the more have to go through this dist-uograde. Some prefer base for testing for this reason.

Also makes perfect sense. For that reason I am about to start a fresh base installation and immediately switch to testing before any dist-upgrade.

Official, dedicated, determined, fanatic systemd HATER since... its release.

[Moderator caprea]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Pap wrote:

the repo changes I have to make are:

…/debian/ bullseye main contrib non-free is replaced by …/debian/ testing main contrib non-free
http://security.debian.org/ bullseye-security main contrib non-free is replaced by http://security.debian.org/ testing-security main contrib non-free
…/antix/bullseye/ bullseye main nosystemd nonfree is replaced by …/antix/testing/ testing main nosystemd nonfree

Yes, you are right about that.
bullseye-backports and bullseye-updates should get removed or out commented for testing, as you have already guessed.

[Member sybok]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi and welcome.

I run a testing at home and stable at work (because testing does/did not have VirtualBox compiled without the systemd-dependecy).
The testing has been pretty stable so far; if there is a surprise coming (to sid and then it is expected to propagate into testing), anticapitalista usually posts a warning on the forum.
As others have mentioned, be careful with the extra repositories.
I dare to mix the testing with repository for MS Teams because it is needed at work.

Also, I have learnt to rather quickly recover (to a sufficient degree) after several failed experiments.
My recipe: 1) separate root ‘/’ and ‘/home’ partitions 2) Occasionally backup configuration files/directories from ‘/etc/’ and my ‘/home’ 3) Occasionally list installed packages into a TXT file OR keep a TXT file with additional packages I usually install 4) bookmarks in browsers

• This reply was modified 1 year, 2 months ago by sybok. Reason: item no. 4 added

[Forum Admin rokytnji]

Helpful

Up

0

::

When I was mentioning antiX package manager. A lot of new users think I am mentioning synaptic.
Google will be your friend better than me going through a long explanation on what the antiX package manager is.

https://www.linuxandubuntu.com/ezoimgfmt/i0.wp.com/www.linuxandubuntu.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/04/AntiX-software-installer.png

Sometimes I drive a crooked road to get my mind straight.
Not all who Wander are Lost.
I'm not outa place. I'm from outer space.

Linux Registered User # 475019
How to Search for AntiX solutions to your problems

[Member Pap]

Helpful

Up

0

::

rokytnji wrote:

When I was mentioning antiX package manager. A lot of new users think I am mentioning synaptic.
Google will be your friend better than me going through a long explanation on what the antiX package manager is.

Yes, of course I am aware of antiX package manager, but that one contains only the “popular” packages. If I don’t find what I need there (basically, all the *-dev packages) I use cli-aptiX or just plain apt.

Official, dedicated, determined, fanatic systemd HATER since... its release.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Pap wrote:

rokytnji wrote:

When I was mentioning antiX package manager. A lot of new users think I am mentioning synaptic.
Google will be your friend better than me going through a long explanation on what the antiX package manager is.

Yes, of course I am aware of antiX package manager, but that one contains only the “popular” packages. If I don’t find what I need there (basically, all the *-dev packages) I use cli-aptiX or just plain apt.

I do the same thing. When I first set up a new system, I may use their “convenience” package installer (whether on “our” distribution or another one), but once I have things initially installed, I use the standard command line utilties at least 90% of the time. For antiX and various Debian-based distributions, I set up a group of command aliases, very similar (but not quite identical) to what anticapitalista has done for antiX, and with these, once I log in, I can string a few of these aliases together on a command line. Each of my alias definitions includes either sudo or whatever admin directive is needed to access that particular distribution. So with a single line of 2-3 alias commands strung together, I can invoke my regular maintenance. Frankly, I could have also put all of them into a single script, a single alias, or whatever, but using the method I choose, I can mix and match the specific commands I want with short, one to three character alias names, and in a few seconds, I can issue the commands. Moreover, if I retain command line history, I can also RECALL a previous command or note the command history number (such as !163), and re-execute whatever was in the 163rd command… LOTS of different ways to expedite system management, once you set it up to suit your particular situation and interests.

--
Brian Masinick

[Author]

Posts