Brian Masinick
Thanks @Brian…
I will get to that soon. I will experiment with dinit until I learn enough architecture. Is is much different from runit.At this point I have created a reference base, fully updated as of today antiX 26 as published. Dinit boots fine on this, so some incompatibility must have crept in that caused my customized antix to fail booting dinit successfully. Frankly, I was focusing on runit at that time, not paying much attention to testing other inits, until I discovered failure of runit on that newly acquired test laptop, Dell Latitude E6410.
Just having re-tested my newly created pristine antiX 26, just fully updated, running IceWM on that machine. This new test confirmed that booting runit results in unusable system, while both dinit and s6-rc are fine.
It does not exactly shatter my trust in runit as it runs fine on my other laptops, so I think it must be something in the original runit configuration rather than runit itself that makes it fail to result in a working system on that machine. I will not have the time to investigate this soon, so I am dedicating that machine to dinit antiX, starting fresh from the pristine antiX 26 and developing this installation as before, focusing on dinit now, instead of runit.
Thanks for pointing me back to the original antiX 26, where dinit works. I dedicated one of my external hard drives to this reference antiX.
Based on TWO personal experiences, plus two of yours, I claim that the foundation upon which you’re further customizing is somehow flawed.
My personal test cases are similar: in one situation I also had some incorrect stuff, and I made snapshots and remasters based on those flaws, which were also in my installed instance. I went back to the original image and redid things; got the correct result.
I suggest you try something similar, then perhaps your scenarios will work out better too.
--
Brian Masinick
Alternate "Search B":
This search page