Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

srey · 2004-02-07 21:57:48

OK, as I was commenting to some folks on the #archlinux channel last night, I have been running Arch for about 2 days now, after a year spent with Slack, and a few months with Gentoo (and 90% of that time was spent compiling

So far, I'm extremely impressed. I had never even heard of Arch until a few weeks ago, when some Gentoo users were telling me they bailed out in favor of Arch, so I started Googling on it and reading the forum posts to get some more information. Then, 2 days ago, I downloaded the base ISO and did the FTP install.

10 minutes later (NOT 10 hours, Gentoo folks), I had the base system installed. All i686 optimized, 2.4.24 kernel and all. I loved being able to edit the config files during the install - a nice feature that some others should implement. 10 more minutes, and I had Pacman updated, X installed, and Fluxbox up and running.

The speed and stability is fantastic, and the minimalistic nature of the whole distro is simply incomparible. The responses on the forum are intelligent and respectful. Not so on Gentoo, or worse, Slack. This damn thing boots in 12 seconds, and shuts down in 5! Incredible.

Anyway, I just wanted Judd, all the developers, the package maintainers, and all fellow users to know that you've got something special here. I will try to help out any way that I can, be it documentation, advice, whatever.

Great job!

whol · 2004-02-07 23:03:50

I was running fluxbox on Gentoo for a while, but now I figured I'd try XFCE4 since I saw so many AL screenshots using it. I wonder if it is the unofficial favorite? It has it's own category in the Package section. So far it suits me well enough.

Originally, I didn't see fluxbox in the package section (I was only looking at current). Now I see it, but I'm already checking out XFCE4. A few bells and whistles is not such a bad thing. 8)

I spent weeks rebuilding Gentoo, trying to get OpenOffice to get along with some other apps. Later I tried the precompiled OO, but then system updates downloaded the last *5* quarterly binary updates, only to then complain about some confusion it had regarding binary and source dependencies.

People find it hard to believe you can spend weeks rebuilding your OS, and I was even using ccache and disctcc between my two big boxes. Everytime someone had a suggestion to fix an error, it took 5 hours to see if it helped. One day I said to myself, "Self, there are better things I could be doing with my time than rebuilding my OS."

I'm working on a document on how to install Arch in to a VMWare client. Installing directly from an ISO image (instead of a physical CD) really speeds things up, it takes about 5 minutes instead of 10 minutes for a base install.

thx

Moo-Crumpus · 2004-02-08 00:11:04

whol wrote:

One day I said to myself, "Self, there are better things I could be doing with my time than rebuilding my OS."

Several days later, you will learn there'd be better things to do with your time than configurating arch, trying out which 'common' tools are available or braking the system, if you try them.
I found out arch users and maintainers are kind of snobbish (not all). I won't use slackware or gentoo just to get enogh "maturity" to use arch.

I am sorry, that so many arch users don't appreciate that users who come from a more consistend system have some difficulties with arch. I know what to do in debian, f.e, but all my known tools are not available in arch.
Unfortunately, little documentation really fits arch. I see, f.e., fedora is younger but it's documentation is bigger and better than arch's. Arch is snobbish.
I am sick of begging for help to get knowledge about what tools are to be used to get some little things done. I return to systems that are written to aid users in solving problems.

Bye and good luck, I finished my third and last arch try.

Bobonov · 2004-02-08 02:20:25

Several days later, you will learn there'd be better things to do with your time than configurating arch, trying out which 'common' tools are available or braking the system, if you try them.
I found out arch users and maintainers are kind of snobbish (not all). I won't use slackware or gentoo just to get enogh "maturity" to use arch.

Personally I moved from red hat almost directly to arch, I just tried some other distro on the way but always with unsatisfactory result.

Sorry to wich tools do you refer exactly?? If they are configuration tools
I do not miss them at all, mainly because tools does not allow you to tricks with your configuration.
The addictional tools are only front end to configuration files and 99% of them does not allow you to configure all the option. If you try to chahenge the configuration by hand most of the tools became unusefull.

Arch state clear that it is not a distribution for people that like front end to configuration files. Maybe you should have read better the description before moving to arch. Anyway the file you need to know to manage arch are realy few, almost everything can be done in rc.conf.

Other file are the standard one common to every distribution (httpd.conf, php.ini, inittab, etc. etc.) .

Anyway everyone can have an opinion and if you do not like arch you are free express it in the same way others say they like it.

