Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #87944 > unrolled thread
| Started by | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| First post | 2026-06-14 01:07 +0000 |
| Last post | 2026-06-14 22:35 -0400 |
| Articles | 20 on this page of 102 — 10 participants |
Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc
MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 01:07 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 00:10 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 06:16 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 03:19 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 18:11 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 23:00 -0400
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-14 10:33 +0100
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 18:20 +0000
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-14 19:45 +0100
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 23:49 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-15 01:41 -0400
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-15 01:34 -0400
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-15 07:23 +0100
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 07:02 +0000
Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-15 12:36 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 03:39 -0400
Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-16 11:52 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 22:05 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-17 02:59 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 23:55 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-17 07:00 +0000
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-17 08:14 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 04:10 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-18 19:26 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 03:20 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-18 18:45 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:50 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-19 16:56 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-20 03:41 -0400
Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-20 10:19 +0200
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 01:06 -0400
Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-21 12:34 +0200
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 22:41 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-20 17:36 +0000
Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-20 20:01 +0200
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 03:19 +0000
Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-21 12:29 +0200
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 17:34 +0000
Re: MX Linux "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> - 2026-06-21 19:49 +0200
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 23:22 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-22 01:08 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 06:34 +0000
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-22 09:27 +0100
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 13:46 +0000
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-22 09:22 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 23:51 -0400
Re: MX Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-21 17:49 +0000
Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-22 02:19 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-22 01:13 -0400
Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-22 10:20 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-22 05:25 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 13:54 +0000
Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-22 17:28 +0100
Re: MX Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-22 17:07 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-22 00:11 -0400
Re: MX Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-22 17:07 +0000
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 20:36 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 22:39 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 03:50 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-22 01:16 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 06:29 +0000
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-22 09:55 +0100
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-22 13:50 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 02:34 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 06:44 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 03:35 -0400
Re: MX Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-21 17:30 +0000
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-21 23:31 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-21 23:22 -0400
Re: MX Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-22 17:07 +0000
Re: MX Linux John Ames <commodorejohn@gmail.com> - 2026-06-17 15:50 -0700
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 04:53 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-16 17:52 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 23:19 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-17 07:07 +0000
Re: MX Linux The Natural Philosopher <tnp@invalid.invalid> - 2026-06-17 11:06 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-18 04:02 -0400
Re: MX Linux Charlie Gibbs <cgibbs@kltpzyxm.invalid> - 2026-06-18 18:26 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:37 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-18 19:23 +0000
