You are not logged in.

#576 2018-01-26 21:23:40

lo1
Member
Registered: 2017-09-25
Posts: 584

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Trilby wrote:

But a 2 core 4GB laptop just seems like it'd be a tight fit for building everything.

I made the mistake to think that my laptop was powerful enough to build a kernel (I wanted to test the AUDIT function and some other goodies, actually I'm not sure what I wanted to accomplish).
It took me from 4pm to 10 pm, I couldn't use my laptop during those 6 hours and somehow I managed to fail compiling the kernel as I wanted. It was just a test, but I'm sure I'll never try it again until I'm sure of what I'm doing. BTW is an AMD 4 core.

Just to stay in topic, why I chose Arch? Same old story: I want a minimal system that allows some laziness and endless customization, and mostly I was sick of clicking at things that appears on a display without knowing what the hell am I doing.
I can't say that I've become a linux guru, but I'm planning to learn as much as I can and in the fastest possible way, and Arch is a distro that just fits my needs.

Last edited by lo1 (2018-01-26 21:25:01)

Offline

#577 2018-01-26 21:30:56

2ManyDogs
Forum Moderator
Registered: 2012-01-15
Posts: 3,326

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Trilby wrote:

I suppose I can always just let builds run overnight - which I may try.  But a 2 core 4GB laptop just seems like it'd be a tight fit for building everything.

I used to run Gentoo on a single-core 32-bit Celeron. Updates ran all night. I still run CRUX on a single-core 64-bit Celeron with 2G memory, and it works too. I can't build Firefox on it, but I don't care.

But those are desktop machines. I'd be worried about a laptop overheating, but I've never run a source-based distro on a laptop.

Last edited by 2ManyDogs (2018-01-26 21:31:10)

Offline

#578 2018-01-26 21:51:21

KnownAsDon
Banned
Registered: 2018-01-23
Posts: 22

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

I chose arch because:

*when i wake up in the morning i know what i do and dont have on my laptop
*when i open my laptop i cant tell the diffrence if im sleeping or im awake cause everything is like i want
*is the best linux distro in my opinion
*supports a ton not to say all of the softwares and packages u would ever want
*it makes u practise
*i learn something new everydayu
*it has made terminal my baby now even when i start up the laptop ill open the terminal to check for updates
*it has probably the best wiki forum
*people are so nice in its cominitu
*it is fast and hell
*I LOVE IT

Offline

#579 2018-01-27 12:48:12

mxfm
Member
Registered: 2015-10-23
Posts: 156

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Trilby wrote:

I think I would like gentoo too - unfortunately, the only computer I have that is remotely close to powerful enough for compiling everything from source being practical is my work computer, and that's where I stay more conservative with arch.

I suppose I can always just let builds run overnight - which I may try.  But a 2 core 4GB laptop just seems like it'd be a tight fit for building everything.

I tried gentoo and was dissappointed for two reasons: use flags mess and old software versions (ignoring old compilations - because it is a feature, and openrc - because it can be replaced with systemd). Here are reasons why Arch user will be disappointed by gentoo.

1. Core linux (kernel, gcc, DEs) packages are slightly outdated, but specific software are significantly outdated. For example, I used R 3.4 for a long time when in official repos main version was 3.2. Some people complained that latex/octave packages are so outdated that they are unusable. I know this because I am from phd background which requires this stuff, folks doing video/audio/images may have their issues. Old versions are caused by two reasons: devs aversion and lack of manpower. For example, AFAIK gcc 5 started to use C++ and this increased maintenance efforts. Gentoo devs decided just to ship old version (unfortunately, I do not have link right now for that forum thread). Lack of manpower is another problem. The reason of new version is important because of security fixes. In my experience arch security fixes are faster then gentoo.

2. Outdated versions exacerbate problems with use flags when new version of program depends on new version of library and it was not updated by devs. I had troubles with xfce dependecy of tumbler, which depends on thumbnailers, which depend on ffmpeg, which depend on gtk libs, which depend on gdk/x libs. If image support suddenly breaks in thunar, there is only guess that something is broken in that chain but it is hard to know what. It may be broken because old tumblerd places thumbs in '~/.thumbnails' and new thumbnailer puts them in '~/.cache/thumbnails'. Or may because new tumblerd switched to new priority list of thumnailers. Or something is inconsistent with ffmpeg/gst libs.

tl;dr

Anyone who prefers new software and distro with sufficient manpower will be strongly dissappointed by gentoo.
Anyone who implicitly assumes that "more configurable" means "and also stable/working" will be disappointed too.

