Experimental isos for testing

anticapitalista · posted: 2014-12-31 19:19

I have made available these 32 bit systemd-free iso files.

========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://sourceforge.net/projects/antix-linux/files/Testing/antiX-14R/"
linktext was:"https://sourceforge.net/projects/antix- ... antiX-14R/"
====================================

antiX-14-a4-RV_386-jwm.iso (c145MB)
md5sum: 3bc09c2442d59d6958a5720502edae03
This version includes X, jwm, dillo browser, rox-filer, moc.
alsa, rxvt, conky, leafpad, udevil plus antiX tools for
persistence and remastering. This is quite vanilla so not for those
who want beauty out of the box.

antiX-14-a4-RV_386-net.iso (c103MB)
md5sum: cd7e2cfb7623de7a9cf4f5451268884a
This is a very basic net install. No X. no grub. Use this to have
complete control.

Both these versions are for advanced users.
Both versions are attempts to be 100% systemd-free. (except udev)
To install run the cli-installer.
Make sure you have a net connection working before
trying to install.
Answer Y(es) when asked if using antiX-net.

Have fun!

thriftee · posted: 2014-12-31 19:34

Do they have spacefm? Or did that require systemd?

I'm definitely going to try the JWM version...

anticapitalista · posted: 2014-12-31 19:45

No spacefm. The jwm version includes rox.

Both iso files are very basic.

thriftee · posted: 2014-12-31 23:23

I'm trying the JWM version. It boots fine, except 3 missing e100/ drivers . What should we answer when it wants to overwrite the grub config with something newer? The default was no, so that's what i did.

It seems to be trying to copy to itself instead of the drive, and then it runs out of space

rust collector · posted: 2015-01-01 00:27

did you partition, AND format the drive you are trying to install to? or if not format, at least set fs type? 82 and 83, or whatever you want?

What I am wondering, there is no wireless stuff here, is there?

thriftee · posted: 2015-01-01 00:57

yeah, it is formatted ext4. I will boot another o/s if I still can and reformat it to ext2

i don't understand why ext4 would be a problem,but if it is,it just needs to say what types are ok is all.

I hacked up the script and put echo's through it and yes,it has problems seeing the drive saying its invalid, and then goes on its merry way filling the ram drive full

rust collector · posted: 2015-01-01 01:54

damnit, that means I just admitted I...

oh well, yes I suck.

thriftee · posted: 2015-01-01 02:28

The problem is that if you say no to repartitioning the disk, it fills the drive no matter what else.

If you say yes,it works even if all you do is quit from the diskpartitioning program.

My guess is that a variable or location or mounting is different depending on which path you take, and the solution is just to take themto the partitioning program after giving a message saying its ok to just quit out of it if everything is ready. I think another difference is that after the partitioning program it then asked for a particular partition type and probably goes and formats that partition of the drive... anyway,its in the one branch vs the other.

Too tired to try to fix it and I don't know the language...

It is installed and running now after 3 or 4 hrs of tries.

Thanks anti... I know these things are not easy to write and debug...

I will look at it later and see if I can fix it myself...

PS: I would guess that if you don't alter the partition table you would still need to do the mount at the beginning of the setfs function or routine, and if that isn't done, you start copying things to the live system working area, wherever that is instad of the disk drive. As I said before, the other possibility would be just to always follow the repartition branch of the code.

I concluded that either way it deletes all the data from the drive, anyway. I chose adding a line to unmount even if you choose not to repartition.

Code: Select all

##End of functions

#Run Help
if [["$1" =="-h" ||"$1" =="--help" ]]
  then
  help_text
  echo ''
  read -p $"Press Enter to exit this script."
  exit
fi

# Run as root check
if [[ $UID -ne 0 ]]
  then
  echo -ne"\e[31m"
  echo $"Please run this script as root."
  echo -ne"\e[0m"
  exit
fi

# Make sure /live/aufs/dev, /live/aufs/sys, /live/aufs/proc exist when starting script
mkdir -p /live/aufs/dev /live/aufs/sys /live/aufs/proc
# Make sure fstab is ok and start swap - (needed for antixsnapshot)
make-fstab 
swapon -a
# Show requirements
kernel="-$(uname -r)"
echo ''
header
echo ''
# Repartition or not and set file up system via cfdisk
yn $"Do you want to repartition the disk (y/N)"
if [[ $ans -eq 1 ]]
 then
   repartition $1
   echo '====';
   echo ''
   getroot
   echo ''
   setfs $rdrv
 else
   echo ''
   getroot
   echo ''
   umount /dev/$rdrv > /live/aufs/dev/null 2>&1
   echo $"Deleting the contents of the $rdrv partition."
   echo $"This may take some time. Please wait...."
fi
mount /dev/$rdrv /media/$rdrv > /live/aufs/dev/null 2>&1
rm -r /media/$rdrv/* > /live/aufs/dev/null 2>&1
echo ''
# Set up separate /home and mount on /media/$hdrv

rust collector · posted: 2015-01-01 03:01

well, I used the live full version to format this one, to ext4, said no to repartition, let it format to ext4, and it works.
I get the"could not install grub" message, but it is installed later anyway, so it is not a problem.

