What makes Arch stand out?

Cdh · 2010-07-05 05:03:53

Gusar wrote:

pacman -Rd openjdk && pacman -S --asdeps jre
Does the above not work?

Yes, that's how it works. But I believe pacman should handle this...

Mr.Elendig wrote:

(jre does not provide java-enviroment, jdk does)

Indeed... That's the problem... Because eclipse depends on java-environment. After thinking about it it's obvious that jre is not enaugh for eclipse.

Last edited by Cdh (2010-07-05 05:06:02)

Misfit138 · 2010-07-06 13:18:01

Cdh wrote:

Gusar wrote:
pacman -Rd openjdk && pacman -S --asdeps jre
Does the above not work?
Yes, that's how it works. But I believe pacman should handle this...

Now I'm confused.
Looks like pacman handles it just fine..?

Aprz · 2010-07-09 06:42:15

For me, Arch stands out from other distribution because it doesn't have a bunch of unnecessary crap, and it's quick to set up. Something like LFS takes many hours of no sleep or several days to set-up perfectly if everything goes smoothly while Gentoo stage3 has a bunch of unnecessary stuff (e.g. /boot linked to itself, which I assume is for anybody who messed up while editing menu.lst, or I believe they were using grub.conf or something like that now, I forget), compiling takes a long time, etc.. What I like to do is install arch really quick (I still use the really old CD where you could check off what you wanted to install using ncurses, I recall the newer CDs not doing that), update everything, install, download, and compile what I like, and I am done. Everything takes no more than three or four hours to get set up and working. Once everything is up and ready, I no longer never ever need to play with again, but occasionally I do anyhow because I think of projects like "Hm, I wonder how do I do this..." or whatever, but mostly usually little programming projects instead that I eventually never end up finsihing anyhow because I get caught up with real life situations...

Yarui · 2010-07-11 02:01:32

Aprz wrote:

I still use the really old CD where you could check off what you wanted to install using ncurses, I recall the newer CDs not doing that

Either you are mistaken or they went back to the old system, because I used the most recent CD to install Arch and it did use that setup method.

Cdh · 2010-07-11 11:40:09

Misfit138 wrote:

Now I'm confused.
Looks like pacman handles it just fine..?

In this case it was my mistake, sorry.

Another example. Install midori-git from the nightly repo, then pamcan -Rd libsoup-git and install libsoup. Then do pacman -Syu and enjoy not being told why libsoup shall be replaced by libsoup-git.

Also it's freaking slow the first time run after reboot: http://omploader.org/vNHdjdQ/out.ogv
It's german but you get the idea...

Allan · 2010-07-11 12:22:21

Yeah... we optimised the extraction of the sync databases which had the unfortunate side effect of having less of it cached when it comes time to read it. We have stuff in the pipeline that takes the reading of the [extra] db from 28sec to 0.2sec on my computer.

Bruce Lee JR · 2010-07-18 23:18:18

I thank everyone for all there VERY informative posts. I have just joined this community and this is probably like my 2nd post lol. I have quoted most people in here for my introduction thread because I agree with most 1000%

iBertus · 2010-07-19 02:28:47

I use Arch becaues it has great performance and it's really easy to make custom packages. Oh, and pacman is the best package manager I've ever used in the Linux world.

crouse · 2010-07-19 02:45:10

This Linux distro is exactly how "I" feel Linux should feel/run. It's very fast, easy to update, and has a "rolling release" system that doesn't require you to "upgrade" or re-install your existing system. Text based configuration files make setup fairly painless, as long as you have some experience with editing those types of files.

#1 reason i use this distro , the community, and especially the developers.
The community, because there are so many nice people here.
The developers, because no matter how loud the newbies whine, they don't change the way things are done to fit "popular" demand. They keep true to the original priniciples that started Arch. I don't think any of them know how much most of us appreciate their dedication and the fact they don't waiver from their path for "the masses"............. plenty of distro's for the masses Arch is for "competent" Linux users, and I hope it always stays that way.

Last edited by crouse (2010-07-19 02:47:07)

Misfit138 · 2010-07-20 02:38:17

crouse wrote:

..#1 reason i use this distro , the community, and especially the developers.
The community, because there are so many nice people here.
The developers, because no matter how loud the newbies whine, they don't change the way things are done to fit "popular" demand. They keep true to the original priniciples that started Arch. I don't think any of them know how much most of us appreciate their dedication and the fact they don't waiver from their path for "the masses"............. plenty of distro's for the masses Arch is for "competent" Linux users, and I hope it always stays that way.

The Arch Way wrote:

Concepts, designs and features are generated and implemented by using the Arch Way principles as a guide, rather than bowing to external influences. The development team are resolute in their commitment and dedication to the Arch Way philosophy. If you share their vision, you are welcomed and encouraged to use Arch.

Amen..

Allan · 2010-07-20 02:53:25

Yep... that is right people... We really do not care what you think!

