MX Linux Forum

xali wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 5:59 am so if you want to install a snap for some reason but still want to work with sysv, which is the appropriate approach?

none. snaps require systemd. so you boot systemd mode if you want to use snaps.

which is why we offer flatpaks instead of snaps. flatpaks do not require systemd.

I'm glad we are not ideological driven like antiX and we offer choices to people. In the small poll I created I see that about 10% percent of our users do make use of systemd in one way or another, I'm glad we'll not let them down.

In the same vein as Adrian's post above, I'm glad antiX has taken an ideological position and we will stick to it as our users expect.

it all works :)

Adrian wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:28 am I'm glad we are not ideological driven like antiX and we offer choices to people. In the small poll I created I see that about 10% percent of our users do make use of systemd in one way or another, I'm glad we'll not let them down.

That must be the reason why MX became #1 at distrowatch ranking.

I can't really understand people saying they'll ditch MX-19, because it's giving people a choice... a choice they already have in MX-18.x and earlier.

mx-2018 wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 11:54 amI can't really understand people saying they'll ditch MX-19, because it's giving people a choice... a choice they already have in MX-18.x and earlier.

Those would be the uninformed.

I personally would be happy to lose such users. (That's OK anticapitalista, we'll send them all to you)

To be fair to those users, Debian Buster did break systemd-shim, so co-existence of both inits in the same installation was looking uncertain for MX19, if not for the person who stepped up to look into fixing the shim package for Buster.

So for those users who like MX but need systemd for some reason, they might have had to find another distro if MX decided to stick with antiX base and go full on sysV with no systemd.

Or if they wanted MX to stay with sysV as default, they might have left -- possibly to antiX -- if MX went completely systemd.

I think in their own way, both antiX and MX offer an out-of-the-box alternative (I'm sure Head on a Stick will be by soon to explain that if you knew what you were doing, you could choose from a range of inits besides systemd in Debian proper, ) to systemd-as-default in Debian-land.

asqwerth wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:32 pm I'm sure Head on a Stick will be by soon to explain that if you knew what you were doing, you could choose from a range of inits besides systemd in Debian proper

Have you tried runit-init? It's awesome...

Head_on_a_Stick wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 2:48 pm

asqwerth wrote: Tue Jul 09, 2019 12:32 pm I'm sure Head on a Stick will be by soon to explain that if you knew what you were doing, you could choose from a range of inits besides systemd in Debian proper

Have you tried runit-init? It's awesome...

Now that you're here @Head_on_a_Stick... :lipsrsealed: Have you thought of writing a tutorial on how-to change inits on Debian based systems? I'm assuming you have done that. I have encountered folks on other Forums who would love to see how it's done.