Arch as a main desktop.

Crooksey · 2006-12-04 10:48:56

I am currently running Gentoo 2006.1 as my main desktop, however one thing i cant do atm is get my sound working, its really anoying me.

Soim thinking of switching, most likely back to arch, first of i have a few questions.

1) Is it farily easy to setup ati drivers (fglrx)
2) Is it fairly easy to setup my sound card (alsa hda-intel)
3) USB/cd rom support.

If all those can be achived in a few hours, ill be happy.

iphitus · 2006-12-04 11:00:25

Easy!

1) pacman -S ati-fglrx and modify xorg.conf where needed.

2) add your user to the 'audio' group (gpasswd -a USER audio) and just put your volumes up and unmute. should work fine then.

3) probably should work automatically. if it doesnt, just add the relevant modules to your MODULES=() line in /etc/rc.conf.

James

Crooksey · 2006-12-04 12:17:33

That easy?

On 32bit arch will flash install in a good amount of time?

chrismortimore · 2006-12-04 12:37:15

Crooksey wrote:

On 32bit arch will flash install in a good amount of time?

As quickly as your internet. A "pacman -S flashplugin" will get it installed. Pull in your favourate browser at the same time and your sorted, just a case of waiting for it to download.

mr.MikyMaus · 2006-12-04 12:38:28

With hda-intel may be some problems. I know many people, mostly with laptops, who have problems with configuring alsa on these cards. But it really depends on actual sound chip. Which one you have?

-miky

(edit: typo)

noriko · 2006-12-04 12:39:12

you mean adobe flash?
yes?
simply as

pacman -s flashplugin

for flash v7
or

pacman -s flashplugin-beta

for flash v9-beta

downloads in a few seconds install in 1-3 seconds mostly waiting on ldconfig.

Crooksey · 2006-12-04 12:42:43

I have..

-------------------------------------------
ICH southbridge HD-audio and modem ICH6
ICH6M
ICH7
ESB2 Details 
---------------------------
(hda-intel)

EDIT: Worked on OSS on ubuntu.

chrismortimore · 2006-12-04 12:45:02

For the hda-intel cards (I have one in my desktop), it only started "working" with kernel 2.6.17 (it gave crappy quality and cut out randomly etc), but it's fine with 2.6.18.

Crooksey · 2006-12-04 12:50:21

Can i choose to have that as the default kernel on install?

chrismortimore · 2006-12-04 13:10:23

Crooksey wrote:

Can i choose to have that as the default kernel on install?

The current default is 2.6.18. Arch isn't like Gentoo, there arn't multiple versions of a package available, thus you get whatever version is in the repo. I thought it'd be a problem for me (I'm an ex-Gentoo user), but it makes life a lot easier. For starters, when something doesn't work, you don't get told to upgrade to ~x86... But I'm not gonna start a rant.

If you want to always have a certain kernel installed, you can tell pacman to ignore the kernel packages and install your own.

mr.MikyMaus · 2006-12-04 13:16:43

Crooksey wrote:

Can i choose to have that as the default kernel on install?

Afaik no (I didn't any Arch install CD quite a long time), but it is not a problem installing new kernel. Just pacman -Sy kernel26 and some grub tunning. There is some wiki for that on arch home pages, since there may be problem in switching from initramfs to initcpio.

I had no problems with it though.

Acid7711 · 2006-12-04 13:43:22

chrismortimore wrote:

I thought it'd be a problem for me (I'm an ex-Gentoo user), but it makes life a lot easier. For starters, when something doesn't work, you don't get told to upgrade to ~x86...

Yes! Exactly. I've been 100% happy with my switch. I was getting sick of finding version B, C, or F to solve problems when version A in "stable" didn't work.

But, Arch to the rescue!

Crooksey · 2006-12-04 15:43:54

So will the default kernel work with my soundcard?

Is it best to run a base install with network, the pacman the rest?

mr.MikyMaus · 2006-12-04 16:01:03

Crooksey wrote:

So will the default kernel work with my soundcard?

Depends on what you call "default", but yes, with the most recent default kernel (or any other recent version of kernel) should work. But as I said, it depends on your card's chip.

The information you provided has no meaning, since there is only some family of chipsets, not particular chip. Try

# head /proc/asound/card0/codec#0

The sound will work, but it may not work as it should (mixed up controls, no master volume, etc..) Most of these problems are a little bit annoying but acceptable.

Crooksey wrote:

Is it best to run a base install with network, the pacman the rest?

Yes, definetely.

wrythe · 2006-12-05 03:02:44

Crooksey wrote:

I am currently running Gentoo 2006.1 as my main desktop, however one thing i cant do atm is get my sound working, its really anoying me.
Soim thinking of switching, most likely back to arch, first of i have a few questions.
1) Is it farily easy to setup ati drivers (fglrx)
2) Is it fairly easy to setup my sound card (alsa hda-intel)
3) USB/cd rom support.
If all those can be achived in a few hours, ill be happy.

