A view of managing System Maintenance

[skidoo]

I recently made a customized theme in MX (because that appears to be the only way to make the mouse cursor larger)

Some cursorsets employ scalable imagefiles (and provide a choice of "sizes"), some do not.
Here you can find 875 freely-available mouse cursor sets, including animated sets and (no kidding) "left-handed" sets and...
https://www.opendesktop.org/browse/cat/107/

It seems they are talking about problems with "caching all over the place" as opposed to some "universal" style cache (whether that is the same cache we discussed, or associated/linked with the kind of cache we discussed).

Three? In Linux are such caches created "at will", and "wherever"?

^--- and (hold that thought) ---v

if there was a System Utility that I could go to, to adjust System "stuff" (within proper, restricted, technical limits) then I don't need to bother you about this.

Across flavors of linux, and across projects which are intended to be used on "linux desktop systems", yes some "conventional" path locations exist ~~ separate paths where font caches, and icon caches, and thumbnail image caches are expected (invited) to reside. Yes, not every software project adheres to use of those "conventional" locations.

With each package install operation (and update, remove, purge operation) the package management automated workflow will (er, should) refresh the appropriate cache(s).

It's unclear to me: what is your concern, your goal, with regard to self-managing the cache contents and/or cache update frequency?
FWIW, toward "avoiding bloat" and minimizing the size of system backups... I personally choose to nuke (delete) the iconcache files.
Additionally (knowing that, in my use, I will _never_ need use of the @64 @72 @128 @256 -sized variants) I delete a large portion of the files residing under /usr/share/.../icons/.../256

(woogaloo)
wherever possible, I try to never use something with a "0.xxxx" prefix - even from Synaptic. "Beta" is a no-no.

What do you guys think of the program - worthy or way too risky?

Wait, let's jump back up to "how can I make my mouse curser larger?" aka "appears to the the only way to..."

See? This is one example, one among endless "tasks" for which
you're looking for, asking for, expecting a one-size-fits-all "answer" where none such exists.

Behind the "xTeq -ish" woogaloo user interface, there's already a jumble of conditional considerations. For. Each. Task.
Should the UI lead you toward "xrandr", rescaling your entire desktop larger, in order to "solve" the mouse cursor task?
Should (must?) the UI prompt you, steer you toward documentation, so that you learn "it depends (whether your selected cursorset provides "sized" variants)"?

woogaloo was presented as a proof-of-concept. It will never see (by my hand) a "version one point oh"
Is it (its functionality) dangerous?
That's both a great question, and underscores the ultimate "point" of the presentation ~~ "with great power comes great responsibility".
Any allinonecontrolpanel application risks serving as a "footgun" when it is operated by an uninformed user.
IMO, the "all-in-one" utility should, instead, present "questions, plus link to task-relevant wiki page, or user manual section, or application-specific documentation"

[boombaby]

Hello, skidoo...

Thanks for that. The mouse cursor tip was good.

Thanks for the info on the caches. The fact that not all software adheres to Standards appears to be a problem, if you want a stable O/S. You know, in the last few days I found another cache for one bit of software but now I can't find it.

Be fair, skidoo, it's not '...endless taks...you're looking for' just some tasks that will make managing the system easier and the "User experience" better.

On your last points; yes, there are a number of ways to present an outcome...
...

[boombaby]

Hello, skidoo, et all...

In recent weeks I have been working on the problem of my system "freezing" - instant (freezing) and unrecoverable. This was not happening after original install of MX. This problem appeared to commence after a recent update that I carried out. I cannot be certain. I wasn't watching because I didn't expect it - if I was working out of stable repos. (Again, I repeat that I originally loaded Vivaldi from a pkg.)

My reference point (on "freezes") from personal experience is icon-cache (old Windows) and failing Memory chips (various hardware). Other instances come from poor software, possibly other things.

Anyway, after taking a quick look at this post...

......... http://www.mxlinux.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 74#p459447

...it got me thinking about my graphics & drivers.

So, I read a couple of items, and then used lshw to check my graphics and (eventually) came up with...

......... "Intel HD 5500"

To find some details about that chip and potential problems one Goog search led me to...

......... https://askubuntu.com/questions/759925/ ... linux-oses

...then, one of it's links led me to...

......... https://askubuntu.com/questions/682655/ ... -on-ubuntu

...and one of it's links led me to...

......... https://bugs.launchpad.net/xserver-xorg ... ug/1432194

...and in there, to...
......... https://bugs.launchpad.net/ubuntu/+sour ... ug/1452318


While the group(s) isn't(aren't) discussing my (own) problems with freezes, there is a mention in one place of "race condition", in another of "window top-bar graphics problems" (which I believe I've had) and "post suspend problems". (I use "Suspend" quite a lot, so I needed to take an interest in their discussion surrounding usage.) There is also mention of the Gnome desktop in conjunction with problems in those discussions too. (I use the Gnome spin-off, MATE.)

They also mention driver problems and packages. There was discussion of Intel chips and drivers. I have Intel.

So, while checking my driver pkgs in Synaptic Pkg Mgr, in the details for xserver-xorg-video-intel I noticed that it warns...