So far, it looks just as great as the old jwm spin

anticapitalista · posted: 2015-01-01 11:30

The first grub message fails since it cannot install to the live cd, but it does work later as rust collector points out.

It is best to install to an already formatted (ext4 is ok) partition. If you are installing to an external device, I'm not sure if grub installs to the device's partition mbr.

skidoo · posted: 2015-01-02 00:18

Why is the kernel not SMP -aware?
An oversight? Because it produces a smaller compile kernel?

As is, with my same as ever testing hardware... I'm seeing 90% CPU load just from scrolling a browser window.
With several apps running,"tearing" or blocky artifacts occur when a window is dragged.

skidoo · posted: 2015-01-02 01:01

boot menu option"boot from first hard drive" fails for me.
It's looking for hd0?
If I specify hd1, correct-looking entries for each of the other installed O/Ses is displayed,
but I get a grubby error (same error)"Error 22: no such partition" when selecting any entry.
(reported as an apparent bug, even though it doesn't impair my immediate use)
===

boot menu: absence of"custom boot" line
Apparently it has been omitted by design. The result feels like a serious usability regression
I would need to memorize all the"stuffs" and retype them each boot? (remove"quiet", add"splash=v", add"toram", etc)
(ouch)

===

boot menu: F1"using the help system" screen
Does the text REALLY need to 'splain to the user"consists of a sef of linked pages..." ?!?
Howabout, instead, simply"use these keys to navigate the help pages"
and
why DAZZLE the user with either / or choices for each navigation command?
left OR backspace
right OR enter OR space
up OR home
down OR end
Like... is there a chance that a given user's keyboard will NOT have an Enter key, but WILL have a space key?
(yep, reads like petty criticism, but clarity of helptext is a serious issue)

===

boot menu: F1 ---} second"F7" link, labeled"save bootloader settings"
the helptext states
"on liveUSB + frugal, the F6 Save menu should appear, replacing the F6 desktop"
Okay, the link is labeled F7... but the helptext is discussing F6
and
as is, when booting liveUSB,"F6 Desktop" is, in fact displayed (contrary to the helptext)
(reported as an apparent bug, even though it doesn't impair my immediate use)

===

question / observation:
bootmenu F4 does not support multiple selections, right?
As a result, in the absence of a saved, replayable"custom boot" line
user wanting both"toram" and"automount=usb" must hand-edit during each boot, right?

skidoo · posted: 2015-01-02 01:23

uuidd
why? Is this a leftover, got injected by debootstrap during build?
I killed the process and purged uuid-runtime package... and haven't noticed any ill effects due to its absence.

===

wondering:
Should packages"syslinux","extlinux" and"syslinux-common" be apt pinned?
(potential issue is that isolinux, needed for snapshot, is absent from one of those newer packages)

===

etc/aptpapt.conf.d
"never markauto-sections
...multiverse/ddlibs"
???

===

perceived issues with the default theme:
1) grAy beside gRay (cannot easily discern active vs inactive toolbar tabs (seen in geany, spacefm, etc)
2) unchecked checkboxes are essentially"invisible" due to checkbox border matching dialog box color (seen in synaptic etc)
3)"zebra stripe" alternating lines (spacefm, synaptic etc) colors 1&2 are too similar
4) nearly impossible to discern (how GRAY is gray?) which toolbar icons represent currently inactive (greyed-out) commands vs available commands
5) similarly, difficult to discern active/disabled drop-down menu commmands (and toolbar"display text only" command text)

===

cosmetic issue:
@1920x1080, both the bootmenu screen, and the desktop background display stretched, egg-shaped blue earth

thriftee · posted: 2015-01-02 01:29

I have the gray vs GRAY problem too....

rust collector · posted: 2015-01-02 01:38

Well, in this case, I think it is to be expected, that if you change the system, (which you would do, with systems like this, ) you set up the colors and details?

I get a feeling this is meant to be something to play with, not something that should work on any machine, ready to run.