- This topic has 61 replies, 7 voices, and was last updated Dec 16-7:34 pm by olsztyn.
- Posts
olsztyn
From experience, an indiscriminate upgrade to SID across the board leads to the same failure as before. The upgrade to SID must be done manually and selectively, being sensitive to antiX architecture.
Update:
If there are no objections or raised issues regarding the the previously outlined methodology I just want to report that this challenging project appears to finally work nicely.
I admit that I spent lots of time (and wasted most of that time) attempting to upgrade the existing SID Core to SID Base unsuccessfully, as warned by anticapitalista.
Having embarked on a different approach, namely starting from antiX 22 Base and manually upgrading to SID does seem to work. Synaptic was my friend here, showing difference in versions and naming of individual packages to help decide upgrades, so the upcoming SID Base is antiX specific and antiX architecture is not broken in result.
Taking this process as a learning experience, where methodology is enhanced in the course of the process execution, I added a few upgrade rules, so as to create a ‘semi-stable’ SID Base of antiX 22, in addition to previously posted methodology:
– If existing package is in Beta condition (naming convention) but the SID version is past Beta then upgrade.
– If existing package is release condition (naming convention) but the SID version indicates still Beta condition then do not upgrade yet.
– If both sides are Beta condition, but SID version is newer then upgrade.
– As previously mentioned, antiX specific versions take precedence and are upgraded only when SID version is newer antiX specific.With the above methodology I have at this point arrived at antiX SID Base that I will be further developing into a fully usable, semi-stable instance, for testing.
At this point it is furnished with kernel 6.0 but both previous kernels are installed as well.
Anyone, if interested in SID, can repeat the process to create SID antiX Base. It is easy but kind of time consuming in comparison to upgrade across the board…
But please anyone let me know if there are any faults or incorrect assumptions in this methodology so I can adjust accordingly…- This reply was modified 11 months, 4 weeks ago by olsztyn.
Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_ParametersWith the above methodology I have at this point arrived at antiX SID Base that I will be further developing into a fully usable, semi-stable instance, for testing.
At this point it is furnished with kernel 6.0 but both previous kernels are installed as well.Methodology outlined previously appears to work. My antiX runit SID ‘Base’ is being further developed into SID ‘Full’ as we speak. However it must be maintained cautiously to keep it ‘stable’.
Just to report my observations on my experience with antiX 22 runit SID ‘Base’ and beyond:
– All software is running their latest version as in SID or Debian Unstable, except I did not replace any antiX specific modules with Debian ones, even if later version, maintaining therefore antiX as should be. Any upgrade adventure must not be across the board, such as dist-upgrade, but must be selective, adhering to the previously defined rules. Any indiscriminate dist-upgrade is certain to wreak havoc in antiX SID, such as removal of runit components or installation of libelogind0 and doomed to failure.
– It is very noticeable how many components have been modified by anticapitalista (I attribute this to him for simplicity). This looks to me it must be an immense project to maintain antiX as systemd and elogind free as it must involve lots of work… Thank you anticapitalista!
However this also is a potential for growing concern how long such effort can be continued going forward at this pace. Particularly that some day anticapitalista might not be in his twenties anymore and might grow frustrated with this never ending effort…
– Having said that antiX 22 runit SID ‘Base+’ appears to work very nicely at this point for day-to-day use I noticed one minor issue that I am trying to resolve. Namely after installation of additional services, such as CUPS, such services do not seem to start automatically upon boot but need to be added in Runit-Services with each session, if needed. I am probably missing something to make them start automatically. CUPS is not included in Base but I have been developing Base further…
– So far all WM, customizations, such as for IceWM and JWM ported to SID with no issue, so bottom panels and key bindings work nicely the same way as in the antiX 22 ‘production’.
– Although I have started working on Pipewire implementation, following accomplishments of @stevesr0 and previously @Xecure, I am just a beginner and the entire Pipewire architecture still remains a project in itself.
Here I must mention that I am no longer installing Pulseaudio stuff in this SID antiX. I was about to remove Pulseaudio from my antiX 22 Full Stable, but I read that even complete removal leaves some garbage behind, so I need to understand how to do it cleanly. So far Alsa alone seems to work fine for me and mere support for Bluetooth is not worth.In summary:
The new SID Base+ version of antiX is about to become my new baseline of antiX for day-to-day operation. Just must be careful not to upgrade indiscriminately…Update:
The CUPS service not starting automatically on boot has been resolved. No issues remain at this point.- This reply was modified 11 months, 3 weeks ago by olsztyn.
- This reply was modified 11 months, 3 weeks ago by olsztyn.
Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters
- You must be logged in to reply to this topic.