Jump to content


 


Register a free account to unlock additional features at BleepingComputer.com
Welcome to BleepingComputer, a free community where people like yourself come together to discuss and learn how to use their computers. Using the site is easy and fun. As a guest, you can browse and view the various discussions in the forums, but can not create a new topic or reply to an existing one unless you are logged in. Other benefits of registering an account are subscribing to topics and forums, creating a blog, and having no ads shown anywhere on the site.


Click here to Register a free account now! or read our Welcome Guide to learn how to use this site.

Photo

antiX


  • Please log in to reply
15 replies to this topic

#1 Al1000

Al1000

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,187 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:21 AM

Posted 11 June 2016 - 11:29 AM

Has anyone here tried this? A while ago I tried MX-14 (which is based on antiX) and didn't like it, which kind of put me off trying antiX again, until now.

http://antix.mepis.org/index.php?title=Main_Page

What led me to antiX:

I decided I was bored with LXLE (12.04) on my old laptop and wanted to replace it with something smaller and lighter. I tried Debian Jessie without a desktop or desktop environment but with xorg and openbox, then Bohdi Linux and Bohdi Linux Legacy, but they all, together with LXLE 14.04 which I tried later out of interest, crashed when they got to the part of the boot process when the computer tries to load the desktop, and after displaying error messages relating to the VIA graphics during booting. Exactly the same happens with any *buntu 14.04 distro, and also with Ubuntu 12.04.

Then I tried Vector Linux which looked more promising initially, but I soon realised that CPU frequency scaling wasn't working and the CPU was running at its max frequency all the time. I searched the internet for CPU frequency scaling tools that I could install, but Vector Linux' software repositories didn't have any of the ones I found, nor did it even have Conky!

So at that point I decided Vector Linux is not for me, and had another look at the recommendations for "Linux" distros for "Old Computers" on DistroWatch and couldn't help but notice that antiX is well up there.

http://distrowatch.com/search.php?ostype=Linux&category=Old+Computers&origin=All&basedon=All&notbasedon=None&desktop=All&architecture=All&package=All&rolling=All&isosize=All&netinstall=All&status=Active

Downloaded and burned the "full" 32 bit version to CD, and was pleasantly surprised to find it booted up and seemed to work no problem. I recall MX-14 having jittery graphics and scrolling being jerky on this old laptop, but with this latest version of antiX the graphics and scrolling are silky smooth.

It uses the Debian software repositories so there's plenty of software available, and you decide whether you want to use Stable, Testing or Unstable when you install antiX. I went for Stable due to the old hardware it's going on.

The installer is kind of basic, but that's what I like. It does what it's supposed to do and I managed to use it for the first time without having to read any instructions, without much difficulty.

One thing worthy of note is that the installer did not insist on formatting my swap partition, which the *buntu/Mint and Debian installers do. The antiX installer has an option to "use existing" swap partition.

The OS itself is very impressive, if you're wanting something lightweight and configurable. It uses Puppy-like amounts of RAM and even though its a "full" multi-user Linux distro, it uses well under 2.5GiB of HDD space, as you can see by the default Conky display. (I haven't installed anything yet apart from fully updating the system; the only thing I've uninstalled is Libre Office)

This is the "UltraBlack" theme:

other_desktops_zpsvhlzj7bx.jpg

As you can see, in addition to several themes, there is also a variety of "desktops" which are actually different Windows Managers. You can switch between them with windows open too. Some of them have no "taskbar." The default window manager is IceWM which is what I'm using in the pic above. In the pic below is FluxBox in which you right-click on the 'desktop' to access a menu:

fluxbox_zpsiz6w3wtz.jpg

Suffice to say I'm delighted with this little distro and intend on keeping it for a while. It's noticeably faster than LXLE. The only bug I've found so far is that if I enable the "RoxPanel" which is the only way I've found so far to get an additional panel, a new panel appears at the top of the screen but nothing happens when I click on Preferences, which means I can't do much to the panel.

Oh, and nothing happens when I click on "Update Menu" in the menu, but it comes with Synaptic Package Manager and I updated it using apt-get anyway, so these minor annoyances are not enough to put me off. :)

Edited by Al1000, 11 June 2016 - 11:50 AM.


BC AdBot (Login to Remove)

 


#2 mremski

mremski

  • Members
  • 492 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:NH
  • Local time:03:21 AM

Posted 12 June 2016 - 02:03 AM

Ahh, the distinction between a simple Window Manager and a Desktop Environment.  Hard to get folks to understand there actually is a difference.

I will point out that "antiX" is misnamed;  xorg is the descendent of the X-Window System (originally developed at MIT) that was the graphical environment for Unix based computers (Suns, IBM, SGI, tons of others).  If you want a glimpse of the earliest, try "twm".  Ain't pretty, but it does what it was designed to do: manage windows.  

