Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]

Groups > comp.os.linux.misc > #33706 > unrolled thread

black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower

Back to article view | Back to comp.os.linux.misc

Contents

  black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-25 06:47 +0100
    Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2021-11-25 09:44 +0100
      Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-25 16:47 +0100
        Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2021-11-25 19:49 +0100
          Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-26 05:52 +0100
            Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2021-11-26 09:25 +0100
              Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-26 04:07 -0500
                Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Aragorn <thorongil@telenet.be> - 2021-11-26 10:13 +0100
                  Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-26 17:11 +0100
                Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-26 17:12 +0100
                  Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-26 12:11 -0500
                  Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-26 11:54 -0800
                    Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-27 11:25 -0500
                      Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-11-27 18:29 +0000
                        Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2021-11-27 19:50 +0100
                          Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-27 15:23 -0500
              Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-27 03:57 +0100
                Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-27 11:36 -0500
        Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-25 17:15 -0500
          Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Pascal Hambourg <pascal@plouf.fr.eu.org> - 2021-11-26 09:15 +0100
      Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Andreas Kohlbach <ank@spamfence.net> - 2021-11-25 11:01 -0500
    Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower 166p1 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-25 13:00 -0500
      Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-26 06:03 +0100
        Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower 166p1 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-26 23:41 -0500
          Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Soviet_Mario <SovietMario@CCCP.MIR> - 2021-11-27 06:20 +0100
            Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower 166p1 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-28 02:00 -0500
              Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-11-28 10:14 +0000
                Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Bobbie Sellers <bliss@mouse-potato.com> - 2021-11-28 08:07 -0800
                  Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower 166p1 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-29 00:47 -0500
                Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower 166p1 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-11-29 00:12 -0500
                  Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower Stéphane CARPENTIER <sc@fiat-linux.fr> - 2021-12-03 22:54 +0000
                    Re: black screen after updating from MX 19.4 patito feo to MX 21 wildflower 166p1 <z24ba6.net> - 2021-12-04 01:19 -0500

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

#33709

On Thu, 25 Nov 2021 09:44:35 +0100, Pascal Hambourg wrote:
>
> Le 25/11/2021 à 06:47, Soviet_Mario a écrit :
>> after "some" graphics showup (splash screen) but before login
>> ... the screen gets black
>> the HDD shows some activity and the underground boot "seems" to complete.
>> The system is responsive to altgr prtscn + RSEISUB keys
>
> Looks like a graphic driver issue.
> Can you reach a text console with Ctrl+Alt+F1/F2/F3... ?

Was about to say CTRL+ALT+F3 (or what ever F-key) too. Assuming Linux
works the graphical login might have failed. From a TTY he can examine
the logs and might get an idea what wet wrong.

> What happens if you boot in recovery mode ?

Holding SHIFT while the GRUB countdown should stop it and offer an option
to boot into safe (recovery?) mode.
-- 
Andreas

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33710

On 11/25/21 12:47 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> 
> after "some" graphics showup (splash screen) but before login ... the 
> screen gets black
> the HDD shows some activity and the underground boot "seems" to complete.
> The system is responsive to altgr prtscn + RSEISUB keys
> 
> 
> how can I diagnose and possibly solve ?
> 
> 
> another fact : I mad the dist-upgrade in two steps
> 
> after changing the repos from buster to bullseye and adding another new 
> MX repo, I had made
> 
> first APT UPGRADE
> then APT FULL-UPGRADE
> 
> Both showed no error / two "minor" errors (gstreamer package).
> 
   Did you APT UPDATE before APT UPGRADE ?

   If not, the new repos may not have "taken", so to speak.

   I've also run into some debates whether you should have
   BOTH Buster and BullsEye in apt sources during an upgrade.
   BullsEye, at least initially, wasn't entirely "complete"
   and a version upgrade would encounter missing dependencies
   and crash in the middle, trashing things entirely.

   Also, MX (this laptop is MX) sometimes has screen brightness
   issues. After an update mine was almost completely black.
   There WAS a display, but so weak it could barely be seen.
   The usual GUI settings did NOT fix it. However I could
   use the brighter-darker keyboard buttons to turn it up
   to where you could just see it. I'd have to retrace my
   steps, some very obscure file has to be reset AT BOOT,
   every time, to get the desired brightness.

   MX also hates my touchpad ... been tweaking at that for
   a month. It's "better", but still too many phantom
   taps. Latest tweaks to synaptic.conf regarding palm
   detection and z-axis sensitivity have been the most
   help.

