MX Linux Forum

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 5:05 am**

I am still trying to get back to MX.
As I mentioned in this thread https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/upgradi ... nstalling/ My main concern is about doing a lot of work to install the new release! Yes, I am a bit impatient.

When I looked at https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/upgradi ... nstalling/ I said OMG no, I am not going to do all this!

But still searching and researching I concluded that if I just made a fresh install and just followed the defaults (other than customizing software to be installed to exclude games, media players I might not need), I found I could simply update/uppgrade my current installation then issue another command to do the upgrade as follows:

Code: Select all

sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade
sudo do-release-upgrade

As simple as that!

As far as I understood from what I read that the scond command that installs the new release will lokk after repos and change them as required, and will d o it as if I just installed from an ISO but will keep my data, my previously installed software and configuration.

So, If I just made a fresh install now, then when a new release comes out I simply do:

Code: Select all

sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade
sudo do-release-upgrade

and that's all (I hope).

Did I get it right? Any comments? Any body previously did it this way? How was it?

To be honest, I am currently on a rolling release distro, which actually saves me all the hassles of installing a new release. I just install once and forget about it. But I really like MX and the tools it offer especially with system backup, fixing problems (especially the Grub problem not booting).. etc.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 6:21 am**

i hate redoing the whole system too - the biggest thing is deleting and adding all of the stuff i need and do not need. the other tweaks are a bit tedious; but doable. technically once you have it installed - a generic statement here: you can use it/run it for maybe 7-8 years and be safe and covered and good to go. there are possibly more easier and moe technical ways to do it too; however - i am not that smart unfortunately.

i have an extra older laptop running MX so i used that and also notes i tried to write last install or two to compare and to help me with various settings etc. since i do not explore MX and its many features once installed - i just use it daily - i have to refind tthe various aspects to help get stuff tweaked. so do it and spend a day or less and you are good for many years of a wonderful experience with MX!

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:18 am**

@limotux wrote:

When I looked at https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/upgradi ... nstalling/ I said OMG no, I am not going to do all this!

All the recent attempts at using this method have resulted in failure.

Code: Select all

sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade
sudo do-release-upgrade

Where did you find these commands?

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:39 am**

limotux

Rolling upgrade is nice as long as it works but not so nice if things begin to fall apart.

Staying close to defaults is almost always a good idea if you want the next install to be easy.

I am also curious about where you got the code from.
If you choose to use it, will you give a feedback later about how it went.?

I will never say never but I don't have any optimism to share about it. I just want to recommend you to do a solid backup first.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:14 am**

j2mcgreg wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:18 am
Where did you find these commands?

Point 4 at the MX link https://mxlinux.org/wiki/system/upgradi ... nstalling/
I just searched a bit about the second command and found on some web sites (can't remember anything specific) and understood this

Code: Select all

 sudo do-release-upgrade

does hte trick of installing the new release with everything needed including even the new repos, so it is the same as an install from an ISO but it just keeps your data, your previous installed software, configuration.. etc. So it is just like an update not an install actually. And this is what I am looking for.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:23 am**

j2mcgreg wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:18 am
All the recent attempts at using this method have resulted in failure.
Code: Select all
sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade
sudo do-release-upgrade
Where did you find these commands?

I wonder if failure is due to lots of stuff being done or what!
The two commands which I told you I saw some other web sites says simply run them and that's all to get the new release.
I hope someone experienced or someone can tell us if only these two are enough!
If so, I am thinking seriously of converting from my rolling release to MX as it is more user friendly, though the distro I am on now is amazing and never failed me or even neve had a glitch for about a year.

I hope someone experienced tell us if:

Code: Select all

sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade
sudo do-release-upgrade

are just enough to "install" (actually upgrade/update) the new release!

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:31 am**

Jakob77 wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 7:39 am limotux

Rolling upgrade is nice as long as it works but not so nice if things begin to fall apart.

Staying close to defaults is almost always a good idea if you want the next install to be easy.

I am also curious about where you got the code from.
If you choose to use it, will you give a feedback later about how it went.?

I will never say never but I don't have any optimism to share about it. I just want to recommend you to do a solid backup first.

@Jakob77
Yes, I believe a rolling release is a wonderful thing, you just install only once and whatever comes after that even if they made a new release just get to you as updates. To be honest, only if the new release has a new app or so that was not there before then you will need to install it manually. Some times you may need to do a few tweaks to be exactly as if you made a fresh install from the new ISO.

To be honest, I've been on my current rolling release for a full year without a glitch and enjoying it like I never enjoyed before.
But I like how MX is user friendly, and that you can easily snapshot, backup or rescue the system just by booting and issuing a command or using a preinstalled app, and just boot.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:35 am**

@limotux wrote:

I just searched a bit about the second command and found on some web sites (can't remember anything specific) and understood this

Unless "some sites" = the Debian documentation wiki, it won't work because of the gross changes in the base Debian release upwards to the next. You are welcome to try, but I expect that you will be back here looking for answers in short order.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:54 am**

sorry i got the thread to post wrong.
(Please delete this post.)

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:57 am**

j2mcgreg wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:35 am @limotux wrote:
I just searched a bit about the second command and found on some web sites (can't remember anything specific) and understood this
Unless "some sites" = the Debian documentation wiki, it won't work because of the gross changes in the base Debian release upwards to the next. You are welcome to try, but I expect that you will be back here looking for answers in short order.

@j2mcgreg
I repeated the search and I could get this one https://www.fosslinux.com/35838/updatin ... %2Dupgrade

https://stackoverflow.com/questions/331 ... do-command

I saw here as well https://www.fosslinux.com/35838/updatin ... 0Installer. (see the image there) I can install the new version but select the option to keep /home, but I do not know if this will keep the software previously installed (if not then this is not what I am looking for)

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:14 am**

Those instructions are for upgrading within the same release cycle, say from MX 21.1 to MX 21.4. They will not work if you are attempting to go from MX 19 to MX 21, or from MX 21 to MX 23.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:18 am**

seems like everyone is saying - do a clean fresh install and be happy. i agree. i never tried to do some upgrade from one version to another. Dolphin Oracle and other devs have explained on this site prior as to why it isn;t desirable and also ends up with glitches.

instead of wasting time searching and posting this stuff install a fresh version. it would have been done by now other than your tweaks - and even that would have been 'in process' at this moment!

good luck! enjoy MX!

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:32 am**

A clean install is best. That is certainly true.

However, "I want to port the User environment ONLY"
Demand has been very high since the beginning.

Therefore, I will be brave and make a bold proposal.
As a new MX tool, how about developing "Home Transfer"?

This is "Program for porting only Home Folder to a clean installation environment by USB".

It seems like a welcome tool, even though it might add more work for the team.

In other words, it's a tool that overwrites just your home folder.
As for the installed software, I think it might be difficult because there may be problems.

Preserve home folder function is already in the installer, so
I'll leave it up to you to decide if this makes sense.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:39 am**

Freja wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:32 am A clean install is best. That is certainly true.

However, "I want to port the User environment ONLY"
Demand has been very high since the beginning.

Therefore, I will be brave and make a bold proposal.
As a new MX tool, how about developing "Home Transfer"?

This is "Program for porting only Home Folder to a clean installation environment by USB".

It seems like a welcome tool, even though it might add more work for the team.

In other words, it's a tool that overwrites just your home folder.
As for the installed software, I think it might be difficult because there may be problems.

Preserve home functionality is already in the installer, so
I'll leave it up to you to decide if this makes sense.

You can already do this by preserving 'home' in the Custom Partitioning section of the installer.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:40 am**

But,Users can have the peace of mind that
"I have a home folder on USB and can port it any computer".

Snapshot and LIve USB maker can port the whole system,
but it requires long time and large USB capacity.

If it's just the home folder, it's easier to port than that.

By the way, according to my experience, simply copying the home folder
to the USB and porting it on the GUI will give bad results.

Ideally, I want to boot from USB and safely overwrite my home folder,
including hidden files, on the CUI.

