The officially official Devuan Forum!

You are not logged in.

#1 Re: Installation » [SOLVED] Want to use startx instead of slim » 2024-03-17 08:54:49

OK, I resolved my "issues" installing a minimal

  devuan_daedalus_5.0.1_amd64_netinstall.iso

I put the "sysvinit" version on /dev/sda6, and "runit" on /dev/sda7.  In both cases, the "Software selection" consisted just "standard system utilities" [ie no "Desktop Environment"], and installation completed.  After installation, I added xorg, openbox, tint2, lxterminal, and was able to "startx" to produce a welcome "black screen" that I can work with!

I don't know why I found this so difficult, but thanks for your patience.

#2 Re: Installation » [SOLVED] Want to use startx instead of slim » 2024-03-16 14:08:58

@fsmithred,@rolfie:  whether I disable ALL X11 Software during installation or run "update-service --remove /etc/sv/slim" in the full XFCE4, reboot hangs.  In the latter, ctrl-alt-f2 allows tty login, and startx produces a functioning X11 desktop.  In neither of these cases have I done anything out of the ordinary.

Intel Core 2350M laptop.  I can't remember the command to list graphics card, but that can't be important.

#3 Re: Installation » [SOLVED] Want to use startx instead of slim » 2024-03-16 11:54:54

@fsmithred:  thanks, I will try that.  Tried it and it hung after the message saying that the network manager was starting.  I switched to tty2, and was able to login, but I am not sure what other daemons I have to prevent from running so that it will just work.

In the interim, I tried install [on a different partition] without any X11 packages, just Console stuff, and on reboot it stopped [hung] after the message "Starting bluetooth:  bluetoothd".  I guess no-one tried that yet.

#4 Re: Installation » [SOLVED] Want to use startx instead of slim » 2024-03-15 21:57:54

Thanks GlennW, but this looks like it doesn't apply to Runit, but I'll  study it further.

#5 Installation » [SOLVED] Want to use startx instead of slim » 2024-03-15 20:47:03

jacksprat
Replies: 13

New install of "devuan_daedalus_5.0.1_amd64_netinstall.iso" with XFCE4 as the Desktop.  That all worked, but I wanted to remove the "slim" Display Manager and login from the tty, starting X11 with "startx".   Have done this with Runit on Void Linux in the past, but thought I could achieve this on Devuan by moving /etc/runit/default/slim  to /etc/sv-old/ [from another system, not live].  However, when I reboot, the system hangs during the init phase.  I couldn't see why  this wouldn't "just work".  Can someone that has done this before me say what I am missing?  Thanks.

#6 Re: Devuan » APT source.list for Devuan 5.0.1 » 2024-02-15 19:30:03

Or you could type "l3<tab>", just 3 characters.  More seriously, I like  what @stevenhoneyman did with leafpad.

#7 Re: Devuan » APT source.list for Devuan 5.0.1 » 2024-02-13 17:28:11

Thanks for all your replies.  I will use l3afpad for now [can't see the difference].  None of the source.list alternatives worked.  I have to read further docs to find what I am missing.  At least such obscure packages as rfkill, xkbset and lsyncd are there!

Now that I see that leafpad was gtk2, which is not long for this world, it is good to see that https://github.com/stevenhoneyman is continuing development in l3afpad and gtk3.  I am pleased!

#8 Devuan » APT source.list for Devuan 5.0.1 » 2024-02-13 13:40:31

jacksprat
Replies: 14

I just installed Devuan 5.0.1, and wanted to use Leafpad.  I know it is available, but can't set the right /etc/apt/sources.list file entry to allow it to be installed with apt-get.  I have

     deb http://archive.devuan.org/merged ascii/main amd64

as the last line.  Is this correct?  Is there something else I need to do?  Thanks.

Package leafpad is not available, but is referred to by another package.
This may mean that the package is missing, has been obsoleted, or
is only available from another source

E: Package 'leafpad' has no installation candidate

#9 Re: Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-16 15:04:15

@fsmithred:  I just re-installed with mixed success.  I was able to skip bootloader, and it completed without crashing. However, on reboot, it failed with a familiar error:  it was expecting a FAT filesystem [ie it thinks it is UEFI], but after ctrl-D it continues on to a login prompt.  I have been here before, perhaps when I tried to install Devuan earlier in the year [or a Devuan-derived distribution].

I just got a libreboot laptop, which was delivered with Debian-proper and [I think] UEFI;  what horrors await once I have installed "something" to replace Debian?

minor update:  my libreboot seems to be MBR-based, since using fdisk I was forced to create the 4th partition as "extended" so that 5th etc were logical partitions.  Beyond confused about the role of UEFI.

#10 Re: Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-16 13:03:23

Thanks @fsmithred, I tried that but missed the option to skip the bootloader option;  I will give it another go.

#11 Re: Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-16 11:11:02

Thanks @Camtaf:  the computer has been an MBR system from the early days.  My only recourse may be to try a Devuan-derived distribution that uses a different installer.

#12 Re: Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-16 11:01:25

@fsmithred:  if I interupt Devuan installer as you indicate, then /sys/firmware/efi is indeed present.  The same when I run the Void Linux installer [live image], yet I was, as if by magic, able to go on with the installation on /dev/sda1 to create a full Void Linux system;  I just refused to let it scribble over my boot loader, which I grub-install from the safety of /dev/sda7.

So, my question remains:  why does the Devuan installer crash when /dev/sda1 is the target and is not a FAT filesystem?  No polite message saying "We would prefer if you would comply with the UEFI rules, and create a FAT partition at the start of the drive".

When I first setup this laptop, many years ago, I must have changed the BIOS settings to use MBR.  I have installed many distributions on /dev/sda1 over the years, and never had this problem.

Thanks for your patience.

#13 Re: Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-15 21:33:12

@fsmithred:  I have no problem booting the USB-based netinst installer, but it fails trying to install the bootloader.  It fails before I can select UEFI or MBR.  If I continue to the end, the system is left thinking that it is UEFI, and presumably looks for a FAT partition, which is not there [will never be there].

If only there was a shell script to install Devuan, then I could remove the UEFI part.  Without much investment of time, I cannot debug the Devuan installer.

#14 Re: Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-15 20:16:33

Thanks @delgado:  my MBR contains 3 primary, 1 extended an several partitions beyond that.  I have bootable partitions 2 and beyond, one containing Void linux from which I can run "grub-install /dev/sda" to process my grub.cfg.  I have been booting Linux like this for a decade or more on many computers.

The problem is that the Devuan installer failed in the boot loader step, which would have allowed me to tell it that I have an MBR-based system.  As a result, trying to boot /dev/sda1 [where I installed Devuan] stops during the init process, strangely BEFORE it can mount anything.  It thinks I have an UEFI system, and simply gives up [just like I am likely to do].

Devuan is not the first distribution which cannot live when MBR is encountered.  Same thing with Void Linux, where I had to edit the installer script, which was easily "hacked".

#15 Re: Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-15 18:42:12

Thanks @andyp67.  The drive has several partitions with different distributions [antix, void] that I do not want to distrurb.  If the Devuan installer hadn't failed, I would have declined the offer to scribble over my hand-crafted 8-line grub.cfg file.  Surely, I cannot be the only person using MBR BIOS computers?  The only faint memory was that trying to install the grub bootloader again sometime worked.

I don't even know where the "uses UEFI" flag is in a failed install, so that I could repair things.   I can't see how zeroing the start of the partition would avoid the installer crashing.

#16 Installation » Devuan 5.0 netinstall failed [loading boot loader] » 2023-08-15 17:48:01

jacksprat
Replies: 14

I just tried to install devuan_daedalus_5.0.0_amd64_netinstall.iso, and it failed installing the boot loader.  As I find this is a common problem, I continued past this to the and installed a grub.cfg from a separate partition.  On reboot I get an error because Devuan defaults to UEFI, requiring the stupid FAT partition, which is not there as all my computers use ordinary BIOS.

I cannot tell why the original attempt to install the bootloader failed:  presumably, it would have asked me if using UEFI or not.  How do I recover from this, or should I give up?

#17 Re: Other Issues » Package update cuts off peripheral input » 2023-07-25 17:45:56

@hunter0one: I don't see any signs that Void are changing anything.  I don't use elogind on Void, perhaps because I don't use any DM.

In 2015 when I used "sinit" to init Debian7 then Devuan, I used "mdev" plus "something" to effect hot-plugging devices [I forget].  Nowadays, the "mdevd" daemon is available to handle that [not used it yet]. 

The problem is in the lib[g]udev libraries, which are required by firefox, chromium AND all webkit-based browsers.  I can't see what exactly these libraries ACTUALLY do.  The Linux kernel creates static devices, and "mdevd" would respond to new devices and set correct permisions for them.  Will someone save me from reading the source code to find out.

#18 Re: Other Issues » Package update cuts off peripheral input » 2023-07-25 09:56:53

I asked a question about this on the Void Linux support forum, and the response I got included

  "that's conspiracy theory BS. eudev is already """systemd"  becuase it is a forked portion of systemd-udev"

and that their devs are aware of the issue.  I don't know if this is because Void is still on libgudev-237.

It is depressing that the barriers to ditching udev completely, in favour of mdevd are too high for me.  I am sure that in  2015 Firefox "just worked" with udevd replaced with mdev, but perhaps I was not aware of libudev and libgudev back then.  Maybe my memory is wrong.

#19 Re: Installation » Install with Runit as the init » 2023-07-17 10:18:21

Thanks @andyp67: for "rsync" think a better "cp" command:  I have been using it to clone file systems, moving between partitions and removable backup drives.  The issue with startx and /tmp is just an annoying thing of my own doing, and can be resolved.

Aside:  whilst I have used computers for 50 years [mainly scientific research], only since 2015 have I taken an interest  in alternative init systems [etc].  I started by replacing sysvinit with "sinit" on Debian7 and Devuan.  However, I got bored with that, and moved to Void Linux and Runit.  Recently, I have explored Runit on AntiX and Devuan:  both are complicated by re-using the sysvinit scripts.  Both mean I must learn apt, apt-get and dpkg anew.  Hence the questions here.

#20 Re: Installation » Install with Runit as the init » 2023-07-16 20:25:31

Thanks @andyp67, but my rsync backup wouldn't work [startx failed because of a /tmp..Xauthority write error].  After a few days, I will try again.  Worst case, I will re-install from netinstall ISO. 

I hope that APT will allow me to remove Slim completely from the system.  Otherwise, it will be safer to move  from /etc/init.d/ completely.

#21 Re: Installation » Install with Runit as the init » 2023-07-16 18:24:39

Good news:  "apt-get dist-upgrade --fix-missing" completed without any errors.  Bad news:  it seriously messed up my system.  For example, whereas I had stopped slim graphical login with "chmod -x /etc/init.d/slim", now nothing would stop it.  I'm not sure what other damage the dist-upgrade did.

I have decided to try and undo things from an earlier rsync backup.  Thanks anyway for your help here.

#22 Re: Installation » Install with Runit as the init » 2023-07-16 15:47:18

@fsmithred:  I reran the test with the same result.  Here is sources.list minus comments:

deb [url]http://deb.devuan.org/merged[/url] daedalus main non-free contrib
deb-src [url]http://deb.devuan.org/merged[/url] daedalus main non-free contrib
deb [url]http://pkgmaster.devuan.org/merged[/url] daedalus-security main contrib non-free
deb-src [url]http://pkgmaster.devuan.org/merged[/url] daedalus-security main contrib non-free
deb [url]http://deb.devuan.org/merged[/url] daedalus-updates main contrib non-free
deb-src [url]http://deb.devuan.org/merged[/url] daedalus-updates main contrib non-free

Does this look OK?

#23 Re: Installation » Install with Runit as the init » 2023-07-16 13:27:47

@fsmithred:  I changed /etc/apt/source.list from chimaera->daedalus according to your instructions, but the "apt upgrade" failed with error

  "libwacom9 depends on libwacom-common  2.6.0-1 but 1.8-2 is to be installed:  broken packages"

If this was the first of many breakages arising from the shock of switching the sources.list, then I may be stuck.  I will probably reverse sources.list to chiraera and hope that "apt  update" fixes things.  Ideas?

#24 Re: Installation » Install with Runit as the init » 2023-07-15 19:58:16

Sorry @fsmithred, I didn't do anything beyond 4.0 yet.  I will try the "chimaera" to "daedalus" dist-upgrade tomorrow.  I feel confident your plan will work.  Thanks.

#25 Re: Installation » Install with Runit as the init » 2023-07-15 16:20:34

Thanks @fsmithred, I was going to just use 4.0, maybe adjusting my grub.cfg to select the most recent kernel.  However, if I can perform an upgrade to 5.0 following your instructions, I will try this [after a system backup].

By "did nothing" I just meant that no new packages were installed.  I just used

  apt-get update
  apt-get dist-upgrade

so I skipped the separate "upgrade" step, thinking "dist-upgrade" was enough.

Board footer

Forum Software