ISO-Snapshot comparison to Linux-Live.org tool

Forum Forums Official Releases antiX-19 “Marielle Franco, Hannie Schaft, Manolis Glezos” ISO-Snapshot comparison to Linux-Live.org tool

  • This topic has 5 replies, 3 voices, and was last updated Dec 28-3:31 pm by olsztyn.
Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #48178
    Member
    Avatarolsztyn

    While digging into parts of architecture and tools provided by antiX, it is needless to say again that none of other distros seem to provide Live tools as good or even coming close to antiX.
    Taking from here I came across ‘linux-live.org’, which has generic Live tools on github. These tools are presented as being able to create a Live Linux ISO from a Linux running system, which I thought only antiX can do…
    Out of curiosity I took this as a challenge and tested on a customized installation of Astra-Linux. To my surprise it did create a faithful Live system, carrying all details of customization and personalization, just as antiX tools do.
    As these tools (on github) are based on Debian, apart it is a script, not gui based, and using squashfs file system, are there architectural differences?
    Any insight will be greatly appreciated…

    #48201
    Moderator
    AvatarModdIt

    If you have not found it already below site may also be of interest for your experiments.
    #https://www.pendrivelinux.com

    #48237
    Member
    skidooskidoo

    You’ve asked a simple (straighforward) question, to which I might reply
    “Yes, significant architectural differences. Why are you asking?”

    are there architectural differences?

    Instead, I’ll risk spewing details regarding a few of the differences…

    As the Slax distroteer, TomasM transitioned away from a slackware base to using a debian base and, in the the linux-live tool, we can note a carryover of the “sb” (slax bundles) modules heuristic. The notion of employing “loadable, optional, on-demand modules” is explained (and visualized) here. The linux-live tool injects the content of an 01-core.sb (containing busybox, mmc and nvme drivers, plus a few utilities) into an initramfs, and packs the “build-ed” (debian, or whichever) system into another sb bundle file.

    During liveboot, linux-live employs dynefilefs (a fuse filesystem for loop-mounted sb (et al) files, developed by TomasM) and, optionally, httpfs2-enhanced (another proprietary component developed by TomasM, to support pxe boot)… along with posixovl (a fuse filesystem which “provides a filesystem view that supports various POSIX operations while using an otherwise incapable (vfat) lower filesystem“). In contrast, antiX liveboot employs mainstream-kernel-resident overlayfs filesystem.

    The linux-live mechanism contains (IIRC) hardcoded instructions to achieve maximum xz compression (implicit level 6, or specified level 9? I can’t recall) of its “bundle” files. It even includes steps of running upx — “an advanced executable file compressor. UPX will typically reduce the file size of programs and DLLs by around 50%-70%…” — and stripping the headers from the (already tiny) extlinux bootloader files. In contrast, the antiX tools offer a choice of compression (unpacking more-highly-compressed files during each liveboot takes longer, is more CPU intensive) and — more importantly, IMO — the antiX tools provide a well-curated set of exclusionary files//path (omitted from the produced copy, with attention to “no bloat” and toward protecting personal privacy) along with ease of customizing the exlustion list(s).

    We cannot (opensource) see the busybox sourcecode utilized in live-linux; the source is not readily available (the documented ftp server is no longer accessible
    http://ftp.slax.org/Slax-7.x-development/sources/Slax-7.0-sources/busybox-and-ntfs3g/ ). Can we (opensource) see the busybox sourcecode utilized by the antiX tools? (If so, I’m unaware of where/how to retrieve it.)

    ___________________________________________
    When requesting help, pasting the output from inxi -Fzr command will provide important relevant details:
    antiX version//edition ~~ stable vs testing repos ~~ live vs installed vs virtualbox ~~ hardware specs

    #48238
    Member
    Avatarolsztyn

    Thank you skidoo for this extensive analysis of approach taken in both architectures. I greatly appreciate this comparison. This your writeup will be added to my collection of valuable tech articles so as not to lose it. Also I will need to study this subject in more depth, as I am not familiar with some concepts described here.

    In contrast, the antiX tools offer a choice of compression (unpacking more-highly-compressed files during each liveboot takes longer, is more CPU intensive) and — more importantly, IMO — the antiX tools provide a well-curated set of exclusionary files//path (omitted from the produced copy, with attention to “no bloat” and toward protecting personal privacy) along with ease of customizing the exlustion list(s).

    I did notice the flexibility of choice provided in the antiX’ tool, comparing to linux-live, not speaking of gui interface.

    We cannot (opensource) see the busybox sourcecode utilized in live-linux; the source is not readily available (the documented ftp server is no longer accessible
    http://ftp.slax.org/Slax-7.x-development/sources/Slax-7.0-sources/busybox-and-ntfs3g/ ). Can we (opensource) see the busybox sourcecode utilized by the antiX tools? (If so, I’m unaware of where/how to retrieve it.)

    IMHO it would be great study if the source of both technologies could be found somewhere and also to safeguard the maintenance…
    Many thanks and best regards…

    #48239
    Member
    skidooskidoo

    found somewhere

    linked right atop the linux-live.org page: https://github.com/Tomas-M/linux-live
    also dynfilefs , httpfs2-enhanced , posixovl

    https://gitlab.com/antiX-Linux/iso-snapshot-antix
    (dependencies on “remaster-antix” and “iso-template-antix”, a sibling source repository for each)

    ___________________________________________
    When requesting help, pasting the output from inxi -Fzr command will provide important relevant details:
    antiX version//edition ~~ stable vs testing repos ~~ live vs installed vs virtualbox ~~ hardware specs

    #48272
    Member
    Avatarolsztyn

    Thank you skidoo…
    This is a valuable documentation to study these technologies.
    Greatly appreciate…
    Regards.

Viewing 6 posts - 1 through 6 (of 6 total)
  • You must be logged in to reply to this topic.