I want this.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:10 am**

I think that I've seen recommendations on this forum by advisors that you can easily copy your home folder with Gparted.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:33 am**

thinkpadx wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:18 am seems like everyone is saying - do a clean fresh install and be happy. i agree. i never tried to do some upgrade from one version to another. Dolphin Oracle and other devs have explained on this site prior as to why it isn;t desirable and also ends up with glitches.

instead of wasting time searching and posting this stuff install a fresh version. it would have been done by now other than your tweaks - and even that would have been 'in process' at this moment!

good luck! enjoy MX!

Thanks @thinkpadx
It seems that the only and best way is to do a fresh install.
OK. Let me ask a few more questions:
1- For how long I get updates/upgrades for the installed system?
2- What if when a new release comes out I change my repos to the repos of the new release then do the 2 commands:

Code: Select all

sudo apt update && sudo apt full-upgrade
sudo do-release-upgrade

3- In a previous post I saw the option to keep /home, I remember some time ago I read about a command (one command) to install all packages listed in a text file. This can perhaps help, the text file will be in the /home directory which will be kept.

I hope the 3 point above may give a clue on how to install once and stay for 5 years at least on this install without the need to do a fresh install or make moving to a new release much easier and less time and effort.

I appreciate your patience with me and with my lots of questions. If I am not really interested I wouldn't have bothered to ask.
I am just curious and always trying to learn.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:47 am**

Sure would be a lot easier if new MX releases contained a minimal amount of stuff MX needs to work properly. Then users can add whatever stuff they need or want. Current MX new releases require too much time getting rid of stuff you dont need and never use

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:48 am**

The thing with upgrading "stable" distros in-place is that it either won't work right away, so you're stuck with a broken system or they seemingly work and down the line suddenly something breaks, because the upgrade process wasn't as clean as you expected it to be. At the end of the day most times it's easier and a lot less stressful to just do a fresh install. It's also nice to start out with a fresh system every few years to get rid of programs you don't use anymore and set up a fresh config.

I usually work with seperate SSDs and just switch out the boot drive physically when doing such an upgrade, so worst case I will have the old system ready at any time.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:58 am**

Question #1: for about 5 years. For example MX 19 was released in Oct 2019 and all support ends in June 2024
Question #2: That will seriously screw up a system.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:07 am**

j2mcgreg wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:58 am Question #1: for about 5 years. For example MX 19 was released in Oct 2019 and all support ends in June 2024

I see I am getting a bit closer!
Well, doing a fresh install in 5 years sound OK and reasonable.
This can be added to what I mentioned in step 3.
After the 5 years will still be getting security updates? Or it would be completely over!

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:20 am**

limotux wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:07 am
j2mcgreg wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:58 am Question #1: for about 5 years. For example MX 19 was released in Oct 2019 and all support ends in June 2024
I see I am getting a bit closer!
Well, doing a fresh install in 5 years sound OK and reasonable.
This can be added to what I mentioned in step 3.
After the 5 years will still be getting security updates? Or it would be completely over!

Security updates will have ended as well.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:34 am**

outside working - but if you mean for example - 21.1 to 21.2 - 21.3 ersions all is well for mx 21 - mx 23 - no repos not possible - that is why a clean install is needed too. the point upgrades are all good. i have been using since late mx 17 and literally never an issue.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:44 am**

limotux

I can also vote for MX working in the direction of using automatic rolling upgrades.
However I used rolling upgrade with Xubuntu for approximately 5 years and then it began to fall apart.
That is really not nice when you depend on the computer and want to keep your data safe for the last backup.

Now I use MX 21 Wildflower.
An you can see here the lifetime for it is also approximately 5 years but likely and hopefully with the big difference that MX won't fall apart:
https://endoflife.date/mxlinux

Freja

I guess you got the idea from the MX-tool where you can copy the home folder to another user and make them similar.
Never say never and I understand you want it but I can't see how it can work on a random computer.
There can for instance be databases for Thunderbird and Firefox that needs to fit the installed program version number, and I fail to see how a tool can fix that elegantly.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:45 am**

limotux wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:07 am
j2mcgreg wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 10:58 am Question #1: for about 5 years. For example MX 19 was released in Oct 2019 and all support ends in June 2024
I see I am getting a bit closer!
Well, doing a fresh install in 5 years sound OK and reasonable.
This can be added to what I mentioned in step 3.
After the 5 years will still be getting security updates? Or it would be completely over!

Completely over. It will of course continue to run but no updates at all will come in henceforth.

As for rolling distros saving you the bother of not installing again, the time you save by not installing again is lost/spent in other things (ok, I exclude PCLinuxOS, Solus and Void from this as they normally need very little care during updates**):
1. frequent and numerous updates - so you spend more time overall downloading updated packages than it takes to download a new iso for MX every 5 years. Say I update my Anarchy (Arch-based) install every 2 weeks, I have to download maybe 1 GB of packages (roughly 80 - 100+ packages) each time. Yes you can update more frequently so each download is smaller, but the added/accumulated size of all the downloads will be the same. Once a month, Debian might roll up a whole bunch of security updates but what's large for the Debian Stable update once a month is pretty small when compared to weekly Arch updates.

2. when you update, either you spend more time checking update news in case of gotchas and required manual intervention before the update (eg recently Arch completed their git migration and the recommended update command was different and you had to edit your pacman.conf), or you might have to spend some time sorting out issues that arise after the update. Normally you don't need to worry about all this in fixed release distros. Updates are more "brainless", though you should still keep an eye on the update confirmation message to make sure no drastic removal of key packages is going to happen (usually that means something is wrong).

3. for Arch-based distros, you have to keep an eye on pacnew files and sometimes manual changes to conf files have to be effected.

**Even PCLOS recently had an important announcement (to install network manager and its plugins to replace their old network program) which I missed because I assumed they were "safe" and never checked their update announcements. In the end I had to use MX's chroot-rescue-scan to chroot into my PCLOS install to manually install the necessary network packages because I lost my network connection.

So there are pros and cons to both fixed and rolling distros.

If you really want to try manually upgrading MX from one Debian release to the next, then don't follow commands from external sources. Wait for the new release to be officially out, and for MX devs to issue their advisory for an unofficial upgrade path that you can do at your own risk.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:14 pm**

For me, when I am ready to move to a new MX version, I run this script on my old machine, which shows me what *I* have installed, and then use it to decide what I want to install on my new machine.

Code: Select all

comm -23 <(apt-mark showmanual | sed 's/[: \t].*$//' | sort -u) <( { sed 's/[: \t].*$//' /usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt ; dpkg-query -W -f '${Depends}\n' | sed 's/([^)]*)//g; s/ //g; s/,/\n/g' | grep -vF '|' ; } | sort -u) > Packages-installed-by-me.txt

I then use this file to create a script to install apps that I still want, and then use the script to install it all.

I also create my new machine 100% in a VM, then once it is tested and ready to roll, I snapshot it, write it out to a pocket drive and then install to my machine. (Testing several times along the way on other machines before I overwrite mine:-) )

And, of course, I have backups and have also just copied out my home folder and everything under it.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:50 pm**

Is that script different than the MX tool "User Installed Packages"? The output looks the same.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 2:20 pm**

Yes, MX's UIP is intended to make major MX base upgrades as painless as possible. Just preserve your home during the reinstall and use the UIP to restore any non-default packages.

If you've made any customizations outside of your home folder, though, it's still up to you to remember what you did and restore those.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 2:57 pm**

UIP is not found in mx19 AFAIK, so users upgrading from 19 to 23 will have to use that script.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 3:30 pm**

CharlesV wrote:

" I run this script on my old machine, which shows me what *I* have installed, and then use it to decide what I want to install on my new machine.
CODE: SELECT ALL
comm -23 <(apt-mark showmanual | sed 's/[: \t].*$//' | sort -u) <( { sed 's/[: \t].*$//' /usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt ; dpkg-query -W -f '${Depends}\n' | sed 's/([^)]*)//g; s/ //g; s/,/\n/g' | grep -vF '|' ; } | sort -u) > Packages-installed-by-me.txt"
"

Is there a script to show what was deleted ??

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 3:50 pm**

richb wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:50 pm Is that script different than the MX tool "User Installed Packages"? The output looks the same.

