- This topic has 12 replies, 4 voices, and was last updated Aug 1-6:41 pm by Brian Masinick.
-
Posts
-
mikey777
I’ve copied the iso file for antiX19.4-core-sid onto a USB stick, for installing this edition to my laptop’s internal drive.
The installation did not run as it should as the first reboot, following the cli-installer step, resulted in a blank screen and flashing cursor, instead of the command-line prompt presenting itself to allow installation to continue.The issue might be the kernel 5.8 which comes prepackaged with the above sid edition, as I’m attempting the install on an old machine (14 years). So, it might be worth trying the install with an older kernel, something that Brian (Masinick) has already suggested elsewhere on the forum. However, the problem is how do I change the kernel on the USB iso file ?
Many thanks for any help with this.
- This topic was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
- This topic was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
- This topic was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
▪ 32-bit antix19.4-core+LXDE installed on :
- (2011) Samsung NP-N145 Plus (JP04UK) – single-core CPU Intel Atom N455@1.66GHz, 2GB RAM, integrated graphics.
▪ 64-bit antix21-base+LXDE installed on:
- (2008) Asus X71Q (7SC002) – dual CPU Intel T3200@2.0GHz, 4GB RAM. Graphics: Intel Mobile 4 Series, integrated graphics
- (2007) Packard Bell Easynote MX37 (ALP-Ajax C3) – dual CPU Intel T2310@1.46GHz, 2GB RAM. Graphics: Silicon Integrated Systems.
sybok
Hi, try this:
https://download.tuxfamily.org/antix/docs-antiX-19/FAQ/remaster.html
There’s also a link to a youtube video.I have used the instructions/tools once; opposite problem: kernel too old for a vey recent laptop.
Took me some time to change boot to the newly installed kernel but it was easy, in retrospect.
Unfortunately, I have forgotten the details.
Brian Masinick
I’m not sure that your configuration will run with antiX 19.4.
Try antiX 17.4.1 and see if it works. If so, then experiment with kernels. I vaguely recall that the Linux kernel project trimmed out support for some hardware more than 10 years old that is no longer available for newly purchased systems.
If even 17 doesn’t work, go back incrementally to earlier versions. I remember an exchange with someone else in the past year. This approach helped them eventually find a version that works.
--
Brian MasinickBrian Masinick
If you can get the remaster approach to work, that would allow you to have newer software, so try that before the other work around.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by Brian Masinick. Reason: Newer not never
--
Brian Masinick
Xecure
You can ignore this advice, if you don’t think it applies to your case.
You could start with “normal” (non-sid) antiX 19.4-core and before installing anything, change the sources to sid (changing /etc/apt/sources.list.d/[antix.list,debian.list] and comment out or remove all non-sid sources) and then sudo apt update && sudo apt dist-upgrade so that you can then install as a SID system, and not a buster system. This way you can start with a system you know boots, with the 4.9 kernel, and installs with sid repos.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by Xecure.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by Xecure.
antiX Live system enthusiast.
General Live Boot Parameters for antiX.mikey777
I’m not sure that your configuration will run with antiX 19.4.
I’ve made a typo in this thread – I was actually trying to install the 19.3core-sid version (which I’d downloaded), not 19.4 as it isn’t yet available directly for download as a sid version. Silly me!
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
▪ 32-bit antix19.4-core+LXDE installed on :
- (2011) Samsung NP-N145 Plus (JP04UK) – single-core CPU Intel Atom N455@1.66GHz, 2GB RAM, integrated graphics.
▪ 64-bit antix21-base+LXDE installed on:
- (2008) Asus X71Q (7SC002) – dual CPU Intel T3200@2.0GHz, 4GB RAM. Graphics: Intel Mobile 4 Series, integrated graphics
- (2007) Packard Bell Easynote MX37 (ALP-Ajax C3) – dual CPU Intel T2310@1.46GHz, 2GB RAM. Graphics: Silicon Integrated Systems.mikey777
You could start with “normal” (non-sid) antiX 19.4-core and before installing anything, change the sources to sid (changing /etc/apt/sources.list.d/[antix.list,debian.list] and comment out or remove all non-sid sources) and then sudo apt update && sudo apt dist-upgrade so that you can then install as a SID system, and not a buster system. This way you can start with a system you know boots, with the 4.9 kernel, and installs with sid repos.