I bounce between Arch and Gentoo, and I can tell you that a transition to Arch from Gentoo would be very simple--it's just a matter of getting used to how Arch handles things differently. Some of the key differences as follows:

1 - Start-up daemons - In Gentoo: rc-update. Scripts are found in /etc/init.d. In Arch: The DAEMONS=() line in /etc/rc.conf (no level necessary [e.g. boot, default, etc] like in Gentoo). Scripts are found in /etc/rc.d.

2 - New config files - In Gentoo: etc-update and Gentoo pretty much decides what customized files could be overwritten. In Arch: only files specified in /etc/pacman.conf as "NoUpgrade" will be saved as filename.pacnew for you to delete/compare/overwrite yourself.

3 - Modules - In Gentoo: add module names to /etc/modules.autoload.d/kernel-2.6. In Arch: add module names to the MODULES=() line in /etc/rc.conf.

4 - Package management - In Gentoo: emerge. 'nuff said (take that as you will ). In Arch: pacman. Now, pacman is no emerge, but it gets the job done. And since Arch is a binary distribution, kiss those long compile times goodbye. Pacman's output leaves a lot to be desired as far as I'm concerned, but it keeps it simple. It's actually not too hard to write a simple script that will turn the output into something nice and tidy like an "esearch -c" in Gentoo. I can give you mine if you're interested.

That's basically all I can think of off the top of my head. You'd get used to where Arch installs certain packages (e.g. Gnome) as opposed to Gentoo. And if you want to compile something yourself (a la Gentoo) then there is always the Arch Build System which allows you to do exactly that. It's really nice to have around at times.

And, as for your sound card, I have an hda-intel card in my desktop and laptop both and have had no problems. Just modprobe the snd-hda-intel module, run alsamixer and unmute your "Front" level, and you should be golden.

Crooksey · 2006-12-07 18:47:46

Ok im literally about to switch....

But first of, will the pacman fglrx driver include 3D support?

Is cedega easy enough to install? (im a member)

phrakture · 2006-12-07 20:31:26

chrismortimore wrote:

For the hda-intel cards (I have one in my desktop), it only started "working" with kernel 2.6.17 (it gave crappy quality and cut out randomly etc), but it's fine with 2.6.18.

I'll second this. My thinkpad uses intel hda, but it didn't work until 2.6.18 came out. Actually, I also had to turn on the modem (?!?) in the BIOS as well. Now it works perfectly.

chaosgeisterchen · 2006-12-08 00:09:56

Crooksey wrote:

Ok im literally about to switch....
But first of, will the pacman fglrx driver include 3D support?
Is cedega easy enough to install? (im a member)

I would like to question you about what graphics card you are currently using and how satisfied you were with its performance when using Gentoo.

I mostly suggest to replace rather cheap ATI cards with a way better supported nVidia model but I will rather wait for knowing what card is featuring your machine.

Crooksey · 2006-12-08 08:13:33

I have the x1300, it shows support in the wiki page.

And the nvidia card is on my to-do list

ATI Desktop Product Family Support
The ATI Proprietary Linux driver is designed to support the following ATI desktop products:
* Radeon® X1900 series
* Radeon® 9800 series
* Radeon® X1800 series
* Radeon® 9600 series
* Radeon® X1600 series
* Radeon® 9200 series
* Radeon® X1300 series
* Radeon® 9000 series
* Radeon® X850 series
* Radeon® 9700 series
* Radeon® X800 series
* Radeon® 9550 series
* Radeon® X700 series
* Radeon® 9500 series
* Radeon® X600 series
* Radeon® 9100 series
* Radeon® X300/X550 series
* Radeon® 8500 series

So with some tweaking it should be all good.

chaosgeisterchen · 2006-12-08 14:44:42

I know that they are supported but as you seem to be a gamer I just wanted to ask. The fglrx drivers are quite nice, but they do not nearly provide the same performance as the Catalyst drivers do under Windows.

That's the problem about ATI cards. The R300 drivers become better and better but the open source alternative still has to go a long way until equality in terms of performance is achieved.

Good to hear that you have the intention to switch to nVidia, it will give you a better experience when using Linux (as far as I can tell after having switched from ATI X300 to nVidia GeForce 6200).

fglrx should be working without complex tweaking, installing the driver and changing the driver in the /etc/X11/xorg.conf will do the job.

Arch Linux

#1 2006-12-04 10:48:56

Arch as a main desktop.

#2 2006-12-04 11:00:25

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#3 2006-12-04 12:17:33

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#4 2006-12-04 12:37:15

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#5 2006-12-04 12:38:28

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#6 2006-12-04 12:39:12

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#7 2006-12-04 12:42:43

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#8 2006-12-04 12:45:02

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#9 2006-12-04 12:50:21

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#10 2006-12-04 13:10:23

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#11 2006-12-04 13:16:43

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#12 2006-12-04 13:43:22

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#13 2006-12-04 15:43:54

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#14 2006-12-04 16:01:03

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#15 2006-12-05 03:02:44

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#16 2006-12-07 18:47:46

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#17 2006-12-07 20:31:26

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#18 2006-12-08 00:09:56

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#19 2006-12-08 08:13:33

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

#20 2006-12-08 14:44:42

Re: Arch as a main desktop.

Board footer