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-19 04:46 +0100
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-19 05:55 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:56 -0400
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-19 02:59 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-19 17:00 +0000
Re: MX Linux Lawrence D’Oliveiro <ldo@nz.invalid> - 2026-06-15 08:01 +0000
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 07:00 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 23:05 -0400
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 22:32 -0400
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-15 07:21 +0100
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-15 02:50 -0400
Re: MX Linux Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> - 2026-06-15 13:19 +0100
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 06:52 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 03:37 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-16 17:00 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-16 22:40 -0400
Re: MX Linux Marc Haber <mh+usenetspam2616@zugschl.us> - 2026-06-15 13:09 +0200
Re: MX Linux 🇵🇱Jacek Marcin Jaworski🇵🇱 <jmj@energokod.gda.pl> - 2026-06-14 11:50 +0200
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-14 18:16 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 23:04 -0400
Re: MX Linux rbowman <bowman@montana.com> - 2026-06-15 06:56 +0000
Re: MX Linux c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> - 2026-06-14 22:35 -0400
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-17 07:00 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9euvuFm4idU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88027 |
On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 23:55:26 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Can you still GET an eeePC ? Mine fell about three floors > onto concrete ... You might be able to find one on eBay. iirc I bought mine in 2007 when they first came out. At the time it was Linux only; windows came later. Downloaded the antiX 26 full and brought it up in a VM. When I tried to install it said the iso was corrupt. Downloaded from another site. Same story. The live version ran so I opened a terminal and ran 'sudo minstall --no-media-check'. It installed and is working. I went with the default runit/IceWM. Pretty much like 23 without the eeePC limitations. It did use 10.25 GiB of the 30 I gave it. 23 Base was under 4.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Andy Burns <usenet@andyburns.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-17 08:14 +0100 |
| Message-ID | <n9evqfFmcv5U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88030 |
rbowman wrote: > c186282 wrote: > >> Can you still GET an eeePC ? > > You might be able to find one on eBay. iirc I bought mine in 2007 when > they first came out. I dug out my Dell Mini 9 netbook, might still be OK if you're running in text mode, but screen resolution is very limiting (e.g. apps may have dialogues that don't even fit the monitor). Also mini-PCIe IDE SSDs disappeared pretty quickly without getting any higher capacity.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-18 04:10 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <2fKcne0jWrbfNa73nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88032 |
On 6/17/26 03:14, Andy Burns wrote: > rbowman wrote: > >> c186282 wrote: >> >>> Can you still GET an eeePC ? >> >> You might be able to find one on eBay. iirc I bought mine in 2007 when >> they first came out. > I dug out my Dell Mini 9 netbook, might still be OK if you're running in > text mode, but screen resolution is very limiting (e.g. apps may have > dialogues that don't even fit the monitor). Also mini-PCIe IDE SSDs > disappeared pretty quickly without getting any higher capacity. I have an 'older' laptop - even has a DVD drive built in. Upgraded it a bit. It can SERVE fairly well now. IS big and heavy by modern standards. The easy upgrade was replacing the WD Blue with a Samsung 8xx series SATA SSD. Big improvement. It already had kind of a lot of RAM. DO kinda miss my EEE-PC however. JUST enough laptop, ran Linux perfectly. "MX" was the first Linux distro where Grub kinda understood the internal M2 drive and would install shit properly. The rest WOULD NOT. Different NOW, but now ain't THEN. EBay ... had issues with them. Won't play anymore.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-18 19:26 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9iv2eFaeprU3@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88046 |
On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 04:10:40 -0400, c186282 wrote: > I have an 'older' laptop - even has a DVD drive built in. Upgraded it > a bit. It can SERVE fairly well now. IS big and heavy by modern > standards. I've got one of those stuffed away. iirc it runs XP.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-18 03:20 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <xuqcnUVbGvumAa73nZ2dnZfqn_ednZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88030 |
