Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

Vermillion · 2010-08-16 06:02:49

I switched from Ubuntu (after years of using it) to arch a few weeks ago. And I noticed a few things (I don't say that these are disadvantages but i needed to learn how to do it in Arch)

*Installation effort: Ubuntu is a straightforward installation which asks you about your language and login credentials and then the installer does all the work...
*Configuration of your desktop environment: In Ubuntu you start with a configured gnome desktop. In Arch you have to do everything by your own (arrange the panels like you want them, install and enable effects, get a nice looking theme , etc)
*Package Repository: Arch has a good "normal" repo where all the standard packages are but it got its AUR which makes the installation of a lot of software, which isn't available to other distros (as a package...), very easy

bernarcher · 2010-08-16 06:38:04

I'd rather have a rolling release with some (mostly) minor problems every now and then than disastrous breaks on release updates twice a year. Thus this is no real disadvantage of Arch in my view.

Back to the OP. I had an LFS running for a few years (until I lost the time to recompile everything when my hardware broke). It is possible to maintain it using some simple package manager (I wrote one for my own as a series of bash scripts). You even should be able to adapt pacman to LFS.

One possible disadvantage of Arch, as I see it, are driver problems. You have to solve those problems basically on your own (whith the help of this forum, of course) which will mostly be handled in advance by the developers of any good distro.

JohannesSM64 · 2010-08-17 22:09:28

ataraxia wrote:

Not being taken seriously by certain kinds of people. These generally fall into two groups:
1- The ones who haven't "graduated" to Arch-level usage yet. I'm sure you know this kind of person, who thinks Arch is "barbaric" because it isn't dumbed-down, or (even worse) only likes paid-support, corporate offerings. To these people, an Arch user looks like an über-nerd stuck in the past.
2- The "jaded" ones who have gone "beyond" Arch, and now consider taking the time and effort to do something manually to be a waste. Less common in most circles for sure. These people used to run Debian or Slackware for years, but now just use Ubuntu or Mac OS X. To these people, and Arch user looks like hobbyist hacker who needs to "grow up" and find more worthwhile things to spend time on.

Spot on as usual.

starfry · 2010-08-19 13:48:26

Hi, been on Arch 4 days so far to evaluate. So far so good and I am considering the move from Ubuntu.

My ideal would be LFS. I have done it and have built and run a server for a few years. However LFS requires a lot of time to get right and I never quite finished it. It was an excellent learning experience and one day I may return to it.

In the mean time, I get the feeling that Arch is close enough to that ideal. I certainly am glad to be breaking from the hard Ubuntu releases.

The disadvantage is the name. "Arch" is so generic that when trying to google stuff you end up with all sorts of rubbish. At least "Ubuntu" gets you pretty much in the right ball-park.

Not that it's a real disadvantage

nomilieu · 2010-08-19 14:13:52

starfry wrote:

The disadvantage is the name. "Arch" is so generic that when trying to google stuff you end up with all sorts of rubbish. At least "Ubuntu" gets you pretty much in the right ball-park.
Not that it's a real disadvantage

It seems like "Arch Linux" would be just as specific as "Ubuntu" though. Besides, Arch makes up for it by sounding cool.

Ogion · 2010-08-19 14:42:49

Plus searching for "ubuntu" only gives you result-spam, ie. waay too many results, you don't know for whwich ubuntu version those results are (and with Google's tendency to prefer forum threads from 2004..).

Ogion

drcouzelis · 2010-08-19 15:04:35

starfry wrote:

The disadvantage is the name. "Arch" is so generic that when trying to google stuff you end up with all sorts of rubbish. At least "Ubuntu" gets you pretty much in the right ball-park.

I agree that "Arch" being such a generic work makes searching a little bit tricky sometimes. On the contrary, though, when I'm searching for generic Linux help I discover that search engines often point to the Arch Linux wiki and forums anyway.

nomilieu wrote:

Besides, Arch makes up for it by sounding cool.

+1

Anyway, I can't really think of any disadvantages of using Arch Linux, probably because its philosophy fits my computer usage style so well. I think some of the "scary" parts of Arch Linux, for example, updates breaking, text file configuration, and choosing an application from a choice of many similar ones, are just part of the nature of Linux in general and would be difficult to change.

ssri · 2010-08-19 18:44:17

Gullible Jones wrote:

Also, Arch's config files are AFAIK unfriendly towards GUI config apps; they make things easier by far for experienced users, but harder for newbies. So Arch is probably not so great as a base system for an "easy to use" desktop distro.