Good luk with your next distribution.

srey · 2004-02-08 02:24:35

Pink Chick,
In reality, a keyboard, 10 fingers, and an editor is all you need to configure a system.
I'm sure many of us here would be happy to help you out with Arch questions if you get stuck on something.
I'm new to Arch myself, but will probably stay *BECAUSE* of the lack of "fluff" and unnecessary items. To me, learning and tinkering is part of the fun.
I consider myself only an intermediate Linux user, and some of the questions I have may be considered by some as "basic", but perhaps I have not done one particular task yet, and I need help.
But I started with Slack, and it took me a LONG time to learn stuff and get it working. I spent a lot of time with Google, and asking a million questions to other users. Some are indeed snobbish (f.e., don't go near the Slack newsgroup with a question that can be found ANYWHERE on the net, or they will bite your head off). But eventually, you will find the answer.
We all need to work with a system that meets our own needs, so if you want to move on to something more friendly, may I suggest Fedora Core?
It may have everything you're looking for as far as front-end GUI configuration tools. And you're right, there is documentation up the yinyang, but that's due to RedHat being a mutimillion dollar corporation and a user base of tens of thousands.

scottro · 2004-02-08 04:15:33

Speaking of Fluxbox and Gentoo, I think Arch is the only distro besides Gentoo that includes the menu key patch---it becomes incredibly handy, enabling you to navigate the rootmenu with keystrokes.

It's a shame to hear the Gentoo forums and IRC aren't being very helpful, they used to be a fun place to hang out. I guess it's gotten too popular.

Scott

whol · 2004-02-08 04:31:18

Sorry to see you go Pink, as I am just arriving. I read some of your older messages in order to find an example of the condescending replies to your questions, but I did not see any (granted I only read a handful). Regardless, I think one has to trudge forward with a bit of humour and a bit of patience. Do you see the movie "A Knight's Tale"? Sometimes we must trudge.

As the experts here are the first to admit, this distro is not for everyone. Many have said it is more of a "server distro" due to its leaness, or at least that is its heritage. Arch Linux, to me, captures the Unix spirit of "less is more".

I've used linux off an on for a few years, my first couple of questions showed how quickly one can forget the simple things if you havent done them in a while. I'm picking up speed now, slowly remembering things I had forgot, and where to find the answers to other things.

For what it's worth, I don't think people donate their time and energy to something like creating a Linux distro in order to be "snobby". Yet, anyone can be snobby on a bad day, or when they feel like they are being slighted. The best I can currently "give back" is to create an Arch Linux VMWare Guest How-To, but I try to let the people who are helping me know that I will propagate their goodwill. And that, I think, is what it's all about.

Instead of leaving, why not get more involved? You already know a lot about Linux, thats obvious from the questions you asked. There is always a shortage of people who care, and it's clear that you do.

I mentioned I had tried Gentoo and Slackware, I have also tried Debian, Redhat, Mandrake, Knoppix, SUSE, Libranet, and FreeBSD. WIth each distro I eventually encountered some fatal flaw or severe annoyance. - and that could also happen with AL. A big difference is, AL is young and small, and if I have valid concerns - they are more likely to be heard. If they are invalid, I am more likely to find out why. Ironically, aside from normal linux stuff, there is actually *less* to learn with AL, because it is so simple. Other distros tend to have "chain reactions" when changes are made.

If you find a better distro, perhaps discuss it's features with some of the people here. If its the people "in general" that turn you off, then like my mother said, "You can't chose you're family, but you can chose your friends."

thx

sarah31 · 2004-02-08 08:25:09

Pink Chick wrote:

whol wrote:
One day I said to myself, "Self, there are better things I could be doing with my time than rebuilding my OS."
Several days later, you will learn there'd be better things to do with your time than configurating arch, trying out which 'common' tools are available or braking the system, if you try them.
I found out arch users and maintainers are kind of snobbish (not all). I won't use slackware or gentoo just to get enogh "maturity" to use arch.
I am sorry, that so many arch users don't appreciate that users who come from a more consistend system have some difficulties with arch. I know what to do in debian, f.e, but all my known tools are not available in arch.
Unfortunately, little documentation really fits arch. I see, f.e., fedora is younger but it's documentation is bigger and better than arch's. Arch is snobbish.
I am sick of begging for help to get knowledge about what tools are to be used to get some little things done. I return to systems that are written to aid users in solving problems.
Bye and good luck, I finished my third and last arch try.

well not to be snobbish but personally i get tired of hearing such complaints. the docs are VERY clear that if you don't know the commandline and some of the dark underbally of linux then this ditro is not for you.