P.S. Some less relevant points to configuration issue. I don't know why gentoo folks got nuts on systemd/openrc issue. There are almost 30 pages topic collecting critique of systemd. Some points make sense, but 90% is buzz. For example, people bash journald on binary format, but i found journald much more convenient than syslog-ng. I see little difference between doing 'nano/vim logfile' and 'journalctl' to display log text on monitor. Bash scripts are not very configurable and also require some tweaks like systemd units (sometimes). I don't know why systemd makes people crazy. These posts explain very well why systemd is not that bad.

One you say you use gentoo in help forums, the amount of help decreases.

Genkernel is worse than mkinitcpio, my setup is not supported by genkernel or dracut.

Offline

#580 2018-01-27 14:43:29

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 24,193
Website

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

mfxm, you elaborated why gentoo did not work for you, but you've also highlighted your preferences and what it is you value in a distro.  Somehow you've overlooked that preferences and values will differ between individuals and mine are very different from yours.  Though outdated software would be an issue for me to, I'm skeptical on the truth of those claims.  But for most other points, in saying why gentoo is wrong for you, you've actually added support on why it might be right for me.

This is not the time nor place, but I will say, while I fully agree there is an enormous amount of FUD about systemd out there, and a vast majority of the loudest complaints about it are complete nonsense, that is not to say there are not very good critiques such that it is not right for everyone.  I do not want/need most of the things that are now being so tightly integrated into systemd that they are either impossible or just awkward to avoid (udev, dbus, polkit, etc).

Systemd has moved so very far beyond being an init system to the point that I'm not sure it makes any more sense to say GNU/Linux than it does to say Systemd/Linux.  So much of the userspace processes are being consumed by systemd.  This is a fact, and not in itself a critique (aside from failing an old unix philosophy).  I think systemd actually does everything it does extremely well.  And if you want all the bells and whistles of a modern desktop linux system, systemd does it all better than anyone else.  But I don't want those bells and whistles.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#581 2018-01-27 16:25:07

ray731
Member
Registered: 2018-01-27
Posts: 23

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Here's my 5¢ mined from this hw: Notebook Compaq Mini CQ10-600,  RAM 2GiB, Intel Atom CPU N455 @ 1.66GHz one core, Wifi Broadcom BCM4313.

Gentoo
GentoWiki is good and comparable to ArchWiki. It took me a while to bring up wifi by checking carefully wireless ticks for kernel compiling. LXQt was installed easily. Firefox time compilation was huge (ca. 20h - especially nice when at the end of it an error message about a missed USE flag stopped it). I installed QupZilla browser instead.
IMHO: A rolling disto with a great concept, but it's not practical enough. It's usable if you have a spare PC for compiling and then dd-copy a partition to a work PC. Maybe, if there are enough CPU cores and it's possible to compile in background, it would be more acceptable.

Puppy Linux
PuppyForum is good and comparable to ArchForum. Wifi was set up in a breeze. Entire OS is loaded in RAM, session changes are saved in a separate sfs file.
IMHO: Puppy is great and quick, but alas, not rolling.

Arch Linux
Arch is rock-and-rolling. But with systemd as unoptional stuff. That's sad. Wifi was set up only with AUR package, and it should be reinstalled after each kernel upgrade.
IMHO: A bleeding-edge distro.

--link redacted--
Arch Linux whith s6 init instead of systemd. That's really cool. Wifi was set up in a breeze.
IMHO: The system is transparent and simple, as it should be.