I believe it is either the same script for very close as UIP.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 3:53 pm**

AA BB wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 3:30 pm CharlesV wrote:

" I run this script on my old machine, which shows me what *I* have installed, and then use it to decide what I want to install on my new machine.
CODE: SELECT ALL
comm -23 <(apt-mark showmanual | sed 's/[: \t].*$//' | sort -u) <( { sed 's/[: \t].*$//' /usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt ; dpkg-query -W -f '${Depends}\n' | sed 's/([^)]*)//g; s/ //g; s/,/\n/g' | grep -vF '|' ; } | sort -u) > Packages-installed-by-me.txt"
"

Is there a script to show what was deleted ??

The only way I think that would work is to do a list of ALL installed apps, then compare against a fresh install. (Which would be different based upon WHICH MX verison and sub version you installed originally. )

Basically a diff against the two lists, but you would have to factor the version updates too.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:09 pm**

AA BB wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 3:30 pmIs there a script to show what was deleted ??

Code: Select all

sudo apt list -i > Currently-installed-packages.txt

diff:

/usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt
Currently-installed-packages.txt
Packages-installed-by-me.txt

(Roughly)

(For the current system)

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:13 pm**

Charlie Brown wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:09 pm
AA BB wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 3:30 pmIs there a script to show what was deleted ??
Code: Select all
sudo apt list -i > Currently-installed-packages.txt
diff:

/usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt
Currently-installed-packages.txt
Packages-installed-by-me.txt

(Roughly)

(For the current system)

Very Nice!!

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:34 pm**

asqwerth wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 2:57 pm UIP is not found in mx19 AFAIK, so users upgrading from 19 to 23 will have to use that script.

I didn't follow the development thread, so I don't know if that's because it uses features only available in MX 21 and up, or just hasn't been packaged for MX 19.

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 6:00 pm**

Charlie Brown wrote
"diff:

/usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt
Currently-installed-packages.txt
Packages-installed-by-me.txt
"

I assume this should be translated into the command :
diff /usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt Currently-installed-packages.txt >Packages-installed-by-me.txt

Correct ?

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 8:18 pm**

I think he meant that the diff of the installed-packages and currently installed packages would give you the "what was uninstalled"

Then you have to factor in the Packages-installed-by-me

But lets see what he says :-)

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:23 pm**

Stevo wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:34 pm
asqwerth wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 2:57 pm UIP is not found in mx19 AFAIK, so users upgrading from 19 to 23 will have to use that script.
I didn't follow the development thread, so I don't know if that's because it uses features only available in MX 21 and up, or just hasn't been packaged for MX 19.

No idea. @fehlix ?

Posted: **Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:44 pm**

AA BB wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 6:00 pm... I assume this should be translated into the command ...

Since the lists don't look exactly the same, first we need to make them look identical. That's why I wrote "roughly".

Also, you would say: 'currently installed packages' minus 'original list' already gives packages installed by the user, but these two are counting just with apt, the other one also counts dpkg installed ones etc. Therefore it'll be better to include that one separately in the formula not to miss anything.

So, something like this, say:

The Original list: ABCDE
Current list: ABFGJK

User Installed Packages list: FGJK

( CDE were removed by the user )

... Then (whatever way):

installed-packages.txt - (Currently-installed-packages.txt - Packages-installed-by-me.txt) = Original Packages Removed by the User

Again, just a rough idea :)

(Yes, that script is the core of the MX Tool that provided a gui)

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 2:41 am**

Jakob77 wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:44 am limotux

I can also vote for MX working in the direction of using automatic rolling upgrades.

My 2 cents! I personally believe this is the way any OS should be.
I understand some would say point releases are more stable than rolling release. I agree with that for sure (theoretically at least), but still the way to upgrade can be the same as rolling, just an update not a fresh install! Developers can control what updates and when to get updated/upgraded.

I do not see it really convenient to do a fresh install again once you already installed a system.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 2:56 am**

asqwerth wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 11:45 am
Completely over. It will of course continue to run but no updates at all will come in henceforth.

As for rolling distros saving you the bother of not installing again, the time you save by not installing again is lost/spent in other things (ok, I exclude PCLinuxOS, Solus and Void from this as they normally need very little care during updates**):

Thank you @asqwerth for your detailed comment.
Well, honestly as I mentioned earlier, I have been on a rolling release for about a year now. (EndeavourOS to be specific)
I have been just getting updates as usual and upgrading from one release to the next just issuing the update command. To be honest I have made a fresh install only once because I simply bought a new laptop in place of my 10 year old laptop).

And to be honest and precise, the latest release they had some changes (like systemd-boot to be the default instead of grub) so just to be up to date I had to do some manual work.

Other than that it has been working flawlessly for about a year with just updating the system.

Now, I am trying to get a Live Persistent MX USB to start with. I really like how MX is really user friendly and that the Grub issue of breaking down can be fixed simply by booting from any USB and issuing a command to fix it.

I hope I get my Live Persistent MX USB disk working soon!

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 5:50 am**

asqwerth wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:23 pm
Stevo wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:34 pm
asqwerth wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 2:57 pm UIP is not found in mx19 AFAIK, so users upgrading from 19 to 23 will have to use that script.
I didn't follow the development thread, so I don't know if that's because it uses features only available in MX 21 and up, or just hasn't been packaged for MX 19.
No idea. @fehlix ?

Will do an translation refresh together with an adjustment to have it also run on MX19, asap.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 9:10 am**

Ich wollte heute MXLinux 21 installieren. Der reinste Fehlschlag! Baim Start des Live-Systems läuft die Überprüfung des Medienspeicher, und endet ohne Fehler festzustellen. Dann bei der Installation stellt er Fehler an der Partition fest, kann nicht installieren und fordert mich auf das auf der Liveversion vorhandene Überprüfungstool zu starten. Gleich nach dem Start werde ich aufgefordert ein Passwort einzugeben. Woher soll man denn das Passwort kennen, wo finde ich das. Ein Neuling fühlt sich völlig verarscht und lässt seine Finger von Linux. Für mich hat sich MXLinux nun auch endgültig erledigt. Die 18 und 19 waren nicht schlecht, nur die vielen Fehler haben genervt. MXLinux entwickelt sich immer mehr zum Schrotthaufen. (Meine Meinung). Hier sind die Fehler schon im System. NEIN DANKE!

Dies ist Kritik! Aus der Kritik sollwas besseres erwachsen!

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 9:23 am**

Tomy wrote: Fri Jun 09, 2023 9:10 am Ich wollte heute MXLinux 21 installieren. Der reinste Fehlschlag! Baim Start des Live-Systems läuft die Überprüfung des Medienspeicher, und endet ohne Fehler festzustellen. Dann bei der Installation stellt er Fehler an der Partition fest, kann nicht installieren und fordert mich auf das auf der Liveversion vorhandene Überprüfungstool zu starten. Gleich nach dem Start werde ich aufgefordert ein Passwort einzugeben. Woher soll man denn das Passwort kennen, wo finde ich das. Ein Neuling fühlt sich völlig verarscht und lässt seine Finger von Linux. Für mich hat sich MXLinux nun auch endgültig erledigt. Die 18 und 19 waren nicht schlecht, nur die vielen Fehler haben genervt. MXLinux entwickelt sich immer mehr zum Schrotthaufen. (Meine Meinung). Hier sind die Fehler schon im System. NEIN DANKE!

Dies ist Kritik! Aus der Kritik sollwas besseres erwachsen!

It must be a great compliment to MX that you have been able to use it for so long without reading the manual.

From MX Linux Users Manual v. 20220313:

2.4 First look

Live Medium login In case you want to log out and back in, install new packages, etc., here are the usernames and passwords:

• Regular user
• name: demo
• password: demo

• Superuser (Administrator)
• name: root
• password: root

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 9:34 am**

limotux wrote: Fri Jun 09, 2023 2:56 am I have been on a rolling release for about a year now. (EndeavourOS to be specific)
I have been just getting updates as usual and upgrading from one release to the next just issuing the update command. ... it has been working flawlessly for about a year with just updating the system.