personally i started with the guiest of them all mandrake and it was hopelessly crappy and the people got so rude that i gave up and hapily went back to using XP. then i came back and moved on to libranet and tried a pure debian install. eventually i had both debian SID and libranet (using SID sources) running beautifully.

i finally decided to try gentoo and was impressed with how much faster a non-i386 optimized system was but was not very impressed with the portage repository handling nor the instability. after twoo weeks of putting way too much into getting it stable than what i got in return i quit.

about this time i discovered arch (right between 0.2and 0.3). it sounded just what i was looking for. there were a few early battles but i can tell you that with all that i learn in debian and with a short spell in gentoo i appreciated just how easy it was to configure.

i for one appreciate tha there are no pointless long winded gui configuration tools. i learn more about my system doing it "the hard way" than being spoon fed generic setting by some gui tool.

the problem with most of the people out there is that they do not want to get their hands dirty. they expect other people to do it for them. they expect computing to be as is as a television remote.

i cannot express just how wrong that is. not to mention "dangerous". do you realized how much time you can save by spending and extra few minutes doing something the hard way? do you not think it is beneficial to know how to do things on the command line for when all else fails and you are stuck without X and all of the fancy gui tools they support? do you not think that this education you pick up is beneficial to the rest of use who are not geeks by trade/education? alot of the coders i know know very well how to use the software they design but are truly lousy at explaining it for the rest of us. but when one individual that has the ability to bridge the gap and get a tutorial down "on paper" can then off this back to the commnity as a whole it helps greatly.

alot of developers or long time users may seem snobby but remember we have paid our dues configuring , learning and helping and it gets really hard to answer, again and again, questions that have been well covered here or issues such as upgrading the xfree on the disc to the current xfree that were documanted in the news on the homepage or on the mail list or even here on the forum.

can arch's documantation get better.... absolutely but first that requires getting individuals that are actually willing to spend long hours writing docs on a regular basis. right now arch has no one like that. there are lots of things that need upgrading on the install docs, FAQs, etc. documentation should strive to be as dynamic as the the ongoing changes in the distro and source it uses.

but even with good docs using arch requires that you either be patient or know the underpinning of linux. you cannot be afraid or too lazy to do a little research every now and then. sometimes the "snobbish" attitude come from the fact that we know damn well that you have not take the thirty seconds it take to look on the webpages' news article for an answer. there have even been instances on irc where one person asks one question and gets an answer then another person, who has been logged for the entire time a question was asked and answered, asks the same question.

alot of questions about software functioning/configuration is a few keystroke away by typing "man <programnamehere>". people say that manpages are useless or old. well i think that you just have not even read some of what is there. you just believe the old rumors out there that manpages are shit.

when i switched to debian and gentoo i found tha manpages are incredibly useful and most developers keep their manpages very well up to date. on the other hand html and infopages are quite often easily a version behind. i have been to several webpages and they don't even provide ANY real help or description o anything useful on their package. it all comes from the manpages. judd, for example, keeps the manpage for makepkg and pacman right up to date, and if it is not he fixes it. if you do not believe me take alook at the cvs log message for the second release of pacman-2.7.3.

then there are those people that just don't know how to ask questions properly. Pink Chick you sometimes asked questions that i would not even begin to know how to respond to because i had not clue what exactly you wanted. either it was because you used terminology or syntax that just did not make it clear. there are many people like me hre that need questions to be stated clearly and as thoroughly as possible. using terminology such as tasksel only confuses me because i think only a few distros actually use such a term and i have never used one that has (well i did use slack but only as a router so never did any real work on it.

personally i don't care if anyone thinks i am snobby because i know i can help when i can. i can be snooty or blunt or even ignore people sometimes but i cannot spend all my time trying to help.

in the end i think arch is a great distro and the community is as good as any other. unfortunately you did not se it that way but you are entitled to that point of view. i hope you are more pleased with where ever you end up. but just remember that learning the core of your system al little more never hurts and you might be surprised by how easy and fast it can be compared to slogging through some gui. guis are great but knowing more than gui is far more helpful to everyone.

wdemoss · 2004-02-08 14:18:18

I have been using AL for about two weeks now, and am loving it. I was fed up with the hand holding attitude of other distros (redhat, suse, mandrake). I didn't like the long, very long, hours on gentoo just to do anything. I got frustrated with debians stability because I actually do use newer hardware and the only way to get it supported was to use unstable, which like it's name suggests is pretty unstable.

So I went on a distro search and came across arch. I reviewed the docs, checked out the community by browsing the forums and logging on IRC a couple a times and just hanging out. And i was thoroughly impressed.

