Is antiX a rolling or semi-rolling distribution?

[Member ryanh]

I came across antiX as an alternative to run a distribution on older devices. In searching through the forums, it isn’t clear to me if antiX is semi-rolling or a rolling release distribution? My understanding is that antiX is based on Debian which suggests that it’s neither and is a regular release/LTS distribution.

Assuming it’s semi-rolling or a regular release, what approach does antiX take to updates? Are these largely backported and if yes, how fast or slow are packages updated? Are there scenarios or situations where packages aren’t patched?

It would be super helpful to get an answer from the developers of antiX.

[Moderator christophe]

Helpful

Up

0

::

I’m not a dev, but I’ll say this: antiX is based on Debian stable by default.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/antix-linux/files/Final/antiX-21/
Except the antiX-Sid variant.
https://sourceforge.net/projects/antix-linux/files/Final/antiX-sid/

confirmed antiX frugaler, since 2019

[Member ryanh]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Thanks @christophe. That suggests to me that that it’s a regular release.

If yes, it’d be great to know/understand what approach does antiX take to updates? Are these largely backported and if yes, how fast or slow are packages updated? Are there scenarios or situations where packages aren’t patched?

[Moderator christophe]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Yes, it’s a regular release, each being supported for as long as its Debian base.
Systemd and some other files are removed & other/better alternatives replace them.
See the release notes for more info.
https://www.antixforum.com/forums/topic/antix-21-grup-yorum-released/
And hopefully someone who knows more about it will also respond.

confirmed antiX frugaler, since 2019

[Member blur13]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Also not a dev, but from what I gather “semi-rolling” in that its based on debian stable, but some packages that are integral to antiX are updated to the latest version on a rolling basis (eg Connman, icewm).

[Member sybok]

Helpful

Up

0

::

antiX is similar to Debian in this regard.
When you perform installation, there is an offer – target of the repositories: stable or testing or unstable.
Not quite sure about the last option (since it has been a while since my last [re-]install).
1) Stable = default choice; fixed release that gets updates, security fixes may be included into older packages instead of providing newer versions of these packages
2) Testing = rolling
3) Unstable/Sid = “wildly” rolling

If you want newer packages in Stable, you may allow “back-ports” into Stable; may lead to instability of the system, i.e. use at your own risk.

I use 2) testing at a home PC and 1) stable at workstations and notebooks (to avoid accumulated/large updates when traveling and not sure about internet connection).

Potentially off-topic, some useful info. can be found also in this post.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by sybok. Reason: item 1)

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Yet another non dev, I run stable Bullseye runit version but have many newer than release packages installed.
And fully up to date patched antiX kernel.

Some packages can not be backported due the neccesity for newer librarys libC one example.
Gimp is one which is important to some users I support.

To get the best of both worlds, stable and rolling we just run from a, special purpose, live stick with
antiX testing when need arises. Sometimes just to assess or test newer package versions.

You can easily keep Browsers, Libreoffice and many other packages up to date, either from Backports,
with usage of the antiX package installer which in many cases offers update/newer packages or,
in some cases, direct downloads from for example LO.org, Mozilla or developer sites. Appimages are also
sometimes useful.

[Member ryanh]

Helpful

Up

0

::

blur13 wrote:

Also not a dev, but from what I gather “semi-rolling” in that its based on debian stable, but some packages that are integral to antiX are updated to the latest version on a rolling basis (eg Connman, icewm).

Is there a way to know which are rolling, semi-rolling and backported?

[Member ryanh]

Helpful

Up

0

::

sybok wrote:

antiX is similar to Debian in this regard.
When you perform installation, there is an offer – target of the repositories: stable or testing or unstable.
Not quite sure about the last option (since it has been a while since my last [re-]install).
1) Stable = default choice; fixed release that gets updates, security fixes may be included into older packages instead of providing newer versions of these packages
2) Testing = rolling
3) Unstable/Sid = “wildly” rolling

If you want newer packages in Stable, you may allow “back-ports” into Stable; may lead to instability of the system, i.e. use at your own risk.

