olsztyn
Did you not get the update to the control centre?
If this was a question also to me (In English ‘you’ singular and ‘you’ plural forms are the same, so not distinguished) then my answer is that I did not update the CC before updating live-kernel-updater. Who would have thought there is such dependency on live tool…
Yes, this is possible generally. Some entries are equipped with “which” instead of “test” against a hard coded path. But I’m pretty sure applying this to all entries will slow down startup time noticeably, while not sure about that (how to measure that?). There must be a reason why all the original/ancient control centre entries use test instead of which. If this is not a showstopper slowdown, we can easily replace all the test lines to use which instead of a hard coded path.
Thank you @Robin for this analysis. I was only thinking of resiliency of the Control Center to ensure integrity and reduce dependency on changes to individual tools. Just as example I was thinking of the equivalent MX Control Center (it is called differently but it is immaterial to essence), I did not notice such sensitivity and dependency on changes to individual tools…
I am not trying to be critical of the way antiX Control Centre is coded, as I am appreciating antiX design as it is. I was just asking out of consideration whether further improvements to enhance resilience would be possible. Control Centre is a critical part of antiX after all…
Thanks again and best regards.
Live antiX Boot Options (Previously posted by Xecure):
http://antixlinuxfan.miraheze.org/wiki/Table_of_antiX_Boot_Parameters