MX Linux Forum

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 3:36 am**

Hello
Exasperated, but will do best to summarize as briefly as can. Couple of days ago was able to start backups to new microSDs, in preparation for making a snapshot; a hiccup or two, but was able to get one microSD done. Today, still trying to fix image thumbnail issues so tried removing excess image bits and pieces eg webp and 2 thunar leftovers ... removing the webp pixbuf file removed eom, so had to reinstall eom. Later installed etherape, due to browser news stuff, then tried to remove it after serious issues detailed below showed, incase it's it that triggered issues somehow, but the uninstall seized up package manager. [Checked now and etherape was uninstalled] Doing these bits as snapshot preparation too.

First noticed worse issues when started to continue backups to new sandisk microSD yesterday. Card unmounting itself/going read-only etc, which I saw online meant it could be faulty ... brand new, but tried format [same exfat that's always worked and works on previous cards], but problems continued. Tried second new microSD: same. Gave up trying to use microSDs, as all they do is copy a bit then blip off and everything grinds to a halt. Even inserting previous microSD, sometimes the issue of the card unmounting itself and being inaccessible happens, and I know these cards work fine otherwise.

Decided to try to lanshare stuff across to laptop (mx21), for the 1st time on new machine, so at least have a backup somewhere ... the bigger the file/folder the slower the transfer, often to the point of never transferring. It has taken me absolutely HOURS getting some backups done tiny piece at a time with lanshare.

Had new machine for two months. This is so bad it even made me wonder if it's hardware failure or a virus/hacked, but otherwise pc runs things perfectly. Overall am very concerned about constant permissions issues that never existed on previous mx21, which had been bothering me before these worse issues. More irritated by the day about this, and really putting me off computer, updating, bothering. I need to know I have the ownership, and am hitting too many blocks.

Is it the xfce stuff under Mate that's causing issues? Want to run sysV and Mate, and I like MX! [Had installed Mate myself, over MX 23.4, as don't think any respins were updated yet at that point] Did I miss installing something?
Is it pipewire/wayland stuff?
Is it liquorix kernel stuff? ntfs3 running somehow instead of ntfs-3g? Don't want to update the kernel to higher; prefer to go lower, but new machine wouldn't run on non-liquorix/lower kernels. Seeing in this thread potential issues liquorix running ntfs3 can do: viewtopic.php?p=811623&hilit=pipewire+p ... ns#p811623
Why would running PCManFM affect desktop so badly that suddenly couldn't run any software on 2nd monitor? Had to remove it, after years of use, and really want to be able to reinstall it, but be sure it won't affect anything else when run ... it's the only software that showed more image permissions, including that nothing was set to run a faulty image preview: as soon as clicked that permission to 'on', fixed the image. Do art as main thing, so am hitting image issue a lot, where preview doesn't form into final image; trying find solution to that also. Couldn't find anywhere any relevant settings about whether PCManFM has any control over desktop or not, so was only left with uninstall as the fix for now.
How can I get full guaranteed ownership over functions?
Is it something in the bios as well?
Reading about polkit issues on another thread, about sysV and systemd-shim. Is this part of the issue?
Would turning off mitigations fix things? [unsure how to do that]
Any of these areas now require computer to be forced to be online? I'm offline 99% of the time, network turned off.
What has changed since previous mx21 I ran without any of these issues happening?

Posting this instead of trying out various things am finding online regarding changing permissions, just incase I mess things up via trying that. Would greatly appreciate advice.