   I've been tempted to go to Lubuntu or Mint with LXDE
   on top, but MX does offer a lot of neat stuff you
   don't find in other distros - including  utility to
   create a custom distro on your box and save it to
   an ISO for installation elsewhere that actually works.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33714

Il 25/11/21 19:00, 166p1 ha scritto:
> On 11/25/21 12:47 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>
>> after "some" graphics showup (splash screen) but before 
>> login ... the screen gets black
>> the HDD shows some activity and the underground boot 
>> "seems" to complete.
>> The system is responsive to altgr prtscn + RSEISUB keys
>>
>>
>> how can I diagnose and possibly solve ?
>>
>>
>> another fact : I mad the dist-upgrade in two steps
>>
>> after changing the repos from buster to bullseye and 
>> adding another new MX repo, I had made
>>
>> first APT UPGRADE
>> then APT FULL-UPGRADE
>>
>> Both showed no error / two "minor" errors (gstreamer 
>> package).
>>
>    Did you APT UPDATE before APT UPGRADE ?

yes, sure, after renaming the REPOS, I performed the 
database update.

> 
>    If not, the new repos may not have "taken", so to speak.

Sure

> 
>    I've also run into some debates whether you should have
>    BOTH Buster and BullsEye in apt sources during an upgrade.
>    BullsEye, at least initially, wasn't entirely "complete"
>    and a version upgrade would encounter missing dependencies
>    and crash in the middle, trashing things entirely.

dunno ... but MX is not plain Debian, it also has some 
specific repo on its own, so dunno

> 
>    Also, MX (this laptop is MX) sometimes has screen brightness
>    issues. After an update mine was almost completely black.

same as here (and also some as in some virtual machines 
after some upgrades : luckily there I reversed the upgrade 
restoring a former snapshot)

I really love MX aesthetically, but I must say I have always 
had both screen problems and unpredictable system stuck.
Tonight, on a third other 11y-old machine where too I had 
installed a fresh WILDFLOWER on a dedicaded disk, during sw 
installation, a freezing crash. totally unresponsive.
Debian never crashes on that dual boot machine.


>    There WAS a display, but so weak it could barely be seen.
>    The usual GUI settings did NOT fix it. However I could
>    use the brighter-darker keyboard buttons to turn it up
>    to where you could just see it. I'd have to retrace my
>    steps, some very obscure file has to be reset AT BOOT,
>    every time, to get the desired brightness.
> 
>    MX also hates my touchpad ... been tweaking at that for

and also hates the network cards of a really old NZ200 small 
toshiba :\

>    a month. It's "better", but still too many phantom
>    taps. Latest tweaks to synaptic.conf regarding palm
>    detection and z-axis sensitivity have been the most
>    help.
> 
>    I've been tempted to go to Lubuntu or Mint with LXDE

I love Mint LMDE (the pure debian version).

>    on top, but MX does offer a lot of neat stuff you

I agree, it ships with a lot of very tasty and friendly 
utilities ... but out of 3 true machines and a virtual one, 
it runs reliably on just ONE.
And it is a distro where I do not even do much 
"experiments", just very normal usage.

On Debian I made all possible disasters, and somewhat it 
absorbs the strikes.
Devuan too seems rocky, but I am experiencing problems 
upgrading from beowulf to dedalus.
Maybe I'll open another 3D :\

>    don't find in other distros - including  utility to
>    create a custom distro on your box and save it to
>    an ISO for installation elsewhere that actually works.
> 


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33726

On 11/26/21 12:03 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> Il 25/11/21 19:00, 166p1 ha scritto:
>> On 11/25/21 12:47 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>>
>>> after "some" graphics showup (splash screen) but before login ... the 
>>> screen gets black
>>> the HDD shows some activity and the underground boot "seems" to 
>>> complete.
>>> The system is responsive to altgr prtscn + RSEISUB keys
>>>
>>>
>>> how can I diagnose and possibly solve ?
>>>
>>>
>>> another fact : I mad the dist-upgrade in two steps
>>>
>>> after changing the repos from buster to bullseye and adding another 
>>> new MX repo, I had made
>>>
>>> first APT UPGRADE
>>> then APT FULL-UPGRADE
>>>
>>> Both showed no error / two "minor" errors (gstreamer package).
>>>
>>    Did you APT UPDATE before APT UPGRADE ?
> 
> yes, sure, after renaming the REPOS, I performed the database update.
> 
>>
>>    If not, the new repos may not have "taken", so to speak.
> 
> Sure
> 
>>
>>    I've also run into some debates whether you should have
>>    BOTH Buster and BullsEye in apt sources during an upgrade.
>>    BullsEye, at least initially, wasn't entirely "complete"
>>    and a version upgrade would encounter missing dependencies
>>    and crash in the middle, trashing things entirely.
> 
> dunno ... but MX is not plain Debian, it also has some specific repo on 
> its own, so dunno
> 
>>
>>    Also, MX (this laptop is MX) sometimes has screen brightness
>>    issues. After an update mine was almost completely black.
> 
> same as here (and also some as in some virtual machines after some 
> upgrades : luckily there I reversed the upgrade restoring a former 
> snapshot)
> 
> I really love MX aesthetically, but I must say I have always had both 
> screen problems and unpredictable system stuck.
> Tonight, on a third other 11y-old machine where too I had installed a 
> fresh WILDFLOWER on a dedicaded disk, during sw installation, a freezing 
> crash. totally unresponsive.
> Debian never crashes on that dual boot machine.
> 
> 
>>    There WAS a display, but so weak it could barely be seen.
>>    The usual GUI settings did NOT fix it. However I could
>>    use the brighter-darker keyboard buttons to turn it up
>>    to where you could just see it. I'd have to retrace my
>>    steps, some very obscure file has to be reset AT BOOT,
>>    every time, to get the desired brightness.
>>
>>    MX also hates my touchpad ... been tweaking at that for
> 
> and also hates the network cards of a really old NZ200 small toshiba :\