Last edited by jasonwryan (2018-01-27 17:11:37)

Offline

#582 2018-01-27 17:10:26

R00KIE
Forum Moderator
From: Between a computer and a chair
Registered: 2008-09-14
Posts: 4,734

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

@ray731
In the two posts you have made you are advertising or linking to your own Arch derivative which we don't support or care about here, stop doing that or there will be consequences, you've been warned.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Co … licitation


R00KIE
Tm90aGluZyB0byBzZWUgaGVyZSwgbW92ZSBhbG9uZy4K

Offline

#583 2018-01-27 17:23:02

mxfm
Member
Registered: 2015-10-23
Posts: 156

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Trilby wrote:

mfxm, you elaborated why gentoo did not work for you, but you've also highlighted your preferences and what it is you value in a distro.  Somehow you've overlooked that preferences and values will differ between individuals and mine are very different from yours.  Though outdated software would be an issue for me to, I'm skeptical on the truth of those claims.  But for most other points, in saying why gentoo is wrong for you, you've actually added support on why it might be right for me.

This is not the time nor place, but I will say, while I fully agree there is an enormous amount of FUD about systemd out there, and a vast majority of the loudest complaints about it are complete nonsense, that is not to say there are not very good critiques such that it is not right for everyone.  I do not want/need most of the things that are now being so tightly integrated into systemd that they are either impossible or just awkward to avoid (udev, dbus, polkit, etc).

Systemd has moved so very far beyond being an init system to the point that I'm not sure it makes any more sense to say GNU/Linux than it does to say Systemd/Linux.  So much of the userspace processes are being consumed by systemd.  This is a fact, and not in itself a critique (aside from failing an old unix philosophy).  I think systemd actually does everything it does extremely well.  And if you want all the bells and whistles of a modern desktop linux system, systemd does it all better than anyone else.  But I don't want those bells and whistles.

I don't see how my option was meant to enforce someone choice, in particular yours. I made several claims why people looking for newest packages and stable system (like me) would be disappointed. Yes, my thoughts can be subjective, but I cannot see why they become very wrong. Whether gentoo packages are outdated comparing to arch can be easily checked. Is genkernel worse than arch mkinitcpio? Yes, because indeed it does not support my setup, I filed issue myself and was working on genkernel patch myself (after which I came to conclusion that mkinitcpio authors produced a very good init shell script).

OK, so you don't like systemd for consuming stuff. Lets' take it for granted (i can argue that some parts are optional - for example, one can prevent systemd from consuming inet by using default resolver and dhcp client instead of resolved and networkd, as I do; yes, this does not help from consuming core parts - init and journal subsystems). But you can use (unsupported) openrc in arch linux. Or, you can use distro other than arch and gentoo which does not have systemd (i heard some good words about void linux and runit).

Now some words about the preference of "not having systemd bells and whistles" itself. I think 1) that some systemd stuff is really needed because lots of software today depends on dbus in a such way, that it is not some fancy feature anymore and 2) Sitting on unstable distro with limited init, syslog systems and outdated packages for the sake of "not having systemd bells and whistles" will not pay in long-term. I used gentoo for some time and constantly had issues which could have been avoided if i was using systemd distro with stable software (i mean software versions match each other so everything is working). The more troubles I had, more often I was asking myself why should i have such inconvenience for the sake of "not having systemd bells and whistles".

tl;dr

Anyone is free to try gentoo, i merely express arguments why they would be disappointed (by instability, lack of some features, by outdated software).

P.S. By the way, when I was looking at gentoo packages versions it remind me about another problem - gentoo site has often glitches indicating lack of manpower for web site too.

Offline

#584 2018-01-27 19:06:59

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 24,193
Website

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

mxfm wrote:

... lots of software today depends on dbus...

And that's relevant.  If you use lots of software.  Not if you don't.

There is only one bit of software I use on my system that has a hard dependency on dbus.  And I could quite readily replace that tool with an alternative.

Last edited by Trilby (2018-01-27 19:08:36)


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#585 2018-01-27 19:16:53

ugjka
Member
From: Latvia
Registered: 2014-04-01
Posts: 1,424

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

At this point there is no choice, arch offers what I want and there are very few competing distros that come close.

Offline

#586 2018-03-18 02:10:51

perdomwx
Member
Registered: 2013-07-18
Posts: 6

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

I primarily use Arch because it gives me control over the software I have in my system. I also like that fact how well KDE runs in it.

Offline

#587 2018-03-18 04:19:52

ace_ang
Member
Registered: 2018-03-18
Posts: 16

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

It simply clicked with me and I find it interesting.