Acecero · 2010-07-20 03:05:41

@Allan: If I had a nickel for everytime I read that.

hwkiller · 2010-07-26 17:50:03

Hmm, off the top of my head:

1) Simplicity (as in the Amish, not parent-friendliness)
2) A great mixture of full control and usability
3) Great repos and a great package manager
4) ABS + AUR + yaourt + pkgbuilds = incredibly simple to install and compile programs.

Anikom15 · 2010-07-26 22:32:07

It works.

DStein · 2010-07-27 06:24:05

Besides rolling release, abs, wiki, and everything else already mentioned, I like that Arch is DE neutral. I've always been partial to KDE myself, but I can easily recommend Arch to friends and coworkers that prefer just about any other desktop. And for that matter I have Arch running on a very very old laptop without any GUI at all. Hows that for flexibility?

Anikom15 · 2010-07-27 17:57:15

^ That is a major plus. I like how Arch keeps things vanilla, or the way the developer intended.

brisbin33 · 2010-07-27 18:33:47

Gusar wrote:

...Especially when coupled with wifi-pipe.

I did that!

Labello · 2010-07-28 15:32:20

brisbin33 wrote:

Gusar wrote:
...Especially when coupled with wifi-pipe.
I did that!

WHOOT!?

This is just awesome!

Will try this on my netbook soon!

schen · 2010-07-28 23:40:18

Arch is fast, uses BSD-style init, has an amazing package manager, a great wiki, and a great community.

zenny · 2010-07-29 08:47:48

I am into the linux bandwagon since 1994. I started with the boot-and-root-floppy-way of initial release of slackware and then moved to debian and RH5.2, checked with several distros sidux, sabayon, gentoo, mepis, ubuntu, dsl, puppy, t2 and the list goes on. I am trying to test arch for a long time, but due to lack of time I could not.

Two months back, I tried with archlinux (archbang). Disabled all archbang repositories. And reinstalled everything including several window managers and so on. I am liking arch very much. I use packer (the wrapper for pacman, really sweet) with tiling wm. There is nothing vanilla that can compare with arch.

However, I find a few hassles with arch, too.

1) When it comes to regular stuffs, arch documentation and community are awesome, but when it comes to advanced stuffs like cinelerra or lxc, it is not the case. I had to recompile the restricted version of cinelerra (because the cv version was not working for everyone https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=100668) and lxc (I am still nowhere, see https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=100083).

2) I love to install arch on production servers, but after reading several posts in this forum (https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=95946 and https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=86890, most of people recommend either Centos or Debian. .-( (also see #10, #12 #15 of https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=98133 thread)

3) As a rolling release, I feel that Arch is not good option for those who has slow internet connection, like in developing world.

Anyway, I liked the Arch way. I am happy about it because I do not have to reinstall distro or run across several problems on each upgrades. -)

Last edited by zenny (2010-07-29 08:53:08)

shak · 2010-07-29 15:09:23

Simple
Fast
Great package manager
Great community
aur

kcirick · 2010-08-05 05:52:17

Non-GUI Installation
pacman
/etc/rc.conf
community/support
Simplicity/Transparency

cesura · 2010-08-05 06:06:05

BSD-style init scripts
AUR
Package building system (makepkg)
ArchWiki
Rolling-release
Pacman
KISS
And best of all, the community!

kang · 2010-08-07 02:06:41

Arch is simple (but in a smart way) and that's the key.

- simple rc init (no update-* hell, no upstart hell, no 999 hidden functions)
- simple package management
- simple website, forum, wiki (clear, quick information access)
- simple packaging (takes 5min to learn how to make your own package - and i make packages on Debian and Gentoo for years, where.. I'm still learning new stuff every day)
- community - anyone - can contribute packages in a simple, very fast, centralized and efficient way: AUR
- community packages can be voted for inclusion
- bare install, no extra crap

Arch is easy and very stable (probably because it's simple)
- no packaging issue so far, and i'm using [testing] as well as several AUR packages

Last edited by kang (2010-08-07 02:07:47)

cactus · 2010-08-07 05:24:07

tacos
poutine

Arch Linux

#26 2010-07-05 05:03:53

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#27 2010-07-06 13:18:01

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#28 2010-07-09 06:42:15

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#29 2010-07-11 02:01:32

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#30 2010-07-11 11:40:09

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#31 2010-07-11 12:22:21

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#32 2010-07-18 23:18:18

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#33 2010-07-19 02:28:47

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#34 2010-07-19 02:45:10

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#35 2010-07-20 02:38:17

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#36 2010-07-20 02:53:25

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#37 2010-07-20 03:05:41

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#38 2010-07-26 17:50:03

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#39 2010-07-26 22:32:07

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#40 2010-07-27 06:24:05

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#41 2010-07-27 17:57:15

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#42 2010-07-27 18:33:47

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#43 2010-07-28 15:32:20

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#44 2010-07-28 23:40:18

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#45 2010-07-29 08:47:48

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#46 2010-07-29 15:09:23

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#47 2010-08-05 05:52:17

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#48 2010-08-05 06:06:05

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#49 2010-08-07 02:06:41

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

#50 2010-08-07 05:24:07

Re: What makes Arch stand out?

Board footer