- This topic has 20 replies, 9 voices, and was last updated Apr 13-6:35 am by olsztyn.
-
Posts
-
BobC
VW, Which version did you install?
I’m thinking that my machines with 4 gb or less of memory might be better off running 32 bit versions of systems if available, as they seem to run more efficiently, in terms of memory consumption. I haven’t done any scientific testing to see if that also results in better performance, but it could…
Has anyone done any testing on that?
Brian Masinick
‘leaner and meaner’ conveys to me the idea that something is ‘better than’ or ‘preferred’
which led me to suspect, based on Runit posts, that the antiX team may be preparing for an antiX change.
That’s why I asked my original question… to get clarify whether my suspicion was correct.
The team responded with ‘false’, thereby telling me my suspicion was incorrect.I apologize if my misinterpretation of ‘leaner and meaner’ an/or the Runit posts offended anyone;
I simply wanted to know where antiX was headed and did not want to invest lots of my time learning one antiX version, if the team is preparing to change to another version.I have both the previous SysVInit and the runit versions installed on my system (I also have MX Linux, Debian Linux, and several others) installed.)
The runit implementation is definitely nimble. I don’t notice a lot of difference between the SysVInit and runit versions in terms of functionality. I didn’t check resource usage or specific performance numbers, but the development team did do some analysis prior to choosing runit as a second option. I suspect that these two init subsystems are probably the two most efficient (and flexible), but they certainly both met the development team’s expectations.
The init system that we DO NOT promote with antiX is the one that Debian chose when they were looking for a more “modern” alternative to SysVinit.
As I previously shared,
https://www.slant.co/topics/4663/~linux-init-systems
compares several init alternatives. You’ll see why the team chose runit to complement the existing init subsystem and to provide another choice. You’ll also see why so many people were upset with the Debian team – enough so that the Devuan distribution forked from Debian.All of the init subsystems mentioned do offer the basic ability to spawn and fork processes. Runit is one of the ones that stays very true to its purpose, and that’s why the team chose it; the functionality is clean, fast, and light. The classic method, however, is also tried and true, and is also well suited to our distribution, and that is why these two are available.
I think if you look at the slant site and also compare the two init subsystems, you’ll see the wisdom of the developers. You choose one or the other; they are both effective and suit the purposes of this particular distribution well. I hope this helps.
--
Brian MasinickBrian Masinick
I just installed Hannie Schaft onto an HP laptop and that sure is mean and lean.
Wow!
I rarely have a new computer, and even when I do, it’s usually at the end of a sales cycle so it’s more affordable.
I therefore always look for systems that are efficient and effective.Though antiX isn’t the only one out there, I consistently find that every release works well for me, often better than any other.
Puppy Linux and Absolute Linux are two other distributions I can think of that are known to work with a fairly wide range of systems. They are good, too, but I actually get even better results overall with antiX. Some releases of those others have worked quite well, but EVERY version of antiX (and MX, and the old MEPIS too) have worked exceptionally well for me and this continues to be true.So while there are plenty of good, usable Linux distributions out there, antiX in particular has always suited my needs better than the others and this remains true with the current release. Huge thanks to both our developers and our community that makes suggestions and helps to test and improve our work. Thanks to all who participate!
--
Brian Masinickolsztyn
anticapitalista wrote:
AA BB wrote:
masinick: The above comments seem to suggest the antiX dev team is looking to replace SysVInit with runit. True ?False.
There’s your answer and it came from the man who is the person who owns antiX and makes decisions.
Pardon me…
I do not require any reply to this my post but the reply AABB got confuses me… AABB had a valid question on direction antiX is going and he got a confusing reply that promoting runit antiX as leaner and meaner has nothing to do with antiX direction even if antiX tries to be such all alomg…
So, overlooking such reply I would like to level set:
Are these correct statements (I expect them to be denied or corrected one way or another):
– Development of Runit was actually dropped in 2014. This means either it it a finished and perfect product, not requiring any fixes or improvements?
– antiX developers are not in fact set on most lean and mean edition of antiX (which would be on Runit instead of sysvinit) but offering two versions going forward, unsure if Runit version is rock solid, having not been developed since 2014?
As I said, I am OK with either but if Runit actually works and it is ‘leaner and meaner’ as promoted I would myself want to move to Runit…Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_ParametersBrian Masinick
What I read in the reference I posted was that:
1 Runit did have development stopped after 2014, but I recently read in an update that there’s a maintainer at the present time.
2. Also, I am NOT the definitive authority or the person who makes any decisions, anticapitalista is.
3. Runit is well received in the informal polls.
4. SysVInit is still stable and popular.
Let’s accept the excellent work from anticapitalista and the development team and accept their statement and their choice.
--
Brian MasinickLet’s accept the excellent work from anticapitalista and the development team and accept their statement and their choice.
Yes, indeed. Whatever anticapitalista wants to say on Runit I am fine with it. I am more interested in excellence of antiX than clarity of statements.
Thanks masinick also for additional info that a possibility is that someone is out there to maintain Runit should there be such need…Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
https://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters
- The topic ‘Why runit instead of other alternative inits?’ is closed to new replies.