On 6/17/26 03:00, rbowman wrote: > On Tue, 16 Jun 2026 23:55:26 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> Can you still GET an eeePC ? Mine fell about three floors >> onto concrete ... > > You might be able to find one on eBay. iirc I bought mine in 2007 when > they first came out. At the time it was Linux only; windows came later. Bought mine about the same time - soon converted it to Linux. GOOD unit ! > Downloaded the antiX 26 full and brought it up in a VM. When I tried to > install it said the iso was corrupt. Downloaded from another site. Same > story. The live version ran so I opened a terminal and ran 'sudo minstall > --no-media-check'. It installed and is working. I went with the default > runit/IceWM. > > Pretty much like 23 without the eeePC limitations. It did use 10.25 GiB of > the 30 I gave it. 23 Base was under 4. Ah, Antix-26 ... DID manage to install it in VBox. Nice very tight distro. Some ICEWM variant as the primary GUI interface. Didn't love it - indeed there were no scroll bars for like terminal windows ! Installed LXDE ... some issues on boot ... had to use like Alt-F1 or Ctrl-F1 or something to select the new desktop - F1 itself didn't work on my lap. Some weird box kept coming up later with like 15 desktops - did manage to make it go away. Now it's all cool. Antix can install in well under a gig. It's very tight. The latest 'full' version, alas, DOES come with the whole LibreOffice shit - had to manually remove. Nothing against Libre ... but we DON'T want/need it on everything. There MAY have been some tiny checkbox somewhere - didn't see it. Anyway, built it out - installed maybe every 'development' suite. Had to expand the virtual disk considerably. Use the tools in VBox - but then you have to use like GParted to enlarge the space the distro sees. Easy, but not one-step. Note the initial install - you get a choice of the "legacy kernel" or the "modern kernel". Strongly suggest the latter. 32-bit is now kinda heavily 'depricated'. You CAN install an alleged 32 bit ... but they SAY a LOT of the current software won't work with it. Anyway, ANTIX is especially good because it starts out SO "minimal" - no bullshit or complications. You can then expand AS YOU NEED without all the usual distro baggage. My appraisal of Antix-26 - VERY GOOD. Oh, only had to dedicate TWO cpu cores in VBox and it's STILL snappy. WAY different than my Endeavour install yesterday. (that ALSO works well, but hogs a LOT more CPU/mem) So, if you want desktops/servers/whatever based on Deb ... ANTIX26 may be your best starting point. Sure, many other, MUCH fatter, distros, but then you get a mega-dose of what THEY think is 'important'. Despite propaganda, Deb makes for GREAT servers. CAN be very tight/fast - To The Point. Anyway ... if you think MX is "too" - then ANTIX !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-18 18:45 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9isn6FaeprU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88044 |
On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 03:20:18 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Note the initial install - you get a choice of the "legacy kernel" or > the "modern kernel". Strongly suggest the latter. > 32-bit is now kinda heavily 'depricated'. You CAN install an alleged > 32 bit ... but they SAY a LOT of the current software won't work with > it. I went with the 'modern' kernel, though 6.6 isn't very modern. The host Leap 16 is 6.12 as is MX. However it works. > Anyway, ANTIX is especially good because it starts out SO "minimal" - > no bullshit or complications. You can then expand AS YOU NEED without > all the usual distro baggage. > > My appraisal of Antix-26 - VERY GOOD. I'd add an asterisk -- if you're on an older system with RAM and processor limitations. IceWM is usable, certainly more than fluxbox, but lacks the polish of Xfce. The 23 Base package was more 'build it out as you want it'. If I'm going to get LibreOffice and other stuff in Full that I don't use I'd rather go with MX for an older box like my 2011 Acer netbook. For an out of the box install I like it better than the Mint Xfce I looked a briefly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-19 02:50 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <n5acnZVUso08e6n3nZ2dnZfqn_udnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88064 |
On 6/18/26 14:45, rbowman wrote: > On Thu, 18 Jun 2026 03:20:18 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> Note the initial install - you get a choice of the "legacy kernel" or >> the "modern kernel". Strongly suggest the latter. >> 32-bit is now kinda heavily 'depricated'. You CAN install an alleged >> 32 bit ... but they SAY a LOT of the current software won't work with >> it. > > I went with the 'modern' kernel, though 6.6 isn't very modern. The host > Leap 16 is 6.12 as is MX. However it works. Well ... "modern" enough :-) I don't demand bleeding edge - just something Good Enough for this year. >> Anyway, ANTIX is especially good because it starts out SO "minimal" - >> no bullshit or complications. You can then expand AS YOU NEED without >> all the usual distro baggage. >> >> My appraisal of Antix-26 - VERY GOOD. > > I'd add an asterisk -- if you're on an older system with RAM and processor > limitations. IceWM is usable, certainly more than fluxbox, but lacks the > polish of Xfce. The 23 Base package was more 'build it out as you want > it'. If I'm going to get LibreOffice and other stuff in Full that I don't > use I'd rather go with MX for an older box like my 2011 Acer netbook. For > an out of the box install I like it better than the Mint Xfce I looked a > briefly. I used IceWM on some PI-3s back in the day. It's kind of 'usable', but not 'friendly'. Pretty low CPU/mem drain however. NOT sure why Antix picked it as the default. LXDE would be the more friendly rival and it's MUCH nicer. Oh well, they ARE about "minimal" ... In any case, STARTING very 'minimal' is a nice change from the common distros. Tight and Simple. You can then ADD whatever YOU want. Good paradigm. Debian CAN be VERY small and tight. Alas almost no modern distros give you that. Gave it all a rest today, after being up to 5AM before. Still have to deal with the VBox 'extension pack', which is less friendly these days. Simplest case I'll just link it to my little "NAS" so files can be shared. Using the 'bridged adapter' setting it IS on my local network. And, IS pretty snappy even dedicating just two cores to Antix. Gonna see how much I can cut back the memory before performance suffers. The LiniVerse is never static.