   Older hardware is always a problem. Most distros start
   cutting out the 'old' stuff to save space and complexity.
   Your best bet is one of those small distros meant to be
   run on old machines. You CAN turn a 'small' distro into
   a full-sized one, of course.


>>    a month. It's "better", but still too many phantom
>>    taps. Latest tweaks to synaptic.conf regarding palm
>>    detection and z-axis sensitivity have been the most
>>    help.
>>
>>    I've been tempted to go to Lubuntu or Mint with LXDE
> 
> I love Mint LMDE (the pure debian version).
> 
>>    on top, but MX does offer a lot of neat stuff you
> 
> I agree, it ships with a lot of very tasty and friendly utilities ... 
> but out of 3 true machines and a virtual one, it runs reliably on just ONE.
> And it is a distro where I do not even do much "experiments", just very 
> normal usage.
> 
> On Debian I made all possible disasters, and somewhat it absorbs the 
> strikes.

   It's pretty tough. Probably why so many others use it
   as their base.

> Devuan too seems rocky, but I am experiencing problems upgrading from 
> beowulf to dedalus.
> Maybe I'll open another 3D :\

   Devuan is interesting, but I don't think it has
   a big enough development team to really get it
   shipshape.

> 
>>    don't find in other distros - including  utility to
>>    create a custom distro on your box and save it to
>>    an ISO for installation elsewhere that actually works.


   Ah ... brightness fix ... in /etc/rc.local put :
     echo 150 > /sys/class/backlight/amdgpu_bl0/brightness

   This is for a Dell subnotebook but might be relevant
   elsewhere.

   I am not entirely happy with XFCE and added LXDE.

   Mint is pretty good - my main box is Mint now. I did
   undo some annoying "Ubuntisms" ... /etc/network/interfaces
   works again (zero reason to change that old convention).
   Gotta pull off some other garbage too. I don't use, or
   even like, 'cloud' crap.

   There may be some utility in installing KVM and putting
   a basic copy of your current system in there as a VM.
   THEN practice the update process on THAT and see if it
   works or where/why it goes wrong. If you nuke it, just
   replace it with a copy and try again.

   Anyway, MX is my "go to" system most of the time. I just
   plain like it. Apparently a lot of people do, it's still
   number one on DistroWatch.

   The closer 'buntu copies DO have one advantage - a much
   smoother (though not infallible) distribution upgrade.
   I put just WAY too many apps on a box to have to start
   from scratch every time Deb goes up a version.

   And the RPMs ... um, no, not really. Fedora is quite
   poor. Centos has been murdered by IBM. I installed
   an Oracle Linux VM the other day, but I don't know if
   it's gotten the same downgrades as Centos yet. The
   only good RPM distro is OpenSUSE - and it's very good,
   very helpful, an all-around nice distro. Always has been.
   A bit too bulky for a PI alas - but I *did* make it run
   on one.

   Arch, Gentoo ... just too much work. The BSD's have
   their place however, esp for outward-facing servers.
   Trying out GhostBSD and Dragonfly currently, but
   Free/OpenBSD are still the rock solid standards.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33727

Il 27/11/21 05:41, 166p1 ha scritto:
> On 11/26/21 12:03 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>> Il 25/11/21 19:00, 166p1 ha scritto:
>>> On 11/25/21 12:47 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>>>

CUT ALL
> 
>    I am not entirely happy with XFCE and added LXDE.

me too I usually add LxDE (or if avail LxQT), to save some 
ram on such poor machines

> 
>    Mint is pretty good - my main box is Mint now. I did
>    undo some annoying "Ubuntisms" ... /etc/network/interfaces

since you need to de-ubuntize mint, why not give a try to 
LMDE ? It is Linux Mint purely debianized.

The exact difference I dunno which could be, maybe slower 
updating cycle (Debian is less frantic than Ubuntu), and 
some lagging, but It no longer share ubuntu's repos, and 
less emphasis on SNAP apps.

I tried the 3 release, in a VM, so I don't think I'll 
upgrade it.