No, the documentation is not the thickest, but it is to the point and easy to understand. Another thing i didn't realize at first, but come to figure out is that it seems that 99 percent of the packages are just made directly from the package distributors source. So if i want some documentation on package X or package Y I can just go to their website, which is clearly stated in the PKGBUILDs and read their docs. I don't have to wonder what AL has done to the package to "Help" me like i did on the hand holding distrubitions.

When I installed Arch things were a breeze. 15 on a ftp install and i had a base system, 20 minutes later had gnome installed and working great. I like the way arch is set up.

I like rc.conf ALOT. I like pacman ALOT. I like abs ALOT. Why, because they are very simple and lean. I like that i can make a PKGBUILD in about 10 minutes and be fully integrated into package management system. Maybe you can do that with rpms, i never found out, maybe because there was soooo much documentation of other non essestial things that i never go to it.

Also, I don't think that they, the arch community, are not snobbish, especially the main poeple, or at the least who've I've noticed the most (xentac, sara31, zen_gurella, dp ... sorry if i missed anyone, or if someone was mistakenly called main that isn't i am new ), but they are blunt. They also expect you to respect them and their efforst enough to not waist there time with something you could have done your self in about five minutes. I have not noticed a relunctence of anyone to help. Just noticed that some of these people understand they're emense value to the AL project, and expect others to at least appriciate it.

So to end this note, I want to say a big THANKYOU to ALL those that have gotten AL to where it is. I plan on staying around a bit, and hopefully i can contribute some small tokens of my appriciation for what has been done thus far.

See you around ....

Caesium · 2004-02-08 15:27:33

I used slack long long ago, ('96ish) then stoped useing linux all together pretty much due to work, some time later I installed rh7 for a week, didn't like it went back to ms.. toyed with mandrake 9.2 for a few days, sucked. found this little disto (you know there is only 6 topics on linuxiso for the arch distro? ;p).

I gotta say after some initial troubles getting my hardware working this is pretty sweet, and plenty fast. I like that there is no solid docs and no line by line walk thrus heh, there is plenty of tips and pointers out there to get pretty much whatever you need to work.

zbled · 2004-02-08 15:34:43

i've been using al for about 2 weeks now - before i've used gentoo for about 1,5 years - and i have to say, that i wouldn't be able to install arch without the experience collected in gentoo... (f.eg. during install the install-cd wasn't able to mount hda1 to /mnt/boot ...)

i like arch. it's fast, it's up to date, it's thin - and the community's okay - and thanks god, it's not debian with dselect, tasksel, a mailserver installation (exim) without asking, and so on

anamesa · 2004-02-08 15:58:54

Pink Chick:

Several days later, you will learn there'd be better things to do with your time than configurating arch, trying out which 'common' tools are available or braking the system, if you try them.
I found out arch users and maintainers are kind of snobbish (not all). I won't use slackware or gentoo just to get enogh "maturity" to use arch.

It's exactly because i've better things to do with my time than messing up with configuration, that i use arch. That's why i love it. This distro handles a complex thing like a linux distribution in the simplest way possible. All i needed to know was a handfull of configuration files in etc, and most info was clearly stated in the docs. I always use the stock kernel, because it's very well thought off and does everything i need and never built a package, because everything i need is allready there in the repositories. Whenever i have a problem, a quick search through the forums brings the answer. It seems that there are many guys here who like configuring their system, so it's not bad to use their knowledge and experience. It's far more time consuming and difficult to use any gui tool, since i have to learn it, i prefer no tools at all [i'm joking here, of course]. A couple of questions that were not in the forums were promptly answered by people of arch, and in a way that even a kid [that i am, since i'm lazy] could have followed. In the end, all i have to do is to "pacman -Syu" and wait a bit. I always wait a day or two before upgrading though, since i need to have a working system all the time, and i don't want it broken. Anyway, it has never crashed, everything works as expected, and i'm very happy, since maintenance is kept at a minimum.

I also think that the "official document" is a bit dissuasive. The first time i tried to install it i was "terrified" in advance, but everything went out smoothly. It seems that the developers are a bit sadistic to newcomers. Of course i had downloaded some packages i knew i needed and where not included in the base iso then [arch 0.5] or would make my life easier [mc, ppp, wvdial (was on dialup then) and their dependencies]. First time i took a glance at arch's homepage, and read that they have a means to handle dependencies, i said: are they kidding? The funny thing is that they were not. In fact arch is getting boring, there are not any serious flaws in it, so the "configuring guys" won't have many things to do . A perfect occasion for them to write their memoirs, so as to provide the rest of us [or at least me] with an explanation of their mysterious activities in configuring.