I call this a feature

hurleyef · 2010-08-20 13:54:07

The only disadvantage that I can think of is that some of the software in the aur doesn't work (at least for me) For example, google chrome earth segfault after running for only a few moments and burg's graphical parts simply didn't work for me. With burg I even wound up having to use grub2's mkconfig. These are small things though, as anything I need google earth for I can do through a browser, chromium works perfectly (even the dev version compiled from the aur), and graphical boot screens aren't particularly important.

The pros trump all though. Rolling release, simple structure, bleeding edge packages, abs, pacman, stability, etc.

THCMyst · 2010-08-20 16:37:56

Personally, I use two linux distros.

Slack13 x64
Arch x64

I enjoy Slackware because I've been using it since 8 or 9 (started back with Fedora at like, Fedora 2), and It's always worked good for me, whether I was working on MuDs or trying to setup gaming servers. However, The problem I found with Slackware is that I want a system I can build up myself. Sure this can be done really with any distro, but Arch is my preferred pick for this. I do have some issues with programs that compiled on other distros, but don't like Arch, but that's just part of programming.

Current Machines:

Development Laptop:
2.6GHz Core 2 Duo
6GB DDR2 Memory
320GB 7200RPM HD
Nvidia 260M
Windows 7 x64 / Arch x64 (I like debugging in windows)

Netbook:
1.6GHz Intel Atom
1GB DDR2 Memory
160GB 7200RPM HD
Windows 7 x86 / Arch x86 (Windows because the girlfriend uses it)

Server Machine:
2.8GHz AMD Athlon X2 5600+
1.5GB DDR2 Memory
500GB 7200RPM HD
Arch x64

Linux Development Desktop:
2.8GHz Pent 4 Single Core
1.5GB DDR Memory
120GB 7200RPM HD
Arch x86 / Slackware 13 x86 (Always test compiles on multiple distros)

As you can see, I use Arch, I still haven't found a real disadvantage. I've NEVER had Arch die on me. First time I set it up it was a bit different, but ever since then, I love it.

snyda · 2010-08-20 17:04:52

Ari'osika wrote:

Here's an extreme but unfortunately true case (for me at least). Using Arch has turned me into a kind of power-user freak. I know I'll eventually abandon all other distros once I build an LFS-system complete a *BSD-style init and custom written package manager. "Simply to have more control".

I've fallen into that trap more than once. I had an issue with connecting to wifi, but for some reason with GDM it worked. So, just install GDM and move on, right? No, I had to spend a whole day trying to figure out exactly why my wireless wouldn't work without it. A great learning exercise, for sure, but I did lose a whole day of working (or fishing) because of it. That and fighting back the urge to fire up VirtualBox and set up LFS..

Carlwill · 2010-08-21 23:31:26

I really can't find any disadvantages of Arch. It's by far the best distro of Linux I have ever used. I use it on my laptops, workstations, and personal servers. If there was official enterprise support, I could make it fly at work too but sadly I am forced to use RHEL / CentOS.

If I wasn't using Arch, I would be back on Debian.

kaizoku · 2010-08-22 02:03:03

The only disadvantage is that none of my colleagues heard of archlinux, they are all ubuntu fanboys.

ozar · 2010-08-22 02:56:35

The disadvantage for me was how it totally screwed up my distro-hopping campaign that had been going so well for a couple of years. After installing Arch, I lost all interest in trying out other distros, and now here I am almost 6 years later, and still have no interest in distro-hopping. That said, the biggest headache for me during my time with Arch has been the inconsistent quality of the package mirrors. Each time that I find a really good one, it seems that it goes lousy before long, but I suspect that other distros suffer the same inconsistency. As it turns out, some of these problems are actually related to the crappy ISP that we have here locally.

crouse · 2010-08-22 06:43:45

kaizoku wrote:

The only disadvantage is that none of my colleagues heard of archlinux, they are all ubuntu fanboys.

forgive them, for they know not what they do .......

marfig · 2010-08-22 13:35:59

The only disadvantage I've seen so far in using Arch Linux is when I'm running it as a guest on VMWare; VMWare Tools aren't compatible and can't be installed, and open-vm-tools aren't simply working correctly under X since at least 2.6.34 (don't know before that).

