Path: csiph.com!eternal-september.org!reader02.eternal-september.org!.POSTED!not-for-mail From: Andreas Kohlbach Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.misc Subject: Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Date: Sat, 27 Nov 2021 11:36:06 -0500 Organization: A noiseless patient Spider Lines: 36 Message-ID: <87ilwdv9mx.fsf@usenet.ankman.de> References: <619f4cf4$0$8916$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <619fdaac$0$3697$426a74cc@news.free.fr> <61a099f0$0$8889$426a74cc@news.free.fr> Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain Injection-Info: reader02.eternal-september.org; posting-host="233b42deb30c04f28fc683a732ce6d58"; logging-data="32318"; mail-complaints-to="abuse@eternal-september.org"; posting-account="U2FsdGVkX19zWdb/zUGu2+tt3qUZ7WTo" User-Agent: Gnus/5.13 (Gnus v5.13) Emacs/27.1 (gnu/linux) Cancel-Lock: sha1:hpIZhLIhbLBBrN9ciiYgIn53fEU= sha1:7B87ZehUN1HwAirKOrJwF7HlCb8= X-No-Archive: Yes Xref: csiph.com comp.os.linux.misc:33737 On Sat, 27 Nov 2021 03:57:56 +0100, Soviet_Mario wrote: > > After the full upgrade, I had some other a bit disagreable > surprises. Some expected : a few launchers in the XFCE > panels showed a cross icon, and their executable was no longer > existing (i.g. catfish must have been either discontinued or moved in > another position or changed name, I have had no time to do this hunt > yet) and some very strange thing > > the USB-MODEM (alcatel) ceased to work, since the NETWORK MANAGER did > not work no matter what. > also INXI -N said ETH0 interface : DOWN I don't know about USB-modem connections. But unless it's somehow using eth0, and if there's no cable in the ethernet jack, "eth0 down" is expected. > I had the very bizarre idea to try to reboot bypassing SysVInit (the > default on MX) and use SystemD ... well, this way the Network manager > was working, and the connection restored. Doubt that will help. It's booting already with SystemD. > I dunno why SysVInit NOW is preventing Network Manager to work > properly (it had not been the case beforehands) while SystemD > recognizes it ... > > but the most of the problem is solved. > > The gist is : sometimes the update/upgrade must be repeated many > times, since in one sweep only many packages remain not upgraded. Some package depend on other packages and those also must have certain version numbers. If a dependency of these isn't met there other packets depending on it won't get an update. They'll eventually get it later. -- Andreas