>    works again (zero reason to change that old convention).
>    Gotta pull off some other garbage too. I don't use, or
>    even like, 'cloud' crap.
> 
>    There may be some utility in installing KVM and putting
>    a basic copy of your current system in there as a VM.
>    THEN practice the update process on THAT and see if it
>    works or where/why it goes wrong. If you nuke it, just
>    replace it with a copy and try again.
> 
>    Anyway, MX is my "go to" system most of the time. I just
>    plain like it. Apparently a lot of people do, it's still
>    number one on DistroWatch.

it's sleek !
now it seems to also work with WiFi networking, deep 
misteries ... I have done no further maintenance. It simply 
awakened on the right foot :)

> 
>    The closer 'buntu copies DO have one advantage - a much
>    smoother (though not infallible) distribution upgrade.
>    I put just WAY too many apps on a box to have to start
>    from scratch every time Deb goes up a version.
> 
>    And the RPMs ... um, no, not really. 

I had problems with Dragora updater, but likely due to my 
zero-skill, and at last I resigned.
As long as it had worked, my impressions on Fedora 28-29 had 
been good. Just a bit unfamiliar despite using XFCE.

> Fedora is quite
>    poor. Centos has been murdered by IBM. I installed
>    an Oracle Linux VM the other day, but I don't know if
>    it's gotten the same downgrades as Centos yet. The
>    only good RPM distro is OpenSUSE - and it's very good,
>    very helpful, an all-around nice distro. Always has been.
>    A bit too bulky for a PI alas - but I *did* make it run
>    on one.
> 
>    Arch, Gentoo ... just too much work. The BSD's have
>    their place however, esp for outward-facing servers.
>    Trying out GhostBSD and Dragonfly currently, but
>    Free/OpenBSD are still the rock solid standards.


-- 
1) Resistere, resistere, resistere.
2) Se tutti pagano le tasse, le tasse le pagano tutti
Soviet_Mario - (aka Gatto_Vizzato)

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33742

On 11/27/21 12:20 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
> Il 27/11/21 05:41, 166p1 ha scritto:
>> On 11/26/21 12:03 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>> Il 25/11/21 19:00, 166p1 ha scritto:
>>>> On 11/25/21 12:47 AM, Soviet_Mario wrote:
>>>>>
> 
> CUT ALL
>>
>>    I am not entirely happy with XFCE and added LXDE.
> 
> me too I usually add LxDE (or if avail LxQT), to save some ram on such 
> poor machines
> 
>>
>>    Mint is pretty good - my main box is Mint now. I did
>>    undo some annoying "Ubuntisms" ... /etc/network/interfaces
> 
> since you need to de-ubuntize mint, why not give a try to LMDE ? It is 
> Linux Mint purely debianized.


   It's going to be many months before a LMDE based
   on BullsEye will be available. LMDE is always
   behind the curve alas.


> The exact difference I dunno which could be, maybe slower updating cycle 
> (Debian is less frantic than Ubuntu), and some lagging, but It no longer 
> share ubuntu's repos, and less emphasis on SNAP apps.
> 
> I tried the 3 release, in a VM, so I don't think I'll upgrade it.
> 
>>    works again (zero reason to change that old convention).
>>    Gotta pull off some other garbage too. I don't use, or
>>    even like, 'cloud' crap.
>>
>>    There may be some utility in installing KVM and putting
>>    a basic copy of your current system in there as a VM.
>>    THEN practice the update process on THAT and see if it
>>    works or where/why it goes wrong. If you nuke it, just
>>    replace it with a copy and try again.
>>
>>    Anyway, MX is my "go to" system most of the time. I just
>>    plain like it. Apparently a lot of people do, it's still
>>    number one on DistroWatch.
> 
> it's sleek !
> now it seems to also work with WiFi networking, deep misteries ... I 
> have done no further maintenance. It simply awakened on the right foot :)

   Do they still make Mephis anymore ??? You can get Antix, a
   pretty bare (but OK) distro, but has MX totally displaced
   Mephis ? Antix makes a pretty good base for expansion, it's
   like a really minimalized Debian with the crudest display
   manager.


>>
>>    The closer 'buntu copies DO have one advantage - a much
>>    smoother (though not infallible) distribution upgrade.
>>    I put just WAY too many apps on a box to have to start
>>    from scratch every time Deb goes up a version.
>>
>>    And the RPMs ... um, no, not really. 


  Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
  kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
  does much better.

  Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
  the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
  just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.


> I had problems with Dragora updater, but likely due to my zero-skill, 
> and at last I resigned.
> As long as it had worked, my impressions on Fedora 28-29 had been good. 
> Just a bit unfamiliar despite using XFCE.


   Sorry, no Fedora for me. That's a distro that has
   gone to hell IMHO. I do remember Red Hat Linux ...
   USED to be top notch.

   I did make a Oracle Linux (uek) VM the other day
   and am exploring it. MOSTLY like Centos - but
   perhaps not as affected by the IBM deal. Perhaps.
   FIRST order - dump el-crapo Gnome and install
   XFCE. Working pretty well  :-)

   There's also "Scientific Linux", worth looking
   into.

   But, RPM universe, pick OpenSUSE/OS-TumbleWeed
   every time.