It's difficult to find replacements of software that I need for work though, so I'm stuck with using Wine. Still, it's great that there's this option, else I'd never even be in the Linux world.

Offline

#588 2018-03-18 14:34:27

ayekat
Member
Registered: 2011-01-17
Posts: 1,392
Website

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

perdomwx wrote:

I primarily use Arch because it gives me control over the software I have in my system.

That applies to any system with a package manager, though, doesn't it? (and wouldn't a system that doesn't give you that control be horrible anyway? tongue)


{,META,RE}PKGBUILDSpacman-hacks (includes makemetapkg and remakepkg) │ dotfiles

Offline

#589 2018-03-18 16:25:20

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 24,193
Website

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

ayekat wrote:

That applies to any system with a package manager, though, doesn't it?

In principle, sure - but in practice, not really.

At the extreme end, macOS and android both have package managers; but if the whole system is built like a Jenga tower, you can't really remove that one bit just because you don't like it.

ayekat wrote:

and wouldn't a system that doesn't give you that control be horrible anyway?

No need for the subjunctive mood of the verb there: yes, those systems are horrible.  Which is why many of us choose arch.


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#590 2018-03-18 17:44:45

perdomwx
Member
Registered: 2013-07-18
Posts: 6

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

ayekat wrote:
perdomwx wrote:

I primarily use Arch because it gives me control over the software I have in my system.

That applies to any system with a package manager, though, doesn't it? (and wouldn't a system that doesn't give you that control be horrible anyway? tongue)

That's valid, however Arch is ahead by not pre-installing more software than you actually need like unlike other distributions.

Offline

#591 2018-03-18 18:43:55

ayekat
Member
Registered: 2011-01-17
Posts: 1,392
Website

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Trilby wrote:

At the extreme end, macOS and android both have package managers; but if the whole system is built like a Jenga tower, you can't really remove that one bit just because you don't like it.

Ah, I forgot about those, you're right.

perdomwx wrote:

Arch is ahead by not pre-installing more software than you actually need like unlike other distributions.

I conclude that you haven't taken a look at the base group yet. smile (that's a pretty controversial topic, by the way, so I'll leave it at that)

Debian, Fedora and Gentoo (+ a surely a plethora of smaller niche distributions) allow "only what I need"-kind of installations as well.
What makes distributions like Arch so nice is that the installation procedure (it's basically calling `pacstrap` with the list of packages you want installed) makes the choice of packages transparent to the user.


{,META,RE}PKGBUILDSpacman-hacks (includes makemetapkg and remakepkg) │ dotfiles

Offline

#592 2018-03-18 20:59:39

eschwartz
Trusted User/Bug Wrangler
Registered: 2014-08-08
Posts: 3,610

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Yeah, um, Arch Linux has never been afraid to compile packages --with-kitchen-sink and include the resulting non-optional dependencies because "packages with more features are nice". If nothing else, that alone proves that you don't necessarily have as much control as you think...


Managing AUR repos The Right Way -- aurpublish (now a standalone tool)

Offline

#593 2018-03-18 21:05:40

ugjka
Member
From: Latvia
Registered: 2014-04-01
Posts: 1,424

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

On /r/linux on reddit there's always a shitstorm whenever someone says that arch is minimalist. But in general there is a lot of hate towards archlinux

Offline

#594 2018-03-18 21:07:00

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 24,193
Website

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

ugjka wrote:

On ... reddit there's always a shitstorm ... in general there is a lot of hate

FTFY


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#595 2018-03-18 21:09:08

ugjka
Member
From: Latvia
Registered: 2014-04-01
Posts: 1,424

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Trilby wrote:
ugjka wrote:

On ... reddit there's always a shitstorm ... in general there is a lot of hate

FTFY

Yeah I get it... But I think a lot of ppl confuse minimalism with simplicity but even then you'll have neckbeards shouting "this is not the unix way"

Offline

#596 2018-03-18 21:13:56

ngoonee
Forum Fellow
From: Between Thailand and Singapore
Registered: 2009-03-17
Posts: 7,247

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

ugjka wrote:

But in general there is a lot of hate towards archlinux

I call 'psychology'. In particular the tendency all humans have of thinking their preferred X (in this case Arch) is the target of a lot of unfair hate.