I can confirm this - at any rate, using EOS XFCE as a virtualbox client, no problems and rock stable. With the KDE version of EndeavourOS which I also installed in a Virtualbox just to check out their very latest, problems arose a few weeks after install. Then again, cynics including myself might say KDE with its trillions of complicated config options presents problems the moment you start running it

So anyway, assuming no glitches occur, there's still always low level anxiety associated with running a rolling release, especially when it comes to Arch based systems. Someone else in this thread pointed out the frequent and massive updates. I have my EOS set to "once daily", and usually that's enough to make it download tons, including new kernel updates, systemd versions etc almost each time. In addition, with Arch, some run-of-the-mill stuff for whatever reason is not available from the official repositories, so you need to use AUR which may or may not be safe. AUR makes you build stuff - and it can be a lengthy process, even basics like my favorite browser, Librewolf - which in Debian based systems requires a couple of clicks to install in no time. Plus you can't ever be sure that something coming from AUR won't at some point cause conflicts with stuff from the official reps, so you may end up with a broken system and no clue why this is.

With that in mind, I think while rolling would be ideal if it were reliable at all times and in any circumstances, the safer, more comfortable method probably is installing new versions. In practice, this isn't such a big deal. Back up /home to be on the safe side, then during installation make sure your current home directory is not formatted, set it to "keep old home" when the installer offers that option, and, once you're up and running again, take a little time reinstalling whatever packages you need which the fresh install is missing. I recently upgraded my main system from MX 19 to 21, and a VBox from 21 to 23beta1 - both without problems and probably using less time than you would require updating EOS if you left that unattended for a week or two.

The one thing I'd say - and this is purely personal and no criticism at all - is I do prefer the old Calamares installer. The new one MX has been using since 21 can be seen as less straightforward and somewhat daunting at first. That said, I'd recommend to stick with fixed releases and once every so many years install a fresh version.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 9:44 am**

limotux

About wasting time it depends on how you look at it. In my opinion a good discussion about Linux can almost never be a waste of time.
If handled well I believe small and big frustrations and a will among the users makes a distro better.
And just as important everybody learns something along the way.

If you accept you need a new clean install and you find the correct procedure for it I guess you will be surprised about how easy it is.
As I sense it your frustration is more about not having a good backup and restore procedure.
Your hard drive can die instantly and you have to be ready for that to happen at any moment.
If you are not on top of that situation you run it risky and can be lost no matter what kind of upgrade you aim for.

On the other hand if you have all that in place.
You have a good new backup on at least two different external unplugged disks and you know exactly how to restore.
You have written a file with your detailed configuration that can be used as recipe and check list (you made it during the first install).
Then you are ready to roll pretty fast if you have to.

However I see now that you are on another distro that I don't know.
That can be more complicated.
You might want to check some programs and their version numbers and configuration extra well before switch and restore.

But then there is no way to avoid a fresh new install for you if you want to use MX-Linux.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 10:39 am**

@Tomy

Dies ist ein englisches Forum und alle Antworten hier müssen in dieser Sprache erfolgen. Ansonsten gibt es ein deutsches Forum, das Sie stattdessen nutzen können

@Jakob77

Your response was spot on.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 1:04 pm**

Well, I hope I am welcome on my "new" old laptop (

Code: Select all

sudo dmidecode -t bios

-> Release Date: 10/01/2018) but it is for me Brand New as I just installed MX

on it.
The first thing to do was to install Chromium to log in here and say hi to you.
I will be back in a few, to discuss with you nice people.
:

Thoug the date I got is in 2018 I still believe it is much older and this might be just a BIOS update as I can see:

Code: Select all

Dual Core model: Intel Core i5-2450M

which was released around 2011/2012 So it is like 10 yeas old!
FYI:

Code: Select all

System:
  Host: limo Kernel: 6.0.0-6mx-amd64 x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc 
  v: 10.2.1 Desktop: KDE Plasma 5.20.5 wm: kwin_x11 vt: 7 dm: SDDM 
  Distro: MX-21.3_KDE_x64 Wildflower January 15  2023 
  base: Debian GNU/Linux 11 (bullseye)

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 1:36 pm**

hebelwirkung wrote: Fri Jun 09, 2023 9:34 am I can confirm this - at any rate, using EOS XFCE as a virtualbox client, no problems and rock stable. With the KDE version of EndeavourOS which I also installed in a Virtualbox just to check out their very latest, problems arose a few weeks after install. Then again, cynics including myself might say KDE with its trillions of complicated config options presents problems the moment you start running it

So anyway, assuming no glitches occur, there's still always low level anxiety associated with running a rolling release, especially when it comes to Arch based systems. Someone else in this thread pointed out the frequent and massive updates. I have my EOS set to "once daily", and usually that's enough to make it download tons, including new kernel updates, systemd versions etc almost each time. In addition, with Arch, some run-of-the-mill stuff for whatever reason is not available from the official repositories, so you need to use AUR which may or may not be safe. AUR makes you build stuff - and it can be a lengthy process, even basics like my favorite browser, Librewolf - which in Debian based systems requires a couple of clicks to install in no time. Plus you can't ever be sure that something coming from AUR won't at some point cause conflicts with stuff from the official reps, so you may end up with a broken system and no clue why this is.

With that in mind, I think while rolling would be ideal if it were reliable at all times and in any circumstances, the safer, more comfortable method probably is installing new versions. In practice, this isn't such a big deal. Back up /home to be on the safe side, then during installation make sure your current home directory is not formatted, set it to "keep old home" when the installer offers that option, and, once you're up and running again, take a little time reinstalling whatever packages you need which the fresh install is missing. I recently upgraded my main system from MX 19 to 21, and a VBox from 21 to 23beta1 - both without problems and probably using less time than you would require updating EOS if you left that unattended for a week or two.

The one thing I'd say - and this is purely personal and no criticism at all - is I do prefer the old Calamares installer. The new one MX has been using since 21 can be seen as less straightforward and somewhat daunting at first. That said, I'd recommend to stick with fixed releases and once every so many years install a fresh version.

Thanks @hebelwirkung for your wonderful feed back.
Allow me to just add, well, for me I had no problems though I am on KDE, and though I have read some people facing problems (including me but was a minor thing and I got support instantly). But I still can say it is rock solid.

I agree with you that a rolling release is a good feature, that you never need to reinstall or all the hassles of backing up data, reinstalling previously installed software... etc.

Regarding to the lots of downloads, well, I can think of a way similar to a rolling release but not necessarily really rolling, I mean it can be something like changing repos (on Debian to Testing repos not sid), this way updates/upgrades will be as stable as the annual releases, but the users will get the upgrades same way as it is done in rolling. It can be annual or semi annual, or whatever the developers see fit and they are satisfied with the stability. I am not talking about having updates and upgrades as frequent as Arch or Arch based, I am talking about upgrades/updates/new releases in the same way (or technology) as rolling. That is install just once and that's all.

I am not interfering with the developers business of course, they are doing a great job with MX. But I believe brain storming might contribute something.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 3:20 pm**

Tomy wrote: Fri Jun 09, 2023 9:10 am ...
Gleich nach dem Start werde ich aufgefordert ein Passwort einzugeben. Woher soll man denn das Passwort kennen, wo finde ich das.
...

Code: Select all

Tomy -- "...Right after the start I am prompted to enter a password. 
How should I know the password, where can I find it..."

What you seek was right in front of you. ---> Was Sie suchen, lag direkt vor Ihnen.

Posted: **Fri Jun 09, 2023 3:53 pm**

limotux wrote: Fri Jun 09, 2023 1:36 pm ... I am on KDE, and though I have read some people facing problems (including me but was a minor thing and I got support instantly). But I still can say it is rock solid.

Regarding to the lots of downloads, well, I can think of a way similar to a rolling release but not necessarily really rolling, I mean it can be something like changing repos (on Debian to Testing repos not sid), this way updates/upgrades will be as stable as the annual releases, but the users will get the upgrades same way as it is done in rolling.

@limotux - Congrats on running KDE without problems on EOS. I may have used the difficulties I encountered as a welcome excuse to abandon KDE (again) - from time to time I try to like it, but though it does have features I appreciate, overall it just isn't my cup of tea.

As for switching a Debian base from stable to testing, as I understand it this does increase the risk of things going wrong, testing - by definition - being the state of something before it is officially declared to be fully stable. One of the many good things about MX is that - using MX Package Installer - you can upgrade seleced apps via Testing or Backports without abandoning the stable base, though probably it's a good idea to use those options sparingly. In many cases, upgraded versions of this or that piece of software don't truly give you revolutionary new options, as you will know from using EOS and comparing their stuff to the less cutting edge versions offered by Debian stable.