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-19 16:56 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9lalqFmbflU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88085 |
On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 02:50:00 -0400, c186282 wrote: > Gave it all a rest today, after being up to 5AM before. Still have to > deal with the VBox 'extension pack', which is less friendly these > days. Simplest case I'll just link it to my little "NAS" so files can > be shared. Using the 'bridged adapter' setting it IS on my local > network. I tried installing VirtualBox on Leap 16. Not at all friendly.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-20 03:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <55OcnU3iTN792av3nZ2dnZfqn_adnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88101 |
On 6/19/26 12:56, rbowman wrote: > On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 02:50:00 -0400, c186282 wrote: > >> Gave it all a rest today, after being up to 5AM before. Still have to >> deal with the VBox 'extension pack', which is less friendly these >> days. Simplest case I'll just link it to my little "NAS" so files can >> be shared. Using the 'bridged adapter' setting it IS on my local >> network. > > I tried installing VirtualBox on Leap 16. Not at all friendly. VBox is NOT as easy/general as it used to be alas. Sure you can $$$$$$Pay$$$$$$ for VM-Ware .... Seems Oracle has kind of lost interest in VBox. Some distros it will work, some it won't. No good online solutions. Roll the dice. On my current MX it works pretty well - except the 'extension pack' stuff can be quirky, or just unusable. Anyway, it's good enough so I can eval new distros. TRIED it on Leap, and Fedora, far more problems. See the ARCH "AUR" distros were full of malware. Arch is kinda FLUSHING those - too big a problem to fix, so Start Over. Have ONE Arch deriv as a VM ... do I try to FIX it, or just FLUSH it ??? DO remember when evil people managed to infiltrate a MINT distro ... they didn't catch it right away. A bud of mine at the office had just spent good time installing MINT ... and was REALLY pissed when I told him he'd have to flush it. We usually look for hacks finding tiny flaws in existing software - but the BEST hack is to get into the base distro/repos themselves. Linux USED to be "safe" and "beyond notice". NOT so anymore. Shit, 90 plus % of the firmware in the world is Linux. The evil people have TAKEN NOTICE. OK, big loss, just FLUSHED the Arch-based VM. SHIT !
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-20 10:19 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <n9n0ntFti34U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88125 |
On 2026-06-20 09:41, c186282 wrote:
> On 6/19/26 12:56, rbowman wrote:
>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 02:50:00 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>
>>> Gave it all a rest today, after being up to 5AM before. Still
>>> have to
>>> deal with the VBox 'extension pack', which is less friendly these
>>> days. Simplest case I'll just link it to my little "NAS" so files
>>> can
>>> be shared. Using the 'bridged adapter' setting it IS on my local
>>> network.
>>
>> I tried installing VirtualBox on Leap 16. Not at all friendly.
>
> VBox is NOT as easy/general as it used to be alas.
>
> Sure you can $$$$$$Pay$$$$$$ for VM-Ware ....
>
> Seems Oracle has kind of lost interest in VBox.
> Some distros it will work, some it won't. No
> good online solutions. Roll the dice.
>
> On my current MX it works pretty well - except
> the 'extension pack' stuff can be quirky, or
> just unusable. Anyway, it's good enough so I
> can eval new distros.
>
> TRIED it on Leap, and Fedora, far more problems.
>
> See the ARCH "AUR" distros were full of malware.
> Arch is kinda FLUSHING those - too big a problem
> to fix, so Start Over. Have ONE Arch deriv as
> a VM ... do I try to FIX it, or just FLUSH it ???
>
> DO remember when evil people managed to infiltrate
> a MINT distro ... they didn't catch it right away.
> A bud of mine at the office had just spent good
> time installing MINT ... and was REALLY pissed when
> I told him he'd have to flush it.
>
> We usually look for hacks finding tiny flaws in
> existing software - but the BEST hack is to get
> into the base distro/repos themselves.
But they did not get into the base distro/repos, just into the community
side, where a single person publishes his playground. Unverified.
>
> Linux USED to be "safe" and "beyond notice". NOT
> so anymore. Shit, 90 plus % of the firmware in the
> world is Linux. The evil people have TAKEN NOTICE.
>
> OK, big loss, just FLUSHED the Arch-based VM. SHIT !
