Running great for me! Oh yeah, according to the user and system string, this is antiX 13.2. I don't be a thinkin' so. That's just what the string says. This system has a recent kernel and it's running Debian Testing software without any problems, can run with either sysvinit or systemd - I'm running systemd right now, I believe.

Whatever I'm actually running, it is working fine and it has pretty new application software. No weirdness in this, even though it has a hodgepodge of code. In practice, it works just fine for me; clearly I've messed around with this image for a pretty long time and it works fine.

When performing the snapshot operation, do you get a logfile written to var/log? Look for an errmsg in logfile.
"only 8 MEGs" sounds like the script bailed due to insufficent free RAM, or insufficent drive space for writing to the working directory.

I have barely scratched the surface with the build, rebuild, snapshot alternatives and options.

I have done a lot of work with past versions of antiX when we were focusing more on the three variations: Full, Base, and Core, and much of my current investment is based on them. For example, I have a 13.2 release that is updated at least as current as antiX 15 Beta - in fact, until I actually SAW otherwise, that's what I thought I was running.

I have generated at least one"Frugal" snapshot; that was nice; it can be used with a CD or USB (though I'm going to have to get my"act straight", know which image I used when I create it, and then use that same image to activate and run the Frugal image snapshot that I created. I did that at least once and it worked beautifully, but I really have not exercised it beyond that, and I certainly have not exercised all of the possible snapshot options, nor was I, at least yesterday, running against the proper instance of the current Beta.

What I have done, nevertheless, certainly demonstrates that we have numerous ways, both supported and unsupported, documented and undocumented, to configure and run our antiX systems. What I can say, based on my own experiences so far is that I can continue to run instances of antiX against"Testing" and they work. The few kinks I see there is that you have to be cautious about how you start and stop the system, depending on which process and scheduling software approach you use - the one we seem to be actively supporting in antiX remains the classic sysvinit so far, and systemd is now the current approach in Debian Stable and Debian Testing, so if you mix your system with those, as I have, you have to understand that a few things are going to work differently (and if you don't make provisions for them, you'll certainly break them).

I definitely noticed that I have to be careful specifying how to shut down the system when I use systemd because systemd uses systemctl, whereas the classic run levels found in sysvinit handle things completely differently. So if you"experiment" like I do, be careful what you're doing; some things will not work the same way and if you're not careful they won't work at all.

The good news is that it's possible, if you can accept a few different"work flows" from what's documented, you can run a hybrid antiX - Debian against either Stable or Testing. I'm interested in seeing what we'll end up with for the next versions of MX-14 and antiX and how they compare to my total"hacks". I'm confident that our integrators will do a very good job with whatever infrastructure or infrastructures that we end up supporting!