Code: Select all

Snapshot created on: 20241215_1628
System:
  Kernel: 6.11.10-1-liquorix-amd64 [6.11-15~mx23ahs] arch: x86_64 bits: 64 compiler: gcc v: 12.2.0 parameters: audit=0
    intel_pstate=disable BOOT_IMAGE=/vmlinuz-6.11.10-1-liquorix-amd64 root=UUID=<filter> ro quiet
    splash
  Desktop: MATE v: 1.26.0 info: mate-panel wm: marco v: 1.26.1 vt: 7 dm: LightDM v: 1.26.0
    Distro: MX-23.4_x64 Libretto December 15 2024 base: Debian GNU/Linux 12 (bookworm)
Machine:
  Type: Desktop System: ASUS product: N/A v: N/A serial: <superuser required>
  Mobo: ASUSTeK model: PRIME A620M-A v: Rev 1.xx serial: <superuser required>
    UEFI: American Megatrends v: 2613 date: 04/12/2024
CPU:
  Info: model: AMD Ryzen 7 7700 bits: 64 type: MT MCP arch: Zen 4 gen: 5 level: v4 note: check
    built: 2022+ process: TSMC n5 (5nm) family: 0x19 (25) model-id: 0x61 (97) stepping: 2
    microcode: 0xA601206
  Topology: cpus: 1x cores: 8 tpc: 2 threads: 16 smt: enabled cache: L1: 512 KiB
    desc: d-8x32 KiB; i-8x32 KiB L2: 8 MiB desc: 8x1024 KiB L3: 32 MiB desc: 1x32 MiB
  Speed (MHz): avg: 1983 high: 5150 min/max: 545/5389 boost: enabled scaling:
    driver: amd-pstate-epp governor: performance cores: 1: 5149 2: 545 3: 5150 4: 5150 5: 5149 6: 545
    7: 5149 8: 545 9: 545 10: 545 11: 545 12: 545 13: 545 14: 545 15: 545 16: 545 bogomips: 121597
  Flags: avx avx2 ht lm nx pae sse sse2 sse3 sse4_1 sse4_2 sse4a ssse3 svm
  Vulnerabilities:
  Type: gather_data_sampling status: Not affected
  Type: itlb_multihit status: Not affected
  Type: l1tf status: Not affected
  Type: mds status: Not affected
  Type: meltdown status: Not affected
  Type: mmio_stale_data status: Not affected
  Type: reg_file_data_sampling status: Not affected
  Type: retbleed status: Not affected
  Type: spec_rstack_overflow mitigation: Safe RET
  Type: spec_store_bypass mitigation: Speculative Store Bypass disabled via prctl
  Type: spectre_v1 mitigation: usercopy/swapgs barriers and __user pointer sanitization
  Type: spectre_v2 mitigation: Enhanced / Automatic IBRS; IBPB: conditional; STIBP: always-on;
    RSB filling; PBRSB-eIBRS: Not affected; BHI: Not affected
  Type: srbds status: Not affected
  Type: tsx_async_abort status: Not affected
Graphics:
  Device-1: AMD Navi 33 [Radeon RX 7700S/7600S] vendor: Sapphire driver: amdgpu v: kernel
    arch: RDNA-3 code: Navi-3x process: TSMC n5 (5nm) built: 2022+ pcie: gen: 4 speed: 16 GT/s
    lanes: 8 ports: active: HDMI-A-1 empty: DP-1, DP-2, DP-3, Writeback-1 bus-ID: 03:00.0
    chip-ID: 1002:7480 class-ID: 0300
  Device-2: AMD Raphael vendor: ASUSTeK driver: amdgpu v: kernel arch: RDNA-2 code: Navi-2x
    process: TSMC n7 (7nm) built: 2020-22 pcie: gen: 4 speed: 16 GT/s lanes: 16 ports:
    active: HDMI-A-2 empty: DP-4,DP-5,Writeback-2 bus-ID: 0d:00.0 chip-ID: 1002:164e class-ID: 0300
    temp: 40.0 C
  Display: x11 server: X.Org v: 1.21.1.7 compositor: marco v: 1.26.1 driver: X: loaded: amdgpu
    unloaded: fbdev,modesetting,vesa dri: radeonsi gpu: amdgpu display-ID: :0 screens: 1
  Screen-1: 0 s-res: 4480x1440 s-dpi: 96 s-size: 1185x381mm (46.65x15.00")
    s-diag: 1245mm (49.01")
  Monitor-1: HDMI-A-1 mapped: HDMI-A-0 pos: primary,left model: BenQ LCD serial: <filter>
    built: 2021 res: 2560x1440 hz: 60 dpi: 109 gamma: 1.2 size: 597x336mm (23.5x13.23")
    diag: 686mm (27") ratio: 16:9 modes: max: 2560x1440 min: 720x400
  Monitor-2: HDMI-A-2 mapped: HDMI-A-1-1 pos: right model: AAA built: 2016 res: 1920x1080 hz: 60