This manifests itself in sports, in politics, in any arena of life where people make choices, somehow everyone believes the one they choose gets a lot of unfair comments/treatment etc.

The right Arch response is to not give a damn.


Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Offline

#597 2018-03-19 08:41:21

ray731
Member
Registered: 2018-01-27
Posts: 23

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Trilby wrote:

[At the extreme end, macOS and android both have package managers; but if the whole system is built like a Jenga tower, you can't really remove that one bit just because you don't like it.]

Re android, you can root your device and get full control of the whole system. For example, you may remove all google crapps, install / remove any apk with a package manager, or install a new custom ROM.

Offline

#598 2018-03-19 11:00:44

Trilby
Inspector Parrot
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 24,193
Website

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

Like I said, you can't remove one piece you don't like.  Of course, on any hardware you can scrap everything and put your own OS.  But then you are not working within the existing OS, you are replacing it.

And in the case of android phones, there are service providers with whom your phone will no longer work if you do this.

Really, this is a bit like saying a 586 computer can have the same processing power as a modern multicore i7 ... just as long as you swap out the processor, ram, and some of the busses.

Last edited by Trilby (2018-03-19 11:02:15)


"UNIX is simple and coherent..." - Dennis Ritchie, "GNU's Not UNIX" -  Richard Stallman

Offline

#599 2018-03-19 12:17:14

ray731
Member
Registered: 2018-01-27
Posts: 23

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

I don't mean hardware, but software. Android OS = Linux kernel + Google apps + not Google apps. Having root access, I can work with existing OS, i.e. leave minimal number of packages needed for service providers (and they do work with this) and scrap all the rest.

The same to arch. I can replace only systemd with another init system, and the rest (that doesn't require systemd, or can work around it) does work.

Offline

#600 2018-03-19 19:41:59

Cknight70
Member
Registered: 2018-01-24
Posts: 64

Re: why you choose ArchLinux?

In general, I have been getting tired of company politics deciding things rather than what is best for users. Windows 10 happens to be a perfect example of an OS ingrained with company agenda in it. So, last year I decided I wanted to ditch Windows for good and head over to FOSS land.

I had a feeling of cluelessness in past experiences with Linux. Even with Ubuntu, people were recommending to use the console for certain tasks. So, I wanted something that could hopefully help me learn more about the OS I was using. I'm majoring in Computer Science, so it would be useful to know more about my computer anyways.

For those reasons, I looked for a minimal install distro that told me how to do something, rather than holding my hand blindly leading me along. I also enjoy choices so I would appreciate whatever I choose to have plenty of updated packages.

First I looked at FreeBSD having heard it was centralized and so was its documentation, as opposed to Linux having many different packages made by different people. So I assumed it would be easier to understand fully and be more stable.
But... no optimus like support or real support for newer Intel graphics until 2019 made me skeptical and  it didn't seem to have too many packages. Then I had problems dual booting with Windows on UEFI. So I decided to look at other options.

For a while after trying FreeBSD, I aimlessly looked for a distro, Linux or otherwise that would fit my needs. Three notable ones I ended up doing research on being TrueOS, Void, and Slackware before concluding they were not what I wanted. (P.S. I don't know why none of them had Systemd, I'm a big fan of it now...)

Now during this time I had known about Arch but was trying to avoid it! Like ugjka mentioned, there is a lot of negativity surrounding Arch in some non-professional communities like Reddit and 4chan. The general message I got from these places is "Arch is for people who want to feel superior than others and they have way too much time to fix their constantly breaking system."

But when I saw the wiki, it convinced me to give it a chance. I'm really glad I did. All the negative slander seem so far detached from the reality I've experienced that it actually makes me worried for the people saying such things.
Arch has been great. It fits what I want perfectly and the people are nice and very helpful as long as you're willing to do your homework first. I've also learned a lot, making Linux a joy to use now. I didn't even know what a kernel was before installing Arch.
I have no plans on switching.

Thanks for reading smile

Last edited by Cknight70 (2018-03-19 19:53:23)

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB