MX Linux Forum

Just a question I've had for a while now. The only time I ever run the system from a USB drive is to install from a snapshot as the slowness would drive me nuts. The last SSD I bought was a 225GB from Walmart for $29, which is as cheap as a good USB 3.0 thumb drive. While I have never run MX from a USB 3.0 drive, I can't imagine it would be anywhere near as fast as running on even a cheap SSD.

So who does run from a thumb drive and why?

I run MX from usb 3.0 with toram, persistent root, can't imagine SSD being faster than my CPU/ram.

I run antiX on a live-USB (3.0), which is in fact faster than some cheap eMMC devices (like my two netbooks).

Will add that live usb is slow on boot and shutdown. I can pull that usb and works a treat in any PC I plug it into, can't say the same for my Arch SSD install.

I may be thick but I have yet to hear why as I really don't see a USB system will be faster/better than an installed system. About the only use I can see is as a portable system I can use on computers that I don't own. Never use any computers except my own so I have never seen the need for a portable system. I do keep a current snapshot to do installs when necessary though...

NGIB wrote: Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:07 pm I may be thick but I have yet to hear why as I really don't see a USB system will be faster/better than an installed system. About the only use I can see is as a portable system I can use on computers that I don't own. Never use any computers except my own so I have never seen the need for a portable system. I do keep a current snapshot to do installs when necessary though...

the usb system *can* be totally loaded into ram, which is faster than an installed system. only bootup and shutdown (while the persistence files are sync'd) takes longer.

but the other reason you specify is another good reason for live-usbs, and that is how I use the MX live usb, as a evolving install media.

NGIB wrote: Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:07 pm I may be thick but I have yet to hear why as I really don't see a USB system will be faster/better than an installed system. About the only use I can see is as a portable system I can use on computers that I don't own. Never use any computers except my own so I have never seen the need for a portable system. I do keep a current snapshot to do installs when necessary though...

Maybe it's simply that it's handy and some people find it convenient.

In my case, MX isn't one of the distros that I use each day, but I do like to run MX live from a flash drive sometimes, maybe just to test something out or maybe just messing around and playing some music or whatever. Whether it's faster or better than the installed system, that part doesn't really matter to me. Sometimes it's just the fact that somebody posted something at the forums and I booted up an MX live session just so I could see what they were talking about.

And as I've mentioned elsewhere, whenever a new (to me) computer happens to come my way, first thing I try to do is boot it with the MX flash drive, then have a look around.

I like having a full-fledged MX install on a 3.0 Sandisk Ultra 120gb USB. It is as fast as a SSD drive, and I don't notice any difference. Nice to have a portable MX install.
Note that not all USB sticks are created equal, I burned up one stick with a full install, and some cheaper USB sticks have not stood the test of time, either slowing down or freezing up.

Portability and flexibility.

You can bring your home computer's OS with you when traveling without having to bring an entire personal laptop and have it risk being damaged, lost or stolen (as long as there's a computer that you can use at your destination), and run personal software without installing it on your company laptop while on business trips.

You can have your own personal MX and run it on a computer where for some reason you're unable to install it permanently (a shared computer for example) or simply don't wish to install it and hassle with resizing Windows' partition, setting up dual-booting, and risking data loss or problems booting.

You can have multiple USB sticks containing multiple versions of MX that you can boot from, to beta test newer versions or assist in supporting older versions, without having to set up a complicated multi-boot, multi-partition configuration. This also saves valuable disk space as you don't have to dedicate 10 or 20GB to an MX-16 partition that you only boot into once a year.

You can use a live USB to create respins.

With a little imagination you must be able to think of other scenarios where a full-featured live OS on a USB stick is useful besides as an installation medium.

I guess I'm just dull as I don't need a portable system since the only computers I use are my own and have installed systems. I swap out hard drives when I'm testing stuff as it only takes a minute and I have lots of spare drives. One thing I check before I buy any laptop (haven't owned a desktop in 20 years) is how easy hard drove changes are. I was just genuinely interested in why people use USB as I've never seen the need except as an install medium,,,

I snapshot my system and use Live USB maker to create an ISO of it. I have used it for recovery purposes and to transfer the system to another computer. So I do not regularly run from the USB. I do run from it to do testing of alphas and betas. I find it more convenient then swapping out disk drives or installing to extra drives in my system. This avoids a careless mistake of installing to the wrong drive or overwriting my working grub.

You can use a live MX USB to spread the joy! Maybe you have a friend who is curious about Linux and wants to try it out on their own computer without committing to an install. Perhaps they are clueless about how to download an ISO, validate the download, and create a live USB. Well, you have everything ready to go.

I may be wrong but isn't running live w/o persistence a reasonable way to visit sketchy web sites?

I boot daily on one of my jobs, from usb, a live session of MX with persistence because I don't want to touch the MBR of the pc I use there (w10 installed), just in case. I don't need W10 but other people is just used to it. I have my persistence files in one partition of the hard drive and use the usb stick just to boot, so although it is a 2.0 stick, the performance is excellent. I am using now the persist_static mode.
I think I will try soon a frugal install.

Right now I only use Xubuntu as a daily drive permanent installation but I have my $HOME backed up with Lucky Backup on MX live USBs. That way if my hard drive crashes or the whole (old) laptop dies I can at least boot one of the live USBs and have easy access to anything I need before I restore $HOME to a new hard drive or new computer.

xxxxxxx!
Sorry for that being my first word in my first post, but I had just written 2 pages of text in response, and when I clicked submit, the board just logged me out.

I will post this - se if it sticks - and then try to return with an answer to the question...

hihi - automod censor...

Well, back to the point, but I'll skip to the conclusion:

My reason to choose MX was the ability to test it on a production machine without messing with the HDD: AND the ability to make a snapshot of a nice setup, so my non-net machines can stay updated and share look and feel.
(After all, production machines must NEVER be on the internets)
For a non-techie, that is [insert incredibly gross and offensive expletive] unfunny in a windows setting!
- After having MX as my first hands-on .nix experience I can already say that this distro solves a lot of my problems
- Speed dont seem to be a problem: on a 32 bit Dell laptop w. 2GB ram and USB 2.0 it runs just fine off the live stick with no discernible lag (disclaimer: I have only gotten to small tests, production file-test will have to wait untill I'm less sleepy, but I don't expect problems; I'm a text man, and 1000 pages of pure text is nothing to any o/s after DR DOS 3.0)

NGIB wrote: Sun Jun 23, 2019 9:14 pm I guess I'm just dull as I don't need a portable system since the only computers I use are my own and have installed systems. I swap out hard drives when I'm testing stuff as it only takes a minute and I have lots of spare drives. One thing I check before I buy any laptop (haven't owned a desktop in 20 years) is how easy hard drove changes are. I was just genuinely interested in why people use USB as I've never seen the need except as an install medium,,,

I swap out hard drives only when I want to test a new MX installer, otherwise I use a live USB to test versions/respins of MX or antiX. Why?

Your workflow: burn the ISO to a USB stick, shut down, disconnect every peripheral's cable from the laptop (external mouse, speakers, power supply, whatever) if there are any, turn the laptop upside-down, remove the battery, remove the cover over the drive, remove your system drive, install a spare drive, close the case, replace the battery, turn the laptop over, reconnect your peripherals (if any), power up, reboot from the USB, install MX (and set up partitions, time zone, user name and password, root password, grub install location), then reboot into the new installation. That sounds like way too much unnecessary work to me.

My workflow: plug in a USB stick, burn the ISO to it, reboot, select the USB from my boot menu, boot, hit F5 and enable persistence and F8 to enable saving the boot options, configure persistence file sizes, change default passwords and select the sync type. Done!

And I have a full-featured operating system that I can install apps to, install updates to, customize my desktop, and do everything I can do on an installed system. I no longer even have to hit F5 and F8 or configure persistence options or passwords the next time I boot from my USB, I just boot, and it's just the way I left it the last time I used it. No tearing into the machine and swapping hardware needed.

One of these methods is way easier and faster than the other. :)

Yes, mainly for convenience, & trying things out - but my computers usually have installed systems too.

Amen ...

Just thankful it replaced that bogus on-again, off-again CD/DVD ROM framus, is all.

Love permanence and order in my life - dont care about the difference in miniscule
boot times, I can still only type on one doc screen at a time - maybe my multitasking
skills need sharpening - and not two - BTW, Snapshot is sheer genius for distribution,
security - we love it - do not use/allow other O/S within our organization - ever.