    dpi: 85 size: 575x323mm (22.64x12.72") modes: max: 1920x1080 min: 720x400
  API: OpenGL v: 4.6 Mesa 24.2.8-1~bpo12+1 renderer: AMD Radeon RX 7600 (radeonsi navi33 LLVM
    15.0.6 DRM 3.59 6.11.10-1-liquorix-amd64) direct-render: Yes
Audio:
  Device-1: AMD driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel pcie: gen: 4 speed: 16 GT/s lanes: 8
    bus-ID: 03:00.1 chip-ID: 1002:ab30 class-ID: 0403
  Device-2: AMD Rembrandt Radeon High Definition Audio vendor: ASUSTeK driver: snd_hda_intel
    v: kernel pcie: gen: 4 speed: 16 GT/s lanes: 16 bus-ID: 0d:00.1 chip-ID: 1002:1640 class-ID: 0403
  Device-3: AMD Family 17h/19h HD Audio vendor: ASUSTeK driver: snd_hda_intel v: kernel pcie:
    gen: 4 speed: 16 GT/s lanes: 16 bus-ID: 0d:00.6 chip-ID: 1022:15e3 class-ID: 0403
  API: ALSA v: k6.11.10-1-liquorix-amd64 status: kernel-api tools: alsamixer,amixer
  Server-1: PipeWire v: 1.0.0 status: active with: 1: pipewire-pulse status: active
    2: wireplumber status: active 3: pipewire-alsa type: plugin 4: pw-jack type: plugin
    tools: pactl,pw-cat,pw-cli,wpctl
Network:
  Device-1: Realtek RTL8111/8168/8411 PCI Express Gigabit Ethernet vendor: ASUSTeK PRIME B450M-A
    driver: r8169 v: kernel pcie: gen: 1 speed: 2.5 GT/s lanes: 1 port: e000 bus-ID: 09:00.0
    chip-ID: 10ec:8168 class-ID: 0200
  IF: eth0 state: up speed: 1000 Mbps duplex: full mac: <filter>
  IF-ID-1: tun0 state: unknown speed: 10000 Mbps duplex: full mac: N/A
Drives:
  Local Storage: total: 20.01 TiB used: 17.93 TiB (89.6%)
  SMART Message: Unable to run smartctl. Root privileges required.
  ID-1: /dev/nvme0n1 maj-min: 259:0 vendor: Western Digital model: WD Blue SN580 1TB
    size: 931.51 GiB block-size: physical: 512 B logical: 512 B speed: 63.2 Gb/s lanes: 4 type: SSD
    serial: <filter> rev: 281010WD temp: 31.9 C scheme: GPT
Partition:
  ID-1: / raw-size: 930.25 GiB size: 914.57 GiB (98.31%) used: 173.79 GiB (19.0%) fs: ext4
    dev: /dev/dm-0 maj-min: 253:0 mapped: luks-<filter>
  ID-2: /boot raw-size: 1024 MiB size: 973.4 MiB (95.06%) used: 215.1 MiB (22.1%) fs: ext4
    dev: /dev/nvme0n1p2 maj-min: 259:2
  ID-3: /boot/efi raw-size: 256 MiB size: 252 MiB (98.46%) used: 274 KiB (0.1%) fs: vfat
    dev: /dev/nvme0n1p1 maj-min: 259:1
Swap:
  Kernel: swappiness: 15 (default 60) cache-pressure: 100 (default)
  ID-1: swap-1 type: file size: 8 GiB used: 0 KiB (0.0%) priority: -2 file: /swap/swap
Sensors:
  System Temperatures: cpu: 49.2 C mobo: 38.0 C
  Fan Speeds (RPM): N/A
  GPU: device: amdgpu temp: 33.0 C mem: 30.0 C fan: 0 watts: 4.00 device: amdgpu temp: 40.0 C
Repos:
  Packages: pm: dpkg pkgs: 2329 libs: 1158 tools: apt,apt-get,aptitude,nala,synaptic pm: rpm
    pkgs: 0
  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 bookworm-updates main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/debian.list
    1: deb http://deb.debian.org/debian bookworm main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
    2: deb http://security.debian.org/debian-security bookworm-security main contrib non-free non-free-firmware
  Active apt repos in: /etc/apt/sources.list.d/mx.list
    1: deb http://mxlinux.mirrors.uk2.net/packages/mx/repo/ bookworm main non-free
Info:
  Processes: 366 Uptime: 1h 0m wakeups: 1 Memory: 62.02 GiB used: 2.57 GiB (4.1%) Init: SysVinit
  v: 3.06 runlevel: 5 default: graphical tool: systemctl Compilers: gcc: 12.2.0 alt: 12
  Client: shell wrapper v: 5.2.15-release inxi: 3.3.26
Boot Mode: UEFI