So, it seams to me that arch is not only streamlined with regard to what one can make out of it, but also with regard to who uses it, be it noob or not. Anyone can make the best out of it, with as little effort as possible. Thanks to the arch developers of course. If anyone knew, then s/he would be a dev, now we have them, so we don't have to know or learn more than minimum. And thank god they're a bit snobbish -- what?! not all of them? --, so they don't repeat themeselves a million times.

So, thank you guys for this diamond of a distro.

srey · 2004-02-08 16:01:10

Like I said, my first experience with Linux was Slackware, and coming from a Windows, Mac, and Solaris (work) background, the learning curve was steep. I'm just glad my boss sent me to those "Introduction to Unix" courses when I first started, that helped a lot I can tell you. But eventually, I understood enough to get things working. Maybe I'm better off now, just because I never started with a RedHat, Mandrake, Suse, etc.

Then Gentoo came along, and I got sucked in to the hype, and was led to believe that it was the greatest thing since sliced bread. But, after weeks and weeks rebuilding my system and messing with optimization flags, I gave up. Then a few Gentoo users told me to check out Arch.

Arch just scratches me where I itch. So clean and fast. And if I screw up badly, I know that 20 minutes later I can wipe the drive and start over.

I have not run into any snobbiness here, but I've only asked a few questions so far. One had to do with the devpts line in my /etc/fstab. That could have been answered very rudely, but it was not. It may seem like a "dumb" question, but I have not used a distro that put that line in there by default in case the users overrides the default 2.4 kernel and installs 2.6 from a fresh install. To me, that may be a good tip to put in the install docs.

I think Sarah nailed it in her response - Arch is not for everyone, and folks need to search the forum - and read the man pages - first so that the gurus don't keep answering the same questions over and over.

If someone wants me to, I can put somthing together that answers the "top 10" or "top 20" questions asked, and maybe that would help?

I think that Arch will become very popular, and that could mean more people with the time to invest in development and documentation efforts, but right now, I kind of like the small town family feel of this community.

jlowell · 2004-02-08 18:35:53

srey,

Anyway, I just wanted Judd, all the developers, the package maintainers, and all fellow users to know that you've got something special here.

A enthusiastic welcome to you, srey. I would agree that Arch is special. I too left Gentoo behind about a month ago; it had been the principal distro on my network for about a year. Let it suffice to say that after an awful lot of hard work a routine emerge -u world left my window manager and a number of associated programs in tatters and that was enough for me. I think I was about 20 user flags and 50 configuration files behind at the time. Gentoo's complexity, at least in terms of the performance improvements one derives, is a bit overdone. There is something elitist about that that I've never encountered here, Pink Chick's discouragement notwithstanding. And I make this statement as someone who has built each of his Arch systems entirely from source with reasonably aggressive compiler options. Again, welcome to you.

Pink Chick,

I am sorry, that so many arch users don't appreciate that users who come from a more consistend system have some difficulties with arch.

I am sick of begging for help to get knowledge about what tools are to be used to get some little things done.

It's one thing to feel frustrated in an attempt to set up a distro the way you want it and to find that difficult and quite another to mischaracterize the attempts of others to offer you help as somehow insensitive or arrogant. Judging from a quick review of several of the threads in which
you've participated, I find the basis of your complaints rather hard to comprehend, truthfully. Anyone has their moments with things, God knows I've had mine. But to place responsibility for your decision to leave Arch on the community here is more than a little unfair, it's less than honest.

jlowell

Moo-Crumpus · 2004-02-09 12:00:55

you cannot be afraid or too lazy to do a little research every now and then. sometimes the "snobbish" attitude come from the fact that we know damn well that you have not take the thirty seconds it take to look on the webpages' news article for an answer. there have even been instances on irc where one person asks one question and gets an answer then another person, who has been logged for the entire time a question was asked and answered, asks the same question.

Well, you just suggest I was waiting for others to make their fingers dirty. In fact, you think it's silly questions. Well, thats your point of view.
Read the mans and howtos, and you will find a bunch of tools that is not part of arch. And adduser, useradd, groupadd, addgroup, usermod, update-grub, ... they are not eye-candy-gui-tools, it is the ass on the bite. There is no documetary labeld "DON'T FEAR INCOMPATIBILITIES - YOU REACHED TOTAL BASICS". I found a lot of documentaries that looked quite well and logical, and they seemed to fit, but after following them I ruined my system, or enhanced rights to far as would be necessary, or broke some parts as the documentary was not written to administrate a devfs using linux and so on. I reinstalled arch again and again, and tried out to find a better way, finally I asked, if there was not a known working way.

