"Fattening" antiX and no systemd

[skidoo]

It was obvious that anticapitalista only guesses that some packages "may depend on libsystemd0"
and that "There may be other packages that need to be made systemd-free, but who knows."

What's obvious is that you're trolling and that you are bent on "winning an argument".

No one has had the time for, nor the need for, inspecting and scrubbing 10,000+ debian packages.
Until someone reports "Hey, I tried to install packageXYZ today and can't b/c it depends on packageQRS, which in turn depends on systemd"
why should we expect anticapitalista to know / care about the dependencies of packageXYZ ?

Your expectation that maintainers should proactively patch every "packageXYZ",
moreover every subsequently released version of every "packageXYZ"
represents an unreasonable "philosofical" (sic) demand.

[Richard]

Thank you, skidoo!

[Jerry3904]

+1

[manyroads]

Whilst reading this thread I, also, read a thread on the Debian vote to standardize on systemd. :lipsrsealed: Rather than mixing metaphors, I'll mix discussion threads, this is all beginning to sound, to me, a lot like a major distro discussion on architectural direction(s). Maybe Distrowatch isn't so wrong afterall....

btw... please ignore my comment here... it's just random, 'out loud' thinking.

[misko-2083]

Go away and laugh and/or cry! I could easily have deleted my post rather than add to it.

It was harsh, but we all need it sometimes.
Going now.

It was obvious that anticapitalista only guesses that some packages "may depend on libsystemd0"
and that "There may be other packages that need to be made systemd-free, but who knows."

What's obvious is that you're trolling and that you are bent on "winning an argument".

No one has had the time for, nor the need for, inspecting and scrubbing 10,000+ debian packages.
Until someone reports "Hey, I tried to install packageXYZ today and can't b/c it depends on packageQRS, which in turn depends on systemd"
why should we expect anticapitalista to know / care about the dependencies of packageXYZ ?

Your expectation that maintainers should proactively patch every "packageXYZ",
moreover every subsequently released version of every "packageXYZ"
represents an unreasonable "philosofical" (sic) demand.

That's a fair argument, no one expects from anyone to clean all the packages.
That branch would require many people. For a small team like antiX it's not possible.

But if you don't pin systemd packages with some update systemd will be installed.
So it's either clean them all or pin sytemd by default and it's parts.
This is how I look at it.

Talking about freedom and systemd is paradoxical https://github.com/systemd/systemd/issu ... -454544525
Took sime time to find this.

If systemd was easy to remove there wouldn't be this kind of talk.

[eye_of_man]

I have been thinking the same thing re: "fattening" antiX. I had a bit of spare time this past weekend and was able to build up a MX "lookalike" in a VM starting with an antiX-core install, then adding XFCE, etc. It's still systemd free, though care must be taken to ensure that libsystemd0 is not installed. I haven't tested it extensively, but everything I've tried works. Just for grins I also added on a subset of the MX tools. Currently I have this sitting in a VM, but I plan to put it on a live USB and tinker some more with it.

Here's a tiny screenshot (I had to scale the png down, the original was apparently too large to be attached):
antiX-mimicking-MX18.png

Edit: link to pasteboard for better view of the above screenshot:
https://pasteboard.co/HZP5nDg.png

Looks really nice. I think there may be "demand" for something like this if you feel like releasing it.

I mostly did it to satisfy my own curiosity as much as anything else. I'm not sure how to go about creating a 'release', and at any rate I probably wouldn't feel comfortable doing so without additional testing to ensuring that things more or less function as expected. If folks are really interested in such a thing then let me know via PM or whatever.

As an aside, I'm very happy with stock MX. I have various versions of MX installed on four of my machines here at home. I also have antiX installed on an older machine as well, and I've been playing around with it recently. I suppose that's what has piqued my interest regarding its flexibility. I have to say that overall I find antiX to be a most impressive piece of work.

[dreamer]

I have been thinking the same thing re: "fattening" antiX. I had a bit of spare time this past weekend and was able to build up a MX "lookalike" in a VM starting with an antiX-core install, then adding XFCE, etc. It's still systemd free, though care must be taken to ensure that libsystemd0 is not installed. I haven't tested it extensively, but everything I've tried works. Just for grins I also added on a subset of the MX tools. Currently I have this sitting in a VM, but I plan to put it on a live USB and tinker some more with it.

Here's a tiny screenshot (I had to scale the png down, the original was apparently too large to be attached):
antiX-mimicking-MX18.png

Edit: link to pasteboard for better view of the above screenshot:
https://pasteboard.co/HZP5nDg.png

Looks really nice. I think there may be "demand" for something like this if you feel like releasing it.

I mostly did it to satisfy my own curiosity as much as anything else. I'm not sure how to go about creating a 'release', and at any rate I probably wouldn't feel comfortable doing so without additional testing to ensuring that things more or less function as expected. If folks are really interested in such a thing then let me know via PM or whatever.

As an aside, I'm very happy with stock MX. I have various versions of MX installed on four of my machines here at home. I also have antiX installed on an older machine as well, and I've been playing around with it recently. I suppose that's what has piqued my interest regarding its flexibility. I have to say that overall I find antiX to be a most impressive piece of work.

No problem. If I really want this I think I can put it together myself and so can probably most users on this forum. My comment was more to reflect that there seems to be some "empty space" between antiX and MX Linux. There is a thread about slimming down MX and now this thread about making antiX fatter.

[skidoo]

But if you don't pin systemd packages with some update systemd will be installed.
So it's either clean them all or pin sytemd by default and it's parts.
This is how I look at it.

We're in agreement. A screenshot in my earlier post might have sufficed, instead a longwinided attempt to bring kids (newcomers) up to speed

[figueroa]

... with Gentoo or even Linux From Scratch.

Yeah, looking at gentoo certainly does make sense. I actually did so but in the end I could not find a stable, supported set of tools to do a frugal install with the same sort of persistence options antiX and MX offer

I think you are right. A long-term live-usb or frugal install of Gentoo or LFS doesn't make sense. The storage and hard drive thrashing requirements are hight because of the need to be regularly be compiling from source to stay up-to-date. For a frugal or live-usb, for now, antiX and MX seem to be the best and very solid choices.

[asqwerth]

I think you are right. A long-term live-usb or frugal install of Gentoo or LFS doesn't make sense. The storage and hard drive thrashing requirements are hight because of the need to be regularly be compiling from source to stay up-to-date. For a frugal or live-usb, for now, antiX and MX seem to be the best and very solid choices.

That's the thing, isn't it? No single distro is going to be the perfect distro for every single use case and user.

And even if you decide a distro is the best for a particular use, there might still be a few things about the distro you wish you could change or improve on.