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 7:13 am**

Based on bitter experience:

The first thing to do before you make any changes be sure you have a full backup, and test that you can restore it.
This will allow you the option of starting over when/if you go further and further down a rabbit hole of increasing modifications.
As a suggestion: Use mx-snapshot, cross your fingers and hope no errors show up, and save the resultant .ISO file off your computer

On the subject of slow transfers, look for advice on increasing the values of /proc/sys/vm/dirty_bytes and
/proc/sys/vm/dirty_background_bytes (Google or DuckDuck are your friends)

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 7:44 am**

Hello MikeR and thank you for your message. Wise advice to go ahead and at least get some kind of backup snapshot done in the interim. Definitely easier to do a 2nd one later, rather than reinstall everything from scratch. Will look up the transfer advice you've said, although I'm a bit nervous of me messing anything up by changing the innerds. Backups 1st is definitely on the list therefore, lol.

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 7:46 am**

@autumn wrote:

First noticed worse issues when started to continue backups to new sandisk microSD yesterday. Card unmounting itself/going read-only etc, which I saw online meant it could be faulty ... brand new, but tried format [same exfat that's always worked and works on previous cards], but problems continued. Tried second new microSD: same. Gave up trying to use microSDs, as all they do is copy a bit then blip off and everything grinds to a halt. Even inserting previous microSD, sometimes the issue of the card unmounting itself and being inaccessible happens, and I know these cards work fine otherwise.

Simple test: is this problem repeated if you back up to a USB thumb drive instead of an SD card?

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 8:50 am**

Thanks j2mcgreg. Great advice, and have done that. Has taken around 25 minutes to copy 3.4gb folder, watching speed go from 6.0mb/sec to 1.0mb/sec. Sped up very fast right at the end. Tried copying a larger file, old gog game from years back, but forgot that doing that from an external to USB probably isn't a useful test ... copied very fast until hit the 'file too large' issue. With microSD I format it to exFAT, so never need to worry if any file is large, and find that USBs wear out fast whereas microSDs seem to stand the test of time usually. Had been working fine on old machine, with much less ram, and surprised to find via search that performance is lower if have large ram ... it's an opensuse page, about changing dirty cache, which I found further to MikeR suggesting looking it up, but am unsure if should just follow the instructions there ... was thinking could try the two echo lines, then try the 3.4gb copy again, onto USB, to see if it's faster, then try on a microSD if it is.
https://www.suse.com/support/kb/doc/?id=000017857

EDIT: just tried to run the echo lines, with and without sudo, and permission denied for both.