>
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 01:06 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <AqGdnYr3DtD67Kr3nZ2dnZfqnPSdnZ2d@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88126 |
On 6/20/26 04:19, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-06-20 09:41, c186282 wrote: >> On 6/19/26 12:56, rbowman wrote: >>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 02:50:00 -0400, c186282 wrote: >>> >>>> Gave it all a rest today, after being up to 5AM before. Still >>>> have to >>>> deal with the VBox 'extension pack', which is less friendly these >>>> days. Simplest case I'll just link it to my little "NAS" so >>>> files can >>>> be shared. Using the 'bridged adapter' setting it IS on my local >>>> network. >>> >>> I tried installing VirtualBox on Leap 16. Not at all friendly. >> >> VBox is NOT as easy/general as it used to be alas. >> >> Sure you can $$$$$$Pay$$$$$$ for VM-Ware .... >> >> Seems Oracle has kind of lost interest in VBox. >> Some distros it will work, some it won't. No >> good online solutions. Roll the dice. >> >> On my current MX it works pretty well - except >> the 'extension pack' stuff can be quirky, or >> just unusable. Anyway, it's good enough so I >> can eval new distros. >> >> TRIED it on Leap, and Fedora, far more problems. >> >> See the ARCH "AUR" distros were full of malware. >> Arch is kinda FLUSHING those - too big a problem >> to fix, so Start Over. Have ONE Arch deriv as >> a VM ... do I try to FIX it, or just FLUSH it ??? >> >> DO remember when evil people managed to infiltrate >> a MINT distro ... they didn't catch it right away. >> A bud of mine at the office had just spent good >> time installing MINT ... and was REALLY pissed when >> I told him he'd have to flush it. >> >> We usually look for hacks finding tiny flaws in >> existing software - but the BEST hack is to get >> into the base distro/repos themselves. > > But they did not get into the base distro/repos, just into the community > side, where a single person publishes his playground. Unverified. YET that's where a LOT of the cool software is - so everybody WILL/MUST use 'AUR'. Look, if it's easily accessible by your distro, and esp if it's Cool Stuff, then the distro people MUST police that. Modern, nasty, world. Linux has/had a rep for being solid. That was one of the reasons many adopted it. If that perception is now all WRONG then ....... >> Linux USED to be "safe" and "beyond notice". NOT >> so anymore. Shit, 90 plus % of the firmware in the >> world is Linux. The evil people have TAKEN NOTICE. >> >> OK, big loss, just FLUSHED the Arch-based VM. SHIT ! >> Anyway, my long effort installing Endeavour is just GONE now - FLUSH ! Don't know what bits of it to trust for anything. WAY too old to spend six weeks in Intensive Research/Testing. Am I supposed to use ghex to probe every byte ??? Made a VDI of it ... but as soon as I want the disk space back then it is FLUSH too. I'll check back when/if they claim to have addressed The Problems.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 12:34 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <n9pt1dFdiv4U2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88135 |
On 2026-06-21 07:06, c186282 wrote:
> On 6/20/26 04:19, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>> On 2026-06-20 09:41, c186282 wrote:
>>> On 6/19/26 12:56, rbowman wrote:
>>>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 02:50:00 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> Gave it all a rest today, after being up to 5AM before. Still
>>>>> have to
>>>>> deal with the VBox 'extension pack', which is less friendly these
>>>>> days. Simplest case I'll just link it to my little "NAS" so
>>>>> files can
>>>>> be shared. Using the 'bridged adapter' setting it IS on my local
>>>>> network.
>>>>
>>>> I tried installing VirtualBox on Leap 16. Not at all friendly.
>>>
>>> VBox is NOT as easy/general as it used to be alas.
>>>
>>> Sure you can $$$$$$Pay$$$$$$ for VM-Ware ....
>>>
>>> Seems Oracle has kind of lost interest in VBox.
>>> Some distros it will work, some it won't. No
>>> good online solutions. Roll the dice.
>>>
>>> On my current MX it works pretty well - except
>>> the 'extension pack' stuff can be quirky, or
>>> just unusable. Anyway, it's good enough so I
>>> can eval new distros.