......... '...use of this driver is discouraged.....try unloading and let kernel run...blah...blah...blah.'

It's the same info (locally) as here (globally)...

......... https://packages.debian.org/stretch/x11 ... ideo-intel


So checking my driver details...

......... $ sudo lspci -vnn | grep VGA -A 12

and

......... modprobe

...shows that I am using the i915 driver

Why is my system using the Intel driver when this driver "usage is discouraged on modern equip"? [ie HP Pavillion]


The upshot of chasing all those rabbits down the Linux warren (not a slur, rather, a humourous observation) is that, while I might be getting closer to nailing down the problem (or NOT), a lot of time has been spent doing that - and - I also need to have certain capabilities to sustain that process. The average home User - the group "owned" by Mikey, which is the same group you (ie MX and Linux generally) wants to target - cannot do that (or not easily at least).

Can I suggest that, if you disagree with the System Utilities (management) approach (eg. xteq) then some sort of diagnostic tool would be a very good "thing". Perhaps such a tool could (exist on the desktop and) be clicked to produce a report (or email, or something) which shows a list of priority points a User could check (or adjust). [I guess I am talking more about real "performance" examination, rather than just simplistic nonesense.]

Such a quick report might work for (say) 3 or 4 areas around which major issues often arise. For instance, it could produce (1.) a brief list correlating chips, drivers and associated packages (perhaps with brief comments); (2.) Desktop capabilities and Settings (and some advice); (3.) critical points from boot-up (esp. failures, errors, serious warnings); (4.).... well you get the drift. (Surely.)

I note here that Mikey's Event log shows interesting stuff at times - especially when you want to chase down a problem.



Before any criticisms, I would also like to note the screenshot of the Nvidia server settings tool shown here...

......... https://unix.stackexchange.com/question ... e-in-linux

[It's a bit like xteq in a way. Choose an area on the left; see it's settings on the right (although in xteq things were shown in order to be adjusted).]


Why am I still niggling for MX (/Antix) to have a go at producing something like that?

......... "Avg. User".

If - currently - your "Average User" requires the memory of an elephant(sic) or two (or 50); the skill of a trapeze artist (min) or juggler(avg) or magician (max); the temperament of a saintly nun; the endurance of an Ethiopian marathoner; and the mind of an evil genius - which, I reasonably believe are current requirements - then you will not tackle the actual "marketplace" of potential Users. [Personal explanation: Despite the proposition being put to me to "have a go and do it yourself" - for the time being - I am unable to properly contribute. Anyway, I don't believe I have the ultimate skill to add to a great "product". You guys are the pros.]


P.S.

I mentioned a day or so ago that my "freeze" problem might have come from a Clipboard manager. I had discovered that it had been turned ON (without my knowledge, probably at installation) so I turned it OFF. The day after I did that I had two freezes in rapid succession. For the time being I have ruled it out as the source of problems, although I still remain concerned about Clipboard and caches.

Also, I have mentioned elsewhere that I thought my "freeze" problem might be coming from Libreoffice (after an update). (Ref only... qv http://www.mxlinux.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 9&start=10 #11 ) So after confirming the Clipboard manager was not the problem I removed Libreoffice 6.1.x (completely, as best as I could). Later, I installed a previous version 6.0.x (which was probably what I had been using before update).

While I have been using my system in exactly the same manner as before (ie when freezing was occurring) I have had no freezes since changeover. I still believe this result needs further testing (possibly for a further week or two) but I am more hopeful about it now.



EPILOG
It may be that cache, clipboard, graphics chips, drivers, memory, desktop choice, hardware type - and all the rest of the rabbits - may not have been the problem after all. Perhaps it was a new version of a single bit of software? Let's hope so.


Regards,
boombaby
_

[Richard]

@boombaby,

In reviewing all the posts in this thread, twice,
I can't find anywhere that you have posted what hardware you are running.
Could be just me, it has happened before.
Would you please post the output of

Code: Select all

$ inxi -Fxzdlop

between code boxes
--you'll need to activate the Full Editor & Preview button at the bottom of the editor window.

[boombaby]

Hello, Richard...

Will do, but the relevance is in thread...
http://www.mxlinux.org/forum/viewtopic. ... 36#p459553 ...esp. post #17 & #18
...so I have posted the details there.

Regards,
boombaby
_

[Richard]

Yes, I had thought it might be in another thread but didn't investigate.
Thanks for posting.

Are you still running Mate?

Actually, what you are asking for is an example of the state of Linux.
Each distro installs and tests the things they distribute.
I've never had any problems with caches, icons or otherwise, while running Linux.

Generally the base system is stable.
Any sort of update has the potential to cause a problem; although,
as a rule, less potential when everything comes from the distro at hand.

That said, Xfce4 is the only desktop environment that MX provides.
All the others are just for the convenience of users who want to try something else.
There is a certain amount of 'buyer beware' in using things that are not part of the original distribution.

The idea of a centralized Control Center has been in place for quite some time.
Some distros provide more, others provide less.
Third party control centers are less likely to work completely in all distributions of Linux.