Currently it is only the antiX/MX"dd" live-usb that doesn't boot UEFI. The standard live-usb boots both 32-bit and 64-bit UEFI with more features and support than any other distro I know of. In addition, you lose almost all of the antiX/MX live-usb special features when you use a"dd" live-usb.
If you insist on only using a"dd" live-usb and you also insist on only boot via UEFI (for all of my UEFI machines, I get a boot menu with legacy option by pressing F12) then your are currently out of luck. Sorry. AFAIK, this is the first time this issue has been raised. We were aware of this limitation but we did not know there was a demand for this combination.
-
BitJamPosts: 1,308
- Joined: 31 Aug 2009
-
greywolfPosts: 18
- Joined: 02 Feb 2014
#17
I am not being critical BTW, just asking. Anyway, I will continue to use Antix or MX on the few remaining 32 bit machines I support. 'Jessie' is getting a bit long in the tooth to worry about this too much more. I might just have to wait for the next version of things to arrive and have another look then. There are plenty of distros that work - just not as well IMHO! __{{emoticon}}__
cheers,
greywolf.
Sorry, I don't understand this difference. The name of the iso I am trying is"antiX-16_x64-full.iso" Is this not correct? It does not work whether I use dd or one of the other distros (Mint etc) usb creation tools to create the live usb.BitJam wrote:Currently it is only the antiX/MX"dd" live-usb that doesn't boot UEFI. The standard live-usb boots both 32-bit and 64-bit UEFI with more features and support than any other distro I know of. In addition, you lose almost all of the antiX/MX live-usb special features when you use a"dd" live-usb.
I find it the simplest is all, I am not insisting on it! That's why I asked if someone could post the antix2usb script here! I do not have a current Antix install to get it from.BitJam wrote:If you insist on only using a"dd" live-usb .....
F12 does nothing of the sort here, and AFAIK, there is no such option, having read the manual a couple of times; hence uefi only approach. I do my support on a time-limited voluntary basis because I love Linux.BitJam wrote:..........and you also insist on only boot via UEFI (for all of my UEFI machines, I get a boot menu with legacy option by pressing F12) then your are currently out of luck. Sorry. AFAIK, this is the first time this issue has been raised. We were aware of this limitation but we did not know there was a demand for this combination.
I am not being critical BTW, just asking. Anyway, I will continue to use Antix or MX on the few remaining 32 bit machines I support. 'Jessie' is getting a bit long in the tooth to worry about this too much more. I might just have to wait for the next version of things to arrive and have another look then. There are plenty of distros that work - just not as well IMHO! __{{emoticon}}__
cheers,
greywolf.
-
tlmillerPosts: 13
- Joined: 16 Sep 2016
#18
MX-15
MX-15.01_386 LinuxTracker
MX-15_x64 LinuxTracker
antiX
32 bit:
antiX-16_386-full.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_386-base.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_386-core-libre.iso LinuxTracker
64 bit:
antiX-16_x64-full.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_x64-base.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_x64-core-libre.iso LinuxTracker
Of these, I've downloaded 2/3 of the 64-bit antiX 16's. If there's some other image somewhere that works with UEFI, please let me know. I don't have any desire for v15 or for 32-bit, and the"libre" wouldn't work on many of my systems. So I'm not sure what is supposed to be downloaded for UEFI functionality.
I agree with greywolf. What do you mean only the antix/mx live version? The downloads show:BitJam wrote:Currently it is only the antiX/MX"dd" live-usb that doesn't boot UEFI. The standard live-usb boots both 32-bit and 64-bit UEFI with more features and support than any other distro I know of. In addition, you lose almost all of the antiX/MX live-usb special features when you use a"dd" live-usb.
If you insist on only using a"dd" live-usb and you also insist on only boot via UEFI (for all of my UEFI machines, I get a boot menu with legacy option by pressing F12) then your are currently out of luck. Sorry. AFAIK, this is the first time this issue has been raised. We were aware of this limitation but we did not know there was a demand for this combination.
MX-15
MX-15.01_386 LinuxTracker
MX-15_x64 LinuxTracker
antiX
32 bit:
antiX-16_386-full.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_386-base.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_386-core-libre.iso LinuxTracker
64 bit:
antiX-16_x64-full.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_x64-base.iso LinuxTracker
antiX-16_x64-core-libre.iso LinuxTracker
Of these, I've downloaded 2/3 of the 64-bit antiX 16's. If there's some other image somewhere that works with UEFI, please let me know. I don't have any desire for v15 or for 32-bit, and the"libre" wouldn't work on many of my systems. So I'm not sure what is supposed to be downloaded for UEFI functionality.
