is Arch falling behind?

AndyRTR · 2006-03-30 11:30:34

The Frugalware Developer Team is pleased to announce the immediate availability of Frugalware 0.4 for the i686 and x86_64 architectures, our fourth stable release.
A short and incomplete list of changes since 0.4rc2-i686:

    * Updates:
          o Update to Linux 2.6.16
          o Update to GNOME 2.14
          o Update to OpenOffice.org 2.0.2.1
          o Lots of minor bugfixes
          o Create a howto about upgrading from the previous stable release

    * A few statistics since 0.3:
          o 4186 changes
          o 732 new packages
          o 302 fixed bugs

    * For who haven't followed the changes in the pre/rc releases, the most important changes:
          o Implemented fwcpan, a new tool to install any cpan module, just like it would when you install it with pacman.
          o Split OpenOffice, now all language packs and dictionaries can be installed/removed separately.
          o Libificated pacman to meet our needs, and the newborn pacman 3 has become the default package manager.
          o Network configuration has been redesigned, now we support various network profiles, and many more network parameters (hardware address, multiple ip addresses on a single interface, etc) than before.
          o Created a new, more verbose documentation.
          o Switched to udev as the default hotplug multiplexer.
          o Bugfix: now automounting for usb sticks works fine, not only for CDs or DVDs.
          o Added package splitting support.
          o Started to work on a PPC port.
          o Rewritten setup from scratch in C. The new framework will allow to implement a graphical installer, too.
          o The init script system was redesigned: more user-friendly error messages, now uses gettext for translations.
          o Modularized Xorg 7.0, Apache 2.2.0, KDE 3.5.1, Firefox 1.5.0.1, Thunderbird 1.5


Please refer to the Frugalware Stable ChangeLog for more information.


Download for i686: netinstall (19M), cd1 (490M), cd2 (604M), dvd (3.5G)


Download for x86_64: netinstall (19M), dvd (2.5G)


Torrents also available.


SHA1SUMS:
dfec06c393187037a362f4d2e57819c4e97e71dd frugalware-0.4-i686-cd1.iso

09c29ec582eadc02dee2be0fd1230cff8ec40695 frugalware-0.4-i686-cd2.iso

872912bc9f1caa46895247364bcf7538074f8238 frugalware-0.4-i686-dvd.iso

6a1a49985450d2cad8c8efb7f988c266a454f899 frugalware-0.4-i686-net.iso

81e79a3bbb9d327555d272d841e3d0fc0c784de7 frugalware-0.4-x86_64-dvd.iso

d4b39dbdc9bfadaf379bf7cc3662ce9d0b20a010 frugalware-0.4-x86_64-net.iso

Puh. They are less developers. But they're much faster and have almost everything included we are waiting for.

What's up with arch? Are we going to loose the bleading edge state :?:

AndyRTR

tpowa · 2006-03-30 11:38:23

i don't see your problem at all, we have all this stuff in testing.
give it a shot and try give feedback then we can move along faster.
greetings
tpowa

AndyRTR · 2006-03-30 11:56:06

We don't have support for multiple architectures. Even not in testing. Nobody cares except Xentac.

We don't have a source build OpenOffice. Some packages take too much time before they get updated even if it is not much work to do(krusader is the last example).

For me it loooks that big packages stay quiet long in testing. Is arch becoming more conservative?

And running arch not having latest pacman is strange. Isn't it?

tpowa · 2006-03-30 11:59:32

hmm what you wanna hear?
last time we did changes it was too fast now others claim we are too slow, use testing and you are bleeding edge what's the problem?
else feel free to use abs to get what you want

ady · 2006-03-30 12:03:04

Arch has all those things and kde 3.5.2, if u add some unofficial repos u get xfce4-svn and a bundle of other things cvs/svn

dtw · 2006-03-30 12:11:36

TBH, mate, I just think you have a bee in your bonnet over your perceived lack of support for the 64 bit port.

64 bit is still a new architecture and I'm not sure Arch ever originally intended to support other architectures - it was i686 optimized in a time when i686 was not the only arch after all.

64 bit will be supported and adopted in time I think, especially as more people buy 64 bit machines. I also appreciate your frustration, I have been there myself. But airing your laundry in public ain't a good way to go, I've been there too. Criticism, as well meaning as you might feel, ain't always welcome round here.