Since I chose Arch Linux as a means to learn Linux, this has been having an impact on my ability to effectively run the VM. But that's as far as I can go in terms of disadvantages and none are the fault of Arch.

Last edited by marfig (2010-08-22 13:36:45)

Carlwill · 2010-08-22 14:10:55

marfig wrote:

The only disadvantage I've seen so far in using Arch Linux is when I'm running it as a guest on VMWare; VMWare Tools aren't compatible and can't be installed, and open-vm-tools aren't simply working correctly under X since at least 2.6.34 (don't know before that).

Have you ever installed / used VirtualBox? I find it so much more complete and functional on a Linux host & using Linux or Windows guests.

www.virtualbox.org

marfig · 2010-08-22 14:20:42

Carlwill wrote:

Have you ever installed / used VirtualBox? I find it so much more complete and functional on a Linux host & using Linux or Windows guests.

[off topic]
I'm running a Windows host. VirtualBox under Windows unfortunately has the habit of irreparably halting or crashing the VM when I'm using it in full screen on a second monitor and I try to access the VM top slide menu.

Recently, I've figured out a way to deal with this: Disable the slide menu in VirtualBox preferences and only use the drop-down menu (host key + RMB, if I recall correctly). As such I plan to start using VirtualBox soon.
[/off topic]

Last edited by marfig (2010-08-22 14:21:34)

kcirick · 2010-08-22 14:57:51

I'm running Arch via VMWare on my macbook, and open-vm-tools seems to do fine on it. What exactly doesn't work on your vmware? Maybe the difference between OSX-hosted VMWare vs Windows-histed VMWare?

I've also tried VirtualBox, but there is some sort of bug that wastes my CPU usage (every time I run VirtualBox CPU uses constant 100%)

marfig · 2010-08-22 15:49:00

kcirick wrote:

Maybe the difference between OSX-hosted VMWare vs Windows-histed VMWare?

Possibly. I experience inconsistent behavior in text copy/paste operations between host and VM. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn't. Sometimes only if I first try to copy something from the Linux VM to the windows host, other times, the other way around. Sometimes only when I restart X, other times not even that way.

fsckd · 2010-08-22 23:16:13

Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

GHC upgrades.

splittercode · 2010-08-22 23:21:32

fsckd wrote:

GHC upgrades.

Is this a consistent problem? I've only used arch for about half a year and I was hoping the recent debacle was a one-time thing...

Allan · 2010-08-23 00:01:44

splittercode wrote:

fsckd wrote:
GHC upgrades.
Is this a consistent problem? I've only used arch for about half a year and I was hoping the recent debacle was a one-time thing...

You would hope a lesson would be learnt...

splittercode · 2010-08-23 02:24:18

Allan wrote:

You would hope a lesson would be learnt...

By who? It was easy to remedy with some ignorePkg'ing, so there wasn't really any lesson to be learned on my end. I'm just curious.

Acecero · 2010-08-23 02:40:52

splittercode wrote:

Allan wrote:
You would hope a lesson would be learnt...
By who? It was easy to remedy with some ignorePkg'ing, so there wasn't really any lesson to be learned on my end. I'm just curious.

I am assuming Allan was referring to the people who maintain the GHC updates.

Arch Linux

#26 2010-08-16 06:02:49

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#27 2010-08-16 06:38:04

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#28 2010-08-17 22:09:28

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#29 2010-08-19 13:48:26

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#30 2010-08-19 14:13:52

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#31 2010-08-19 14:42:49

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#32 2010-08-19 15:04:35

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#33 2010-08-19 18:44:17

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#34 2010-08-20 13:54:07

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#35 2010-08-20 16:37:56

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#36 2010-08-20 17:04:52

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#37 2010-08-21 23:31:26

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#38 2010-08-22 02:03:03

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#39 2010-08-22 02:56:35

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#40 2010-08-22 06:43:45

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#41 2010-08-22 13:35:59

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#42 2010-08-22 14:10:55

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#43 2010-08-22 14:20:42

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#44 2010-08-22 14:57:51

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#45 2010-08-22 15:49:00

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#46 2010-08-22 23:16:13

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#47 2010-08-22 23:21:32

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#48 2010-08-23 00:01:44

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#49 2010-08-23 02:24:18

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

#50 2010-08-23 02:40:52

Re: Disadvantage of using Arch Linux?

Board footer