>>>
>>> TRIED it on Leap, and Fedora, far more problems.
>>>
>>> See the ARCH "AUR" distros were full of malware.
>>> Arch is kinda FLUSHING those - too big a problem
>>> to fix, so Start Over. Have ONE Arch deriv as
>>> a VM ... do I try to FIX it, or just FLUSH it ???
>>>
>>> DO remember when evil people managed to infiltrate
>>> a MINT distro ... they didn't catch it right away.
>>> A bud of mine at the office had just spent good
>>> time installing MINT ... and was REALLY pissed when
>>> I told him he'd have to flush it.
>>>
>>> We usually look for hacks finding tiny flaws in
>>> existing software - but the BEST hack is to get
>>> into the base distro/repos themselves.
>>
>> But they did not get into the base distro/repos, just into the
>> community side, where a single person publishes his playground.
>> Unverified.
>
>
> YET that's where a LOT of the cool software is - so
> everybody WILL/MUST use 'AUR'.
>
> Look, if it's easily accessible by your distro, and
> esp if it's Cool Stuff, then the distro people MUST
> police that. Modern, nasty, world.
In openSUSE, they refuse, and insist on people not installing from the
"home" repos.
>
> Linux has/had a rep for being solid. That was one of
> the reasons many adopted it. If that perception is
> now all WRONG then .......
>
>
>>> Linux USED to be "safe" and "beyond notice". NOT
>>> so anymore. Shit, 90 plus % of the firmware in the
>>> world is Linux. The evil people have TAKEN NOTICE.
>>>
>>> OK, big loss, just FLUSHED the Arch-based VM. SHIT !
>>>
>
> Anyway, my long effort installing Endeavour is just GONE
> now - FLUSH ! Don't know what bits of it to trust for
> anything. WAY too old to spend six weeks in Intensive
> Research/Testing. Am I supposed to use ghex to probe
> every byte ???
>
> Made a VDI of it ... but as soon as I want the disk space
> back then it is FLUSH too. I'll check back when/if they
> claim to have addressed The Problems.
>
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | c186282 <c186282@nnada.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 22:41 -0400 |
| Message-ID | <MZecnVto0daNPKX3nZ2dnZfqn_oAAAAA@giganews.com> |
| In reply to | #88148 |
On 6/21/26 06:34, Carlos E. R. wrote: > On 2026-06-21 07:06, c186282 wrote: >> On 6/20/26 04:19, Carlos E. R. wrote: >>> On 2026-06-20 09:41, c186282 wrote: >>>> On 6/19/26 12:56, rbowman wrote: >>>>> On Fri, 19 Jun 2026 02:50:00 -0400, c186282 wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Gave it all a rest today, after being up to 5AM before. Still >>>>>> have to >>>>>> deal with the VBox 'extension pack', which is less friendly these >>>>>> days. Simplest case I'll just link it to my little "NAS" so >>>>>> files can >>>>>> be shared. Using the 'bridged adapter' setting it IS on my local >>>>>> network. >>>>> >>>>> I tried installing VirtualBox on Leap 16. Not at all friendly. >>>> >>>> VBox is NOT as easy/general as it used to be alas. >>>> >>>> Sure you can $$$$$$Pay$$$$$$ for VM-Ware .... >>>> >>>> Seems Oracle has kind of lost interest in VBox. >>>> Some distros it will work, some it won't. No >>>> good online solutions. Roll the dice. >>>> >>>> On my current MX it works pretty well - except >>>> the 'extension pack' stuff can be quirky, or >>>> just unusable. Anyway, it's good enough so I >>>> can eval new distros. >>>> >>>> TRIED it on Leap, and Fedora, far more problems. >>>> >>>> See the ARCH "AUR" distros were full of malware. >>>> Arch is kinda FLUSHING those - too big a problem >>>> to fix, so Start Over. Have ONE Arch deriv as >>>> a VM ... do I try to FIX it, or just FLUSH it ??? >>>> >>>> DO remember when evil people managed to infiltrate >>>> a MINT distro ... they didn't catch it right away. >>>> A bud of mine at the office had just spent good >>>> time installing MINT ... and was REALLY pissed when >>>> I told him he'd have to flush it. >>>> >>>> We usually look for hacks finding tiny flaws in >>>> existing software - but the BEST hack is to get >>>> into the base distro/repos themselves. >>> >>> But they did not get into the base distro/repos, just into the >>> community side, where a single person publishes his playground. >>> Unverified. >> >> >> YET that's where a LOT of the cool software is - so >> everybody WILL/MUST use 'AUR'. >> >> Look, if it's easily accessible by your distro, and >> esp if it's Cool Stuff, then the distro people MUST >> police that. Modern, nasty, world. > > In openSUSE, they refuse, and insist on people not installing from the > "home" repos. Arrogance. Yet another good reason to flush OSuse forever.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-20 17:36 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9o1d5Fqo3gU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88125 |