   EXCEPT they screwed me recently, put a substandard
   version of FFMPEG in there that couldn't do what I
   needed it to do. TRIED to install the alt version
   but the dependencies just went deeper and deeper
   and deeper until ... well ... screw it. Now the
   box is Ubuntu Server.

   Anyway, for most people, I'd advise to stick to
   the Debian multiverse. It's a solid base with
   a history going back to about The Beginning.




>> Fedora is quite
>>    poor. Centos has been murdered by IBM. I installed
>>    an Oracle Linux VM the other day, but I don't know if
>>    it's gotten the same downgrades as Centos yet. The
>>    only good RPM distro is OpenSUSE - and it's very good,
>>    very helpful, an all-around nice distro. Always has been.
>>    A bit too bulky for a PI alas - but I *did* make it run
>>    on one.
>>
>>    Arch, Gentoo ... just too much work. The BSD's have
>>    their place however, esp for outward-facing servers.
>>    Trying out GhostBSD and Dragonfly currently, but
>>    Free/OpenBSD are still the rock solid standards.
> 
> 

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33744

Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>   Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>   kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>   does much better.
>
>   Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>   the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>   just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.

For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.

For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.

-- 
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33746

On 11/28/21 02:14, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>    Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>    kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>    does much better.
>>
>>    Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>    the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>    just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
> 
> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
> 
> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.

	Windows poses a problems because so many have to use it at work,
The solution would seem to be a dual-boot Windows Linux machine is 
messed up every time MS decides to repair its broken kernel which messes
up the boot-loader which then has to be reinstalled.

	Actually PCLinuxOS has few problems with updates, using Synaptic
and permits the use of several kernels on one machine, right now I have
two Long Term Support versions installed and the latest from the 
packager, Texstar, who if he finds an error has been perpetrated will 
work on setting it right. On the Forum we have coders and testers as
well as idiots like me.  Now maybe I am lucky having decided after a
couple of HP products fail on me in record time to use Used Dell 
Latitudes, have an E6520, E6540 and E7450. No problems on these models
and I have little fear of a problem when i get around to updating my
two older machines.

Forum is at <https://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php> . Registration 
is free and if you cannot find the current iso files hit the Main button
on this initial forum screen and you will find yourself at the main 
site.   Current iso are 2011, three version of KDE, Mate, XFCE from
the packager and several others from the Community.   The PCLinuxOS 
Magazine is published every month AFAIK and is at volume #178, aimed
at the User base.  PCLinux does not use or even plan to use systemd.
Sure you can get an older package list at Distrowatch.com.  It is best
to have some experience before using PCLinux but like nearly every
current distribution it starts from a Windows XP version of KDE or
whichever Desktop Environment you think you want to use.

Some people like Aragorn move to Manjaro from PCLinuxOS but he is
very knowledgeable and experienced.


bliss - brought to you by the power and ease of PCLinuxOS 
and a minor case of hypergraphia

-- 
bliss dash SF 4 ever at dslextreme dot com

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33748

On 11/28/21 11:07 AM, Bobbie Sellers wrote:
> On 11/28/21 02:14, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>>    Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>>    kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>>    does much better.
>>>
>>>    Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>>    the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>>    just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>>
>> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
>> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
>>
>> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
>> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
>> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
>> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.
> 
>      Windows poses a problems because so many have to use it at work,
> The solution would seem to be a dual-boot Windows Linux machine is 
> messed up every time MS decides to repair its broken kernel which messes
> up the boot-loader which then has to be reinstalled.

   Winders updates tend to nuke multi-boot. There ARE ways
   around it, but they're weird and seem to require UEFI
   booting. Winders has the ultimate ego - nothing else
   exists/matters.

   Use a Linux VM inside Winders, or vice versa. Then it's
   at your fingertips and you can even share folders, run
   them at the same time.

>      Actually PCLinuxOS has few problems with updates, using Synaptic
> and permits the use of several kernels on one machine, right now I have
> two Long Term Support versions installed and the latest from the 
> packager, Texstar, who if he finds an error has been perpetrated will 
> work on setting it right. On the Forum we have coders and testers as
> well as idiots like me.  Now maybe I am lucky having decided after a
> couple of HP products fail on me in record time to use Used Dell 
> Latitudes, have an E6520, E6540 and E7450. No problems on these models
> and I have little fear of a problem when i get around to updating my
> two older machines.
> 
> Forum is at <https://www.pclinuxos.com/forum/index.php> . Registration 
> is free and if you cannot find the current iso files hit the Main button
> on this initial forum screen and you will find yourself at the main 
> site.   Current iso are 2011, three version of KDE, Mate, XFCE from
> the packager and several others from the Community.   The PCLinuxOS 
> Magazine is published every month AFAIK and is at volume #178, aimed
> at the User base.  PCLinux does not use or even plan to use systemd.
> Sure you can get an older package list at Distrowatch.com.  It is best
> to have some experience before using PCLinux but like nearly every
> current distribution it starts from a Windows XP version of KDE or
> whichever Desktop Environment you think you want to use.
> 
> Some people like Aragorn move to Manjaro from PCLinuxOS but he is
> very knowledgeable and experienced.

