MX Linux Forum

https://distrowatch.com/dwres.php?resou ... &distro=mx

My review is based on MX version 17.0:
My laptop: Dell Inspiron 17R SE 7720

Pros:
+ brilliant XFCE desktop presentation
+ systemd free experience
+ MX tools

Cons:
- inflexible installer e.g. missing LUKS encryption options
- bumblebee did not recognize my optimus hardware leading X to a black screen after reboot
- suspend & resume issues (black screen + hard reset needed to return to a working system)

I was pretty impressed by this distro in the beginning, but the issues with my hardware forced me to return to Slackware 14.2, where everything (including bumblebee, resume, suspend) works flawlessly.

Have cons 2 and 3 been addressed?

Suspend and hibernate work perfectly for me with 17 and 17.1. So how does one answer is it addressed? I can only say yes.
I have not tried Bumblebee in 17 but it worked fine in 16.

Installer comment is an opinion only. Others have praised it.

My take, that user liked MX but seemingly made no effort to solve his issues.

My take, that user liked MX but seemingly made no effort to solve his issues.

You are most likely correct. I just thought I'd give cons 2 and 3 a mention.

As for the installer, I personally think it's excellent.

I am glad you did mention it.

the detection method for bumblebee can be imperfect, as sometimes the secondary graphics accelerator part (the nvidia part) registers with the system as a primary graphics card instead of as a secondary card. In that event, the standard nvidia-drivers get installed instead of the primus drivers.

I've got an idea for a fallback, but I haven't had time to implement it.

Missing full disk encryption is the first thing mentioned here - don´t be blind on that, please. It is a major bummer - I know at least five people who have seen MX and would like to try, but went away because of that.

Also nvidia BS is still a major problem because it leaves the user with a black screen or otherwise unusable install - Ubuntu has the same problem with their 18.04 release, but it runs flawlessly with Debian Stretch, so it might be an unwanted regression. I recommend not to mess around with that, as especially Optimus is pain and please just copy from others what they digged out to work well. Optimus on Debian is OK, also Arch seems to have good people that are able to make it work. You need a very big community to test that nvidia bs, so just take it from the bigger distros like they figure it out.

Both of these points are essential things - the point is that there are distros out there that already have that working without problems, so it is kind of inacceptable that MX has handicaps here. I think your team is to small to get that done right, so again: please just copy paste from where it is working and do not regress. Thanks!

Maybe one more thing to make the position more clear: it is kind of problematic to tell people 'based on Debian' and then deliver something that has two major things broken that run just fine on Debian. Don´t know how many of them will draw false conclusions about Debian, because regressions implanted by your team, it is definitely a reason to grumble. I wish there was some rule for cases like this - yes, build on debian, but do not remove features or destroy things that are already working fine. Add things, but do not destroy.

Hate to be *that* guy but somebody has to tell the truth.

And if we don't say "based on Debian" people will bitch we don't give credit. You can't win.

Fact 1. MX is based on Debian.
Fact 2. MX is not Debian. So some things that work in Debian won't work in MX, also MX won't work on any architecture other than 386 and x64. We don't have the same target as Debian. Also some things that are very easy to do in MX are hard to do (or even impossible) in straight Debian so there's also that...

Ultimately, if Debian works better for you, use Debian.

And I would add, MX is not Debian with window dressing. It is based on Debian as it uses the Debian repositories. It has its own unique set of features and makes no claim to be a Debian clone. If I wanted Debian I would have installed Debian.

DEBIANUSER wrote:Maybe one more thing to make the position more clear: it is kind of problematic to tell people 'based on Debian' and then deliver something that has two major things broken that run just fine on Debian. Don´t know how many of them will draw false conclusions about Debian, because regressions implanted by your team, it is definitely a reason to grumble. I wish there was some rule for cases like this - yes, build on debian, but do not remove features or destroy things that are already working fine. Add things, but do not destroy.

Hate to be *that* guy but somebody has to tell the truth.

There are plenty of posts on the Debian forums by people having the exact same issues with Bumblebee and Nvidia drivers on Dell laptops, so don't jump to the conclusion that MX is causing the issue. Dells have lots of quirks on Debian that other brands don't, like it or not. Someone that is trying to trace the root cause would take the time to test both MX and Debian before blaming MX for their hardware's oddball behavior.