On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 03:41:17 -0400, c186282 wrote: > TRIED it on Leap, and Fedora, far more problems. On Leap 16 after installing the rpm from virtualbox.org it popped up a laundry list of requirements that looked like it was going to build a kernel driver on site. That was similar to Mint, where VB would start but then said it needed packages that conflicted with the current software. I was able to install it on Fedora by enabling the RPMFusion unfree repo. That went better. Then it got weird. I started with MX and it came up once. I'd not selected the bridge option so it had a 10 series IP. I shut it down, and selected the bridge. It seemed to start, put up the splash screen, and that was it. No desktop, no input from the mouse or keyboard. I tried again with the same result. I had a couple of other isos on the Fedora box. Both Mint and antiX started and ran. With the bridge network option, both had 192.168.1.x addresses that I could ping from the host and the Leap box on the same LAN, I tried the kvm/QEMU MX VM to make sure it hadn't been affected with no problem. Now if there could be a mind meld... VB is difficult/impossible to install but handles the bridge nicely. kvm/QEMU is easy to install but the documentation on creating a bridge is obscure.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-20 20:01 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <n9o2r5F4iqjU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88131 |
On 2026-06-20 19:36, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 03:41:17 -0400, c186282 wrote:
>
>> TRIED it on Leap, and Fedora, far more problems.
>
> On Leap 16 after installing the rpm from virtualbox.org it popped up a
> laundry list of requirements that looked like it was going to build a
> kernel driver on site. That was similar to Mint, where VB would start but
> then said it needed packages that conflicted with the current software.
Did you try any of the rpms provided by openSUSE or the community?
You have selected package name: virtualbox
1. repo-oss (16.0) + | 7.2.6 | x86_64
2. openSUSE:Leap:16.0 - | 7.2.6 | x86_64
3. Virtualization ? | 7.2.10 | x86_64
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 03:19 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9p3irF9jmdU1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88132 |
On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 20:01:09 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > Did you try any of the rpms provided by openSUSE or the community? Yes. 'sudo zypper install virualbox' installs Oracle Virtual Box. You can open the application and try to create a VM. It says the driver is not loaded or set up correctly and you should run /sbin/vboxconfig. Running that say you have to install the virtualbox-host-source, kernel- devel, and kernel-default-devel. Assuming those all build and don't require additional packages like make, which is not installed, I'm running SecureBoot and the kernel drivers would need to be signed, I lost interest at that point. The community seems to be divided on whether it will work anyway. As you know Leap 16 ain't Leap 15 so you have to be very careful to check the datelines if available. On Fedora, after adding the RPMFusion ppa, 'sudo dnf install virtualbox' gets the job done. Or it may be VirtualBox. I recall something getting fussy about case.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 12:29 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <n9psnhFdiv4U1@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88134 |
On 2026-06-21 05:19, rbowman wrote:
> On Sat, 20 Jun 2026 20:01:09 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>
>> Did you try any of the rpms provided by openSUSE or the community?
>
> Yes. 'sudo zypper install virualbox' installs Oracle Virtual Box. You can
> open the application and try to create a VM. It says the driver is not
> loaded or set up correctly and you should run /sbin/vboxconfig.
>
> Running that say you have to install the virtualbox-host-source, kernel-
> devel, and kernel-default-devel. Assuming those all build and don't
> require additional packages like make, which is not installed, I'm running
> SecureBoot and the kernel drivers would need to be signed,
I read that people installed it from the default or the virtualization
repo, and that was it. It just worked. I have not tried.