-
BitJamPosts: 1,308
- Joined: 31 Aug 2009
#19
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://github.com/BitJam/live-usb-maker"
linktext was:"live-usb-maker"
====================================
which I hope will replace antix2usb soon. It is command line only for now. OSDisc already uses this program to make the antiX/MX live-usbs they sell. Part of my motivation for writing it was so our live-usbs from OSDisc would boot via UEFI without losing the benefits of an ext4 file system. If it doesn't work on your distro then I will try to fix it so it does.
Sorry, I was responding to tmiller who said they were not willing to install a new program to get one OS to work. IMO the antix2usb program is rather fragile. It doesn't work on all distros. If you are willing to install a program, I suggest using mygreywolf wrote:I find it the simplest is all, I am not insisting on it! That's why I asked if someone could post the antix2usb script here! I do not have a current Antix install to get it from.
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://github.com/BitJam/live-usb-maker"
linktext was:"live-usb-maker"
====================================
which I hope will replace antix2usb soon. It is command line only for now. OSDisc already uses this program to make the antiX/MX live-usbs they sell. Part of my motivation for writing it was so our live-usbs from OSDisc would boot via UEFI without losing the benefits of an ext4 file system. If it doesn't work on your distro then I will try to fix it so it does.
All the version you listed boot fine via 64-bit UEFI as long as you make a live-usb on a fat32 partition. All versions of antiX-16 boot on 32-bit UEFI as well as 64-bit UEFI. The new live-usb-maker program makes things easier by automatically putting the live-usb on an ext4 partition and then adding a small fat32 partition for booting via UEFI.tlmiller wrote:[...] Of these, I've downloaded 2/3 of the 64-bit antiX 16's. If there's some other image somewhere that works with UEFI, please let me know. I don't have any desire for v15 or for 32-bit, and the"libre" wouldn't work on many of my systems. So I'm not sure what is supposed to be downloaded for UEFI functionality.
-
tlmillerPosts: 13
- Joined: 16 Sep 2016
#20
Is there any plans on making an image of antiX anytime in the future that works with UEFI if you have just a normal booting system and the normal tools installed in every distro on the planet without having to install anything special?
Ah. Well I guess that answers that.BitJam wrote:Sorry, I was responding to tmiller who said they were not willing to install a new program to get one OS to work. IMO the antix2usb program is rather fragile. It doesn't work on all distros. If you are willing to install a program, I suggest using mygreywolf wrote:I find it the simplest is all, I am not insisting on it! That's why I asked if someone could post the antix2usb script here! I do not have a current Antix install to get it from.
========= SCRAPER REMOVED AN EMBEDDED LINK HERE ===========
url was:"https://github.com/BitJam/live-usb-maker"
linktext was:"live-usb-maker"
====================================
which I hope will replace antix2usb soon. It is command line only for now. OSDisc already uses this program to make the antiX/MX live-usbs they sell. Part of my motivation for writing it was so our live-usbs from OSDisc would boot via UEFI without losing the benefits of an ext4 file system. If it doesn't work on your distro then I will try to fix it so it does.
All the version you listed boot fine via 64-bit UEFI as long as you make a live-usb on a fat32 partition. All versions of antiX-16 boot on 32-bit UEFI as well as 64-bit UEFI. The new live-usb-maker program makes things easier by automatically putting the live-usb on an ext4 partition and then adding a small fat32 partition for booting via UEFI.tlmiller wrote:[...] Of these, I've downloaded 2/3 of the 64-bit antiX 16's. If there's some other image somewhere that works with UEFI, please let me know. I don't have any desire for v15 or for 32-bit, and the"libre" wouldn't work on many of my systems. So I'm not sure what is supposed to be downloaded for UEFI functionality.
Is there any plans on making an image of antiX anytime in the future that works with UEFI if you have just a normal booting system and the normal tools installed in every distro on the planet without having to install anything special?
-
greywolfPosts: 18
- Joined: 02 Feb 2014
#21
@BitJam, thanks for the clarification and elaborations.
I have decided this is somehow linked to the particular hardware, in the sense that the Asus implementation of uefi requires something in the structure of the usb stick that is not being provided by the Antix processes?
To try to prove this what I did was this:
I wrote a dvd of the iso using old stock standard Xfburn. I then converted the machine back to Legacy BIOS mode, reset boot order, and rebooted. Works fine! Boot options of Antix Live come up. Entered live dvd and installed Antix 16 to spare ext4 partition. When given options for bootloader (MBR, root or ESP), chose ESP. On reboot again went back to BIOS and turned off all legacy, reset boot priority to PCLinuxOS ( this machines primary OS ) and rebooted with 'Save & Exit'
In PCLinuxOS had to update grub bootloader and reboot (felt like the old Windows days!! __{{emoticon}}__ ) and there was Antix 16 running from PCLinuxOS bootloader on totally uefi only system.
