Page 1 of 1
Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:18 am
by KBD
I did a fresh install of Debian Buster yesterday and it is very solid out of the box. Was glad to see synaptic was there by default, so they got that bug worked out. I installed MATE desktop on it, and it was about 500 mb ram use at boot, and I never broke 1 gb ram use with Chrome and one tab open. Feels much less bloated than Ubuntu. MX is going to have a great base to build on.
Edit: ram use below is with 2 tabs open, Reddit and MX Forum, so under 1 gb ram use with 2 tabs open.
Code: Select all
_,met$$$$$gg. viking@debian
,g$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$P. -------------
,g$$P" """Y$$.". OS: Debian GNU/Linux buster/sid x86_64
,$$P' `$$$. Host: 4291ZDF ThinkPad X220
',$$P ,ggs. `$$b: Kernel: 4.19.0-4-amd64
`d$$' ,$P"' . $$$ Uptime: 41 mins
$$P d$' , $$P Packages: 1729 (dpkg)
$$: $$. - ,d$$' Shell: bash 5.0.3
$$; Y$b._ _,d$P' Resolution: 1366x768
Y$$. `.`"Y$$$$P"' DE: MATE
`$$b "-.__ WM: Metacity (Marco)
`Y$$ WM Theme: Blue-Submarine
`Y$$. Theme: Blue-Submarine [GTK2/3]
`$$b. Icons: Moka [GTK2/3]
`Y$$b. Terminal: mate-terminal
`"Y$b._ Terminal Font: Monospace 13
`""" CPU: Intel i5-2520M (4) @ 3.200GHz
GPU: Intel 2nd Generation Core Processor Family
Memory: 931MiB / 7860MiB
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:38 am
by BV206
What command do you use to get that system info display?
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:40 am
by KBD
BV206 wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:38 am
What command do you use to get that system info display?
neofetch. I can't remember if it is on MX by default, but if not you can add it from synaptic or the terminal.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 11:55 am
by rasat
Debian is great.... buster will prove it.
Code: Select all
$ neofetch
_,met$$$$$gg. amurt@rasatPC
,g$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$P. -------------
,g$$P" """Y$$.". OS: Debian GNU/Linux buster/sid x86_64
,$$P' `$$$. Host: Inspiron 5567
',$$P ,ggs. `$$b: Kernel: 4.19.0-1-amd64
`d$$' ,$P"' . $$$ Uptime: 13 mins
$$P d$' , $$P Packages: 2406 (dpkg)
$$: $$. - ,d$$' Shell: bash 5.0.3
$$; Y$b._ _,d$P' Resolution: 1920x1080
Y$$. `.`"Y$$$$P"' DE: GNOME 3.30.2
`$$b "-.__ WM: GNOME Shell
`Y$$ WM Theme: Marwaita (OSX)
`Y$$. Theme: Adwaita [GTK2/3]
`$$b. Icons: breeze [GTK2/3]
`Y$$b. Terminal: gnome-terminal
`"Y$b._ CPU: Intel i7-7500U (4) @ 3.500GHz
`""" GPU: Intel HD Graphics 620
GPU: AMD ATI Radeon R7 M260/M265 / M340/M360 / M4
Memory: 1901MiB / 3845MiB
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:55 pm
by Eggnog
I've been running Buster for a while. It's very good. I have had no problems with it at all.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 1:27 pm
by KBD
Eggnog wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 12:55 pm
I've been running Buster for a while. It's very good. I have had no problems with it at all.
That's good to know. I've heard that from others as well.
Edit: some info about Debian Buster:
https://itsfoss.com/debian-10-buster/
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:02 pm
by Head_on_a_Stick
Debian buster is fantastic, really shiny.
It even has runit-init as a PID1 option now:
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?f=19&t=141656
But the systemd-shim has gone so MX will have to make a choice as to the init system.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:12 pm
by dreamer
Head_on_a_Stick wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:02 pm
Debian buster is fantastic, really shiny.
That sounds good!
But how useful is that when packages depend on systemd?
But the systemd-shim has gone so MX will have to make a choice as to the init system.