Regards

Jack

NGIB wrote: Sun Jun 23, 2019 7:07 pm I may be thick but I have yet to hear why as I really don't see a USB system will be faster/better than an installed system. About the only use I can see is as a portable system I can use on computers that I don't own. Never use any computers except my own so I have never seen the need for a portable system. I do keep a current snapshot to do installs when necessary though...

Unable to replace bad EIDE hdd on old laptop. Used its CD drive to install MX-15-Core-32 on the root partition of a USB 2 flash. Operates better than the hdd and boots on all computers it's been tried on.

hear why as I really don't see a USB system will be faster/better than an installed system.

faster:

dynamic persistence
(files changed during session are written to RAM, faaaaaast b/c drive I/O is entirely avoided)
(think. Just on example: files written/retrieved from web browser cache)
+
"toram" boot option
(the entire O/S is cached to RAM, avoiding drive I/O disk reads throughout the session)
+
semi-automatic save mode
(can manually perform persist-save at will, repeatedly throughout the session... or NOT)
(you are also asked/prompted to save during shutdown)

_____________________________________

better:

During toram sessions, the boot media can be removed (reattached only if/when performing a persist-save operation)
+
policy: no automount & only root can perform mount operations
(keywords ~~ isolation, lightning strikes, sandboxing, goof-proof, worry-free)

can "dry run" the persist-save rsync operation to conduct forensic studies
(what files have changed during the current session? or, what files have changed since last on-demand persistence waypoint)

my reason are quite simple , to run my preferred OS whenever i travel , and to bypass internet cafe bill if i go to travel to save some cash . <<< don't follow me

i found it , i can bypass local windows bill management system using live USB , and most internet cafe admin don't even care . but yeah thanks to that i managed to scrape by living frugally until July 7th when my pay-check day and a day living in luxury .

I have a very specific reason to run a live system from a thumb drive (or whatever you'd prefer to name a basic usb boot), namely that my company almost shoves through that all payroll stuff must only exist under an app from either google or else apple. Neither of which greatly appeals.
The only desktop alternative then will run (under FF in extremis, but mostly Win10 only), but it then requires the installation of a designated xpi plugin to function fully. Which is nothing something trivial btw. The eula of said plugin then says that they can and may well access anything and everything about you and even alter any or all perms stuff. No chance of me ever granting quasi root access to a fly-by-night and un-audited comapny app ...on my own main installs. Just cannot risk this. Then live boots are a godsend here.

Not any big deal on a Live boot though, with also pushing it fully into ram (to rack up speeds a lot) and to then operate very crucially with persistent storage.Then the stated plugin method is 99% self-contained. It gets only what it needs and cannot ever impact anything else.Then just label the usb stick correctly and intermittently boot the stick to then interact with HQ.

Other very legitimate reasons are just try-before-you-buy stuff. Install loads of new apps on-the-fly and tweak them all and just experiment to heart's content - and the very next boot all is back to normal here. You could also beta test a new MX release as well, by stress-testing it a lot. Not the same as an actual install, but very many features can be tested out here. Another option, if you do travel a lot, is to decide if you want to make any purchases on some random desktop or laptop that you might come across. Not really, I would think.
Of course, nowadays not so especially relevant anymore with the rise-and-rise of smartphones, but there are still some marginal use cases to be thought of where carrying *nix-on-stick can come in very useful indeed, even if only as a fallback option. Rescue mode, fail-safe mode, full-on encryption and to keep many files with you at all times.

I may be wrong but isn't running live w/o persistence a reasonable way to visit sketchy web sites?

I don't know how data is managed with a live thumb drive system, but that was my first thought too. If someone wanted to surf sites with questionable content then I would think that a system running in ram that left no trace on internal drive would be desirable. I've read about a distro called Tails that runs from thumb drive for this very reason; anonymity.

I might be missing something here, but isn't obvious?
I myself run it so I can have an MX install on the fly, for example at a friend's house.
Who wouldn't want their favorite distro anywhere and anytime?

good point. I've often used it for rescue operations.

and at summer camp this year my kid needed to right a short essay for his environmental science merit badge. Out came my antiX live USB so we could have the libreoffice-writer for the task, as the camp didn't have internet access for his usual choice of google-docs.