Neuro · 2006-03-30 12:14:33

AndyRTR wrote:

We don't have a source build OpenOffice. Some packages take too much time before they get updated even if it is not much work to do(krusader is the last example).
For me it loooks that big packages stay quiet long in testing. Is arch becoming more conservative?

Unfortunately you're right about OpenOffice. It's really sad that Arch doesn't have it's own-built package. Too bad no one picked up your work from the "Making Packages" forum.

And yes, some packages are rarely updated and lag a bit. But, you can't generalize this, because, compared to other distros, Arch is really bleeding edge. I suppose you're already using [testing] and the sole purpose of it is to test things before going into [current]. I doubt if Frugal's KDE or GNOME received enough testing before they put it into mainstream use.

Personally, I like Arch's approach: bleeding edge but with some sensible testing before. Although I agree, it's not perfect.

raskolnikov · 2006-03-30 12:20:21

The main feature that appeal me to frugalware is that they have a "stable" tree. Yeah I know of the "release" repo, but it's just a snapshot of "current"... Having a stable "extra" as frugal do would be nice.

AndyRTR · 2006-03-30 12:29:32

The lack of support for the 64bit port is really disappoiting me as 64bit will be the future :cry:

I don't have a problem if a slower speed is now the goal of the development. But I'm not sure if the devs are only too busy to do their job here. I love the rolling release. I just wonder if arch has become to big to be the fastest and(!) stable distro.

Unofficial repos and AUR are not the core distro. So don't mix it. I know how to deal with custom packages ;-)

tpowa · 2006-03-30 12:38:00

busy to do the job?
yes i'm too busy to do the OO.org built but it will come in the future,
Jan wants to look at it as we stated in an early bug report already.
the rest you mentioned is up to date, so i don't understand your point.
it seems you don't know how much work it is to be bleeding edge.

iphitus · 2006-03-30 12:41:36

AndyRTR wrote:

We don't have support for multiple architectures. Even not in testing. Nobody cares except Xentac.

I care. I'd like to see an x86-64 port. I'd be willing to work on it with you. Is there a todo list anywhere? Anything specific to work on?

We don't have a source build OpenOffice. Some packages take too much time before they get updated even if it is not much work to do(krusader is the last example).

Which is maintained by JGC who happens to have GCC, Glibc, Xorg, GTK2 and gstreamer. Sometimes things have to be prioritised. Krusader doesnt have a higher priority than those. To be fair, a majority of Arch's packages, are updated frequently, and those that arent are in the minority.

For me it loooks that big packages stay quiet long in testing. Is arch becoming more conservative?

Unfortunately it most certainly is.

But it's not the developers... It's the users.

Daily I see posts about people wanting to holdpkg or ignorepkg or whatever xorg, and kernel and udev and other things like that.

The users are becoming conservative. The users dont use testing. So yeah, thats why theres a lot in testing, Nobody tests testing, and then we have to push it out and hope it doesnt mess up too many systems.

raskolnikov: our extra is meant to be stable, but bugs creep in because users dont test.....catch 22!

And running arch not having latest pacman is strange. Isn't it?

Not really.

James

AndyRTR · 2006-03-30 12:58:37

Tpowa - I know ;-)

That's why I've asked it. I want to know if it is still the goal to have everything first. If not that's not a problem. I think James has found better words for what I mean.

iphitutus: Wiki section - mail me for details and let's meet in #archlinux64 - cu there later.

AndyRTR

raskolnikov · 2006-03-30 13:25:23

iphitus wrote:

raskolnikov: our extra is meant to be stable, but bugs creep in because users dont test.....catch 22!

Hey, I use testing you know

But when I want to do some productive things I need a stable distro, and with Arch I spend some time to fix bugs after -Syu (fam startup error, fonts installed in X11R6 instead of /usr/share/fonts, etc). Annoying, especially when bugs are reported while packages are in testing and they move into current/extra broken.

pixel · 2006-03-30 13:28:32

Good system is not about "bleeding edge" but stability and reliability, and that said Arch's current should be aimed at providing stable packages at all costs. All ultra bleeding edge packages should be in testing until they are tested thoroughfully.

If you ask me i dont care about Gnome, KDE, OpenOffice at all, im not using those blobs of bloat on any of my machines. It's nice Arch provide these programs for desktop oriented users, but it shouldnt be its goal.

dtw · 2006-03-30 13:50:46

AndyRTR wrote:

The lack of support for the 64bit port is really disappoiting me as 64bit will be the future :cry:

Will it? Is that an absolute certainty?