On the whole, Debian's strongest point probably is its stability, which is why hardcore Debian fans swear by it. They probably would say it's wise not to jeopardize that by mixing repos with abandon

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 2:10 am**

hebelwirkung wrote: Fri Jun 09, 2023 3:53 pm ....

@limotux - Congrats on running KDE without problems on EOS. I may have used the difficulties I encountered as a welcome excuse to abandon KDE (again) - from time to time I try to like it, but though it does have features I appreciate, overall it just isn't my cup of tea.

As for switching a Debian base from stable to testing, as I understand it this does increase the risk of things going wrong, testing - by definition - being the state of something before it is officially declared to be fully stable. One of the many good things about MX is that - using MX Package Installer - you can upgrade seleced apps via Testing or Backports without abandoning the stable base, though probably it's a good idea to use those options sparingly. In many cases, upgraded versions of this or that piece of software don't truly give you revolutionary new options, as you will know from using EOS and comparing their stuff to the less cutting edge versions offered by Debian stable.

On the whole, Debian's strongest point probably is its stability, which is why hardcore Debian fans swear by it. They probably would say it's wise not to jeopardize that by mixing repos with abandon

Thank you @hebelwirkung
Well, I can compare an Arch based rolling release to Debian SID, given that Testing repo is much more tested and much more stable than SID, so I think following Testing repos will be rolling while being much more stable.

Again my point is not having the latest software, it is about installing only once without the hassles and risks of doing a fresh install.

And again if SID is equivalent to rolling then testing will be rolling and more stable. I think this would get best of both worlds.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 4:48 am**

You're not going to get any support/help here if you are trying to make MX a Debian Testing distro, as you are well aware from your involvement in the discussion in this thread: viewtopic.php?p=728059#p728059

if SID is equivalent to rolling then testing will be rolling and more stable.....

Oh boy. Please read this to understand more about Debian Testing and potential issues. https://www.debian.org/doc/manuals/debi ... ng.en.html

Testing

does not have permanent security support.

I can just imagine the requests in this forum for help and support if MX moved to being based on Debian Testing .

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 5:11 am**

asqwerth wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 4:48 am You're not going to get any support/help here if you are trying to make MX a Debian Testing distro...

I can just imagine the requests in this forum for help and support if MX moved to being based on Debian Testing .

As I understand it, he wants to not have to install new versions but install once and then keep rolling. The point about Debian is that it's not really meant to be used in this way. He is also using EndeavourOS, though, and that is a rolling release. If rolling is what one's after, one could do worse than EOS (Manjaro for example, in my limited experience). Probably @limotux believes that Debian Testing by and large is as safe and stable as Debian stable. Well it's not, but sometimes, that's maybe difficult to accept until some breakage or other forces the insight on you.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 6:11 am**

hebelwirkung wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 5:11 am
asqwerth wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 4:48 am You're not going to get any support/help here if you are trying to make MX a Debian Testing distro...

I can just imagine the requests in this forum for help and support if MX moved to being based on Debian Testing .
As I understand it, he wants to not have to install new versions but install once and then keep rolling. The point about Debian is that it's not really meant to be used in this way. He is also using EndeavourOS, though, and that is a rolling release. If rolling is what one's after, one could do worse than EOS (Manjaro for example, in my limited experience). Probably @limotux believes that Debian Testing by and large is as safe and stable as Debian stable. Well it's not, but sometimes, that's maybe difficult to accept until some breakage or other forces the insight on you.

I am sure OP is already aware that a fresh install can be done with the preservation of /home, or that the devs might provide a "do at your own risk" upgrade-path to carry out in-place upgrades when MX23 is finally released, as they did for the past 2 releases.

Apart from that, you are right that the OP may need to learn from experience as to what Testing is like. I have run Testing (old Parsix, old SolydX) and Sid based distros (Semplice) and while I didn't have huge problems keeping them going, I had to pay more attention and spend more time for each upgrade (and they were frequent). Plus judicious use of "apt-mark hold" to hold packages until some other dependency was also updated.

You can't do brainless one-click updates like you can for Debian Stable-based distros.

If you want full rolling, Arch-based or Void or even PCLOS are pretty good. I don't have issues with Manjaro - the install on my PC has served me well since 2015.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 6:28 am**

limotux

I agree it is essential to keep data safe but if you have an extra computer where you can test the new install and your restore without destroying the old installation, what is the risk.?

If you know how to choose copy instead of erase in Thunar (Xfce) you will just be making more backup and that leads to even more safety.

I can see nothing but convenience in your life.

Using the whole disk for MX (for a dummy like me the only way to go) will also make the basic install extremely easy and safe.

By the way I have an old computer that was really slow but when I gave it a SSD drive it helped a lot.
I don't know if it is an idea for you but it can also be a way to keep the old system when the new one is installed. If you have regrets you can just switch back again.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 6:32 am**

asqwerth wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 6:11 am I have run Testing (old Parsix, old SolydX) and Sid based distros (Semplice) and while I didn't have huge problems keeping them going, I had to pay more attention and spend more time for each upgrade (and they were frequent). Plus judicious use of "apt-mark hold" to hold packages until some other dependency was also updated.

You can't do brainless one-click updates like you can for Debian Stable-based distros.

If you want full rolling, Arch-based or Void or even PCLOS are pretty good. I don't have issues with Manjaro - the install on my PC has served me well since 2015.

And then one gradually loses track of stuff, hold this package, wait for that dependency - I just don't think it's worth the hassle. Okay, maybe that's me, because I have done updates in a state of near coma and not paid the least attention to what I was doing; one reason I like brainless one-click updates :-)

Manjaro died on me some years back, and for some reason, each time I've since tried it out again I had minor issues, sound stuff for example, stuff to do with AUR packages, this or that, never anything major, just small things which sometimes might take quite a while to work out. I know it's unfashionable to praise Debian as it's considered not sexy or whatever. But if you depend on your main machine for work for example, there's a lot to be said for solid, stable and reliable...

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 8:58 am**

I thank all of you guys for all your valuable input.

I do understand MX is based on Debian Stable and on making a new install when a new release comes out, and I won't get support here if I changed the defaults. I understand this I assure you.

I searched more and found that even the Testing repos have bulseye in the repo, so it is still not really what I was after.

Anyway, I have it now on the "new" old laptop, leaving it as is with defaults. I will see how things go when the next release comes out.
As a dear member said, that having only one OS (which is MX) installed on the full drive would make the upgrade much easier.

Thank you all for all your input.

I was just thinking out loud with you, in hope I will learn more and get more experience.
I will keep that installed MX as is, on defaults and see how it goes.

Thank you all for everything.

But honestly, I really hope some day there will be a rolling release of MX, not necessarily rolling and getting updates all the time, but perhaps rolling as just install once and get updates as usual, and upgrades when developers see the software is really stable. The only and main point is to install once. It would be the best of both worlds.

Hopefully with every new release there will be instructions to upgrade to the new release without the need to do an install.
I ma just thinking out loud with you.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 9:38 am**

limotux wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 8:58 am ...

But honestly, I really hope some day there will be a rolling release of MX, not necessarily rolling and getting updates all the time, but perhaps rolling as just install once and get updates as usual, and upgrades when developers see the software is really stable. The only and main point is to install once. It would be the best of both worlds.

...

In my opinion, anyone that wants a 'rolling' MX should set all Debian repos to Debian Testing immediately after installation and just roll.
But, it would no longer be MX.

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 11:02 am**

I don't understand this hype regarding rolling releases.

I have never seen a commercial release (if it was not IT and you did not have an expert at hand) that lasted longer than 3 months without having to manually rework after any updates.

Yes, the problems were usually solved after a half to 3 hours, but "sell" such an operating system times e.g. a photographer / video creator, who still 1000 pictures of a wedding and 2 training videos for an agency to a fixed date must have ready ... he can not afford the dates burst (he does not survive here in the province) or he must refuse orders, because he just had to patch half a day a crappy rolling update. All already experienced, that's why I (and a dozen colleagues) use opensuse and mx .

I allowed myself to play with Arch and its derivatives and also with the first opensuse tumbleweed, because I had spare computers for such games, on work computers it would have given me gray hair.