Why is that gone? Lack of maintainer? This package seems crucial to using Debian without systemd as init.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:17 pm
by dolphin_oracle
dreamer wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:12 pm
Head_on_a_Stick wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:02 pm
Debian buster is fantastic, really shiny.
That sounds good!
But how useful is that when packages depend on systemd?
But the systemd-shim has gone so MX will have to make a choice as to the init system.
Why is that gone? Lack of maintainer? This package seems crucial to using Debian without systemd as init.
systemd-shim was an Ubuntu based project, and its been abandoned since they gave up Upstart (the ubuntu init system before systemd)
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:42 pm
by Head_on_a_Stick
dreamer wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:12 pm
But how useful is that when packages depend on systemd?
Why does it matter if the systemd package is installed if it is not running as PID1?
I don't like systemd because it's too complicated and the codebase is too big, runit-init solves that completely for me.
Although I do actually prefer the slightly more complicated OpenRC option because of the lovely user interface and tools.
dreamer wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:12 pmThis package seems crucial to using Debian without systemd as init.
Nope, I can run either sysvinit or runit-init as PID1 without the systemd-shim in Debian buster.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:05 pm
by dreamer
Head_on_a_Stick wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:42 pm
dreamer wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:12 pm
But how useful is that when packages depend on systemd?
Why does it matter if the systemd package is installed if it is not running as PID1?
I don't like systemd because it's too complicated and the codebase is too big, runit-init solves that completely for me.
Although I do actually prefer the slightly more complicated OpenRC option because of the lovely user interface and tools.
dreamer wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 4:12 pmThis package seems crucial to using Debian without systemd as init.
Nope, I can run either sysvinit or runit-init as PID1 without the systemd-shim in Debian buster.
Packages depend on systemd. That's why systemd-shim is needed. A usable OS requires more than being able to boot the system. But maybe you are happy to recompile all the packages that depend on systemd? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:55 pm
by rasat
If systemd-shim is removed in buster, what init I am currently running in buster. Is this correct?
Code: Select all
$ dpkg -S /sbin/init
systemd-sysv: /sbin/init
Package: systemd-sysv
https://packages.debian.org/sid/systemd-sysv
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:57 pm
by anticapitalista
systemd
but MX will probably have sysvinit
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Thu Apr 25, 2019 6:38 pm
by KBD
dreamer wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:05 pm
Packages depend on systemd. That's why systemd-shim is needed. A usable OS requires more than being able to boot the system. But maybe you are happy to recompile all the packages that depend on systemd? ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
This was the concern about systemd from the start--it would become a cancer worming its way into the entire OS.
I hope MX can stay clear of this systemd disease, but I'm sticking with MX no matter what init it uses in Buster.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 1:55 am
by Head_on_a_Stick
dreamer wrote: Thu Apr 25, 2019 5:05 pm
But maybe you are happy to recompile all the packages that depend on systemd?
I am happy having the systemd package installed as long as it isn't doing anything, which would be the case if either sysvinit or runit-init were running as PID1.
As it happens my buster system doesn't have the systemd package installed at all and it is perfectly functional with my dwm desktop.
You may have problems with a bloated desktop environment like XFCE but I don't want to run those for the same reasons that I don't want to use systemd.
But anyway this is off-topic for this thread so I will stop now.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 7:13 am
by manyroads
Probably the reason for the earlier poll... I'm for pitching systemd. I know no one asked.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 7:29 am
by JayM
I wonder if Secure Boot will carry over to MX 19 (or 20)? That would be one less thing for people who are cursed with UEFI computers to have to deal with just to get an MX USB to boot.
Re: Buster looking good
Posted: Fri Apr 26, 2019 11:39 am
by KBD
JayM wrote: Fri Apr 26, 2019 7:29 am
I wonder if Secure Boot will carry over to MX 19 (or 20)? That would be one less thing for people who are cursed with UEFI computers to have to deal with just to get an MX USB to boot.
That's a good point. I saw that Buster will install on secure boot computers now, that would be a big plus. I guess everything is give and take in these decisions.