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 8:58 am**

Forgot to add that this is current dirty_background_ratio:

sysctl vm.dirty_background_ratio ...
vm.dirty_background_ratio = 10

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 9:09 am**

autumn wrote: Tue Mar 04, 2025 8:50 am Thanks j2mcgreg. Great advice, and have done that. Has taken around 25 minutes to copy 3.4gb folder, watching speed go from 6.0mb/sec to 1.0mb/sec. Sped up very fast right at the end. Tried copying a larger file, old gog game from years back, but forgot that doing that from an external to USB probably isn't a useful test ... copied very fast until hit the 'file too large' issue. With microSD I format it to exFAT, so never need to worry if any file is large, and find that USBs wear out fast whereas microSDs seem to stand the test of time usually. Had been working fine on old machine, with much less ram, and surprised to find via search that performance is lower if have large ram ... it's an opensuse page, about changing dirty cache, which I found further to MikeR suggesting looking it up, but am unsure if should just follow the instructions there ... was thinking could try the two echo lines, then try the 3.4gb copy again, onto USB, to see if it's faster, then try on a microSD if it is.
https://www.suse.com/support/kb/doc/?id=000017857

I asked that question because I've always found built in SD card readers to be problematic at best, to the point where I now use an external USB SD card reader to transfer images from my camera to my laptop.

Posted: **Tue Mar 04, 2025 10:32 am**

Sorry, I should have said that it's not a built-in SD card reader. I'm using an adaptor, as you're right that the external readers work really well. Never used an inbuilt one tbh. Just managed to find a spare SD reader hadn't tried before, Anker this time, and a big 11gb copy went over in a couple of minutes! So maybe the microSD part of things was that the external reader was on the way out. Haven't tried a very big folder yet, but it's looking good.

EDIT: the 3.4gb folder that took 25m before has taken about 2m.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:37 am**

Just to add another issue unfortunately, again about unbelievably slow copying, particularly when larger files or folders involved. Using freefilesync and normally chucking some small videos over into the right folders results in a quick backup to externals, but, on doing that today, as prep before snapshot, it is taking forever. There's a huge row of yellow icons taking up first a fifth of the panel, then a quarter, now nearly a third, and this has gone on so far for over an hour and showing no sign of finishing soon. A new yellow icon pops up every time one of them completes. Puzzling to see only 11% of 64ram being used, when so much more could be, to surely make copying faster?

I also wanted to ask if it's better that I make separate threads for the other issues ... pcmanfm and permissions. Lanshare/slowness/freefilesync all relate, but pcmanfm and general permissions, which I hit up against further as detailed above, when tried to make changes regarding dirty settings, are different issues. I hadn't known if everything was related, hence originally putting everything in one thread, but can change that if it's better or what's normally done. Somebody must know what permission changes have happened since mx21, lol.

What panel looks like at the moment:

Looking in the monitoring center, a freefilesystem process, one of the 35 active, is using 7 threads and 2 cores, averaging 1mb write speed. With every slowness issue I'm seeing /dev/null is the first entry in Opened Files list, then /dev/urandom twice, then, in this instance, the video file location, and then it's destination.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 1:20 pm**

autumn wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:37 am Puzzling to see only 11% of 64ram being used, when so much more could be, to surely make copying faster?

Why would you expect a file copy operation to use more RAM than this? RAM is a computer's ability to store state locally. It's not the bottleneck in a file copying operation. In a bucket brigade, the ability to transfer water is limited by the number of buckets, not how much more water the reservoir is capable of holding.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 3:33 pm**

DukeComposed, thanks for posting but I don't understand much about RAM. All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance, and these pesky issues illustrated above show that to be so (my poor panel has recovered, as I blitzed the job and just manually backed things up). I'm not very tech, but concerned about the permissions/slow issues I keep hitting, and PCManFM/lanshare in with that. I'm trying to get to why some things are so slow which weren't in mx21, plus concerned e.g. that I couldn't change the dirty settings without or with sudo. Have at least got a snapshot done and running the live was 100% fine, so that's something good.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 3:54 pm**

autumn wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 3:33 pm All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance, and these pesky issues illustrated above show that to be so

Be precise. Profile, don't speculate. Post exact URLs to reference documents when you cite them.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 4:32 pm**

@autumn wrote:

All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance,

Sorry to burst your bubble, but that's nonsense.
Just remember that any computer operation is only going to go as fast as the slowest part involved can process the data. For example, a USB 2 port has a maximum transfer rate of 480 megabits/sec while a USB 3 port has a maximum transfer rate of 5 gigabits/sec. So if a USB 3 capable drive is inserted into a USB 2 port, that USB 2 port is going to be the bottleneck.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:46 pm**

DukeComposed wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 3:54 pm
autumn wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 3:33 pm All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance, and these pesky issues illustrated above show that to be so
Be precise. Profile, don't speculate. Post exact URLs to reference documents when you cite them.