If you know better sources, why don't you post some of them? Does all archers have to dig for it again and again? Sometimes, it was enough information to say "Follow the You should look out for the definition of snobbism.

Bobonov · 2004-02-09 18:15:11

Ok so you miss many tools that do the "dirty work" for you as far as I understood.
Any tools, is a curs one or a gui, that add a user a group or change something in the system, most of the time it is a fronted to the single command. For sure using a tool is a big save of time, but when you change system and move, for instance, from mandrake with drakeconf to suse with yast, you have to start again. In my opinion if you really want to use your system start with the basis and then save time with "tools". So the next time you move to another system you already know where to look.
As I already wrote tools do not allow you to trick your system. Most of the time they allow you to only do stupid setting that can be done with less that 15 char on the command line.

Anyway about tools that are mentioned in documentation and how to nut you do not find them in arch is because they are third parties tool to the basic application. For sure there are many tools to administer samba, and maybe some of them are mentioned in the how-to but this does not mean that samba.org make them.

So if you think you need a tool you can either make a package yourself (this is quite simple) or put a post in "requested package", it is possible that somebody has a PKGBUIL ready for you.

Personally newer reinstalled archlinux and I can assure you that I have done a lot of experiemnt and mistake but maybe I was lucky that I never messed up the system so badly to have to reinstall it.

rasat · 2004-02-10 06:50:42

Bobonov wrote:

Ok so you (Pink Chick) miss many tools that do the "dirty work" for you as far as I understood.

From my experience with Arch Linux when I did my first install (Dec 2002) coming from Gentoo, which had a well documented step-by-step guideline, I felt same as Pink Chick. Frustration increased when having such an excellent distro (Arch Linux) in your hand.... how to do the post configure without having easy readable docs or tools??? Though the members on this forum helped me with all my questions, still the though of frustration was nagging at the back of my mind.

The solution was not to demand Arch Linux to develop tools and docs but trying to understand what's the aim and philosophy of AL... what makes it different from others. Beside the general description about AL, I found two points, which has been enough at least for me, describing the inside of AL. I don't think Judd Vinet intended to make it as AL's philosophy but somehow this became / becoming the trend of AL:
ARCH LINUX is my (Judd Vinet) perfect distro, to sum it up. I started building it for two reasons:
1. I didn't find any other distributions that met my ideals. Some came very close to what I wanted but there were annoying quirks, or an added complexity that seemed to hurt more than help.
2. For fun, and to give a little something back to the free software community, since I've taken so much. In my understanding, the developers will build AL without "annoying quirks" and "complexity"..... here we could say: "a perfect base". A base doesn't include fancy tools and auto configure, but with manual based configure tools and with few functions for the users to be able to do further development on their own. It is a free gift "to give a little something back to the free software community, since I've taken so much".

When you receive a gift from someone, its usually expected to give something in return . So, users are welcome to contribute to AL with their ideas, tools and suggestions. The "User Contributions" forum is one of the result from this "get and return" concept. TUR, ArchStats and Hwd are other good examples.

To conclude, there are two sides in Arch Linux: (1) Developer and (2) User contributions. Here not to expect the two sides to merge but to have a mutual relation where anyone can pickup what they want to add in their machine. If someone feel something is missing, ether develop it yourselves (if its good contribute it) or make a suggestion and hopefully there is some willing to do it for you (for others as well).... so far I have seen Archers happy to help whenever its possible. If not "today" but someone will do it sooner or later (if the idea is good)... that's the current spirit of AL as I see it.

Xentac · 2004-02-10 07:01:58

Well said rasat.

Bobonov · 2004-02-10 10:15:30

I completely agree with you rasat, these are exactly the reasons that convinced me to move to archlinux.

Anyway this leave space in extra and turs to put tools that help in managing arch, or better a linux standard installation. Then is up to the people to chose if they want to use them or not.

Another part of arch philosophy, on my point o view, is: "the package you are looking for does not exist?? Then make it and give it to the community", afterwards is up to developer to chose if they want it in extra or in base or if somebody from tur want to care about it or is better to put it in the trash bin.

To be more clear "arch has some helping tools but do not expect to find the in the base install"

sarah31 · 2004-02-10 14:49:53

but #2 has also long been a hinderance to arch development. creating a distro to be used by others "for fun" is hardly a business like approach which is just what arch needs right now.

it needs all its developers together and visible. it needs to show that it can handle an large influx of people.

the community is growing fast and now is not the time to develop for fun. if you do want people using and staying with the distro you have to show that you can support there growing demands (and no that does not mean gui tools and weakening the strength of arch's small package set).

one of the reasons i left was that i was left out on an island too much. now Xentac is for a large part. that has to change.