Snarkout · 2006-03-30 14:06:14

dtw wrote:

AndyRTR wrote:
The lack of support for the 64bit port is really disappoiting me as 64bit will be the future :cry:
Will it? Is that an absolute certainty?

We'll all be using 64 bit on the day we are all using ipv6.

Pablo_Escobar · 2006-03-30 14:28:02

Compared to the stable branch of Gentoo we're miles ahead of them.
Compared to f.e. Fedoras core & extras repo , we're lacking in some areas, but I have to say, by testing FC5, their "new" packages are not well prepared.

Dusty · 2006-03-30 15:57:35

I wasn't aware we were in a race.

Moo-Crumpus · 2006-03-30 16:16:30

Seems we are. It's all about sports, you know.

pressh · 2006-03-30 16:20:12

Can we still win ?

mezoko · 2006-03-30 19:17:13

Moo-Crumpus wrote:

Seems we are. It's all about sports, you know.

eww sports I suck at them....
Guys I love arch. 90% I almost never have a problem with arch. Everyonce in a while arch is has an issue but it is usually fixed.

iBertus · 2006-03-30 20:21:32

IMHO, the x86_64 port is not gaining support because most Arch users came here to get the most out of i686 and like to get the most use out of a machine possible prior to upgrading.

That said, I took the plunge after having some hardware issues with my previous rig. I'll be glad to help with Arch64 if I can, I'll build packages and help with docs, but I'm pretty busy and can't dedicate more than a few hours per week. I'm already neglecting other projects (sorry, dtw) that I wanted to assist with and I plan on finding some sort of balance soon. Thank god the semester is almost finished and this summer I should be able to really get to work on these projects.

Lone_Wolf · 2006-03-30 20:41:32

Maybe it's time to apply KISS to the way arch is developed.

Here's a proposal :

- Archstats (or a similar tool) is made part of the base install and included in the cron jobs. It must track current, extra, community (AUR) and unsupported packages (AUR)

- current & extra focus on big packages important for all/most of arch users.
ex : kernels + modules (nvidia,ati, madwifi etc) , udev, xorg, gnome, kde

- All other packages are moved to community.

- For community we add a new group : package maintainers These only have to take a few packages and keep them uptodate.

- TU's concentrate more on managing AUR.
Checking packages for safety, moving packages between community / unsupported based on archstats results, appointing package maintainers are some of the jobs they need to do.
When a package is to move from unsupported to community, the user that maintained the package sofar is the first choice to become the package maintainer for this package.

When package maintainers don't do their job, the packages they maintain are moved back to unsupported and the user loses the status of maintainer.

In short : ArchLinux has many experienced users. Make them part of the team, even if they only maintain 1 package !

EAD · 2006-03-30 20:41:37

I having ARCH , it is so good!
almost never had a prolbem couldnt solve with help of people here. I think most distos can have a lesson from ARCH :!:

AndyRTR · 2006-03-30 20:54:19

Lone_Wolf wrote:

In short : ArchLinux has many experienced users. Make them part of the team, even if they only maintain 1 package !

Sounds good - but: packages have dependencies! So groups have to be build. It's almost not possible to only maintain a single package.

Arch Linux

#1 2006-03-30 11:30:34

is Arch falling behind?

#2 2006-03-30 11:38:23

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#3 2006-03-30 11:56:06

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#4 2006-03-30 11:59:32

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#5 2006-03-30 12:03:04

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#6 2006-03-30 12:11:36

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#7 2006-03-30 12:14:33

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#8 2006-03-30 12:20:21

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#9 2006-03-30 12:29:32

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#10 2006-03-30 12:38:00

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#11 2006-03-30 12:41:36

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#12 2006-03-30 12:58:37

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#13 2006-03-30 13:25:23

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#14 2006-03-30 13:28:32

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#15 2006-03-30 13:50:46

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#16 2006-03-30 14:06:14

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#17 2006-03-30 14:28:02

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#18 2006-03-30 15:57:35

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#19 2006-03-30 16:16:30

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#20 2006-03-30 16:20:12

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#21 2006-03-30 19:17:13

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#22 2006-03-30 20:21:32

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#23 2006-03-30 20:41:32

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#24 2006-03-30 20:41:37

Re: is Arch falling behind?

#25 2006-03-30 20:54:19

Re: is Arch falling behind?

Board footer