Support for MX and antiX Linux distros
http://www.forum.mxlinux.org/
Is this a minor issue which only affects a few users?The latest version of of MX (or AntiX) won't install on my HP Stream (issues with the emmc "hard drive") and on my desktop fails to recognize the video card properly ( AMD Radeon RX 550 ); which is staggering in this day and age. This causes unacceptable performance issues and make me feel like it's Linux 1998 with HW support.
I've been using Linux since '96 and could probably resolve these issues with a bit of time, but with a plethora of choice around its easier to install another distro.
I still rate it a 10 out of 10 because over the years it's been a top notch and under recognized distribution that I think is overlooked way to often. It deserves everyone to check it out, and I'm certain that while I'm not happy with the latest version, this is an exception and not the norm.
the mmc thing is fixed in the current installer.colin_b wrote: Sat Jun 02, 2018 10:52 pm Another grumble..
Is this a minor issue which only affects a few users?The latest version of of MX (or AntiX) won't install on my HP Stream (issues with the emmc "hard drive") and on my desktop fails to recognize the video card properly ( AMD Radeon RX 550 ); which is staggering in this day and age. This causes unacceptable performance issues and make me feel like it's Linux 1998 with HW support.
I've been using Linux since '96 and could probably resolve these issues with a bit of time, but with a plethora of choice around its easier to install another distro.
I still rate it a 10 out of 10 because over the years it's been a top notch and under recognized distribution that I think is overlooked way to often. It deserves everyone to check it out, and I'm certain that while I'm not happy with the latest version, this is an exception and not the norm.
Have these points been mentioned in the forum?Deserves 10 points, but
The 2 things that make me return to Fedora (which I also like), are:
- Under Antix kernels (test), firefox does not work; blank page.
- No up-to-date CPU microcode to mitigate CVE-2018-3640 [rogue system register read] aka 'Variant 3a' vulnerability
- And, No update to mitigate CVE-2018-3639 [speculative store bypass] aka 'Variant 4' vulnerability.
colin_b wrote: Fri Sep 07, 2018 4:14 pmHave these points been mentioned in the forum?Deserves 10 points, but
The 2 things that make me return to Fedora (which I also like), are:
- Under Antix kernels (test), firefox does not work; blank page.
- No up-to-date CPU microcode to mitigate CVE-2018-3640 [rogue system register read] aka 'Variant 3a' vulnerability
- And, No update to mitigate CVE-2018-3639 [speculative store bypass] aka 'Variant 4' vulnerability.
I'm not absolutely certain, but I think Debian policy says that helper scripts can go into /usr/lib/<packagename>, but if they're talking about the ones in /usr/local/bin, they really should be going into /usr/bin instead.Version: 17.1
Rating: 10
Date: 2018-08-20
Votes: 2
In limited use, I find it one of the best, easy to use distros, in what is a rather small collection.
I would be using it full time, except for one thing: they put their superb collection of helper scripts in /usr/local. I have my own large collection of (perhaps not-so-superb) admin scripts which I keep there as well, and I would prefer not to mix them.
In the past, /usr/local was supposed to be reserved for the local installation. Now I know there is presently a geek slap fight going on as to whether that should matter. which I choose to remain silent on.
I'd be happier if MX would either integrate their scripts into /usr (which they probably don't want to do for the same reason), or maybe move them to /opt, although I realize there is likely no best solution.
/usr/distro, maybe? Don't like that either.
Anyway, MX is one of the best distros around right now.