The one I've been using for as long as I can remember (building from source and installing on work computers) is WindowMaker.  It's designed to look like the old NeXt machines (Steve Jobs before he went back to Apple).


FreeBSD since 3.3, only time I touch Windows is to fix my wife's computer


#3 vacuum-tube

vacuum-tube

  • Members
  • 99 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:02:21 AM

Posted 13 June 2016 - 12:10 AM

I was needing something that would run a browser at a decent speed and tried antix-15.1 and it worked super on this old desktop. It was a last chance before it went down the road.

 

$ inxi -Fx
System: Host: emachines-T3092 Kernel: 4.0.5-antix.3-486-smp i686 (32 bit gcc: 4.9.3) Desktop: IceWM 1.3.8
Distro: antiX-15.1_386-full Killah P 18 February 2016
Machine: Mobo: First model: AU31 v: PCB 1.x Bios: Phoenix v: TCB426G date: 03/30/2004
CPU: Single core AMD Athlon XP 3000+ (-UP-) cache: 512 KB
flags: (pae sse) bmips: 4342 speed: 2171 MHz (max)
Graphics: Card: NVIDIA NV34 [GeForce FX 5200] bus-ID: 02:00.0
Display Server: X.Org 1.16.4 drivers: nouveau (unloaded: fbdev,vesa) Resolution: 1024x768@60.00hz
GLX Renderer: Gallium 0.4 on NV34 GLX Version: 1.5 Mesa 10.3.2 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio: Card-1 NVIDIA nForce2 AC97 Audio Controler (MCP)
driver: snd_intel8x0 ports: d800 dc00 bus-ID: 00:06.0
Card-2 NVIDIA nForce Audio Processing Unit bus-ID: 00:05.0
Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture v: k4.0.5-antix.3-486-smp
Network: Card: NVIDIA nForce2 Ethernet Controller driver: forcedeth port: d400 bus-ID: 00:04.0
IF: eth0 state: up speed: 100 Mbps duplex: full mac: 00:40:ca:7b:bb:f1
Drives: HDD Total Size: 120.0GB (4.2% used) ID-1: /dev/sda model: ST3120022A size: 120.0GB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 108G used: 2.8G (3%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda1
ID-2: swap-1 size: 2.17GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda2
Sensors: None detected - is lm-sensors installed and configured?
Info: Processes: 100 Uptime: 1:47 Memory: 216.0/2020.3MB Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Gcc sys: 4.9.2
Client: Shell (bash 4.3.301) inxi: 2.3.0



#4 Al1000

Al1000
  • Topic Starter

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,187 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 05:02 AM

Ahh, the distinction between a simple Window Manager and a Desktop Environment. Hard to get folks to understand there actually is a difference.


It's interesting to see what the differences are. I'm using IceWM which for example doesn't support desktop icons, but that's ok because I prefer panels to desktop icons anyway.

Had an issue with sound, but installed pulseaudio and now it works fine.

I noticed, after updating the system with apt-get, that Adobe flash player in Iceweasel was being blocked due to being out of date. So I updated with Synaptic, which replaced Iceweasel with Firefox ESR. I would rather have had Iceweasel but at least flash player is now up to date.

So the only remaining issue is with RoxPanel. If I can't get it working properly, I may change window managers to Rox-IceWM so that I can use desktop icons.

Another noteworthy thing is that I no longer need to use a USB dongle for wifi with this old laptop. The rt2500pci driver has always worked ok in Puppy, but was unreliable with LXLE and all other *buntu based distros I've used in it, including Mint. In antiX however, it works just as well as it does with Puppy. :)

Edited by Al1000, 15 June 2016 - 05:09 AM.


#5 Al1000

Al1000
  • Topic Starter

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,187 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 05:04 AM

it worked super on this old desktop


That's a high-spec machine in comparison to my old laptop. :)