Moo-Crumpus · 2004-02-10 17:59:08

I appologize for my words, my frustration was to big, and I should not let frustration rule my keyboard.

Oe aspect of arch is, from my point of view, that it differs basically from other distributions I ever used. The rc.conf was new to me, but it was easy, and I quickly found out it was useful. The power of devfs still is a seal to me, but I have the idea, that a lot of things, I usually did by tweaking privileges of some files and devs could be easier done using devfs, f.e. to get the right to sync your palm (what was quite nice solved via devs). I felt like it was necessary to know more about the elegance of arch, one the one hand to use it's power, and on the other hand not to defibrate it. But if I asked, what others thought to be the best way of many to get several things done, response was little.

As there is still no overview, what tools are available to do basic tweakings, I had to efford a lot of time to explore each little part. Progress was poor, it was personally hard to find out that "gpasswd" was the tool to take, f.e. It is available, now that I found it out I agree it is enough to do what is necessary.
I lately installed some machines with another distribution, and things went so easily. Some hours later, users could do what they usually do on desktop machies. I was very dissapointed to see my progress whith arch was so little, and more frustrated, that I could not go ahead to really use arch (that is a pearl of a linux distribution) because of some simple but unkown shell commands. I had the fastest, most elegant distribution - and I was stuck struggeling basic things.

Then, I joined the next native languaged linux irc, felt ashamed for asking how to do simpliest things, and again and again fetched replies, arch would have never been designed to be used by fools, like obviously me, and if I would not spent the time to find it out by myself, I would never be an archer, and if it was not true that I only was too lazy. Some tried to help me, but the information was to little, like 'setuid root!'. Recieving such replies after all my spent time blow my stack immediately, the more that I knew that a lot of other ones already knew what to do, and all I needed was a hint like some others successfully followed the documentation of app xyz, and it worked out. I was never to lazy to read and learn, I printed and read a mountain of papers (after I found out that cups needs ghostscript, to be honest).

All I needed, and I guess a lot of others could and will need it, to, was that some people would share their whisdom, possilby in a kind really short "how to's". I need no hand to hold mine while doing things, a short insertion would do. There is no need to have this done by maintainers or developpers, users could and should do that for and by each other.

I still can't believe that there seems to be no competition at all in what solution is considered to be best in arch's environment. Competition of solutions allways was and will ever be the strength of open source evolution end each distribution. Furthermore, some packages in the future could need a fiction of how a well done arch system should be basically set up.

I am convinced maintainers and developpers have little spare time to teach others in basics. But I think it is necessary to share solutions. Not only the big ones. Unfortunately, the "Arch Linux Deskop Guide" still is a draft. Best way to share solutions was a wiki.

But maybe I am completely wrong? All arch users are individuals, and everyone is happy with his own setup? If this is (only) an accumulation of geeks, each one happy to build his own thing, and the only common purpose is the usage of 686 compiled packages, then I am in the wong place. I guess I am never geek enough to do it all the rough way for my own. If you think, I and users like me am totally missplaced in arch environment, I have to accept it.

Dusty · 2004-02-10 17:59:17

If you don't like Arch Linux, you have three options:

· Get used to it
· Change it (use Arch as a base for a distro of your own)
· Don't use it

"complain about it" isn't an option. You can try it of course, but it won't solve any of Arch's problems.

Asking questions to figure out How or Why Arch does something is fine. Complaining about it is a waste of your time and anybody who chooses to read it. Trying to convince somebody that Arch isn't good enough for them is a waste of your time if they like it. Trying to convince somebody that Arch is a good distro is a waste of your time if they don't like it.

I'm ready to leave this community because of the complaints I keep hearing. I doubt that's a big loss to anybody here, but am I the only one???

