MX and Devuan?
Re: MX and Devuan?
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. I copy & paste to the terminal. Liars, Wiseguys, Trolls, and those without manners will be added to my ignore list.
Re: MX and Devuan?
I break them when trying to make them the way that I require them to be, for me.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.
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
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
Re: MX and Devuan?
What happens when a user of antix want's to install gnome for example?anticapitalista wrote: ↑Sat Nov 10, 2018 7:31 pmWRONG and FUD!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 installI 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.Code: Select all
apt update && apt install systemd
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/
Ooops, libsystemd0.
- anticapitalista
- Developer
- Posts: 4160
- Joined: Sat Jul 15, 2006 10:40 am
Re: MX and Devuan?
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.
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
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
Re: MX and Devuan?
Then you are no longer running antiX and it is not an antiX problem. :)What happens when a user of antix want's to install gnome for example
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.
kernal 5.10.0-26-amd64 x86_64; Xfce-4.18.0; 8 GB RAM
Intel Core i5-3380M, Graphics, Audio, Video; & SSDs.
Re: MX and Devuan?
Very simple, you say? :)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.
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.
The screenshot, from Dragan, the creator of TRIOS.
He that made Gnome run on TRIOS without systemd. So it is possible.
And if I install Budgie Desktop on Antix, I'll be runing Solus instead of Antix?! :DRichard wrote: ↑Mon Nov 12, 2018 7:38 amThen you are no longer running antiX and it is not an antiX problem. :)What happens when a user of antix want's to install gnome for example
You could choose among the distros mentioned here that include gnome:
https://www.google.com/search?q=distros ... 8&oe=utf-8
Are you kidding me?
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.
Re: MX and Devuan?
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"
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
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
Re: MX and Devuan?
@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
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
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
Re: MX and Devuan?
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.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"
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.
Re: MX and Devuan?
@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.
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
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