al@puppy-pc:~
$ inxi -Fx
System:    Host: puppy-pc Kernel: 4.4.10-antix.1-486-smp i686 (32 bit gcc: 4.9.3) Desktop: IceWM 1.3.8
           Distro: antiX-16-b5_386-full Berta Cáceres 19 May 2016
Machine:   System: NEC s (portable) product: Packard Bell EasyNote v: PB15M00301
           Mobo: MiTAC model: N/A v: 5a Bios: Insyde v: R1.06 date: 11/19/2004
Battery    BAT0: charge: 20.0 Wh 100.0% condition: 20.0/40.0 Wh (50%) model: NEC Internal status: Full
CPU:       Single core Mobile AMD Sempron 3000+ (-UP-) cache: 128 KB
           flags: (nx pae sse sse2) bmips: 1603 speed/max: 800/1800 MHz
Graphics:  Card: VIA K8M800/K8N800/K8N800A [S3 UniChrome Pro] bus-ID: 01:00.0
           Display Server: X.Org 1.16.4 driver: vesa Resolution: 1024x768@61.00hz
           GLX Renderer: Gallium 0.4 on llvmpipe (LLVM 3.5, 128 bits)
           GLX Version: 3.0 Mesa 10.3.2 Direct Rendering: Yes
Audio:     Card VIA VT8233/A/8235/8237 AC97 Audio Controller driver: snd_via82xx port: e000 bus-ID: 00:11.5
           Sound: Advanced Linux Sound Architecture v: k4.4.10-antix.1-486-smp
Network:   Card-1: Ralink RT2500 Wireless 802.11bg driver: rt2500pci v: 2.3.0 bus-ID: 00:0a.0
           IF: wlan0 state: up mac: 00:10:60:8e:ea:0f
           Card-2: VIA VT6102 [Rhine-II] driver: via-rhine port: e200 bus-ID: 00:12.0
           IF: eth0 state: down mac: 00:40:d0:67:79:e1
Drives:    HDD Total Size: 40.0GB (10.4% used) ID-1: /dev/sda model: IC25N040ATMR04 size: 40.0GB
Partition: ID-1: / size: 13G used: 2.5G (22%) fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda7
           ID-2: swap-1 size: 1.61GB used: 0.00GB (0%) fs: swap dev: /dev/sda6
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 61.0C mobo: N/A
           Fan Speeds (in rpm): cpu: N/A
Info:      Processes: 120 Uptime: 8:51 Memory: 448.4/940.1MB Init: SysVinit runlevel: 5 Gcc sys: 4.9.2
           Client: Shell (bash 4.3.301) inxi: 2.3.0 


#6 vacuum-tube

vacuum-tube

  • Members
  • 99 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:02:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 09:11 AM

Just installed antix MX-15 on this desktop.

 

Antix developers did an excellent job on this distro.

It is packed with more apps than I will ever need.

Not a big Xfce fan but it works great out of the box and that is what is important.

 

I can almost see myself leaving the big flagship distros.

Linux distros as Antix and Puppy that do all that the big flagship distros do and uses less resources Hmmm makes me wonder.

 

$ inxi -Fx
System:    Host: Dell-Optiplex-GX620 Kernel: 3.16.0-4-686-pae i686 (32 bit gcc: 4.8.4)
           Desktop: Xfce 4.12.2 (Gtk 2.24.25) Distro: MX-15_386 Fusion 24 December 2015
Machine:   System: Dell product: OptiPlex GX620
           Mobo: Dell model: 0F8096 Bios: Dell v: A01 date: 05/24/2005
CPU:       Single core Intel Pentium 4 (-HT-) cache: 2048 KB flags: (lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3) bmips: 5984
           clock speeds: max: 2992 MHz 1: 2992 MHz 2: 2992 MHz
Graphics:  Card: Intel 82945G/GZ Integrated Graphics Controller
         Intel 945G x86/MMX/SSE2
Audio:     Card Intel 82801G (ICH7 Family) AC'97 Audio Controller

Network:   Card: Broadcom NetXtreme BCM5751 100 Mbps
Drives:    HDD Total Size: 80.0GB model: SAMSUNG_HD080HJ
Memory:  3.0GB DDR2 Ram
         


Edited by vacuum-tube, 15 June 2016 - 09:14 AM.


#7 Al1000

Al1000
  • Topic Starter

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,187 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 03:34 PM

Just installed antix MX-15 on this desktop.


Full or frugal install?

As I recall the main issue I had with MX-14 was jerky graphics on this old laptop. IIRC I also had issues with persistence on the frugal install I did, but that might have been something I did wrong. Since I'm so impressed with antiX I'm now thinking of trying a frugal install of the latest MX release on my desktop pc.

Edited by Al1000, 15 June 2016 - 03:37 PM.


#8 vacuum-tube

vacuum-tube

  • Members
  • 99 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:02:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 03:59 PM

I did a full install as I wanted to see haw it ran.

 

I'm going to look into a frugal install though.



#9 vacuum-tube

vacuum-tube

  • Members
  • 99 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:02:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 04:12 PM

Hey Al1000,

 

Where did you see where a frugal install of antix MX-15 could be done as I didn't see that option in my install I did.

 

I know a frugal can be done with antix 15.1.



#10 Al1000

Al1000
  • Topic Starter

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,187 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 04:44 PM

It was MX-14 that I used, which was the latest release at the time.

I just assumed the frugal option would have been available in MX-15 too, but perhaps not...