   PCLinuxOS is ok ... though very focused on KDE, which is even
   more bloated than Gnome (but a lot more usable - hey, look at
   the default Gnome for Centos or OracleLinux - it MUST DIE
   IMMEDIATELY or you just can't STAND it, blend in XFCE). Never
   liked Gnome, but now it's just HORRIBLE.

   But if you're gonna use Linux then Deb, Mint or Ubuntu(s)
   are probably the best way to go these days. Lots of us like
   MX ... which while Deb/Ubuntu is some aspects has some
   nice enhancements.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33747

On 11/28/21 5:14 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>    Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>    kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>    does much better.
>>
>>    Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>    the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>    just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
> 
> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.

   I have TumbleWeed on a couple of boxes. It IS more
   reliable ... except "zypper dup" takes a LONG time.

> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.

   Ummm... no - Winders has a "kernel" of sorts too. Win95/98 were
   basically DOS with Winders as a program that ran on top of it.
   NT/Win2k were more integrated. However in each case they just
   kept the system calls the same and the software would work.

   The "scattered" aspect of Linux, more than the kernel, seems
   to be the problem. You can usually go from a 4.x kernel to
   a 5.x kernel no problem. It's the DEPENDENCIES that'll screw
   you every time. How many times have you seen "Sorry, we cannot
   install ProgramX because it depends on abcxyz.0.12.03.so which
   will not be installed". It won't be installed because it has
   a ton of dependencies, each of which has a ton of dependencies,
   that they didn't include in the repo for the latest distro.

   When people write libraries they seem to have a bad habit
   of changing how they work rather than making sure all the
   OLD stuff works just like always and then adding some
   new stuff. So, a program writ expecting abcxyz,0.12.03.so
   may not work with abcxyz.0.12.04. This shouldn't be.

   Fixes - well, you could always keep ALL the old libraries
   for years, decades maybe. Space isn't so much of an issue
   these days. Alas the most common distro upgrade processes
   don't do that - they uninstall the old and, maybe, replace
   them with the newer versions. Now your older software
   won't work.

   Part of the "scattered" aspect is the "crowd-source" approach
   which let Linux grow so fast and well. Winders, well, that's
   centrally coordinated. Old system calls will always work, new
   libraries will always work with old software. The libraries
   are not so much "new" as they are "added-onto".

   Imagine if every update of HTML used slightly different
   keywords, which did slightly different things in slightly
   different ways, than the previous version - "img" today,
   "image" tomorrow, "picture" the next. This seems to be
   the case with too many library functions in Linux systems.

   There is (was?) a Linux mag with "Zack" the kernel guy.
   There were always battles with Linus - developers kept
   wanting to make fundamental changes that would break all
   kinds of other kernel stuff and/or major software. Linus
   keeps them from doing such evils. Of course Linus isn't
   as young as he used to be - what happens when he retires ?
   No more anchor, it all spins off wildly, developers can't
   keep up with all the sub-versions and ultimately have to
   decide on ONE to support. Instead of being largely
   interoperable with very similar apps, each post-Linux
   becomes a world unto itself down to the binary level.

   I'd predict a RHEL "Linux" and Ubuntu "Linux" and nothing
   else, not even any spin-offs. Soon they'd become proprietary
   one way or another ... some horrible users/month program
   like so much software has become these days. I idly looked
   into Claris FileMaker-Pro the other day. Used to be a good
   little Database program and the price was OK. NOW it's like
   $39 per user per month. No thanks. They're greeding themselves
   out of the market, everybody may as well just use Office 365
   crap instead for about the same rip-off price.

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33809

Le 29-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
> On 11/28/21 5:14 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>>    Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>>    kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>>    does much better.
>>>
>>>    Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>>    the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>>    just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>> 
>> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
>> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
>
>    I have TumbleWeed on a couple of boxes. It IS more
>    reliable ... except "zypper dup" takes a LONG time.
>
>> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
>> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
>> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
>> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.
>
>    Ummm... no - Winders has a "kernel" of sorts too. Win95/98 were
>    basically DOS with Winders as a program that ran on top of it.
>    NT/Win2k were more integrated. However in each case they just
>    kept the system calls the same and the software would work.

In your dreams. When you upgrade Windows, the old stuff can still work,
but it's far from everything keep going on fine. And if you want a system
up to date (ie: not only Windows), you have to take care yourself of
upgrading every single software you installed.

>    The "scattered" aspect of Linux, more than the kernel, seems
>    to be the problem. You can usually go from a 4.x kernel to
>    a 5.x kernel no problem. It's the DEPENDENCIES that'll screw
>    you every time. How many times have you seen "Sorry, we cannot
>    install ProgramX because it depends on abcxyz.0.12.03.so which
>    will not be installed". It won't be installed because it has
>    a ton of dependencies, each of which has a ton of dependencies,
>    that they didn't include in the repo for the latest distro.

