Searching for a 2nd distro

athelas · 2011-02-04 07:07:18

Hi everyone,

so far Arch is the only OS i am using. Because of some work I have to do, I need a 2nd OS which is not that bleeding edge.
Important for me is:

more or less KISS
fast
openbox as wm

So it should be an Arch without rolling release
I've already tried Zenwalk, but when I did 'netpkg upgrade', netpkg was checking every package available on the repo for an update. After 4h of netpkg telling me "package X is not installed: skipping" I stopped and gave up...
In addition I don't really want to have Slackware (I couldn't find openbox) and Gentoo (too much work).
So can someone recommend me a distribution?

Mario

.:B:. · 2011-02-04 07:12:46

If you tried Zenwalk, you might as well try Salix. More or less same concept (but more sane), less excentric developer(s) that are more receptive when it comes to constructive input.

I really can't believe you can't 'find' Openbox on Slackware. It's not like it's an exotic WM. Are you aware there are lots of third party projects building packages/providing slackbuilds for Slackware.

athelas · 2011-02-04 07:42:09

Just checked Salix, but it has only four editions: Xfce, LXDE, Fluxbox and KDE.

I know that there is a lot of third party projects for Slackware. But I don't need many programmes, important are openbox, latex (texlive or tetex) and texmaker. So I don't really want to use third party software (mostly because of security reasons), which should be possible, because I don't care about all the other programmes like mediaplayer, picture viewer etc.

tomd123 · 2011-02-04 07:47:28

debian
*bsd
slackware

arinlares · 2011-02-04 07:51:54

You perfectly described the one distro you say you don't want, athelas. It takes a bit longer to get Openbox in Slackware, but it's only a couple steps more than using a PKGBUILD thanks to the folks at SlackBuilds.org, and their contributors. Of course, you could always make install it on your own, but that's a bit extreme. Once you set up a Slackware system, nothing short of a glass of water can kill it.

Failing that, there's Debian. It's the simplest non-KISS distro I can think of. And there are only three binary KISS distros I can think of.

Last edited by arinlares (2011-02-04 07:52:44)

athelas · 2011-02-04 08:01:41

To be honest, I don't have any experience with *bsd, but probably it is worth to try. Of course debian would be OK, but I thought I might find something "closer" to Arch.

mhertz · 2011-02-04 09:33:42

If you want a non-rolling-release distro, then I would say Zenwalk Core. It's a light base system for you to build-upon without featuring X by default and just command-line tools.

Granted, then the netpkg cli interface is pretty slow and greps against the whole app-database, but other than that, then I personally like it. Also, it's GUI counterpart Xnetpkg is much much faster, so maybe that would be something for you...

Other than that, then Slackware IMHO...

(Btw, there's also a openbox-edition of zenwalk, but i've never tried it and would rather use Zenwalk core and set it up for myself...)

pogeymanz · 2011-02-04 11:24:39

FreeBSD is probably a good idea.

Does it have to be a Linux distro?

FreeBSD is, to me, a more stable version of Arch. Very KISS, as fast as you want it, updates are less frequent.

vostok4 · 2011-02-04 17:58:43

why not just arch and not run pacman that often? if it works... don't break it?

athelas · 2011-02-04 17:59:51

Zenwalk Core was what I've tried and then I followed the How-to to install openbox on top. But I don't understand why netpkg has to check every available package. Especially because I installed the Core Version so that everything is faster... And I've seen the Openbox-Edition, but that's too much preconfigured.

FreeBSD looks really good, but somehow it looks as if it has some trouble with my keyboard-layout (neo2). I have to see, if I can fix it somehow.
Anyways, thanks for your suggestions so far!

steve___ · 2011-02-04 18:00:52

Is the archserver[1] project dead? Without starting a flame for the "arch isn't a server distro" debate, you don't have to update. One can set the date of the repos in /etc/pacman.conf

Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2010/12/08/core/os/i686
Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2010/12/08/extra/os/i686
Server = http://arm.konnichi.com/2010/12/08/community/os/i686

If the machine is critical I would mirror the daily repos locally, in case arm.konnichi.com does down.

[1] http://www.archserver.org/

Last edited by steve___ (2011-02-04 18:02:23)

litemotiv · 2011-02-04 18:16:57

athelas wrote:

Just checked Salix, but it has only four editions: Xfce, LXDE, Fluxbox and KDE.

You do know that LXDE is Openbox right?

athelas · 2011-02-04 18:28:09

Hmm, probably I mess something up, but I am pretty sure that openbox is the wm used in LXDE. And I don't want all that other stuff like lxpanel, pcmanfm... And it doesn't sound as if I can choose exactly what to install during the installation.

Inxsible · 2011-02-04 18:34:33

Are you looking for distros, which specifically have an openbox edition supplied -- like ObUbuntu kinda deal?

Because openbox can be installed on pretty much any distro and you can customize it to your heart's content. Just pick a distro which doesn't have a rolling release model (might I suggest-- ubuntu minimal or debian minimal) and then simply add what you want. The customization will be a one time thing and you won't have to worry too much about updates as in Arch. Debian has a ~2 year release cycle. Ubuntu has a 6 month release cycle.

