So why not include Ubuntu/Mint/Debian in your title as well?

Anyway, it's a PEBCAK issue.

That's actually been answered no less than *THREE* times already. We just happen to live in a World where people react without actually reading and paying attention anymore. But you're right, at this point the post is being hijacked by irrelevant remarks, thereby turning pointless.

@Anticapitalista

I just found the problem package in the MX package manager.
The problem application is ... supertuxkart
It shows up as 500+ MB in size, but when removed it shows up as 670 MB in size.
When you install it from the MX Package Manager by using the tab for stable repository ...

... YOU WILL SEE ANTIX & MX DISPLAYED ON THE SAME LINE FOR THE INSTALLATION !!!

You do not get to see any detailed information at all until you actually click on the install or deinstall button. And when you click on those you're comitted, the process will begin to run in the background even without further confirmation by the user. I was in the process of reading all of the details when suddenly, a window popped up letting me know that the process has been completed.

This problem does not exist with MX 19. On MX 19 the supertuxkart shows up properly with the correct size and path ... no mention of Antix anymore. Consider this though, there are still an awful lot of people using MX 18, and that's where the problem is. Antix shows up in the very same line as MX for the path, no idea why that is. And you know what else? Who's to say that supertuxkart is the only application on MX 18 which is effected like this in the MX package manager?

I will say it again just to drive the point home:
This is NOT a "serious MX Linux maintainer problem" as OP claims.
It's how Debian (and all Debian-based distros) works. Most likely the important keyword "metapackage" has been dropped already, and beyond that: yes, you should read everything before asked to confirm it. Even if it's hidden under a small triangle one has to "expand" first. And most of us here will agree that there's a good argument for NOT using graphical filemanagers. But that still doesn't make it "not anything that requires an individual user resolution, but rather some action by the developers of Antix and/or MX linux distribution."

All in all, I find the thread title and everything that follows rather presumptuous, high-handed and overbearing.
No doubt because OP has "decades of Linux experience"

PS: anticapitalista's defensive stance is very understandable, and the right thing to do in this case.

1 members found this post helpful.

Yep, developers are always thinking like developers. While I'm thinking strictly from a generic user standpoint, albeit a user who's also helping more and more people to get away from the soon to be cloudware only, Winblows system. And from that standpoint, any generic *USER* who sees what's in the second image would (IMO) more than likely, just as I did, figure that something was going on between Antix and/or MX Linux.

Many if not mot developers often appear to be totally oblivious to the fact that numerous portals offer such high praise about MX Linux that it obviously stands to reason that many new generic users would be checking out MX Linux with all that it has to offer. And the more generic NON-DEVELOPERS make use of something, the more important it becomes to have as little confusion as possible. Anyway, the first image shows that it was MX Package Manager being used.
The second image shows clearly that Antix & MX Linux appear in the same path or line.
I stand by what I've said all along ... any generic user would view such a line is being related to one another.

If Antix is so very much different from MX Linux, perhaps it would be a good idea to split the two in this forum as well, since that's another reason why I associated Antix *WITH* MX Linux, as they're both listed *TOGETHER* in the same area of the forum, unlike some of the other distros, right?

.

Attached Thumbnails

     

Well... yes... valid points...

Did you post about this at the MX forums?

There's no reason for me to sign up there again in order to post this. Anticapitalista is to my knowledge one of the developers and I know for certain that he's one of the MX Linux forum members as well. I don't like that forum because it's far too red leaning for me, where the oldtimers who are in charge of the forum have little respect for their own rules which are broken frequently, while simply deleting threads or even accounts without warning when someone points out their own follies. Worst "Administrative Behavior" that I've experienced on a tech forum in 20 years ... at least that's been my experience.

That happens to you a lot, yes?

Well, if you call once in over 20 years out of numerous other active forum memberships a lot ... then yes, I suppose it must be happening a lot.

Never mind

Any basic user wouldn't even be reading that info.....

Just like RedHat & CentOS, share basics, they share basic elements of Debian, but they maintain separate repositories & home webpages, so clearly different from each other.

I don't know why anyone would think that they would be the same, even a beginner....

Not in my experience of using it, some misunderstandings about how things work in a different distro maybe, but that's the worst I've ever encountered when using it.

Well in all fairness, stating that something appears to be related is not the same thing as factually stating that one distro is the same or even almost the same as another one. I'm talking about the perception that such a line might create when being viewed by a generic user. And there's no reason to think that that might or should not happen ... if a user elects to see what the MX Package Manager has to offer. It is an MX feature after all ... and Stable Repository certainly awakens the impression that this area of the PM would be safe to use for anyone who elected to install MX Linux on their machine.

Hmmm, can we all just agree that at this point we're beating a dead horse?