I did. Please see post #5.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:52 pm**

j2mcgreg wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 4:32 pm @autumn wrote:
All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but that's nonsense.
Just remember that any computer operation is only going to go as fast as the slowest part involved can process the data. For example, a USB 2 port has a maximum transfer rate of 480 megabits/sec while a USB 3 port has a maximum transfer rate of 5 gigabits/sec. So if a USB 3 capable drive is inserted into a USB 2 port, that USB 2 port is going to be the bottleneck.

Best take that up with Opensuse, as that's where I saw it. Advice was to look up dirty settings, which I did, and that article came up at the top and seemed to clearly explain things. I don't know. Am not very tech. Just know there are significant issues with larger copies that didn't exist on mx21. Also issues with permissions, and this seems to affect PCManFM, lanshare, freefileshare, all kinds of things, and even since starting this thread I've found it not possible to change the dirty settings via sudo. There were none of these issues when running mx21, with the same setup (xfce/mate) and same programs installed, so I'm hoping to understand why and hope to find how to solve things.

Posted: **Wed Mar 05, 2025 11:12 pm**

autumn wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:46 pm I did. Please see post #5.

From your link: "Low performance may occur on a Linux NFS Client machine with a large amount of RAM, while writing large files to an NFS mount."

Are you running a SUSE? Are you writing to an NFS mount?

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 2:44 am**

When someone is told to generally search, you read links that all tend to cover generally the same, so you can get a ghist. That's what I did. The Suse link was the clearest explanation of those I read, and, as I said, I wasn't sure, but am experiencing poor performance on the new machine/64ram, whereas the old machine/16ram, on mx21, performed great. So the Suse link seemed to explain the general concept and issue best, as far as I could tell. Again, I'm asking advice, and posted the link and my obvious questions more to try to get to the bottom of things.

First you criticise no link, because you didn't bother to read the thread. Now you criticise the posted link. It's very clear you're not here to assist with the issues, so I've reported and blocked.

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 7:28 am**

autumn wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 9:52 pm
j2mcgreg wrote: Wed Mar 05, 2025 4:32 pm @autumn wrote:
All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance,
Sorry to burst your bubble, but that's nonsense.
Just remember that any computer operation is only going to go as fast as the slowest part involved can process the data. For example, a USB 2 port has a maximum transfer rate of 480 megabits/sec while a USB 3 port has a maximum transfer rate of 5 gigabits/sec. So if a USB 3 capable drive is inserted into a USB 2 port, that USB 2 port is going to be the bottleneck.
Best take that up with Opensuse, as that's where I saw it. Advice was to look up dirty settings, which I did, and that article came up at the top and seemed to clearly explain things. I don't know. Am not very tech. Just know there are significant issues with larger copies that didn't exist on mx21. Also issues with permissions, and this seems to affect PCManFM, lanshare, freefileshare, all kinds of things, and even since starting this thread I've found it not possible to change the dirty settings via sudo. There were none of these issues when running mx21, with the same setup (xfce/mate) and same programs installed, so I'm hoping to understand why and hope to find how to solve things.

I read your linked article and it really doesn't fit as a citation for your current problem:
-- It's specific to Suse Linux Enterprise Server
-- It makes no mention of the actual hardware involved
-- it infers, but doesn't categorically state, that Linux is Linux is Linux and it's not. A server environment is very different from the desktop environment that we offer with MX
-- it's out of date. SLES version 11 was released in 2010 and SLES version 15 went EOL in 2018. Linux is such a fast moving target that the seven year gap between SLES 15's EOL and now is equivalent to decades or centuries in other fields of study.