>
> I lost interest at that point. The community seems to be divided on
> whether it will work anyway. As you know Leap 16 ain't Leap 15 so you have
> to be very careful to check the datelines if available.
>
> On Fedora, after adding the RPMFusion ppa, 'sudo dnf install virtualbox'
> gets the job done. Or it may be VirtualBox. I recall something getting
> fussy about case.
>
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 17:34 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9qllpF9jmdU4@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88147 |
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:29:05 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > I read that people installed it from the default or the virtualization > repo, and that was it. It just worked. I have not tried. I can only report my experience with Leap 16 and the virtualbox7.2.6 rpm installed with zypper. https://www.tecmint.com/install-virtualbox-in-opensuse/ "Once the repositories have been refreshed, you will need to install a few required packages for building VirtualBox kernel modules and header files using the following command. $ sudo zypper install gcc make Perl kernel-devel dkms" That's where I lost interest. The list I got was similar except perl and gcc was already on the machine. Perhaps if you were already set up to build kernel modules the rpm installation would automatically build and install them. The zypper install process also reported 'data corruption detected', 'restored data doesn't match checksum', and several errors trying to set permissions in /usr/lib/virtualbox.to 4750 (wrong permission 0755) https://forums.opensuse.org/t/virtualbox-under-leap-16-0/188647 Perhaps if someone really wanted to use VirtualBox they could make it work. Having a VM that can be reached by other machines on the LAN isn't that important. On the Fedora box where it actually installs and works it uses 25% of the CPU for an antiX VM. kvm/QEMU with a MX VM sometimes spikes up when opening Firefox etc but then drops back to 2-3%.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | "Carlos E. R." <robin_listas@es.invalid> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 19:49 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <n9qmhcFgo3tU2@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88155 |
On 2026-06-21 19:34, rbowman wrote:
> On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 12:29:05 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote:
>
>> I read that people installed it from the default or the virtualization
>> repo, and that was it. It just worked. I have not tried.
>
> I can only report my experience with Leap 16 and the virtualbox7.2.6 rpm
> installed with zypper.
>
virtualization repo has 7.2.10
But I'm not going to test it on this laptop. I will try in a month or two.
> https://www.tecmint.com/install-virtualbox-in-opensuse/
>
> "Once the repositories have been refreshed, you will need to install a few
> required packages for building VirtualBox kernel modules and header files
> using the following command.
>
> $ sudo zypper install gcc make Perl kernel-devel dkms"
>
I probably have those already installed in my main machine. Vmware is
the same.
> That's where I lost interest. The list I got was similar except perl and
> gcc was already on the machine. Perhaps if you were already set up to
> build kernel modules the rpm installation would automatically build and
> install them.
>
> The zypper install process also reported 'data corruption detected',
> 'restored data doesn't match checksum', and several errors trying to set
> permissions in /usr/lib/virtualbox.to 4750 (wrong permission 0755)
>
> https://forums.opensuse.org/t/virtualbox-under-leap-16-0/188647
>
> Perhaps if someone really wanted to use VirtualBox they could make it
> work. Having a VM that can be reached by other machines on the LAN isn't
> that important.
>
> On the Fedora box where it actually installs and works it uses 25% of the
> CPU for an antiX VM. kvm/QEMU with a MX VM sometimes spikes up when
> opening Firefox etc but then drops back to 2-3%.
--
Cheers,
Carlos E.R.
ES🇪🇸, EU🇪🇺;
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | rbowman <bowman@montana.com> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2026-06-21 23:22 +0000 |
| Message-ID | <n9ra2dF9jmdU10@mid.individual.net> |
| In reply to | #88157 |
On Sun, 21 Jun 2026 19:49:32 +0200, Carlos E. R. wrote: > virtualization repo has 7.2.10 I tried the 7.2.10 rpm from the virtualbox site. Same deal, some user assembly is required. kvm/QEMU works for what I do so I'm not highly motivated to put it on the Leap laptop.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
Page 2 of 6 — ← Prev page 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 Next page →
Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc
csiph-web