why you choose ArchLinux?

dncrash · 2011-05-08 11:01:45

I use it because of the cool logo ) The packet manager and large community are also vital.

neurolysis · 2011-05-08 12:08:11

I started out a while back trying out minimal installs with the Ubuntu mini CD and building up from there. You're essentially dropped into a CLI at the end, much like Arch, albeit with more bloat. I was still trying out distros for a while, and tried Arch eventually, realising it was achieving the same goal I was trying (and failing) to find with the Ubuntu mini CD.

frank604 · 2011-05-09 04:38:59

Some distributions of linux freeze their packages as in they do not release newer packages after release. This is a stable model where all the package versions are controlled. They also require a new OS install every 6 months or whenever the next version of their release is made.

Some rolling release distributions do not require a reinstall every release and just keep updating their packages. However, they are updated slowly. Some rolling release distributions have extremely older packages compared to non-rolling release.

Bleeding edge means that the latest packages are available.

Arch is rolling release + bleeding edge. That means, you have every available package at your fingertips to use or not. This can be extremely powerful in the sense that certain fixes in new versions can be utilized.

The AUR/ABS/PKGBUILD aspect on arch is convenient and is an amazing community featured option.

You can use bloated distros and peel out the packages you don't need. Arch is more of building from the ground up based on what you need. In the end, the above aspects are what keeps me stuck to Arch

archman-cro · 2011-05-09 10:52:05

frank604 wrote:

Some rolling release distributions have extremely older packages compared to non-rolling release.

Can you name those, maybe?

demian · 2011-05-09 12:10:24

i don't. i choose pikachu!

drcouzelis · 2011-05-09 16:41:49

dncrash wrote:

I use it because of the cool logo.

No joke! I too love the Arch Linux logo. If I had looked into using Arch when it still had the old logo I probably wouldn't have been interested in it.

lolilolicon · 2011-05-09 16:52:26

We just met.

frank604 · 2011-05-09 20:05:35

archman-cro wrote:

Can you name those, maybe?

Personally I've only tried LMDE which is based off debian testing. Read link for more relevant info.

http://forums.linuxmint.com/viewtopic.p … 16&start=0

In the future you can just google around for rolling release distros and check their repository list for versions of packages. This also feels like a challenge to what I have written. If not, I apologize.

Rupp · 2011-05-09 20:20:49

In Soviet Russia, Arch choose you.

Last edited by Rupp (2011-05-09 20:21:14)

pskept · 2011-05-10 20:20:47

1.) the arch way
2.) rolling release with binaries
4.) architecture optimization

dodo3773 · 2011-05-12 17:20:29

I have not been an Arch user for very long but since I have been using it I regret not trying it sooner. I guess the question I would have to ask is: Why not choose Arch Linux? I had a bit of a hard time with the setup and the scene seemed kind of intimidating coming from Ubuntu but after I got over that and dug in I have been happier and happier I did. With this rolling release set up I feel like I am prepared for what is coming in a lot of other distros. Like a Linux time machine ha ha ha. Also, (a lot of people will dispute this) I feel the speed difference in this distro compared to others I have used. I will be surprised if I ever move away. Just give it a shot and see what you think. That is the only way to ever know for yourself.

madeye · 2011-05-12 17:26:51

I must confess my initial reason to try Arch linux was due to a fellow from my local LUG. He told me it was a cool distro
After some time however I discovered the immense power of Arch due to the configuration and customization abilities.

Now both my main workstation, laptop and mediaPC is running arch. All with different configurations.

My list of reasons:
The customization is great.
The community is superb.
The AUR is great for finding software not in the repos.
And the wiki is such a wonder of information that you could write a book about it.(Dusty already did about part of it)

I could go on, but I think you get the picture.

archman-cro · 2011-05-12 17:36:49

dodo3773 wrote:

Why not choose Arch Linux?

Some can't get past the lack of package signing, so they're completely put off by that.

Last edited by archman-cro (2011-05-12 17:37:26)

Griemak · 2011-05-12 18:44:56

1. The wiki's, they are amazing. It's like having a full room of geeks and nerds helping a hot young lady with her computer problems and for once you get to be a hot young lady!

2. Rolling release. I was so tired of treating my Linux installs like a dog, letting it mess all over the house for a few months before maturing just before it died.

3. AUR. If you think mucking around with configuration files can cause errors for an unusable computer, JUST WAIT until you blindly and ignorantly begin setting make flags! (I find this fun, by the way, it really is a positive)

lothar_m · 2011-05-15 08:41:36

frank604 wrote:

Some distributions of linux freeze their packages as in they do not release newer packages after release. This is a stable model where all the package versions are controlled. They also require a new OS install every 6 months or whenever the next version of their release is made.
Bleeding edge means that the latest packages are available.
Arch is rolling release + bleeding edge. That means, you have every available package at your fingertips to use or not.

x2

Last edited by lothar_m (2011-05-15 08:42:27)

wolk · 2011-05-15 18:24:37

1. Simplicity
2. up to date packages
3. very short boot time.
4. simplicity
5. very small minimal set of mandatory packages -- you build your system as you wish
6. simplicity.