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 8:23 am**

I checked the reported SUSE issue, too, and some of their other materials that link to that document number 7010287. I agree with what j2mcgreg says above. Adding to that, the reported "large amount of RAM" was even back then, in this context, more RAM than what you are dealing with, autumn. The document was linked to in the SLES 11/12 OS Tuning & Optimization Guide at www.suse.com a decade ago, and it contains clarification that even then the "large amount of RAM" meant 128 gigabytes and above. It's a specific issue, in a different context and use case, and with parameters that don't match at all with what you are dealing with.

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 8:34 am**

I can only refer back to the obvious that I've already said ... no idea, not tech, trying to post and discuss things with a view to solutions, but all it turns into is deliberate criticising and no reference at all to the issues happening. I made the effort to look things up, yet am supposed to be some kind of tech einstein and know if what I'm reading is 100% right? Why would I be posting here if I was some kind of tech einstein?

Right now, after reading around more, I'm trying to install an antix version of the kernel, after seeing extreme slowness referred to in many places as a long-time kernel bug that crops up, and that seized up again for a while. I try to install a game, and it says it'll take 2 hours instead of the 10 minutes it used to. Permissions blocking this, that and the other, but apparently nobody who made mx23 has any idea what has changed. This is too much. Since there's no answer to clear issues, I'll try to seek somewhere Mate and sysV co-exist and receive support.

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 8:44 am**

autumn wrote: Thu Mar 06, 2025 8:34 am I can only refer back to the obvious that I've already said ... no idea, not tech, trying to post and discuss things with a view to solutions, but all it turns into is deliberate criticising and no reference at all to the issues happening. I made the effort to look things up, yet am supposed to be some kind of tech einstein and know if what I'm reading is 100% right?

Of course you don't need to be a tech einstein, haha :). And it's okay not to know stuff. Discussing about it is exactly the way to check whether you are on the right track. If you post something and say things like "All I know so far is I've seen the article which says more ram equals worse performance, and these pesky issues illustrated above show that to be so", then it's just normal discussion to respond by saying... hey, the article is dealing with a different thing, in a different context, and what you are seeing in your system doesn't "show that to be so", heh. That's what discussion is about. Calmly saying why something isn't the way you think is not personal and not "criticizing" in a negative way. So, yeah, the issue you are seeing is not about the amount of RAM on your machine.

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 10:10 am**

@autumn wrote:

Right now, after reading around more, I'm trying to install an antix version of the kernel

I think that you should reconsider that. Our sister distro, AntiX is aimed at computers that are much older than your rig and I strongly doubt that one of their kernels is going to be of any benefit to you. Your idea of regression could be a good one but an Antix kernel is going too far back. I think instead you should try experimenting with the Liquorix 6.9.12-2 or the 6.6.12-1, both of which were current to when your motherboard was released in Jan 2023.

Edited to add: Before you plunge into an action, ask us first if it's a good move. We have the knowledge and experience to keep you on the right track.

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 11:41 am**

+1 with j2mcgreg ! I think the 6.9.x liquorix is where I would head.

I have had a few strange things on the 6.11 loads, but the 6.9.x and 6.12.x appear to be much better on my 23/24 rigs.

Posted: **Thu Mar 06, 2025 1:01 pm**

Nokkaelaein wrote: Thu Mar 06, 2025 8:44 am That's what discussion is about. Calmly saying why something isn't the way you think is not personal and not "criticizing" in a negative way. So, yeah, the issue you are seeing is not about the amount of RAM on your machine.

The difference between research and random Googling is the critical thinking used in selecting your citations. More to the point, citing unrelated problems on unrelated systems in unrelated scenarios doesn't achieve much in diagnosing the actual issue, which I think still requires actual profiling of the throughput metrics being referenced here.

Posted: **Tue Mar 25, 2025 4:59 pm**

Just seen further responses. Thanks @j2mcgreg. Much appreciate pleasant post and good advice. Thanks to @CharlesV also, for the +1. I ended up installing antix 6.1 back then, and machine runs better generally (probably due to running older Mate?), but all the other issues are still there. Given up on them, as it's overwhelming tbh, but just wanted to say thanks.

MX Linux Forum

serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues

Re: serious issues with microSD/lanshare/PCManFM + image issues