The dependencies on the libraries are not related with the OS but with
the software. Every software is using libraries and needs some version
of it to work. The difference between the Linux way and the Windows way
is the way the libraries are managed.

With Windows, every software comes with its own dependencies. So if five
softwares are using the same library, it's installed five times and
launched five times in memory when needed. So, it's easier to manage,
but it's a waste of ressources.

With Linux, the libraries are mutualise, so it can be tricky when one
library needs to be upgraded and not the other one. It's not the Linux
issue, it's the distro maintainer issue. 

>    Fixes - well, you could always keep ALL the old libraries
>    for years, decades maybe. Space isn't so much of an issue
>    these days. Alas the most common distro upgrade processes
>    don't do that - they uninstall the old and, maybe, replace
>    them with the newer versions. Now your older software
>    won't work.

Once again, it's more complicated, but it's better. Having a lot of
unused old unmaintained libraries can be easier, but it can be used by
an attacker.

>    Imagine if every update of HTML used slightly different
>    keywords, which did slightly different things in slightly
>    different ways, than the previous version - "img" today,
>    "image" tomorrow, "picture" the next. This seems to be
>    the case with too many library functions in Linux systems.

It's not related to Linux or to Windows. Look at python which changed
completely from python2 to python3. Whatever your OS, you have to take
care of it.

>    There were always battles with Linus

Once again, it's not related with Linux. Take anything, if a threshold
in the number of people is attain, there are battle. Look at the morons
on cola fighting for Trump/Biden. There are the battles on the OS, on
the tools, on the religions, on the sport, on anything you want.

>    Linus keeps them from doing such evils. Of course Linus isn't as
>    young as he used to be - what happens when he retires ? No more
>    anchor, it all spins off wildly, 

No. Either they will keep that way or there will be a fork or two but
nothing to worry about. Look at openoffice/libroffice when Oracle took
control of it. There was a fork, and everything is fine in both parts.

>    developers can't keep up with all the sub-versions and ultimately
>    have to decide on ONE to support. 

Yes, of course, so what? Look at systemd, The distro switched from a
sysinit to another one until all recognized the best one was systemed.
If one day there is another one which is better they'll switch again.
With the kernel it would be the same.

>    Soon they'd become proprietary one way or another ... some horrible
>    users/month program like so much software has become these days.

I'm not sharing your fears.

-- 
Si vous avez du temps à perdre :
https://scarpet42.gitlab.io

[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]

#33814

On 12/3/21 5:54 PM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
> Le 29-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>> On 11/28/21 5:14 AM, Stéphane CARPENTIER wrote:
>>> Le 28-11-2021, 166p1 <z24ba6.net> a écrit :
>>>>     Updates, esp version upgrades, are a problem for ALL
>>>>     kinds of Linux/BSD. This is something where Winders
>>>>     does much better.
>>>>
>>>>     Had a red hot Win-95 box - massive amount of memory for
>>>>     the time. Brought it all the way to Vista before it was
>>>>     just TOO damned slow/small. Everything worked.
>>>
>>> For the Linux part, that's what I had before using a rolling distro.
>>> When I update a few things at a time, it's transparent.
>>
>>     I have TumbleWeed on a couple of boxes. It IS more
>>     reliable ... except "zypper dup" takes a LONG time.
>>
>>> For the Windows part, you are not comparing the same things. With a
>>> Windows upgrade, you are only upgrading Windows, you have to take care
>>> of everything else. When you are upgrading Linux, you upgrade the
>>> kernel, the GUI and every single application running on it.
>>
>>     Ummm... no - Winders has a "kernel" of sorts too. Win95/98 were
>>     basically DOS with Winders as a program that ran on top of it.
>>     NT/Win2k were more integrated. However in each case they just
>>     kept the system calls the same and the software would work.
> 
> In your dreams. When you upgrade Windows, the old stuff can still work,
> but it's far from everything keep going on fine. And if you want a system
> up to date (ie: not only Windows), you have to take care yourself of
> upgrading every single software you installed.

   NOT what I've generally experienced over the years. The
   biggest problem of late didn't even have to do with MS,
   but the chip-makers, when they stopped supporting native
   8/16-bit code. Gotta use DOSBOX or something like it.
   I have a CP/M-86 running on VirtualBox ... and a nice
   'C' compiler for it. DOS 2.x as well with IBM 'C' and
   Pascal compilers. But the executables won't run native
   on any i-series Intel processor anymore.

>>     The "scattered" aspect of Linux, more than the kernel, seems
>>     to be the problem. You can usually go from a 4.x kernel to
>>     a 5.x kernel no problem. It's the DEPENDENCIES that'll screw
>>     you every time. How many times have you seen "Sorry, we cannot
>>     install ProgramX because it depends on abcxyz.0.12.03.so which
>>     will not be installed". It won't be installed because it has
>>     a ton of dependencies, each of which has a ton of dependencies,
>>     that they didn't include in the repo for the latest distro.
> 
> The dependencies on the libraries are not related with the OS but with
> the software. Every software is using libraries and needs some version
> of it to work. The difference between the Linux way and the Windows way
> is the way the libraries are managed.