Once / twice a year a complete reinstallation (I'm doing one right now :-) ) is no problem for me, with Fluxbox it is half limited to copying text configs, a few minor adjustments and reinstalling programs that are not included with Flux.

Rawwconverters and video editing programs are mostly appimages, those (and the associated desktop files) are a trivial copy&paste action.

This is a few hours in total that I need for it, but it is also again a ballast free, so to speak virgin system.

MX is as stable as an old tank, as long as you stick with what the MXPI offers (and what runs smoothly as an appimage).

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 1:11 pm**

anticapitalista wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 9:38 am ....
In my opinion, anyone that wants a 'rolling' MX should set all Debian repos to Debian Testing immediately after installation and just roll.
But, it would no longer be MX.

I was thinking the same but found it would not be really rolling as the repo has bullseye in the link. So, I would need to change repos after the new release (not a problem really).
But after changing the repos to the xxxx testing repos of the new release would it just upgrade as an update without the need to reinstall?

Ah, I just got it (I hope I am right), when a new release comes out do the following in order:
1- Cahnge repos to the new release repos
2- Do the update
OR
1- Change the repos to bullseye testing repos
2- Update
3- Cahnge repos to the new release repos (just the new release repos not the testing repos)
4- Update again.

I don't know if any of this would update the wholes system or not?

Posted: **Sat Jun 10, 2023 1:43 pm**

limotux wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 1:11 pm
anticapitalista wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 9:38 am ....
In my opinion, anyone that wants a 'rolling' MX should set all Debian repos to Debian Testing immediately after installation and just roll.
But, it would no longer be MX.
I was thinking the same but found it would not be really rolling as the repo has bullseye in the link. So, I would need to change repos after the new release (not a problem really).
But after changing the repos to the xxxx testing repos of the new release would it just upgrade as an update without the need to reinstall?

Ah, I just got it (I hope I am right), when a new release comes out do the following in order:
1- Cahnge repos to the new release repos
2- Do the update
OR
1- Change the repos to bullseye testing repos
2- Update
3- Cahnge repos to the new release repos (just the new release repos not the testing repos)
4- Update again.

I don't know if any of this would update the wholes system or not?

You need to read this article from the Debian Wiki and then maybe you will see why many of us advise against your idea:
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianTesting

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 12:28 am**

CharlesV wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 12:14 pm For me, when I am ready to move to a new MX version, I run this script on my old machine, which shows me what *I* have installed, and then use it to decide what I want to install on my new machine.
Code: Select all
comm -23 <(apt-mark showmanual | sed 's/[: \t].*$//' | sort -u) <( { sed 's/[: \t].*$//' /usr/share/antiX/installed-packages.txt ; dpkg-query -W -f '${Depends}\n' | sed 's/([^)]*)//g; s/ //g; s/,/\n/g' | grep -vF '|' ; } | sort -u) > Packages-installed-by-me.txt
I then use this file to create a script to install apps that I still want, and then use the script to install it all.

I also create my new machine 100% in a VM, then once it is tested and ready to roll, I snapshot it, write it out to a pocket drive and then install to my machine. (Testing several times along the way on other machines before I overwrite mine:-) )

And, of course, I have backups and have also just copied out my home folder and everything under it.

I used your script and it is not working for me. I have got this output comm: /dev/fd/63: No such file or directory

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 2:33 am**

I have figure out a way to migrate, please comment on this proposed approach

1.-Run this script on the old machine, which shows what is installed

You need to type Ctrl + Shift + V (to avoid weird characters from appearing)

Code: Select all

# Run the command and store the output
output=$(apt list --installed)

# Define the path to the output file
output_file="$HOME/Desktop/packages_install_script.txt"

# Write the script header to the output file
echo "#!/bin/bash" > "$output_file"
echo "" >> "$output_file"

# Loop through each line of the command output
while IFS= read -r line; do
  # Extract the package name from each line
  package=$(echo "$line" | awk '{print $1}')

  # Skip the lines that don't contain package names
  if [[ -n $package ]]; then
    # Append the installation command for each package to the output file
    echo "sudo apt install $package -y" >> "$output_file"
  fi
done <<< "$output"

# Provide execution permission to the output file
chmod +x "$output_file"

# Display a success message
echo "Package installation script generated successfully at $output_file"

2.- Install the APT Packages that are not found into the new mx version

Code: Select all

 Define the path to the packages_install_script.txt file
script_file="$HOME/Desktop/packages_install_script.txt"

# Check if the script file exists
if [ -f "$script_file" ]; then
  # Read the package names from the script file
  package_names=$(grep 'sudo apt install' "$script_file" | awk '{print $4}')
  
  # Loop through each package name
  for package in $package_names; do
    # Check if the package is already installed
    if ! dpkg -s "$package" >/dev/null 2>&1; then
      # Install the package
      sudo apt install "$package" -y
    fi
  done
  
  echo "Package installation completed."
else
  echo "Error: packages_install_script.txt file not found on the Desktop."
fi

#

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 4:38 am**

@anzus101
Have you tried the MX tool User Installed Packages?

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 5:30 am**

limotux wrote: Sat Jun 10, 2023 8:58 am Anyway, I have it now on the "new" old laptop, leaving it as is with defaults. I will see how things go when the next release comes out.

Congratulation.
Don't forget there are many defaults you can change and backup for the next install without loosing support.
MX is designed for that. I guess you can even find defaults so annoying that everybody wants to change them.
This video is for MX19 Xfce but about MX defaults and changing them it can still be relevant:

Things to do after installing MX Linux
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aESEb8lTvz4

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 7:49 am**

Well, I am doing something.
I just created file bookworm.list in /etc/apt/sources.list.d/ containing only deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm main contrib non-free

Then:

sudo apt update

sudo apt upgrade

I will let you know how it goes!

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 8:57 am**

Note that with the bookworm release non-free drivers have been moved from repository non-free to non-free-firmware. You might want to add that in your sources. You probably also need the security and updates lists down the line.

Also the official Debian documentation says to run sudo apt full-upgrade for a release upgrade. This enables the packet manager to remove conflicting packages. Also I don't exactly know how the existance of both bullseye and bookwork sources is being handled. The documentation states to replace and not just add the new release.

I just updated my Debian machine yesterday, so I know that pretty accurately :D

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:25 am**

Well, as I have been warned, after doing this I got lots of errors trying to update!
I better stick with the "official" procedures
I will play with it a little before I reinstall!
You know why I am doing all this! I strongly believe doing something will teach you much better than just studying it.

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:38 am**

It'll at least teach how to install really well *giggle*

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 10:01 am**

limotux wrote: Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:25 am Well, as I have been warned, after doing this I got lots of errors trying to update!
You know why I am doing all this! I strongly believe doing something will teach you much better than just studying it.

Not very surprised you got "lots of errors" - but yes, getting errors by doing something teaches more - and more effectively - than reading about possible errors and fearfully remaining idle

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 10:37 am**

limotux wrote: Sun Jun 11, 2023 9:25 am Well, as I have been warned, after doing this I got lots of errors trying to update!
I better stick with the "official" procedures

Hey, it is fun to experiment. Have one install as your main, workforce, and another for testing, learning and having fun.

I too wanted to have rolling system when I discovered Linux. But over time I figured out, I was way too noob for occasional glitches, that can and will happen sooner or later on rolling systems. I was always waiting few days before I updated my system, so I could see other's users problems and solutions. More users had a problems, longer I was waiting with updating my own system.

Then I realized, I don't need this headache. I'm too lazy to go over few 100 posts every time, before I want to update my system. Many of the problems and solutions I didn't even understand! So I decided I'm too green for this and went to safer more stable flavors of Linux such as Mint etc... When I found out about MX and it's tools, I was hooked. I can't go anywhere else now. Snapshot tool is one of the reasons. Simplicity, stability and bunch of very useful tools that make my day. What else I could want...

Plus, there are some apps, that are newer versions than, if I would have stock Debian. Win-win!

And I hope MX never goes unstable rolling part, since I'm staying noob. Not tinkering with the system, just using it

Posted: **Sun Jun 11, 2023 12:15 pm**

hebelwirkung wrote: Sun Jun 11, 2023 10:01 am Not very surprised you got "lots of errors" - but yes, getting errors by doing something teaches more - and more effectively - than reading about possible errors and fearfully remaining idle

Neither me @hebelwirkung ! I just wanted to see it myself.