I use 2) testing at a home PC and 1) stable at workstations and notebooks (to avoid accumulated/large updates when traveling and not sure about internet connection).

Potentially off-topic, some useful info. can be found also in this post.

Can you elaborate on “allow backports”? My understanding is that if a package is backported, you accept it (patched) or you don’t (unpatched).

[Member ryanh]

Helpful

Up

0

::

ModdIt wrote:

Yet another non dev, I run stable Bullseye runit version but have many newer than release packages installed.
And fully up to date patched antiX kernel.

Some packages can not be backported due the neccesity for newer librarys libC one example.
Gimp is one which is important to some users I support.

To get the best of both worlds, stable and rolling we just run from a, special purpose, live stick with
antiX testing when need arises. Sometimes just to assess or test newer package versions.

You can easily keep Browsers, Libreoffice and many other packages up to date, either from Backports,
with usage of the antiX package installer which in many cases offers update/newer packages or,
in some cases, direct downloads from for example LO.org, Mozilla or developer sites. Appimages are also
sometimes useful.

To clarify, when you say you are running new versions that those installed, can you elaborate on what you mean? For example, do you mean that you have 2 different versions of the same package with one from the antiX repositories and the other directly from Mozilla? Assuming if it’s the latter, how are you receiving updates other than visiting the website or receiving update emails?

[Member sybok]

Helpful

Up

1

::

Can you elaborate on “allow backports”?

The repository files ‘/etc/apt/sources.list.d/‘ contain a file ‘<debian stable codename>-backports.list’.
If enabled (link within is not commented out), back-ports (re-compiled/packaged packages from testing, i.e. newer versions) are enabled.
For more details, see e.g. https://backports.debian.org/
The newest version is preferred by default by the ‘apt’ and ‘apt-get’ and ‘aptitude’utilites.

You could do some more magic with packages and repositories, including back-ports, using pinning, ‘/etc/apt/preferences.d/‘, see e.g. https://wiki.debian.org/AptConfiguration
Note: Systemd is kept out of antiX using apt-pinning.

I.e. the antiX installation, as far as Debian repositories is concerned, is pretty flexible (just as the Debian is).

BTW: You can manually change the files repository files to switch from 1) stable to 2) testing or 3) unstable at any point after the installation.
Addendum at authors request:
EDIT/FYI: I had to modify the path etc-apt-whatever, by making the slashes in Italics, as in https://www.antixforum.com/forums/topic/cannot-reply-to-topic-test/ in order to be able to post an update of my post. Otherwise I would get a block 403 as in https://www.antixforum.com/forums/topic/cannot-reply-to-topic-test/#post-7648 .

• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by sybok.
• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by ModdIt.

[Member ModdIt]

Helpful

Up

1

::

Topic was split:
When possible use package Installer to install latest software versions, that way
packages are included in normal updates.

At times there is a lag between package releases and backports or specific packages, in
particular testing releases are not included/available from distribution sources.

Latest Firefox from mozilla site will, if allowed to do so, inform of available updates.
Download and install is manual, an actual install is not really neccesary, just unpack
the archive to a folder in home , make the binary executable and run, a starter is easy
to make using the tool for personal menu addition in control center.

The download from Mozilla site includes a unique ID which is a certain tracking vector.
With firefox from the distribution that ID is same for all downloads so a particular
user is not quite as easily, but still trackable by moz and partners using/combining
other vectors.

Example Libreoffice, Latest or testing LO from LO Org informs updates are available,
same goes for extensions. Manual download of version and language pack or packs,
unpack the archives, enter sudo apt install drag and drop the
debs in to terminal the path will be auto entered, Press enter to install.

For LO installed in this manner, differing versions installed can coexist but it is
recommended to purge an older version then install the updated package.

Sounds complicated but quick and easy. Just yet another available choice for the user.
This can also be done on a live stick for learning and evaluation, no need to have any
fear of breaking an installation that way.

• This reply was modified 1 year, 1 month ago by ModdIt.

[Author]

Posts