   AND The Problem ...


> With Windows, every software comes with its own dependencies. So if five
> softwares are using the same library, it's installed five times and
> launched five times in memory when needed. So, it's easier to manage,
> but it's a waste of ressources.
> 
> With Linux, the libraries are mutualise, so it can be tricky when one
> library needs to be upgraded and not the other one. It's not the Linux
> issue, it's the distro maintainer issue.


   I won't put it all on them. The multiplicity of library
   versions is enough to overwhelm anybody.


>>     Fixes - well, you could always keep ALL the old libraries
>>     for years, decades maybe. Space isn't so much of an issue
>>     these days. Alas the most common distro upgrade processes
>>     don't do that - they uninstall the old and, maybe, replace
>>     them with the newer versions. Now your older software
>>     won't work.
> 
> Once again, it's more complicated, but it's better. Having a lot of
> unused old unmaintained libraries can be easier, but it can be used by
> an attacker.

   But your existing - often Not Very Old At All - software
   won't work. Security is an issue, but not an excuse for
   breaking everything as bad as the hackers would.

   Somewhere I offered a fix - repair any issues in the libraries,
   BUT KEEP THE INTERFACE THE SAME. You can add new functions, but
   make sure the old ones always work as expected.

>>     Imagine if every update of HTML used slightly different
>>     keywords, which did slightly different things in slightly
>>     different ways, than the previous version - "img" today,
>>     "image" tomorrow, "picture" the next. This seems to be
>>     the case with too many library functions in Linux systems.
> 
> It's not related to Linux or to Windows. Look at python which changed
> completely from python2 to python3. Whatever your OS, you have to take
> care of it.

   Oddly, I never programmed in Python before P3 came out.
   So, to me, Python IS P3.

   Although you can fix 99% of old P2 programs just by adding
   parens around print statements :-)

>>     There were always battles with Linus
> 
> Once again, it's not related with Linux. Take anything, if a threshold
> in the number of people is attain, there are battle. Look at the morons
> on cola fighting for Trump/Biden. There are the battles on the OS, on
> the tools, on the religions, on the sport, on anything you want.

   "the morons on cola fighting for Trump/Biden" ?????

   Ok, that's kind of a, well, odd thing to say.

   Linus seems a very PRACTICAL person. He wants his creation
   to WORK and work CONSISTENTLY. Hardly a bad thing. He is not
   going to go along with weird kernel changes that trash vast
   swaths of what's out there. Yet, Linux remains Very Good -
   so those changes weren't REALLY "necessary" at all ... just
   "creative" brain-farts by young upstarts looking for something
   "significant" to do.


>>     Linus keeps them from doing such evils. Of course Linus isn't as
>>     young as he used to be - what happens when he retires ? No more
>>     anchor, it all spins off wildly,
> 
> No. Either they will keep that way or there will be a fork or two but
> nothing to worry about. Look at openoffice/libroffice when Oracle took
> control of it. There was a fork, and everything is fine in both parts.

   Well, I don't use "Open" anymore ... it's fallen way
   behind the curve. I do wish Libre had done more to keep
   up an Access-compatible app though. Access is a very
   handy WYSIWYG DB system. Nearest thing WAS FileMaker,
   before they went to the per-user-per-month rip-off plan
   like MS. I'll never use IT again ... never reward malice.

>>     developers can't keep up with all the sub-versions and ultimately
>>     have to decide on ONE to support.
> 
> Yes, of course, so what? 

   "So what" ??????????????????

   LOTS of "what".

> Look at systemd, The distro switched from a
> sysinit to another one until all recognized the best one was systemed.
> If one day there is another one which is better they'll switch again.
> With the kernel it would be the same.

   I disagree about systemd being "best". I'm quite happy with
   distros that don't include it. Stinks of the Windows registry
   a bit too much for my tastes - the big spinney Master Control
   Program whose means and motives you can't quite discern ....

>>     Soon they'd become proprietary one way or another ... some horrible
>>     users/month program like so much software has become these days.
> 
> I'm not sharing your fears.

   But you SHOULD laddie ... you should ...... I've seen
   Great System after Great System go to shit and take all
   their Great Apps and Great Paradigms with them.

   I remember when MS was considered "benificent" ... until
   Gates got BIG $$$ signs in his eyes ......

   Did find a cheap way to recover old systems of employees
   No Longer With The Company - who made MS accounts with
   passwords nobody knows, keyed to e-mail addreses nobody
   knows. No more "You must log in to your MS account or
   PowerPoint will not work" bullshit.

   I really really HATE Winders ....

[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]

Page 2 of 2 — ← Prev page 1 [2]

Back to top | Article view | comp.os.linux.misc

csiph-web