Buck Fankers wrote: Sun Jun 11, 2023 10:37 am
Hey, it is fun to experiment. Have one install as your main, workforce, and another for testing, learning and having fun.

I too wanted to have rolling system when I discovered Linux. But over time I figured out, I was way too noob for occasional glitches, that can and will happen sooner or later on rolling systems. I was always waiting few days before I updated my system, so I could see other's users problems and solutions. More users had a problems, longer I was waiting with updating my own system.

Then I realized, I don't need this headache. I'm too lazy to go over few 100 posts every time, before I want to update my system. Many of the problems and solutions I didn't even understand! So I decided I'm too green for this and went to safer more stable flavors of Linux such as Mint etc... When I found out about MX and it's tools, I was hooked. I can't go anywhere else now. Snapshot tool is one of the reasons. Simplicity, stability and bunch of very useful tools that make my day. What else I could want...

Plus, there are some apps, that are newer versions than, if I would have stock Debian. Win-win!

And I hope MX never goes unstable rolling part, since I'm staying noob. Not tinkering with the system, just using it

Well @Buck Fankers I can I understand what you are talking about. I've been there myself worried of the idea of a rolling release and getting "untested" updates.
I have been on Linux since 2000, but yet I can't call myself an expert or a techie. I am just a user!
My experience, after I got retired I had enough time to try new things as I am always doing. So I started 2 years ago distrohopping like crazy for a full year. I tried everything out there, RPM, DEB, Gentoo, BSD,... rolling releases, and "long term" releases...
After a year of distrohopping I discovered (well just my point of view, and I hope I won't get banned) Arch based distros have one good thing I liked (my taste), they come as just a basic operating system, a desktop environment, a browser (usually firefox) and a minimal set of "essential" apps. I noticed the performance was much faster and lighter than other distros.

The most important point (your concern) I discovered that having updates from a rolling release does not mean by any way they are not tested. They are tested for sure. Maybe not long enough like other distros but they fit the bill. Simply speaking, I agree with you and all of you here that non rolling distros are sort of bullet proof. But for me I thought why would I need a bullet proof car if I am not driving in a war zone! I have glass windows, wind shields that are working fine in blocking heat or cold, or dust. But why would I need the glass to be bullet proof?! (unless I am so unlucky and get a bullet somehow)

I have been on a specific and only one rolling release after distrohopping for a year, that is almost full year now . I just installed only once and that's all. I am getting updates same as non rolling releases get updates but more frequently without a glitch, not a single glitch for a year. Just a few days ago I encountered something a bit funny, I was updating, and just pressing "Enter" to give the defaults in the prompt (I generally prefer to go with defaults) to end up with an error message. But this never caused anything to stop working, it was just a message that an app was not updated. I asked at the forum (this was the first "error" I encountered in a year) and in a few minutes I got the solution, he asked me to read the message that was saying something like "Do you want to keep the old version" and the default was "Y" not "n", so I just repeated and read the prompt and answered "n" and things went fine.

Honestly I did not have any serious problem or even a trivial problem in a full year, even if you call the just mentioned issue a problem nothing really stopped working, it was just simply working as expected. Again, why would I need a bullet proof glass if I am not in a war zone. For sure I have to admit having a bullet proof glass is a plus and better for sure, but what is the point.
Honestly as far as I think and know sometimes NVIDIA may need special attention (but it is not difficult) I am not using any NVIDIA stuff so I can't tell. But I see some users having questions there about NVIDIA. If graphics is Intel it just works.
And honestly what I like about MX is how user friendly it is and the tools it give the users. It is impressive actually, especially the ease of fixing Grub breakage, creating a bootable snapshot from the current installed system... I love those.

This is why I am posting this from another MX fresh install of MX! But I promise I will "try" and not be naughty again and mess up my system agin.
(oops! though I promised I am going to change the default boot to systemd)

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2023 2:04 am**

fehlix wrote: Fri Jun 09, 2023 5:50 am
asqwerth wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 9:23 pm
Stevo wrote: Thu Jun 08, 2023 4:34 pm

I didn't follow the development thread, so I don't know if that's because it uses features only available in MX 21 and up, or just hasn't been packaged for MX 19.
No idea. @fehlix ?
Will do an translation refresh together with an adjustment to have it also run on MX19, asap.

Just to report that user-installed-packages (UIP) is now in the MX19 repo. I installed it in my MX19 system on my laptop, and it works to generate the list of packages I'd installed. Thanks, fehlix!

I think this will be very helpful for those who are still on MX19 and need to consider installing either MX21 or MX23 when MX19 is EOL in April 2024. [IMO, unless your hardware is very old, you should go for MX23 and give yourself a full 5 years of use].

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2023 4:33 am**

limotux wrote: Sun Jun 11, 2023 12:15 pm I agree with you and all of you here that non rolling distros are sort of bullet proof.

Not sure anyone here suggested non-rolling was "sort of bullet proof". It isn't. In Linux, as in life, nothing is. (Even MX 19 had an update glitch recently, resulting in a system that wouldn't boot. And MX, in my experience, is as safe and sound as any distro out there.) Just saying. It's wise not to let wishful thinking get the better of the facts.

What definitely is covered by observable facts though is that a rolling release far more frequently offers many more opportunities for stuff to break than a carefully maintained stable one. And with that in mind, it's up to the individual to what extent he's happy to live in danger land...

Posted: **Mon Jun 12, 2023 5:21 am**

hebelwirkung wrote: Mon Jun 12, 2023 4:33 am
limotux wrote: Sun Jun 11, 2023 12:15 pm I agree with you and all of you here that non rolling distros are sort of bullet proof.
Not sure anyone here suggested non-rolling was "sort of bullet proof". It isn't. In Linux, as in life, nothing is. (Even MX 19 had an update glitch recently, resulting in a system that wouldn't boot. And MX, in my experience, is as safe and sound as any distro out there.) Just saying. It's wise not to let wishful thinking get the better of the facts.

What definitely is covered by observable facts though is that a rolling release far more frequently offers many more opportunities for stuff to break than a carefully maintained stable one. And with that in mind, it's up to the individual to what extent he's happy to live in danger land...

In my opinion very well written. One year of success with rolling upgrade in one distro doesn't in itself proof anything significantly at all.
If anyone think it does it is likely just reveling the uncertainties and doubts they for good reasons have to live with all the time below.

From here thanks to the developers for participating in the discussion.
I don't think rolling upgrade needs a very high priority but discussing it now and then can perhaps help clearing the road for it sometime in the future.

Posted: **Tue Jun 20, 2023 3:36 am**

asqwerth wrote: Mon Jun 12, 2023 2:04 am Just to report that user-installed-packages (UIP) is now in the MX19 repo. I installed it in my MX19 system on my laptop, and it works to generate the list of packages I'd installed. Thanks, fehlix!

Although I got some updates in the meantime, (and today again), I can not find it in my MX-19 installation:

k20230620-093514.png

What do I miss?