So, I am up & running so to speak. However!!!!!!, as I said before, there is no way on earth that I am going to expect my novice convertees to try that process.
Where I can now leave my part in this conversation is that I will try:
- your version of the usb stick creator;
- try the resultant stick on 'some' supported machines (not Asus); and
- hope this resolves in future versions.
You guys (devs) might be able to look into why so many other distros work OOTB on this hardware yet Antix 16 does not?
Thanks for the guidance.
greywolf.
I am happy to try any possible solution within reason. I will download your script and have a try with it. I am an old CLI junkie from way back so command line suits fine......I suggest using my live-usb-maker which I hope will replace antix2usb soon. It is command line only for now......
This is unfortunately the bit of this whole discussion that I am having a problem with! This simply is not the case on this hardware; an Asus X555UJ.207 laptop. I have created usb sticks now with"dd","unetbootin", PCLinuxOS image writer and Linuxmint 18 image writer and a couple of spurious others. I have on each occasion, either directly from the distro or by use of 'live' Gparted formatted the usb stick to Fat32 before commencing the iso write - I read that in an earlier thread on this uefi stuff. In each instance the usb stick is simply NOT SEEN by the boot process on boot ( tried both soft & hard boot). Normally ( for Mint for example) I just insert usb stick & hold Esc key on boot and one of the options to boot from is the relevant distro live usb..........All the version you listed boot fine via 64-bit UEFI as long as you make a live-usb on a fat32 partition........
I have decided this is somehow linked to the particular hardware, in the sense that the Asus implementation of uefi requires something in the structure of the usb stick that is not being provided by the Antix processes?
To try to prove this what I did was this:
I wrote a dvd of the iso using old stock standard Xfburn. I then converted the machine back to Legacy BIOS mode, reset boot order, and rebooted. Works fine! Boot options of Antix Live come up. Entered live dvd and installed Antix 16 to spare ext4 partition. When given options for bootloader (MBR, root or ESP), chose ESP. On reboot again went back to BIOS and turned off all legacy, reset boot priority to PCLinuxOS ( this machines primary OS ) and rebooted with 'Save & Exit'
In PCLinuxOS had to update grub bootloader and reboot (felt like the old Windows days!! __{{emoticon}}__ ) and there was Antix 16 running from PCLinuxOS bootloader on totally uefi only system.
So, I am up & running so to speak. However!!!!!!, as I said before, there is no way on earth that I am going to expect my novice convertees to try that process.
Where I can now leave my part in this conversation is that I will try:
- your version of the usb stick creator;
- try the resultant stick on 'some' supported machines (not Asus); and
- hope this resolves in future versions.
You guys (devs) might be able to look into why so many other distros work OOTB on this hardware yet Antix 16 does not?
Thanks for the guidance.
greywolf.
-
ShayPosts: 521
- Joined: 20 Apr 2015
#22
I will try this ! As this BIOS does not let me access Legacy or Safe Boot.as long as you make a live-usb on a fat32 partition.......
-
tlmillerPosts: 13
- Joined: 16 Sep 2016
#23
I dare say Dell must also be in with Asus. I downloaded the script and tried it on my 3 Dells (E5450, E5470, E7470) and my Lenovo (Yoga 700), and all 3 responded exactly the same to the live-usb-creator created USB's as it did to the dd created USB's...absolutely did not recognize that they were even bootable as a UEFI device. PLugged in beside my Antegros USB, and upon bootup going to"boot selection screen" I saw grub (Debian), the internal hard drive (which is the same Debian as grub, don't know why it always shows it as if it's a different device), the Antegros USB stick, and nothing else, the antiX usb was completely unrecognized as a UEFI device.greywolf wrote:
This is unfortunately the bit of this whole discussion that I am having a problem with! This simply is not the case on this hardware; an Asus X555UJ.207 laptop. I have created usb sticks now with"dd","unetbootin", PCLinuxOS image writer and Linuxmint 18 image writer and a couple of spurious others. I have on each occasion, either directly from the distro or by use of 'live' Gparted formatted the usb stick to Fat32 before commencing the iso write - I read that in an earlier thread on this uefi stuff. In each instance the usb stick is simply NOT SEEN by the boot process on boot ( tried both soft & hard boot). Normally ( for Mint for example) I just insert usb stick & hold Esc key on boot and one of the options to boot from is the relevant distro live usb.