Gusar · 2011-02-04 18:37:08

athelas wrote:

Hmm, probably I mess something up, but I am pretty sure that openbox is the wm used in LXDE. And I don't want all that other stuff like lxpanel, pcmanfm... And it doesn't sound as if I can choose exactly what to install during the installation.

Of course you can. All apps that make together LXDE are completely independent. You can pick and choose what you want of those apps and forget that an "LXDE" even exists.

invictus51 · 2011-02-04 18:48:26

Why not Crunchbang, openbox edition. I was using that before i moved to arch, it's a pretty solid distro, debian based.

www.crunchbanglinux.org

athelas · 2011-02-04 23:09:51

Gusar wrote:

Of course you can. All apps that make together LXDE are completely independent. You can pick and choose what you want of those apps and forget that an "LXDE" even exists.

You're right, I knew that as well, but somehow I've overseen that Salix offers a core installation. Just tried in a vm and it looks alright!

invictus51 wrote:

Why not Crunchbang, openbox edition. I was using that before i moved to arch, it's a pretty solid distro, debian based.

Inxsible wrote:

Are you looking for distros, which specifically have an openbox edition supplied -- like ObUbuntu kinda deal?
Because openbox can be installed on pretty much any distro...

No, if I can install a core system and then install openbox out of the normal repos of that distro I am happy. That's the way I did it in Arch as well. That's why crunchbang is not really an option. I thought about ubuntu already, but I guess I would rather stick with Salix or try some other slackware based distributions.

invictus51 · 2011-02-05 01:20:05

athelas wrote:

I guess I would rather stick with Salix or try some other slackware based distributions.

Yeah, I'd say go that route, or go with debian minimal.

sujoy · 2011-02-05 04:33:51

get crux, setup openbox and be happy!

fsckd · 2011-02-05 04:43:05

Perhaps one of these meets your requirements.

sitquietly · 2011-02-05 18:30:09

athelas wrote:

Hi everyone,
so far Arch is the only OS i am using. Because of some work I have to do, I need a 2nd OS which is not that bleeding edge.
Important for me is:
more or less KISS
fast
openbox as wm
So it should be an Arch without rolling release
Mario

I had a similar need -- a bleeding edge Arch system on my development computer and a stable system for my wife with openbox, a custom interface and good selection of apps for her specific needs. I chose for that 2nd stable OS a custom rolled Arch distribution built off my own. It seems to minimize my overall effort and ensures that I don't get bogged down with extra effort supporting a second OS. Her computer has ended up being more reliable to her and less effort for me than when I had Ubuntu or Linux Mint installed on her computer.

"Custom Rolled Distribution" is easy to do with Arch. It just means that I use the standard arch tools to keep the master computer up to date while always adding each package, whether from core/extra/community or AUR, to a local repository. Periodically, when everything is running perfectly on the master computer, I copy the local repository to the other computer and update that computer in the normal arch way --- except that it is only updating from that one local repository.

The master computer is running Arch with rolling release. The other computer is running Arch with periodic, well-tested, releases. "Arch without rolling release"

archman-cro · 2011-02-05 21:57:40

Is there an outdated server where you can pick, say, two months old packages, instead of updating with the latest packages?

chris-kun · 2011-02-05 23:17:46

arch rollback machine?

ewaller · 2011-02-05 23:34:42

It is a rolling release, but how about Gentoo?

It allows fine tuning of what is installed -- That is my definition of KISS.
It is not quite as bleeding edge as Arch (if you choose only a stable architecture)
It is the only other Linux distribution I enjoy.

fukawi2 · 2011-02-06 00:03:46

steve___ wrote:

Is the archserver[1] project dead?

We're not dead, just very short on contributors at the moment

Plus we don't package X at the moment, so the OP would have to build X/OB etc using the Arch Linux ABS.

Arch Linux

#1 2011-02-04 07:07:18

Searching for a 2nd distro

#2 2011-02-04 07:12:46

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#3 2011-02-04 07:42:09

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#4 2011-02-04 07:47:28

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#5 2011-02-04 07:51:54

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#6 2011-02-04 08:01:41

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#7 2011-02-04 09:33:42

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#8 2011-02-04 11:24:39

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#9 2011-02-04 17:58:43

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#10 2011-02-04 17:59:51

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#11 2011-02-04 18:00:52

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#12 2011-02-04 18:16:57

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#13 2011-02-04 18:28:09

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#14 2011-02-04 18:34:33

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#15 2011-02-04 18:37:08

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#16 2011-02-04 18:48:26

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#17 2011-02-04 23:09:51

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#18 2011-02-05 01:20:05

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#19 2011-02-05 04:33:51

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#20 2011-02-05 04:43:05

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#21 2011-02-05 18:30:09

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#22 2011-02-05 21:57:40

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#23 2011-02-05 23:17:46

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#24 2011-02-05 23:34:42

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

#25 2011-02-06 00:03:46

Re: Searching for a 2nd distro

Board footer