Code: Select all

Snapshot created on: 20221106_1515
System:    Kernel: 4.19.0-24-amd64 x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 8.3.0 
           parameters: BOOT_IMAGE=/boot/vmlinuz-4.19.0-24-amd64 
           root=UUID=<filter> ro quiet 
           Desktop: Xfce 4.14.2 tk: Gtk 3.24.5 info: xfce4-panel wm: xfwm 4.14.0 vt: 7 
           dm: LightDM 1.26.0 Distro: MX-19.4_x64 patito feo November 06  2022 
           base: Debian GNU/Linux 10 (buster) 
Machine:   Type: Desktop System: Hewlett-Packard product: HP ProDesk 600 G1 TWR v: N/A 
           serial: <filter> Chassis: type: 6 serial: <filter> 
           Mobo: Hewlett-Packard model: 18E7 serial: <filter> BIOS: Hewlett-Packard 
           v: L01 v02.77 date: 04/17/2019 
CPU:       Info: Quad Core model: Intel Core i5-4570 bits: 64 type: MCP arch: Haswell family: 6 
           model-id: 3C (60) stepping: 3 microcode: 28 cache: L2: 6 MiB 
           flags: avx avx2 lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 ssse3 vmx bogomips: 25541 
           Speed: 1485 MHz min/max: 800/3600 MHz Core speeds (MHz): 1: 1485 2: 1592 3: 1442 
           4: 1578 
           Vulnerabilities: Type: itlb_multihit status: KVM: Split huge pages 
           Type: l1tf mitigation: PTE Inversion; VMX: conditional cache flushes, SMT disabled 
           Type: mds mitigation: Clear CPU buffers; SMT disabled 
           Type: meltdown mitigation: PTI 
           Type: mmio_stale_data status: Unknown: No mitigations 
           Type: retbleed status: Not affected 
           Type: spec_store_bypass 
           mitigation: Speculative Store Bypass disabled via prctl and seccomp 
           Type: spectre_v1 mitigation: usercopy/swapgs barriers and __user pointer sanitization 
           Type: spectre_v2 mitigation: Retpolines, IBPB: conditional, IBRS_FW, STIBP: disabled, 
           RSB filling, PBRSB-eIBRS: Not affected 
           Type: srbds mitigation: Microcode 
           Type: tsx_async_abort status: Not affected 
Graphics:  Device-1: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v3/4th Gen Core Processor Integrated Graphics 
           vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: i915 v: kernel bus-ID: 00:02.0 chip-ID: 8086:0412 
           class-ID: 0300 
           Display: x11 server: X.Org 1.20.4 compositor: xfwm4 v: 4.14.0 driver: 
           loaded: modesetting unloaded: fbdev,vesa display-ID: :0.0 screens: 1 
           Screen-1: 0 s-res: 1920x1080 s-dpi: 96 s-size: 508x285mm (20.0x11.2") 
           s-diag: 582mm (22.9") 
           Monitor-1: VGA-1 res: 1920x1080 hz: 60 dpi: 92 size: 531x299mm (20.9x11.8") 
           diag: 609mm (24") 
           OpenGL: renderer: Mesa DRI Intel Haswell Desktop v: 4.5 Mesa 18.3.6 compat-v: 3.0 
           direct render: Yes 
Audio:     Device-1: Intel Xeon E3-1200 v3/4th Gen Core Processor HD Audio 
           vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus-ID: 00:03.0 
           chip-ID: 8086:0c0c class-ID: 0403 
           Device-2: Intel 8 Series/C220 Series High Definition Audio vendor: Hewlett-Packard 
           driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel bus-ID: 00:1b.0 chip-ID: 8086:8c20 class-ID: 0403 
           Sound Server-1: ALSA v: k4.19.0-24-amd64 running: yes 
           Sound Server-2: JACK v: 1.9.12 running: no 
           Sound Server-3: PulseAudio v: 12.2 running: yes 
Network:   Device-1: Intel Ethernet I217-LM vendor: Hewlett-Packard driver: e1000e v: 3.2.6-k 
           port: f080 bus-ID: 00:19.0 chip-ID: 8086:153a class-ID: 0200 
           IF: eth0 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter> 
           IF-ID-1: vboxnet0 state: down mac: <filter> 
           IF-ID-2: vboxnet1 state: down mac: <filter> 
Drives:    Local Storage: total: 2.17 TiB used: 586.43 GiB (26.4%) 
           SMART Message: Unable to run smartctl. Root privileges required. 
           ID-1: /dev/sda maj-min: 8:0 vendor: Silicon Power model: SPCC Solid State Disk 
           size: 238.47 GiB block-size: physical: 512 B logical: 512 B speed: 6.0 Gb/s type: SSD 
           serial: <filter> rev: T1.3 scheme: MBR 
           ID-2: /dev/sdb maj-min: 8:16 vendor: Silicon Power model: SPCC Solid State Disk 
           size: 119.24 GiB block-size: physical: 512 B logical: 512 B speed: 6.0 Gb/s type: SSD 
           serial: <filter> rev: 3A0 scheme: MBR 
           ID-3: /dev/sdc maj-min: 8:32 vendor: Toshiba model: HDWD120 size: 1.82 TiB 
           block-size: physical: 4096 B logical: 512 B speed: 6.0 Gb/s type: HDD rpm: 7200 
           serial: <filter> rev: ACF0 scheme: GPT 
Partition: ID-1: / raw-size: 230.47 GiB size: 225.79 GiB (97.97%) used: 90.06 GiB (39.9%) 
           fs: ext4 dev: /dev/sda1 maj-min: 8:1 
Swap:      Kernel: swappiness: 15 (default 60) cache-pressure: 100 (default) 
           ID-1: swap-1 type: partition size: 32 GiB used: 1.45 GiB (4.5%) priority: -2 
           dev: /dev/sdc1 maj-min: 8:33 
Sensors:   System Temperatures: cpu: 29.8 C mobo: 27.8 C 
           Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A 
Repos:     Packages: 2780 note: see --pkg apt: 2752 lib: 1474 flatpak: 28 
           No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list 
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian-stable-updates.list 
           1: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian buster-updates main contrib non-free
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian.list 
           1: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian buster main contrib non-free
           2: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian-security buster/updates main contrib non-free
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/enpass.list 
           1: deb https://apt.enpass.io/ stable main
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/google-earth-pro.list 
           1: deb [arch=amd64] http://dl.google.com/linux/earth/deb/ stable main
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/mx.list 
           1: deb https://mx-linux.ethz.ch/mx-packages/mx/repo/ buster main non-free
           2: deb https://mx-linux.ethz.ch/mx-packages/mx/testrepo/ buster test
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/softmaker.list 
           1: deb http://shop.softmaker.com/repo/apt stable non-free
           No active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/various.list 
           Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/vivaldi.list 
           1: deb [arch=amd64] http://repo.vivaldi.com/stable/deb/ stable main
Info:      Processes: 315 Uptime: 9d 1h 6m wakeups: 159 Memory: 15.56 GiB 
           used: 10.21 GiB (65.6%) Init: SysVinit v: 2.93 runlevel: 5 default: 5 tool: systemctl 
           Compilers: gcc: 8.3.0 alt: 8 Shell: quick-system-in default: Bash v: 5.0.3 
           running-in: quick-system-in inxi: 3.3.06

Posted: **Tue Jun 20, 2023 4:45 am**

Jakob77 wrote: Mon Jun 12, 2023 5:21 am
hebelwirkung wrote: Mon Jun 12, 2023 4:33 am What definitely is covered by observable facts though is that a rolling release far more frequently offers many more opportunities for stuff to break than a carefully maintained stable one.
In my opinion very well written. One year of success with rolling upgrade in one distro doesn't in itself proof anything significantly at all.

I first started using Linux as a daily driver on a machine onto which I'd installed Antergos, an Arch-based system. After five weeks and more spontaneous kernel upgrades than I can remember, I gave up and switched to Mint. Part of my reasoning was that I had DKMS modules that needed to be recompiled every time a kernel update happened, and those recompile sessions could last 20 minutes and potentially make my machine unusable if they failed.

Eventually, someone informed me that I could have switched to an LTS kernel to get fewer kernel updates but by then it was too late. The idea of a rolling release is pretty appealing -- I mean think about it. Install the distro once and never have to go through a major dist-upgrade ever again? That sounds amazing. But the counterpoint to that panacea is that any new update of a fresh package may not be thoroughly tested & could easily brick your machine and require manual intervention. One can pick a safer LTS channel for their kernel in a rolling release, but is there an LTS channel for graphics, sound, coreutils, network drivers, Python, compilers, and bootloader? Probably not.

Posted: **Tue Jun 20, 2023 6:41 am**

Duliwi wrote: Tue Jun 20, 2023 3:36 am
asqwerth wrote: Mon Jun 12, 2023 2:04 am Just to report that user-installed-packages (UIP) is now in the MX19 repo. I installed it in my MX19 system on my laptop, and it works to generate the list of packages I'd installed. Thanks, fehlix!
Although I got some updates in the meantime, (and today again), I can not find it in my MX-19 installation:
k20230620-093514.png

What do I miss?

To be installed.

Posted: **Tue Jun 20, 2023 7:45 am**

fehlix wrote: Tue Jun 20, 2023 6:41 am To be installed.

I see.

I have found it. Thank you.

I have 105 packages, that I have installed by myself.
(But it looks like Flatpaks are not in the list.)

MX Linux Forum

Simply installing New Releases

Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases

Re: Simply installing New Releases