Remaster

[Member Peter Linu]

Hiyall,
I want to start experimenting with a live usb. I have read lots. I can’t find an icon for ‘remaster’. Where is it?

Live-USB = zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base: static persistence
VirtualBox= zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base

[Member sybok]

Helpful

Up

0

::

The live-USB tools, including remaster, are antiX (and perhaps also MX-Linux?) specific, hence (at least on my antiX-21 testing):
Main menu -> Applications -> antiX -> …
BTW, more information on remaster can be found: https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Remaster

It seems the wiki incorrectly points to Main menu -> Applications -> System.
It also mentions ‘antiX Control Centre’ which also does not contain it in my case.
Not sure if due to perils of running testing or recent change not reflected in the wiki.

[Member Peter Linu]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Sybok,
Which one of the attached is a pseudonym for ‘remaster’?

Attachments:

1. 

   Screenshot-from-2022-07-14-21-33-04.png
   

Live-USB = zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base: static persistence
VirtualBox= zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base

[Member sybok]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Hi, you seem to have a different menu.
Then try the path in menu that is posted on the wiki.

[Member Peter Linu]

Helpful

Up

0

::

sybok,
The path in the wiki didn’t work either. Then I noticed (attached screenshot) that the control centre doesn’t have a left-hand ‘Live’ category. How do i get that?

Attachments:

1. 

   controlcentre.png
   

Live-USB = zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base: static persistence
VirtualBox= zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base

[Member Peter Linu]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Sorry. Correct screenshot attached.

Attachments:

1. 

   Screenshot-from-2022-07-14-22-29-28.png
   

Live-USB = zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base: static persistence
VirtualBox= zzz-IceWM-antiX21-runit-64-base

[Forum Admin anticapitalista]

Helpful

Up

0

::

It only appears when you are running ‘live’ not installed to hard drive.

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

antiX with runit - leaner and meaner.

[Member iznit]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Which one of the attached is a pseudonym for ‘remaster’?

Peter Linu, from your “installed” system [[[installed to virtual hard drive]]] you can choose “ISO Snapshot” [[[from the menu shown in your screenshot]]]. This will capture the running system into an ISO file. Then choose “Live USB Maker” [[[from the menu shown in your screenshot]]] and when that program launches, browse select that brand new ISO file as the source for creating the live USB.

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

On a system installed to the physical system disk (not live or virtual machine image),
The menu Applications —> antiX —> Remaster exists. (antiX 21).

--
Brian Masinick

[Member olsztyn]

Helpful

Up

0

::

iznit wrote:

from your “installed” system [[[installed to virtual hard drive]]] you can choose “ISO Snapshot” [[[from the menu shown in your screenshot]]]. This will capture the running system into an ISO file. Then choose “Live USB Maker” [[[from the menu shown in your screenshot]]] and when that program launches, browse select that brand new ISO file as the source for creating the live USB.

This pretty much expected process to create Live antiX from a traditionally installed antiX… At this time I do not have any traditionally installed antiX on any of my laptops and I am running antiX Live across the board, but I will traditionally install and test it when time allows. However I would like to hear from experts whether you can actually create a true and effective Live antiX instance through such process, starting from a traditionally installed antiX…
I may likely be wrong in my this challenge, as I am not myself sure of this. I just have some doubts, using terminology of some other posters, so please prove me wrong:
– Traditionally installed antiX, as well as other (Linux) systems detect hardware during the install process and install just appropriate drivers corresponding to hardware. Live antiX does not do such thing as it does not know on what hardware it will run, so it is designed to detect hardware during boot time and adapt accordingly to hardware of the machine on which it happens to boot.
– Creating a Snapshot image from a traditionally installed system, which has configuration of drivers and other hardware support modules pre-established during such system install, will result in such snapshot image carrying a faithful image of the traditionally installed system. Having created a Live version from such snapshot, this Live antiX will boot fine on the same machine from which the snapshot was taken as it is an image reflecting that machine hardware. However being specific to that hardware, such Live may lack the flexibility of true Live to be initially agnostic of the hardware and instead to detect hardware during boot time.

Whether my above conjecture is indeed reflecting the antiX Live design or not – this becomes very interesting and important to know if we want to understand antiX.
Hopefully antiX experts will shed some light on this and will either confirm or disprove the above stated points…

• This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by olsztyn.
• This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by olsztyn.
• This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by olsztyn.

Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Thank you @olsztyn for your astute observations and comments in this matter. They are definitely worth consideration and your main contention that anything derived from an existing configuration will most certainly reflect that configuration UNLESS hardware specifics are SPECIFICALLY omitted from the resultant build – which, as you point out, is usually NOT the case.

Moreover your contention that the live environment attempts to detect the configuration also appears to be accurate. In cases where the target platform cannot be detected and specific drivers included, such configurations cannot work unless the appropriate drivers are somehow grafted into the build AND the kernel in use accepts and recognizes the hardware that’s being included.

I actually have one system where I experience this issue – namely the antiX live and installed images are unable to detect and configure the wireless interface on my newest computer. It’s confounding to me because Debian 11, siduction (a Debian Sid derivative) and MX 21 AHS do recognize the wireless hardware. I haven’t re-engineered the antiX 21 build, since I do have antiX 21 available on FOUR different hardware platforms – and the one I’m using right now runs ONLY antiX. I do hope that antiX 22 will be able to detect and use the wireless driver on my Acer Aspire 5 Model A515-55 because this unit has a responsive NVME SSD that provides a nice boost to an otherwise so-so Intel Core i3 10th Generation processor set; with Linux systems that hardware runs very well. You can just imagine that given the 2010-era desktop system (HP desktop S5747C) runs well with dual core AMD Athlon II X2 255 – mobo speeds between 800 MHz and max 3100 MHz, the Core i3 with faster processors, newer cache and current generation NVME SSD could make the next release of antiX truly FLY!

But back to your comments; I think you’re right on track and your thoughts are certainly consistent with a reasonable interpretation of our implementation. Only a code inspection and an informed developer could tell us more (I’m neither of these), so I can only provide the opinion that your thoughts make good sense.

• This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by Brian Masinick.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member olsztyn]

Helpful

Up

0

::

Brian Masinick wrote:

I think you’re right on track and your thoughts are certainly consistent with a reasonable interpretation of our implementation. Only a code inspection and an informed developer could tell us more (I’m neither of these), so I can only provide the opinion that your thoughts make good sense.

Thank you Brian…
I am hoping some antiX developers will explain these when possible. I am still hoping I am wrong on my conjecture though. It was just based on basic observations of boot behavior difference between an actual antiX Live and an antiX Live produced from ISO snapshot of antiX running on a specific machine.

Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters

[Moderator Brian Masinick]

Helpful

Up

0

::

It may be possible to search for hardware modules regardless of the configuration; that would certainly be nice.

It would also be really nice if newer hardware could be recognized by the process but that may be impossible if we also want to be as lean as possible. I’m hoping for a creative mechanism that could potentially support either newer or older equipment by scanning for certain characteristics and selecting the appropriate kernel and hardware modules; that may be too much to ask while maintaining the lean, efficient nature of the software but it’s worth raising and chatting about while we’re still designing and conceiving what the future software will contain.

--
Brian Masinick

[Member iznit]

Helpful

Up

0

::

whether you can actually create a true and effective Live antiX instance through such process, starting from a traditionally installed antiX

Yes, following the part of my post you quoted…..

iznit wrote:
from your “installed” system [[[installed to virtual hard drive]]] you can choose “ISO Snapshot” [[[from the menu shown in your screenshot]]]. This will capture the running system into an ISO file. Then choose “Live USB Maker” [[[from the menu shown in your screenshot]]] and when that program launches, browse select that brand new ISO file as the source for creating the live USB.

…..if you choose choose “personal snapshot”, it produces [[I have tested]] a perfect result. Beforehand, do take the time to review [[[and probably edit]]] the “general” and “snapshot” excludes files, so you do not wind up with any surprises as to what files have NOT been preserved.

edit

Live antiX does not do such thing as it does not know on what hardware it will run, so it is designed to detect hardware during boot time and adapt accordingly to hardware of the machine on which it happens to boot.

Well I did not read the question carefully enough. My “perfect” result, I did not test whether it is hardware-specific. The snapshot program, I did look into the source code though. It injects a prebuilt “initrd.gz” file which I expect does contain the full range of supported hardawre modules [[[drivers]]].

• This reply was modified 9 months, 3 weeks ago by iznit.

[Member iznit]

Helpful

Up

0

::

On a system installed to the physical system disk (not live or virtual machine image),
The menu Applications —> antiX —> Remaster exists. (antiX 21).

Do [[[attempt to]]] launch it, to confirm that it cannot be run outside the context of a live (exclusively antiX) environment.

[[[ clue: The script for the program is literally named “live-remaster.sh” ]]]

[Author]

Posts