Arch Linux

olive

Member

From: Belgium

Registered: 2008-06-22

Posts: 748

Coming for Slackware

I am currently on Slackware and consider switching to Arch linux. What I like in Slackware is the fact that it does not patch softwares (I trust the original develloper more than the distribution). The fact that it is clean and easy to modify without a lot of abstraction layers that prevent to simply edit the original files and the fact that it is really stable. The fact that it is easy to recompile a package, and modify compiling option (you just have to learn bash to modify the build script, nothing distribution related). My great problem with Slackware is the lack of a comprehensive package repository that manage dependencies. I am tired to spend hours to install the correct libraries to be able to compile a package (although I do not find a problem to self compile a software once in a while).  I have searched a lot for a distribution but all others just add many abstraction layer, heavily patches the software and force you to learn a lot of distribution specific things (for example the documentation on Debian, always speak about a "Debian way"). Do you have suggestion, arguments to convince me to switch to arch. I still find two problems (for me):

The removal of the doc (this idea is contradictory to the fact of distributing a software the way the original author want to)
The fact that it is apparently not so easy to find the exact corresponding source to a software installed. The abs seems to give you the latest version, but what if you do not have the latest version of a software.

dolby

Member

From: 1992

Registered: 2006-08-08

Posts: 1,581

Re: Coming for Slackware

I am currently on Slackware and consider switching to Arch linux. What I like in Slackware is the fact that it does not patch softwares (I trust the original develloper more than the distribution). The fact that it is clean and easy to modify without a lot of abstraction layers that prevent to simply edit the original files and the fact that it is really stable. The fact that it is easy to recompile a package, and modify compiling option (you just have to learn bash to modify the build script, nothing distribution related). My great problem with Slackware is the lack of a comprehensive package repository that manage dependencies. I am tired to spend hours to install the correct libraries to be able to compile a package (although I do not find a problem to self compile a software once in a while).  I have searched a lot for a distribution but all others just add many abstraction layer, heavily patches the software and force you to learn a lot of distribution specific things (for example the documentation on Debian, always speak about a "Debian way").

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Dev … i:Patching

Archlinux has PKGBUILDs which work like SlackBuilds and are even easier to write cause of makepkg.
I am sure you will appreciate pacman but keep in mind that package management with dependency tracking has its disadvantages as well. It will sure save you some time though.

Do you have suggestion, arguments to convince me to switch to arch. I still find two problems (for me):

The removal of the doc (this idea is contradictory to the fact of distributing a software the way the original author want to)

This has changed but will info files will be slowly added in packages. Dont expect all of them added in a day.

The fact that it is apparently not so easy to find the exact corresponding source to a software installed. The abs seems to give you the latest version, but what if you do not have the latest version of a software.

Im not sure what you mean there. Please give an example

Edit: I dont think you are gonna find anything closer to the Slackware patching philosophy than Archlinux. Maybe CRUX too but i dont know if you are willing to use a source based distro.

Last edited by dolby (2008-06-22 09:57:53)

---

There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums.  That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)

boenki

Member

Registered: 2008-06-16

Posts: 5

Re: Coming for Slackware

The removal of the doc (this idea is contradictory to the fact of distributing a software the way the original author want to)

I you recompile the program yourself with abs, you can choose to NOT remove the doc.
Simply edit /etc/makepkg.conf
An interesting file anyway!

stef

dolby

Member

From: 1992

Registered: 2006-08-08

Posts: 1,581

Re: Coming for Slackware

Also from the Archlinux wiki

Arch vs Slackware

Slackware and Arch are quite similar in that both are simple distributions focused on elegance and minimalism. Slackware is famous for its lack of branding and completely vanilla packages, from the kernel up. Arch typically applies patching only to avoid severe breakage and preserve functionality, if absolutely necessary. Both use BSD-style init scripts. Arch supplies a package management system in pacman which, unlike Slackware's standard tools, offers automatic dependency resolution and allows for easy system upgrades. Slackware users typically prefer their method of manual dependency resolution, citing the level of system control it grants them. Arch is a rolling-release system. Slackware is seen as more conservative in its release cycle, preferring proven stable packages. Arch is more 'bleeding edge' in this respect. Arch is i686 and x86_64 whereas Slackware can run on i486 systems. Both have a ports-like system available in addition to their regular package managers- the (unofficial) Slackbuild system is very similar to the Arch Build System (ABS), the latter being slightly more automated. Arch is a very good system for Slack users who want package management with automatic dependency resolution and/or more numerous and current packages.

pretty much sums it up.

---

There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums.  That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)

olive

Member

From: Belgium

Registered: 2008-06-22

Posts: 748

Re: Coming for Slackware

The fact that it is apparently not so easy to find the exact corresponding source to a software installed. The abs seems to give you the latest version, but what if you do not have the latest version of a software.

Im not sure what you mean there. Please give an example

Following the documentation, to have the build script that will download the source you have to sync the abs with the latest version of the official one. Imagine that I have installed Arch some time ago and that I do not have upgraded my system to the latest version. How do I find the source and build scripts of the version I have. Another similar problem is when I install a package, I will get the latest version, but what if the version of some core libraries I have is too old, will I have to upgrade the whole system? Can't i install the version of the package corresponding to the version I have? Usually I have the habit to upgrade my system after a whole backup and when I am sure I have the time to fix the problems it can cause. It may happens that I need a software but that I absolutely need a working computer right now, in these situation I do not want to upgrade the system. But maybe there is something I have overlooked.

moljac024

Member

From: Serbia

Registered: 2008-01-29

Posts: 2,675

Re: Coming for Slackware

I think he meant that the source-code of programs is not easily obtained.

---

The day Microsoft makes a product that doesn't suck, is the day they make a vacuum cleaner.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
But if they tell you that I've lost my mind, maybe it's not gone just a little hard to find...

dolby

Member

From: 1992

Registered: 2006-08-08

Posts: 1,581

Re: Coming for Slackware

The fact that it is apparently not so easy to find the exact corresponding source to a software installed. The abs seems to give you the latest version, but what if you do not have the latest version of a software.

Im not sure what you mean there. Please give an example

Following the documentation, to have the build script that will download the source you have to sync the abs with the latest version of the official one. Imagine that I have installed Arch some time ago and that I do not have upgraded my system to the latest version. How do I find the source and build scripts of the version I have. Another similar problem is when I install a package, I will get the latest version, but what if the version of some core libraries I have is too old, will I have to upgrade the whole system? Can't i install the version of the package corresponding to the version I have? Usually I have the habit to upgrade my system after a whole backup and when I am sure I have the time to fix the problems it can cause. It may happens that I need a software but that I absolutely need a working computer right now, in these situation I do not want to upgrade the system. But maybe there is something I have overlooked.

First of all Archlinux is primarily a binary distribution. Not too many users build their whole system using ABS.
Second Archlinux is a rolling release distribution and the user is expected to update his system regularly. That habit of yours will have to go way IMO if you choose to go with Arch. Archlinux doesnt update like Slackware at all.
Although you can edit /etc/pacman.conf to skip specific packages during upgrades i do not recommend overdoing it with adding a lot of them.

---

There shouldn't be any reason to learn more editor types than emacs or vi -- mg (1)
[You learn that sarcasm does not often work well in international forums.  That is why we avoid it. -- ewaller (arch linux forum moderator)