The method you’ve just described would appear to me to be the simplest way of installing sid on this old laptop – it looks really cool & many thanks for that. Just as an aside, I installed kernel 5.8 on the “normal” (non-sid) antiX 19.4-core, to check that kernel 5.8 in the sid-version was likely to have been the issue: the result showed that it was, i.e. the laptop rebooted to a blank screen.
Using your method, I’ve started with 19.3-core (non-sid). I did this because as sid isn’t yet available on 19.4-core, your method might not work, if I started out with antiX 19.4-core (non-sid). However, following installation of antiX 19.3-core (non-sid), I notice that in /etc/apt/sources/list.d there is a choice between both ‘sid’ and ‘rolling’ repos: it’s unclear now which one I should choose. I thought ‘sid’ was a rolling release, which was my reason for originally choosing sid, i.e. I’d like a rolling rather than a fixed release, with the caveat that it’s as stable as can be possible.
So in the */list.d what’s the difference between ‘sid’ and ‘rolling’ sources? Thankyou for any clarity on this, so that I uncomment the right options – many thanks.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
▪ 32-bit antix19.4-core+LXDE installed on :
- (2011) Samsung NP-N145 Plus (JP04UK) – single-core CPU Intel Atom N455@1.66GHz, 2GB RAM, integrated graphics.
▪ 64-bit antix21-base+LXDE installed on:
- (2008) Asus X71Q (7SC002) – dual CPU Intel T3200@2.0GHz, 4GB RAM. Graphics: Intel Mobile 4 Series, integrated graphics
- (2007) Packard Bell Easynote MX37 (ALP-Ajax C3) – dual CPU Intel T2310@1.46GHz, 2GB RAM. Graphics: Silicon Integrated Systems.Brian Masinick
I’m glad that you were able to determine that certain kernels work with your system and others do not.
As far as “rolling” – that is, offering a continual update path, either Testing or Sid (unstable) would provide this.
In a rather round about way, putting in Stable (instead of Buster or Bullseye) would potentially provide a similar capability, but you’d have to be extremely aware of a new release and the potential for major changes all at once.
For instance, we are very close to the release of Bullseye; it’s currently in release candidate 2 stage. If you set the Debian repo name to stable, update now, then wait about a month (or whenever Debian actually releases Bullseye), you would be best to wait a few days to a week AFTER the release to update. What would happen when the release name is set to stable is that a large number of changes would suddenly become available.
Frankly, when you’re working with Debian packaging, it’s best to hold back on updates right around release time. If you REALLY know what you are doing you can update, but you run a high risk of failure, and if you do experience failure, you have to have a plan to fix the failure; otherwise you have to reinstall. I say all of this because I have deliberately tried to break my system (I did have ways to recover). It only broke once or twice, but when it does, it’s pretty catastrophic; only a reinstall will truly fix it right under those instances, hence my words of caution.
--
Brian Masinickmikey777
Thanks Brian for your advice.
So for a rolling release, which is preferable ‘sid’ or ‘testing’? Are they both as stable/unstable as each other? It’s still a bit unclear for me, and also the differences between them in simple terms – excuse my slowness to latch on.
Therefore, from what you’ve said above, I’ve understood that it’s okay to choose the ‘Stable’ repos option, as long as one waits, say a month or so after a new release, so the system doesn’t break with a sudden surge of changes all at once. In view of this, are you saying it might be unwise to choose the ‘Stable’ option ..?
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
- This reply was modified 1 year, 9 months ago by mikey777.
▪ 32-bit antix19.4-core+LXDE installed on :
- (2011) Samsung NP-N145 Plus (JP04UK) – single-core CPU Intel Atom N455@1.66GHz, 2GB RAM, integrated graphics.