Here are some of the issues I had with the frugal install of MX-14, which I've just looked up:

http://www.bleepingcomputer.com/forums/t/520816/end-of-xp-is-linux-a-way-to-save-the-hardware/?p=3451860

http://forum.mepiscommunity.org/viewtopic.php?f=7&t=36746

#11 vacuum-tube

vacuum-tube

  • Members
  • 99 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:02:21 AM

Posted 15 June 2016 - 05:10 PM

Yeah Mx forums has posts where some have tried frugal installs but had problems with them. You are supposed to be able to do a frugal install with antix 15.1 but I don't know about MX-15.

 

http://forum.mepiscommunity.org/viewtopic.php?f=92&t=39981

 

I also know that hardware requirements are more for MX-15 than for the standard antix 15.1 which I have found will run on nearly anything.

 

My MX-15 Fusion runs like a champ on my old Dell listed above.



#12 wizardfromoz

wizardfromoz

  • Banned
  • 2,799 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Local time:05:21 PM

Posted 16 June 2016 - 02:34 AM

Where did you see where a frugal install of antix MX-15 could be done as I didn't see that option in my install I did.

 

 

Hi guys

 

@vacuum-tube:

 

I can't find it either. I have been running MX-15 since its release last Christmas Eve.

 

BQug4WX.png

 

... and did not recall an option for frugal at install.

 

So I just burned a live USB with it and ran it - couldn't go too far into it as I did not want to install another iteration, but got as far as Steps 2 - 3 ready to install, no mention of frugal.

 

On the other hand, a Google search on "MX-15 frugal install" led me to http://antix.mepis.org/index.php?title=Main_Page , where a Ctrl-F search (4 results) on frugal lends this, in part (at 2nd instance) -

 

 

24 December 2015

MX-15 available

We are extremely pleased to announce the release of MX-15 (codename Fusion) based on the reliable and stable Debian Jessie (8.2) with extra enhancements and up to date applications provided by our packaging team.

Just like MX-14, this release defaults to sysVinit (though systemd is available once installed -but see known issues below).

Available in 32 and 64 bit.

The 32 bit version ships with 2 stable 3.16 Debian kernels (pae and non-pae), while the 64 bit comes with the more recent kernel 4.2 Debian backports kernel to cater for newer hardware.

Both iso files weigh in at around 1GB in size.

  • For 32 bit users, download MX-15.01_386.iso. It fixes a bug found that meant the non-pae kernel did not boot when used live (on cd/dvd/usb). It works fine installed.
  • For those using MX-15_386.iso installed there is no need to download the new iso.
  • For users running live, best to apply the patch to the old iso.

So what does it include?

Core

  • Xfce 4.12
  • Automatic enabling of Broadcom drivers b43 and b44
  • UEFI installer (64bit, experimental)
  • Details: type in terminal inxi -F

Advanced LiveUSB

  • Run in Live mode in 10 languages
  • Easy Live-remaster to make a custom LiveUSB
  • Three forms of Live persistence
  • Easy "frugal" install option
  • Automatic check of all LiveUSB file systems for integrity

 

... beats me :scratchhead:

 

Al will remember Member bmike1, whom has (he is still a Member, just not active in this Section since Christmas) as part of his signature

 

 

... I recommend Linux Mint or, if you need a lighter weight operating system that fits on a cd, MX14 or AntiX.

 

That is what put me on the trail, trialling live scenaria of Anti-X and MX-14 for Elaine's computer (60GB HDD 512MB RAM).

 

 

My MX-15 Fusion runs like a champ on my old Dell listed above.

 

Not surprised. It is one of my favourite Distros - you might like it better than MX-14, Al.

 

Hope none of the above is off-topic, but the two, if not siblings, are at least cousins?

 

Thanks, Al - I will revisit Anti-X.

 

:wizardball: Wiz



#13 Al1000

Al1000
  • Topic Starter

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,187 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:21 AM

Posted 16 June 2016 - 04:28 AM

The OP in the thread at forum.mepiscommunity.org that vacuum-tube posted a link to in post #11, was doing a frugal install of MX-15.

you might like it better than MX-14, Al.


I wouldn't be surprised if I do. I might even like it enough to use it. :)

#14 vacuum-tube

vacuum-tube

  • Members
  • 99 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Not Telling
  • Local time:02:21 AM

Posted 16 June 2016 - 07:44 AM

I think from all of the problems I've read about that I'm staying with Puppy tahrpup6.0.5 for my frugal installs as I've done many and know that it works.



#15 Al1000

Al1000
  • Topic Starter

  • Global Moderator
  • 7,187 posts
  • OFFLINE
  •  
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Scotland
  • Local time:08:21 AM

Posted 16 June 2016 - 08:09 AM

Puppy frugal installs are certainly much more straightforward. If I run into too many issues with installing MX-15 frugally, I'll probably just go for a full install.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users