MX and Devuan?

For interesting topics. But remember this is a Linux Forum. Do not post offensive topics that are meant to cause trouble with other members or are derogatory towards people of different genders, race, color, minors (this includes nudity and sex), politics or religion. Let's try to keep peace among the community and for visitors.

No spam on this or any other forums please! If you post advertisements on these forums, your account may be deleted.

Do not copy and paste entire or even up to half of someone else's words or articles into posts. Post only a few sentences or a paragraph and make sure to include a link back to original words or article. Otherwise it's copyright infringement.

You can talk about other distros here, but no MX bashing. You can email the developers of MX if you just want to say you dislike or hate MX.
Message
Author
User avatar
Mauser
Posts: 1350
Joined: Mon Jun 27, 2016 7:32 pm

Re: MX and Devuan?

#11 Post by Mauser »

Using Devuan would be bad as a base for MX Linux because it would put it further downstream which would cause security updates to come out later which is bad. Also the additional work involved in the change would mess up the MX Linux developer's rhythm.
I am command line illiterate. :confused: I copy & paste to the terminal. Liars, Wiseguys, Trolls, and those without manners will be added to my ignore list. :mad:

User avatar
handy
Posts: 611
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2018 2:00 pm

Re: MX and Devuan?

#12 Post by handy »

manyroads wrote: Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:20 pm Like most things in this world there seems to be a lot of strong opinion on systemd (good, bad, ugly...) Like @handy noted in his comment, I include myself in the uniquely skilled at breaking OSes class of user. I was simply curious re: Devuan because on the surface it seems there might be an opportunity for synergy.
I break them when trying to make them the way that I require them to be, for me.

Arch, Manjaro, PC-BSD, OpenBSD, Artix (apart from not allowing me to install the PIA-VPN client GUI - which is why I'm here), antiX, & MX17, all can withstand the changes that I need to make to be a happy *nix user. :)

(Though, of course Arch & Manjaro are now systemd distros, so they are crossed off of my list.)
1_MSI: MAG B560 TORP', i5, RAM 16GB, GTX 1070 Ti 12GB, M2 238GB + USB, MX-23 Fb to Openbox
2_Lenovo: Ideapad 520S, i5, RAM 8GB, GPU i620, HDD 1TB, MX-21 - Openbox
3_Clevo: P150SM-A, i7, RAM 16GB, nVidia 8600, 2x 1TB HDD & M.2 256 GB, MX-21 - Openbox

misko-2083

Re: MX and Devuan?

#13 Post by misko-2083 »

anticapitalista wrote: Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:31 pm
spidermouse wrote: Sat Nov 10, 2018 6:40 pm Antix is not sytemd-free, it has packages that are dependant on libsystemd0.
Open the terminal and run on new install

Code: Select all

 apt update && apt install systemd
I think that sytemd-free is when all the dependancies from libsystemd0 are removed from the packages. Anticapitalista probably thinks libsystemd is harmless if systemd isn't instaled. The fact is LP can turn libsystemd0 into executive library at any time and during the upgrade pull some other parts of systemd that can controler the network or some other system processes. It's easier to advertise as sytemd-free.
WRONG and FUD!
Why would anyone who doesn't want libsystemd0/systemd intentionally install it? moronic if you ask me.
antiX ootb does not need/use systemd/libsystemd0. (devuan, however, uses libsystemd0 - antiX does not).
Look here for our nosystemd packages - the vast majority make sure libsystemd0 does not get installed.

http://repo.antixlinux.com/stretch/pool/nosystemd/
9_9 What happens when a user of antix want's to install gnome for example?
Image
Image
Ooops, libsystemd0. :number1:

User avatar
anticapitalista
Developer
Posts: 4160
Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 10:40 am

Re: MX and Devuan?

#14 Post by anticapitalista »

It's very simple. Don't install gnome as it is totally entwined with systemd - same with budgie desktop.
Do you know a way to install gnome on a debian base without libsystemd0?

Added: If we know which app or set of apps install libsystemd0 when doing apt-get install gnome, then we might be able to avoid that useless dependency.
anticapitalista
Reg. linux user #395339.

Philosophers have interpreted the world in many ways; the point is to change it.

antiX with runit - lean and mean.
https://antixlinux.com

User avatar
Richard
Posts: 1577
Joined: Fri Dec 12, 2008 10:31 am

Re: MX and Devuan?

#15 Post by Richard »

What happens when a user of antix want's to install gnome for example
Then you are no longer running antiX and it is not an antiX problem. :)

You could choose among the distros mentioned here that include gnome:
https://www.google.com/search?q=distros ... 8&oe=utf-8
Thinkpad T430 & Dell Latitude E7450, both with MX-21.3.1
kernal 5.10.0-26-amd64 x86_64; Xfce-4.18.0; 8 GB RAM
Intel Core i5-3380M, Graphics, Audio, Video; & SSDs.

misko-2083

Re: MX and Devuan?

#16 Post by misko-2083 »

anticapitalista wrote: Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:08 am It's very simple. Don't install gnome as it is totally entwined with systemd - same with budgie desktop.
Do you know a way to install gnome on a debian base without libsystemd0?

Added: If we know which app or set of apps install libsystemd0 when doing apt-get install gnome, then we might be able to avoid that useless dependency.
Very simple, you say? :)
No, it's not even close!