▪ 64-bit antix21-base+LXDE installed on:
- (2008) Asus X71Q (7SC002) – dual CPU Intel T3200@2.0GHz, 4GB RAM. Graphics: Intel Mobile 4 Series, integrated graphics
- (2007) Packard Bell Easynote MX37 (ALP-Ajax C3) – dual CPU Intel T2310@1.46GHz, 2GB RAM. Graphics: Silicon Integrated Systems.Brian Masinick
I don’t think that it is necessary to wait a whole month after a release, or stop updating a month before a release. It’s just important to know when a release takes place and exercise caution around that time, primarily to make certain that the repositories have time to update themselves.
The primary repositories are usually updated within a few hours of release; it’s the secondary repositories that sometimes take a while to be up to date.
If you know what to look for, you can update as soon as you are comfortable that they are “up to date”.I provided a “Wide window” only for those who are completely unfamiliar with Debian releases.
I’ve posted a few articles here already about the status of the Debian 11 (Bullseye) release; it’s currently in Release Candidate 2 stage, which means that it’s close to final.IF you DO want to regularly update your system, the most plausible repo to use right now with the least amount of caution would be Testing.
Why? Stable will be changing from Buster to Bullseye when the release is finalized. Unstable is pretty quiet right now because of various “freeze” initiatives Debian employs. Testing probably isn’t changing much now either, but at release time, Stable will change quite a bit and so will Unstable; Testing will only have a moderate amount of change.
Once the release actually takes place, Stable will become pretty quiet, with only major security changes; it’s only during the week of the release that using the tag “Stable” will be volatile.
Alternatively, if you use the name Buster or Bullseye right now, you won’t have a problem (at least with Debian packages; the concerns there would be with any packages peculiar to a Debian derivative; I’ve never had a problem with Stable, Testing, Unstable, or the use of any release name when using antiX, so I’m being over cautious here, only describing “potential” problems. These “problems” occur only when you get caught making changes as a major repository changes, which is the only reason I over emphasized caution at release time.
--
Brian MasinickBrian Masinick
I hope I’ve not been confusing in this discussion; I’m raising flags so that people will be aware of risks (however small) near release changes; the rest of the time, any of the Debian repositories are reasonable to use; it all depends on your familiarity. Once you really get used to Debian, I think that Sid is the “cool” place to hang out. (That applies to antiX too). You’ll see, if you look closely at what anticapitalista uses, is that in between releases, he spends a lot of time using Sid, at least on his research and development environment. Of course, he also has systems that run his stable software too.
--
Brian Masinickmikey777
Thankyou very much Brian for your very thorough replies which are really appreciated. I think the rest now is really down to me in getting some experience/confidence with using any of the rolling versions, taking your comments into account.
To minimize risk, I do all my day-to-day tasks anyway on the fixed release antix19.4-core (non-sid) which seems as stable as a rock. I’ve included antix19.3-core-sid, and any other antix versions, on any spare drive space, in a multiboot set-up. I’ll give myself plenty of time though, until I’m at ease with the ins-and-outs of any of the rolling antiX versions, before swapping with my trusty fixed release one.
Thankyou again Brian, for your continuing help & encouragement.
▪ 32-bit antix19.4-core+LXDE installed on :
- (2011) Samsung NP-N145 Plus (JP04UK) – single-core CPU Intel Atom N455@1.66GHz, 2GB RAM, integrated graphics.
▪ 64-bit antix21-base+LXDE installed on:
- (2008) Asus X71Q (7SC002) – dual CPU Intel T3200@2.0GHz, 4GB RAM. Graphics: Intel Mobile 4 Series, integrated graphics
- (2007) Packard Bell Easynote MX37 (ALP-Ajax C3) – dual CPU Intel T2310@1.46GHz, 2GB RAM. Graphics: Silicon Integrated Systems.Brian Masinick
I think that you are doing a great job and before long you will be able to help others with the very things that you are doing and learning now.
You are asking good questions; that is a good sign.
Keep up the good work; you are already doing well!
--
Brian Masinick
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.
