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

Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

Report Bugs, Issues and non- pacakage Requests
Message
Author
User avatar
colin_b
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:21 pm

Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#1 Post by colin_b » Wed Mar 28, 2018 6:59 pm

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?

User avatar
richb
Administrator
Posts: 17095
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#2 Post by richb » Wed Mar 28, 2018 7:52 pm

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.
Forum Rules
Guide - How to Ask for Help

Rich
SSD Production: MX 17.1
AMD A8 7600 FM2+ CPU R7 Graphics, 16 GIG Mem. Three Samsung EVO SSD's 250 GB, 350 GB HD

User avatar
colin_b
Forum Regular
Forum Regular
Posts: 339
Joined: Sun Mar 19, 2017 7:21 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#3 Post by colin_b » Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:06 pm

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.

User avatar
richb
Administrator
Posts: 17095
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#4 Post by richb » Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:38 pm

I am glad you did mention it.
Forum Rules
Guide - How to Ask for Help

Rich
SSD Production: MX 17.1
AMD A8 7600 FM2+ CPU R7 Graphics, 16 GIG Mem. Three Samsung EVO SSD's 250 GB, 350 GB HD

User avatar
dolphin_oracle
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 9386
Joined: Sun Dec 16, 2007 1:17 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#5 Post by dolphin_oracle » Wed Mar 28, 2018 8:40 pm

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.
http://www.youtube.com/runwiththedolphin
lenovo ThinkPad T530 - MX-17
lenovo s21e & 100s - antiX-17, MX17(live-usb)
FYI: mx "test" repo is not the same thing as debian testing repo.

User avatar
DEBIANUSER
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 4:53 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#6 Post by DEBIANUSER » Tue May 01, 2018 5:10 pm

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!

User avatar
DEBIANUSER
Forum Novice
Forum  Novice
Posts: 4
Joined: Tue May 01, 2018 4:53 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#7 Post by DEBIANUSER » Tue May 01, 2018 5:14 pm

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.

User avatar
Adrian
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 8924
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 1:42 am

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#8 Post by Adrian » Tue May 01, 2018 5:19 pm

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.

User avatar
richb
Administrator
Posts: 17095
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#9 Post by richb » Tue May 01, 2018 5:36 pm

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.
Forum Rules
Guide - How to Ask for Help

Rich
SSD Production: MX 17.1
AMD A8 7600 FM2+ CPU R7 Graphics, 16 GIG Mem. Three Samsung EVO SSD's 250 GB, 350 GB HD

User avatar
Stevo
Forum Veteran
Forum Veteran
Posts: 16277
Joined: Fri Dec 15, 2006 8:07 pm

Re: Distrowatch reveiw grumbles

#10 Post by Stevo » Tue May 01, 2018 5:47 pm

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.

Post Reply

Return to “Bugs and Non-Package Requests Forum”