Page 16 of 42
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:13 pm
by asqwerth
I seem to recall in Manjaro that in the past year I have had difficulty getting my NAS connecting via smb (from the file manager), so I use a diff protocol in the file manager options (ftp and afp, I think).
I also recall some complaints about this in Dedoimedo's reviews?
e.g.
https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/man ... lasma.html
his previous workaround:
https://www.dedoimedo.com/computers/ubu ... hares.html
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:16 pm
by duane
MX Conkypatch conky shows different date on calendar than on line in conky.
calendar says 23 line says 27th.
I don't like the colors selected for the terminal but those are easily changed.
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:26 pm
by dolphin_oracle
I can connect directly to my samba shares, but the browse feature does not work (in my case,didn't work under mx17/18 either).
smb:///servername/sharename
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:37 pm
by Gerson
Taskbar icons don't show well, I tried several pre-installed themes.
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:38 pm
by dolphin_oracle
Gerson wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:37 pm
Taskbar icons don't show well, I tried several pre-installed themes.
any change if you turn off the frame?
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:41 pm
by Gerson
dolphin_oracle wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:38 pm
Gerson wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:37 pm
Taskbar icons don't show well, I tried several pre-installed themes.
any change if you turn off the frame?
Corrected by removing the frame.
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:47 pm
by Stevo
Can anyone test if the nvidia-persistenced file installs successfully if you boot with systemd?
I did get the same error message on my Optimus system weeks ago when I tried a backport of the 430 driver from experimental, which didn't work, so reinstalled our MX 18 test repo version of 418.74 from my local repo. But I just removed the package to no ill effect to fix that issue. I couldn't figure out what package was pulling it in either...maybe our installer could remove it as the last step if it's present and then fix the system.
I know it's an ugly workaround, but the alternative is to find out what's pulling it in, rebuild the package to stop that happening, and possibly then breaking the system if you boot it with systemd.
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 3:00 pm
by dolphin_oracle
Stevo wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:47 pm
Can anyone test if the nvidia-persistenced file installs successfully if you boot with systemd?
I did get the same error message on my Optimus system weeks ago when I tried a backport of the 430 driver from experimental, which didn't work, so reinstalled our MX 18 test repo version of 418.74 from my local repo. But I just removed the package to no ill effect to fix that issue. I couldn't figure out what package was pulling it in either...maybe our installer could remove it as the last step if it's present and then fix the system.
I know it's an ugly workaround, but the alternative is to find out what's pulling it in, rebuild the package to stop that happening, and possibly then breaking the system if you boot it with systemd.
its a recommend of nvidia-driver.
I have no idea what it actually does.
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 3:51 pm
by KBD
Quick first impressions: I like the clear panel default. I like Conky up in the right hand corner, but the default clock in Conky is distracting. Having menubar enabled by default in the terminal might be useful for new users. The default icons seem tiny, smaller than in MX 18 anyway, and they don't appear to expand like they should when I increase the panel bar unless I make it huge. Would be interesting if it seems the same on larger screens, this is on a 12" screen.
So far MX 19 is working great on my X220 Thinkpad. Next will try it on my other Lenovo 11e laptop as well as my HP laptop.
Edit 1: I must be having some of the same intel issues mentioned earlier in this thread. On my HP laptop it will not launch at all when I select the drive MX is installed on in the bios. It skips to the default Debian install on that machine. On my Lenovo 11e it gets past Plymouth screen then crashes.
Edit 2: My Acer C720 laptop boots up fine with MX 19.
Edit 3: I can boot the live version of MX 19 on my HP laptop with the Sandybridge cpu and intel graphics. And I can run a full install of MX 18 on it, but not a full install of MX 19.
My Lenovo 11e with a Bay Trail cpu and intel graphics will not boot a live or installed version of MX 19, but it boots up an installed version of MX 18 without issue. If any other info is needed let me know.
Re: MX-19 Beta 1 Feedback
Posted: Tue Aug 27, 2019 3:56 pm
by Eadwine Rose
Stevo wrote: Tue Aug 27, 2019 2:47 pm
Can anyone test if the nvidia-persistenced file installs successfully if you boot with systemd?
I did get the same error message on my Optimus system weeks ago when I tried a backport of the 430 driver from experimental, which didn't work, so reinstalled our MX 18 test repo version of 418.74 from my local repo. But I just removed the package to no ill effect to fix that issue. I couldn't figure out what package was pulling it in either...maybe our installer could remove it as the last step if it's present and then fix the system.
I know it's an ugly workaround, but the alternative is to find out what's pulling it in, rebuild the package to stop that happening, and possibly then breaking the system if you boot it with systemd.
I am in systemd now, or rather
has a systemd thing right at the top, so.. I wager that is it, even though the boot whined about not being able to boot due to missing .. something. It was gone before I knew it.
Of course nvidia is already installed here, as is nvidia-persistenced. Reinstalling throws an error..
can you tell me what you want me to do exactly? (back in 18.3 now, but holler if you see me)