It's more like: Don't install gnome, budgie or any of the packages that are "entwined" with systemd.
Intentionally or unintentionally, the fact is any unexperianced user is able to pull libsystemd0 or systemd into Antix.

Is antix systemd-free? Not yet.
This is how I see it.
I hope you'll be able to fix this, make it fully systemd-free.

Do you know a way to install gnome on a debian base without libsystemd0?
All packages related to gnome need to be clean for Gnome to run without systemd.

But why it's possible to install systemd in Antix in the first place?
Or the packages that will install systemd as a dependancy?

In TRIOS linux, for example, installing systemd or packages that were not cleaned were not possible to install.
People from TRIOS were runing Gnome without systemd.
I think that the only issue was that the dialog that sets the time wasn't working.
Image
The screenshot, from Dragan, the creator of TRIOS.
He that made Gnome run on TRIOS without systemd. So it is possible.
Richard wrote: Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:38 am
What happens when a user of antix want's to install gnome for example
Then you are no longer running antiX and it is not an antiX problem. :)

You could choose among the distros mentioned here that include gnome:
https://www.google.com/search?q=distros ... 8&oe=utf-8
And if I install Budgie Desktop on Antix, I'll be runing Solus instead of Antix?! :D
Are you kidding me? :rolleyes:

While there is a method to install packages that will pull in systemd and libsystemd0, this is the problem with Antix.
Last edited by misko-2083 on Mon Nov 12, 2018 12:27 pm, edited 1 time in total.

User avatar
richb
Administrator
Posts: 10323
Joined: Wed Jul 12, 2006 2:17 pm

Re: MX and Devuan?

#17 Post by richb »

It is simple. You install a Linux distro and then you modify it with a DE. It is no longer the original distro. Whatever that DE brings in is not what the distro was as released. So antiX is systemd free.
The Debian creed 'You break it, you keep the pieces". Or in this case "You modify it, you keep init system"
Forum Rules
Guide - How to Ask for Help

richb Administrator
System: MX 23 KDE
AMD A8 7600 FM2+ CPU R7 Graphics, 16 GIG Mem. Three Samsung EVO SSD's 250 GB

User avatar
manyroads
Posts: 2603
Joined: Sat Jun 30, 2018 6:33 pm

Re: MX and Devuan?

#18 Post by manyroads »

@richb I think you have hit the nail on the head... I personally feel that Linux offers a great advantage to its users "you can do anything you want" but that comes with a terrible risk as well "you can do anything you want". It is not a distro's job to stop users from making architectural mistakes. Each distro is only obligated to hold true to its objectives. What a user "bends" the distro to accomodate is that users responsibility.

In fact that's why I asked my original question to learn why the choices made for this distro's (MXLinux) foundation were chosen over others. I knew that the following (Mencken quote) held true, I'm still not quite sure why, though.

"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." - H. L. Mencken
Pax vobiscum,
Mark Rabideau - ManyRoads Genealogy -or- eirenicon llc. (geeky stuff)
i3wm, bspwm, hlwm, dwm, spectrwm ~ Linux #449130
"For every complex problem there is an answer that is clear, simple, and wrong." -- H. L. Mencken

misko-2083

Re: MX and Devuan?

#19 Post by misko-2083 »

richb wrote: Mon Nov 12, 2018 10:41 am It is simple. You install a Linux distro and then you modify it with a DE. It is no longer the original distro. Whatever that DE brings in is not what the distro was as released. So antiX is systemd free.
The Debian creed 'You break it, you keep the pieces". Or in this case "You modify it, you keep init system"
What you said is a nonsense nonsense and I really hope you won't write that anywhere else if you want people to take you seriously. :bagoverhead:

I hope you have a better argument than shifting the blame to the Antix user when the installation of XXX random package also installs libsystemd0 or systemd as a dependancy.
Half full or half empty glass, is still not full or empty. Systemd-free or partially systemd-free are two different things.

User avatar
asqwerth
Developer
Posts: 7211
Joined: Sun May 27, 2007 5:37 am

Re: MX and Devuan?

#20 Post by asqwerth »

@manyroads, actually I was puzzled by your OP because MX is based on antiX, which is where we get the super fast and light base from.

Why would you ask MX, whose roots and connections are with Mepis then antiX (which also started long ago as Mepis-based), whether MX is considering basing itself on Devuan? You should be asking antiX - our base - whether it wants to switch from Debian + its own nosystemd repo, to Devuan.

My understanding also is that Devuan is essentially Debian packages laboriously converted to remove systemd dependencies. So it takes them really long to get their version of the current Debian Stable going since they have to repopulate their repos. This could be outdated information though, so someone correct me if I'm wrong.

AntiX and MX on the other hand keep to the Debian repos but with some changes to make sysV the default init and (for antiX) to have their own nosystemd repo for some key packages. Due to that, AntiX can release their release based on Debian Stable fairly soon after the latter is released, when compared to Devuan.
Desktop: Intel i5-4460, 16GB RAM, Intel integrated graphics
Clevo N130WU-based Ultrabook: Intel i7-8550U (Kaby Lake R), 16GB RAM, Intel integrated graphics (UEFI)
ASUS X42D laptop: AMD Phenom II, 6GB RAM, Mobility Radeon HD 5400

Post Reply

Return to “General”