--
"Simplicity is the ultimate sophistication" -- Leonardo da Vinci

Last edited by wolk (2011-05-15 18:25:33)

techne · 2011-05-15 18:57:05

drcouzelis wrote:

dncrash wrote:
I use it because of the cool logo.
No joke! I too love the Arch Linux logo. If I had looked into using Arch when it still had the old logo I probably wouldn't have been interested in it.

What was the old logo?

archman-cro · 2011-05-15 21:19:54

techne wrote:

drcouzelis wrote:
dncrash wrote:
I use it because of the cool logo.
No joke! I too love the Arch Linux logo. If I had looked into using Arch when it still had the old logo I probably wouldn't have been interested in it.
What was the old logo?

http://www.doxaliber.it/wp-uploads/imag … x_logo.jpg

jlindgren · 2011-05-16 04:00:19

I used Debian testing before Arch. I must say that did have its advantages. I get a lot more breakage from installing updates in Arch. But I've begun to realize that this can be an opportunity for giving back to the Linux community. Just one example: within a couple of weeks after installing Arch, the update to kernel 2.6.38 made the radeon driver essentially unusable on my system (no KMS and no power saving). I spent the time to do a git bisect, found the problem commit, and submitted a patch which fixed the problem. Shortly thereafter, other users started reporting the same problem; and now that the patch has been merged into the kernel, there will be many more who will never even know the problem existed because of my small contribution. I see many other examples of Arch users giving back to the community -- think of the excellent wiki (which I used even before switching to Arch) and the many helpful people on these forums -- and that is why I am glad to be one of them.

trn · 2011-05-18 23:54:17

1) Large community and support base
2) Pacman, although the rolling releases do have some disadvantages.
3) Not a huge fan of Debian, config files and sys-v
4) Don't like Ubuntu or ubuntu based

That leaves... Arch Linux as the best choice to suit my needs for my desktop (server does run Debian, HTPC is running ubuntu)

SS4 · 2011-05-19 00:04:58

1. Rolling Release
2. Pacman
3. No WM/DE on install
4. AUR/ABS
5. The Community

1 - I get bored easily and it's easier to update than reinstall
2 - self-explanatory
3 - Makes it versatile enough to install on the desktop, laptop and toaster
4 - AUR lets pacman handle packages that would otherwise be lost and ABS allows tweaking of a program to suit my own needs easily
5 - People aren't sarcastic enough

Last edited by SS4 (2011-05-19 00:05:24)

lukaszan · 2011-05-20 15:56:32

I wanted 'a slackware' but newer and with a better package manager (some dependency tracking, maybe a central repository). To be honest, I wasn't really looking around, just read about Arch and thought I'd give it a go.

It's been 3 - 4 weeks and it's OK. Pacman is great! So is community (a few outdated howtos, but that's no problem). I'm not so fond of the 'bleeding edge' packages, so I run the updates rarely and thoughtfully (quite a few IgnorePkgs as well).

The rest is a lot like Slackware which is what I wanted.

Well done Arch!

llawwehttam · 2011-05-20 16:15:15

1.) The Arch way
2.) Rolling release
3.) Pacman
4.) Huge choice
5.) An elitist feeling without too much work XD

Awebb · 2011-05-20 17:31:43

wonder wrote:

i choose arch because it suites my needs

I chose Arch because it needs my suits. Where are my pants, by the way?

carukia · 2011-05-21 00:00:38

After reading the 'Unofficial Beginners' Guide on the Wiki I was attracted to Arch by the challenge of installing and configuring the system. I'd always used Ubuntu or OpenSuse up until then so Arch took me out of my comfort zone, which can only be a good thing. I also liked the idea of a rolling release distro.

Arch Linux

#26 2011-05-08 11:01:45

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#27 2011-05-08 12:08:11

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#28 2011-05-09 04:38:59

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#29 2011-05-09 10:52:05

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#30 2011-05-09 12:10:24

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#31 2011-05-09 16:41:49

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#32 2011-05-09 16:52:26

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#33 2011-05-09 20:05:35

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#34 2011-05-09 20:20:49

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#35 2011-05-10 20:20:47

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#36 2011-05-12 17:20:29

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#37 2011-05-12 17:26:51

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#38 2011-05-12 17:36:49

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#39 2011-05-12 18:44:56

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#40 2011-05-15 08:41:36

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#41 2011-05-15 18:24:37

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#42 2011-05-15 18:57:05

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#43 2011-05-15 21:19:54

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#44 2011-05-16 04:00:19

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#45 2011-05-18 23:54:17

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#46 2011-05-19 00:04:58

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#47 2011-05-20 15:56:32

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#48 2011-05-20 16:15:15

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#49 2011-05-20 17:31:43

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

#50 2011-05-21 00:00:38

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Board footer