I have decided this is somehow linked to the particular hardware, in the sense that the Asus implementation of uefi requires something in the structure of the usb stick that is not being provided by the Antix processes?
To try to prove this what I did was this:
I wrote a dvd of the iso using old stock standard Xfburn. I then converted the machine back to Legacy BIOS mode, reset boot order, and rebooted. Works fine! Boot options of Antix Live come up. Entered live dvd and installed Antix 16 to spare ext4 partition. When given options for bootloader (MBR, root or ESP), chose ESP. On reboot again went back to BIOS and turned off all legacy, reset boot priority to PCLinuxOS ( this machines primary OS ) and rebooted with 'Save & Exit'
In PCLinuxOS had to update grub bootloader and reboot (felt like the old Windows days!! __{{emoticon}}__ ) and there was Antix 16 running from PCLinuxOS bootloader on totally uefi only system.
So, I am up & running so to speak. However!!!!!!, as I said before, there is no way on earth that I am going to expect my novice convertees to try that process.
Where I can now leave my part in this conversation is that I will try:
- your version of the usb stick creator;
- try the resultant stick on 'some' supported machines (not Asus); and
- hope this resolves in future versions.
You guys (devs) might be able to look into why so many other distros work OOTB on this hardware yet Antix 16 does not?
Thanks for the guidance.
greywolf.
-
ShayPosts: 521
- Joined: 20 Apr 2015
#24
Success!!
Used Win 10 and formatted Fat32
Used Rufus and selected"GPT for EUFI"
Used F12, Booted to the stick! Will post inxi -Fxz in a bit.
Shay wrote:I will try this ! As this BIOS does not let me access Legacy or Safe Boot.as long as you make a live-usb on a fat32 partition.......
Success!!
Used Win 10 and formatted Fat32
Used Rufus and selected"GPT for EUFI"
Used F12, Booted to the stick! Will post inxi -Fxz in a bit.
Last edited by Shay on 20 Sep 2016, 17:23, edited 1 time in total.
-
ShayPosts: 521
- Joined: 20 Apr 2015
#25
Hope this helps out.
Having several lock ups, but having lots of patience, everything is working.Booted to the stick! Will post inxi -Fxz in a bit.
Code: Select all
$ inxi -Fxz
System: Host: antix1 Kernel: 4.4.10-antix.1-amd64-smp x86_64 (64 bit gcc: 4.9.3)
Desktop: IceWM 1.3.8
Distro: antiX-16_x64-full Berta Cáceres 26 June 2016
Machine: System: TOSHIBA (portable) product: Satellite E45W-C v: PSLZAU-00L00E
Mobo: FF40 model: 06A0 v: 2.0 Bios: INSYDE v: 5.00 date: 07/01/2015
Battery BAT0: charge: 39.3 Wh 97.0% condition: 40.5/45.0 Wh (90%)
model: TKBSS G71C000JJ110 status: Charging
CPU: Dual core Intel Core i3-5015U (-HT-MCP-) cache: 3072 KB
flags: (lm nx sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx) bmips: 8380
clock speeds: max: 2100 MHz 1: 800 MHz 2: 799 MHz 3: 807 MHz
4: 799 MHz
Graphics: Card: Intel Broadwell-U Integrated Graphics bus-ID: 00:02.0
Display Server: X.Org 1.16.4 drivers: intel (unloaded: fbdev,vesa)
Resolution: 1366x768@60.00hz
GLX Renderer: Mesa DRI Intel HD Graphics 5500 (Broadwell GT2)
GLX Version: 3.0 Mesa 10.3.2 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio: Card-1 Intel Wildcat Point-LP High Definition Audio Controller
driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:1b.0
Card-2 Intel Broadwell-U Audio Controller
driver: snd_hda_intel bus-ID: 00:03.0
Sound: ALSA v: k4.4.10-antix.1-amd64-smp
Network: Card: Intel Wireless 3160 driver: iwlwifi bus-ID: 02:00.0
IF: wlan0 state: up mac: <filter>
Drives: HDD Total Size: 532.1GB (1.3% used)
ID-1: /dev/sda model: HGST_HTS545050A7 size: 500.1GB
ID-2: USB /dev/sdb model: USB_Flash_Drive size: 32.0GB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 4.7G used: 2.3M (1%) fs: overlay dev: N/A
ID-2: /home size: 3.8G used: 26M (1%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/loop1
Sensors: System Temperatures: cpu: 48.0C mobo: 27.8C
Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: N/A
Info: Processes: 170 Uptime: 2 min Memory: 181.2/5949.4MB
Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Gcc sys: 4.9.2
Client: Shell (bash 4.3.301) inxi: 2.3.0
-
ShayPosts: 521
- Joined: 20 Apr 2015
#26
A regular BIOS, will see but not boot the stick.