Dusty

sarah31 · 2004-02-10 18:29:12

pink chick ... as far as i am concerned you do not need to apologize. there are problems you bring up that do need to be dealt with.

people get frustrated and i understand your frustration. i really do. i am sure many people using linux (not just this distro) have had their good and bad times. the fact is arch did not suit you at this time. you did make an effort and that is what counts.

my rant earlier was not specifically meant for just you but to the general audience (ok there were a few parts maybe meant just for you). unfortunately i used your words as a basis of my tirade, but to be honest, if anyone had said i would have used it.

it really really really does not hurt to dig into your system until your fingers bleed. is it easy? no. but eventually you come to a broader understanduing of just how valuable it is to know your computer's parts and your OSes layout and functioning ... the latter being the most important of all ... and that goes for whatever OS you use.

sarah31 · 2004-02-10 18:34:24

Dusty wrote:

If you don't like Arch Linux, you have three options:

· Get used to it
· Change it (use Arch as a base for a distro of your own)
· Don't use it

"complain about it" isn't an option. You can try it of course, but it won't solve any of Arch's problems.
Asking questions to figure out How or Why Arch does something is fine. Complaining about it is a waste of your time and anybody who chooses to read it. Trying to convince somebody that Arch isn't good enough for them is a waste of your time if they like it. Trying to convince somebody that Arch is a good distro is a waste of your time if they don't like it.
I'm ready to leave this community because of the complaints I keep hearing. I doubt that's a big loss to anybody here, but am I the only one???
Dusty

well one option ...that is if you like the distro .... is stick with it but don't bother with the forums, irc, or mail list. if you have issues that seem to be arch related file a bug or directly communicate with the maintainer/developer.

arch is suffering a bout of growing too fast and the developers simply are not prepared for it. they are reaching the line where they either step forward and fight the battle beyond the line or retreat into obscurity.

give it time ... take a break from the community and just do your own thing with the distro.

edit: oh and as for complaining ... if it is done right you will get the changes effected. most people using distros almost basically demand changes. when i was maintaining packaqes i always ignored those users that were demanding and whiny. those people that calmly and rationally reported issues and did not level blame or accuse me or arch of something got their way quickly.

and by all means please don't be afraid to rationally ask why something is done in a particualr way that is not "standard". instead of freaking out and running around in a tizzy just ask. it may have been an oversight or the developers may not have know that certain things can be done in more efficient ways. they are human after all and most of them do not have alot of experience behind them.

nuff said

apeiro · 2004-02-10 20:27:13

Pink Chick, you make valid points about Arch. I freely admit that the documentation is very sub-par. It's improvment currently one of our higher priorities, but I think most of the real useful documentation will come from the community itself. A few drafts have popped up on the forum over the last few months, and I'd like to see them mature into documents that we can host as "official" on archlinux.org. There's talk of introducing a collaborative wiki (or the like) that some prolific Archers can use to develop docs and FAQs.

As you said, it can be a little trying to find the right commandline tool when you're not familiar with the environment. It's okay to show up in irc asking questions and be dubbed a "n00b". I agree that some users (and/or devs) can be snobby, but there are always helpful people around as well. The snobby folk are usually just tired of answering the same questions, and instead of keeping silent, they tend to lash out a bit. Ignore the ones that don't help, and thank the ones that do. And if/when you get the right answers, feel free to drop them into a FAQ and send it our way. We like documentation, we just can't write it very well.

Another bonus to learning the ropes in Arch is that, once you've mastered your environment here, you should be able to hold your own on any distro. This is because Arch uses and relies on the basic utilities that should be present on any distribution, from LFS on up. useradd, groupadd, gpasswd... these are all utilities that should be present on any distribution, since they come straight from the shadow package.

You may find the "apropos" tool handy as well. It lets you pass it a keyword or 10 and shows you all the relevant manpages. Sometimes it's effective, sometimes not so much.

Anyway, I hope you find the time and inclination to give it another shot. It's a roller coaster of frustration and elation, but once you figure out how the hell this magicbox is actually working, it can be rewarding.

Arch Linux

#1 2004-02-07 21:57:48

Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#2 2004-02-07 23:03:50

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#3 2004-02-08 00:11:04

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#4 2004-02-08 02:20:25

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#5 2004-02-08 02:24:35

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#6 2004-02-08 04:15:33

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#7 2004-02-08 04:31:18

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#8 2004-02-08 08:25:09

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#9 2004-02-08 14:18:18

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#10 2004-02-08 15:27:33

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#11 2004-02-08 15:34:43

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#12 2004-02-08 15:58:54

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#13 2004-02-08 16:01:10

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#14 2004-02-08 18:35:53

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#15 2004-02-09 12:00:55

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#16 2004-02-09 18:15:11

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#17 2004-02-10 06:50:42

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#18 2004-02-10 07:01:58

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#19 2004-02-10 10:15:30

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#20 2004-02-10 14:49:53

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#21 2004-02-10 17:59:08

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#22 2004-02-10 17:59:17

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#23 2004-02-10 18:29:12

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#24 2004-02-10 18:34:24

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

#25 2004-02-10 20:27:13

Re: Arch is a breath of fresh air ... 2 days with Arch so far.

Board footer