release date for Arch 0.8 ?

uselpa · 2005-03-26 16:13:58

Hi all,

I am a Slackware user in search of a new home. I have installed and played around with ArchLinux 0.7 on my test machine and feel ready to install it on my workstation, along with the current Slackware installation, in order to ease migration.

On the main web page, it says that version 0.8 is 'pending'. As I like to install from CD, and as I couldn't find any -current ISO, is the relase date for version 0.8 close, far or undefined?

Regards,
-pu

puntmuts · 2005-03-26 16:23:45

Upgrading to a new version of ArchLinux is easy: pacman -Syu . If you keep updating your system with that command you will run Arch-current all the time.
So compared to Slackware, upgrading is very easy that way. So a release date of a next version is not that important I guess.

But I'm new to AL as well, I deleted the last Slackware remains on my drives last week.

uselpa · 2005-03-26 16:44:00

I know this is the standard answer, but I have 3 installs to do so a CD would be handy. I suppose there are other ways, like copying the packages from /var/cache/pacman/pkg, but still a CD appears easiest to me.

xerxes2 · 2005-03-26 18:10:47

there is no iso-cd for 0.8 if that's what you mean,
use 0.7 iso to install from,

good luck

beniro · 2005-03-26 18:11:23

What the above dude said is true...pacman -Syu will always have you running Arch current.

but...to answer your question, I believe 0.8 is still a ways off.

Have fun!

i3839 · 2005-03-26 18:29:16

Just install 0.7 on one pc, do pacman -Syu and use the newest packages from its cache (/var/cache/pacman/pkg) for the others, either directly via the network, or burn them on a cd.

woodstock · 2005-03-26 19:18:52

uselpa,

Basically there are two suggestions I can give you:

1 - Use the 0.7 - base iso. Which only contains the base for Arch, which is what most people do. Install that and the pacman -Syu up to the current release state.

2 - Since you have to do 3 installs, and from what it sounds like you need to be up and running as quickly as possible, use the 0.7 full iso's. They contain the base and a few more apps (some DE's and what not). That way you'll have a full working system and can pacman -Syu later on when you have time.

Basically to answer your question, there is no stated release date for 0.8, as Arch doesn't really function like that. Things are similar to Slackware, where you can follow Slackware-current and stay up to date. With Arch however, there really isn't anything other than current. So version numbers and releases don't really matter.

I hope I cleared this up for you. If you have anymore questions feel free to ask .

phrakture · 2005-03-26 20:33:32

You're missing the point, really... Arch versions don't matter... upgraing is a continuous process... people tend to think in RH (or whatever) terms, where they don't get new apps unless they reinstall....
If you must know, I think I'm technically running Arch 0.5 right now... the only major difference with the installs is the installer and which packages are on the CD... however, the packages on the CD can be grabbed with "pacman -Syu"

i3839 · 2005-03-26 21:11:32

I think the point is how to waste time downloading stuff as little as possible.

Perhaps an always up to date install cd could be made? Just some cronjob that generates the install cd automatically with up to date packages?

cmp · 2005-03-27 10:36:53

isn't there a wiki entry for makin an own packgage cd?
just grab everything you need and burn it on cd.

cactus · 2005-04-19 02:23:01

I think arch should make more releases. Since a release is not much more than a snapshot of the repo packages, I think it would be nice to make a base iso "release" (ie, update cd packages) every 6mo. or so.

T-Dawg · 2005-04-19 03:26:04

I think arch should make more releases

I don't think its that necessary considering most users are probably going to Syu to the latest packages after the install anyways. Personally I try to stay away from cd-packages during any install and go for a fresh up-to-date ftp install. I'd rather see that time spent on maintaining or creating more packages in the repos....

cactus · 2005-04-19 03:29:57

Not speaking about people using the distro now. More frequent releases would be more for PR than anything else. It would be much easier to attract new people with more frequent cd remastering. Plus, some people only look at the cd release dates on distrowatch.
They might think, "hmm. arch doesn't seem to release very often", and they keep looking. Since they don't know about arch's rolling release yet, they don't know to look past such things.
A cd remaster should be relatively easy, just a matter of updating the packages or something.

I don't really care either way though. Just trying to add some constructive/useful information.

dtw · 2005-04-19 08:13:08

i think that is great idea cactus! how hard is it for them to put a cd together anyway - i actually think it would dupe loads of people into thinking that arch is making leaps and bounds! tho that might be bad thing...

distro idiot/ricer/un-representative-user wrote:

"Arch is the best cos they release so often with all the latest stuff!"

I can see it going that way....

cactus · 2005-04-19 08:31:33

hmm. you may have a point dibble.

Kern · 2005-04-19 10:24:27

More frequent releases would be more for PR than anything else.

Seems the way to go on distro watch, altho they now seem to pander to the "bump" type of post announcing anything from a review to a newsletter to keep a distros name current on the main page.

Maybe a regular newsletter advocating Arch the solid Base + rolling update is the way to go, rather than pandering to users needs of the latest 0.7.0.0.0.1.15 update and downloaded iso.

Moo-Crumpus · 2005-04-19 11:08:53

cactus wrote:

Since they don't know about arch's rolling release yet, they don't know to look past such things.

A lot of linux distros use rolling releases. Well, red hat and suse don't, afaik. But debian does (more or less if you go to testing and above) and others do. Of course, short release cycles have some PR effect. Allthough I need PR, badly, I don't think I want to struggle with users in arch forums to tell them about rolling releases. This is the minimum one should teach himself before installing arch.

Btw, why does arch need more PR? What for?

A more important question is, will release 0.8 really be named "Chickens Sake"

scarecrow · 2005-04-19 18:02:22

Just doing a network installation from the 0.7 CD, and leaving out devfs right from the beginning (to avoid some footwork later) should suffice for the foreseeable future.
First time I have installed Arch was last September, and I never had the need to re-install since then.

jerem · 2005-04-19 18:08:43

Arch is not really meant for people without a fast internet connection.

i3839 · 2005-04-19 18:38:30

jerem wrote:

Arch is not really meant for people without a fast internet connection.

How so? Because of the rolling release thing?

People don't have to stay up to date all the time. If they have e.g. a laptop and only sync once a while and have no internet the rest of the time doesn't mean they can't use Arch. Or they can know another Arch users who burns a CD with updated packages for them.

All in all I don't see how you can say that Arch is not really meant for people without fast internet.

dtw · 2005-04-20 06:35:59

Arch is not really meant for people without a fast internet connection.

Both Dusty and I used it for ages on a 56k modem so that's blatent disinformation!

Arch Linux

#1 2005-03-26 16:13:58

release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#2 2005-03-26 16:23:45

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#3 2005-03-26 16:44:00

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#4 2005-03-26 18:10:47

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#5 2005-03-26 18:11:23

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#6 2005-03-26 18:29:16

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#7 2005-03-26 19:18:52

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#8 2005-03-26 20:33:32

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#9 2005-03-26 21:11:32

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#10 2005-03-27 10:36:53

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#11 2005-04-19 02:23:01

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#12 2005-04-19 03:26:04

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#13 2005-04-19 03:29:57

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#14 2005-04-19 08:13:08

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#15 2005-04-19 08:31:33

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#16 2005-04-19 10:24:27

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#17 2005-04-19 11:08:53

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#18 2005-04-19 18:02:22

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#19 2005-04-19 18:08:43

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#20 2005-04-19 18:38:30

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

#21 2005-04-20 06:35:59

Re: release date for Arch 0.8 ?

Board footer