GRRRR!
GRRRR!
- Posts: 13 tlmiller
- Joined: 16 Sep 2016
#27
By regular do you mean UEFI or legacy? I'm ASSUMING you mean UEFI since that's what the rest of us are seeing, but want to confirm.Shay wrote:A regular BIOS, will see but not boot the stick.
GRRRR!
-
greywolfgreywolfPosts: 18
- Joined: 02 Feb 2014
#28
All this stuff definitely seems to be tripping up on certain hardware/uefi scenarios. The solution seems obvious to me then! I expect the Antix devs to go out and buy every possible laptop on the market for their next round of testing!!!! __{{emoticon}}__
Here is a thought. What if the difference that is causing the problem with the Antix sticks and not with other distros is related to kernel version and/or lack of systemd? It has been decades since I did os development, but it just occurred to me that hardware detection is very much a kernel matter. When I get time I might have a look at putting a newer kernel on the install and try creating a new iso to test with? The systemd thought arises only from the fact that it is a 'point of difference'. I know nothing about the inner working of the PITA intruder.
Perhaps an outcome of this discussion could be that the devs may publicise a 'sticky' warning that folk who come across this"stick recognition" issue with their hardware may need to install in legacy mode before returning to uefi mode on their machine.
greywolf.
Here is a thought. What if the difference that is causing the problem with the Antix sticks and not with other distros is related to kernel version and/or lack of systemd? It has been decades since I did os development, but it just occurred to me that hardware detection is very much a kernel matter. When I get time I might have a look at putting a newer kernel on the install and try creating a new iso to test with? The systemd thought arises only from the fact that it is a 'point of difference'. I know nothing about the inner working of the PITA intruder.
Perhaps an outcome of this discussion could be that the devs may publicise a 'sticky' warning that folk who come across this"stick recognition" issue with their hardware may need to install in legacy mode before returning to uefi mode on their machine.
greywolf.
-
tlmillerPosts: 13
- Joined: 16 Sep 2016
#29
I do know that a lot of distro's have had issues with UEFI, I had worked a lot with Mageia during the development of v5 testing their implementations to get it right.
BAH...that's why there's people that have the hardware, they're tasked with testing if things work.greywolf wrote:All this stuff definitely seems to be tripping up on certain hardware/uefi scenarios. The solution seems obvious to me then! I expect the Antix devs to go out and buy every possible laptop on the market for their next round of testing!!!! __{{emoticon}}__
greywolf.
I do know that a lot of distro's have had issues with UEFI, I had worked a lot with Mageia during the development of v5 testing their implementations to get it right.
-
BitJamPosts: 1,308
- Joined: 31 Aug 2009
#30
I just made a fresh antiX-16_x64-core-libre live-usb using live-usb-maker just to be sure no bug crept into our production iso files. It booted fine via UEFI on two Dells (xps-13, inspiron-3147), and on an Acer ES1-511. It had trouble fully booting on an ASUS-T100 but I got to the UEFI bootloader menu without a hitch. I enabled secure boot on the Dell-3147 and again I could boot via UEFI.
On all machines except the ASUS-T100 I used the F12 key to get to a boot menu so I could select to boot from the live-usb. On the ASUS I used F2 to get the the BIOS/UEFI in order to change the boot order. From my perspective, the"standard" way to boot from live media is to open up a boot menu during or after POST and select the live media from the list provided. If that fails then the next thing I do is go into BIOS/UEFI and change the boot order. Perhaps you are using a different way to boot live media that I'm not aware of.
I'm sorry you are all having such difficulty. I don't know why it works fine on a wide range of hardware for all of our testers and for all of our devs and for the testers at OSDisc but now it suddenly fails to work for you three. One far-fetched idea is that you are all using secureboot and somehow the signing key we used for the live bootloader was revoked on your machines.
On all machines except the ASUS-T100 I used the F12 key to get to a boot menu so I could select to boot from the live-usb. On the ASUS I used F2 to get the the BIOS/UEFI in order to change the boot order. From my perspective, the"standard" way to boot from live media is to open up a boot menu during or after POST and select the live media from the list provided. If that fails then the next thing I do is go into BIOS/UEFI and change the boot order. Perhaps you are using a different way to boot live media that I'm not aware of.
I'm sorry you are all having such difficulty. I don't know why it works fine on a wide range of hardware for all of our testers and for all of our devs and for the testers at OSDisc but now it suddenly fails to work for you three. One far-fetched idea is that you are all using secureboot and somehow the signing key we used for the live bootloader was revoked on your machines.