Welcome!
Important information
-- Spectre and Meltdown vulnerabilities
-- Change in MX sources

News
-- MX Linux on social media: here
-- Mepis support still here

Current releases
-- MX-17.1 Final release info here
-- antiX-17 release info here

New users
-- Please read this first, and don't forget to add system and hardware information to posts!
-- Here are the Forum Rules

GCC-7 and MX's non-PAE kernel [Solved]

Message
Author
User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15662
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: GCC-7 and MX's non-PAE kernel [Solved]

#21 Post by Stevo » Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:33 pm

To answer a few questions, it's very easy to get the Liquorix headers to require the release's default gcc version, but this has to be set in a configuration file before the packages are compiled from source. You can't do it after the fact. You just have to change the one spot in /debian/config/defines where it says "gcc-7" to "gcc", run a command (PYTHONHASHSEED=0 debian/bin/gencontrol.py) to regenerate all the other config files from your changed defines, and then it will use whatever the default gcc is on that release...even gcc-8 if that's the default. Stretch=gcc-6, Jessie-based=gcc-4.9, Ubuntu 14.04=gcc-4.8.

Remember that newer kernels often need updated out-of-tree drivers, such as broadcom-sta-dkms or Nvidia graphics.

I also maintain a separate repo for Liquorix backports that does the same thing for gcc, so that's another alternative for antiX users.

However, you also asked the exact same question more that a month ago, and then responded with a bunch of violently racist sewage about the name of the antiX release...so you're just a troll wasting our time. Do you think our memories are as short as that?

skidoo
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 817
Joined: Tue Sep 22, 2015 6:56 pm

Re: GCC-7 and MX's non-PAE kernel [Solved]

#22 Post by skidoo » Thu Feb 01, 2018 4:51 pm

.
This would be a great FAQ addition to the wiki (bottom of page? https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/repos-mx-17 )
Q. I noticed there are lots of updates that MX stretch repo has that AntiX repo does not, what's up with that?
A. different projects, different repos, different goals. antiX also has a lot of packages in its' "nosystemd" repo that mx does not have.

One of the great errors people make when discussing "debian based distros" is the assumption that they are all the same. MX is based on antiX which is in turn based on Debian. So if you think of the layers, both antiX and mx use the debian stable repos by default. MX does use most of the antiX repos as well, but not the "nosystemd" one. antiX doesn't currently enable any of the mx repos by default, but the MX repos are generally safe to use for installing software on antiX, but I wouldn't want to leave them enabled all the time for fear of some problem during an antiX upgrade because system level packages can be very different and the mx repos feature backported software that can be newer than that in debian's repos.

in other words, its cleaner for the two project's goals NOT to keep all the repos enabled on both systems. there is some cross pollination of packages when necessary and wanted though. there are several de-branded mx tools in antiX for instance, but they are hosted in different repos. and there are several antiX tools on MX.

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 15662
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: GCC-7 and MX's non-PAE kernel [Solved]

#23 Post by Stevo » Thu Feb 01, 2018 5:57 pm


Post Reply

Return to “antiX”