You are not logged in.

#26 2012-10-23 19:40:06

pogeymanz
Member
Registered: 2008-03-11
Posts: 1,020

Re: Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

I know I'm late to the party here, but I'd just like to say that Arch is not any harder to maintain than Ubuntu.

If you've Ubuntu for more than six months, you know that updates/upgrades can mess your stuff up. I've had Ubuntu upgrades screw my system to the point that I just needed to reinstall. This is mostly because as a user, I customized a bunch of stuff and then Ubuntu would patch upstream projects with their own ideas, and my setting would conflict with their new vision. This is at least my theory.

Since Arch packages are almost all exactly the upstream project (including default settings), there seems to be less of that in my experience. Also, for the most part, if an update is going to require some intervention, the package manager will usually let you know that some conflict exists. Then you can just check the Arch homepage and it will let you know what to do. Even this is really rare.

Also, as far as running MATE or Cinnamon or even Unity, you have to use the AUR, which is one of my favorite parts of Arch, but these packages are unsupported by the devs, so the chances of instability is probably higher.

These days 64bit seems to have more users, so it's probably better than 32bit.

I can't really say much on the issue of the developers, just because I don't know what makes a good dev. They are pretty good natured and usually pretty amusing to read.

Offline

#27 2012-10-23 21:11:41

icmp.request
Member
From: São Paulo - Brazil
Registered: 2012-10-19
Posts: 10

Re: Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

Thanks pogeymanz. I believe my main point is not only the nature of devs but if arch does hire new devs if they fit the criteria and are needed, and also how devs are open to user's contributions (patches, bugfixes, etc.).

I know how it is to update and break everything. In other words, Arch gives us as much freedom to tweak around as the old Slackware?

I'm surprised not even MATE is included on the "official" repository. What are most guys that didn't like the new Gnome3 doing? Just jumping back to Gnome2? KDE? XFCE?

Offline

#28 2012-10-23 21:15:13

ewaller
Administrator
From: Pasadena, CA
Registered: 2009-07-13
Posts: 12,390

Re: Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

icmp.request wrote:

sitquietly,

I don't know if the Forum Moderators would like us to go off-topic and talk about other distribution on Arch Linux's Forum, so I'll try to be brief and post only once specifically about it..

As long as things remain polite, respects other operating systems,  remains factual, and somehow relates to Arch Linux,  I will not take issue.
... As long as the discussion does not spill out of the  Arch Discussion subforum


Nothing is too wonderful to be true, if it be consistent with the laws of nature -- Michael Faraday
Like you, I have no idea what you are doing, but I am pretty sure it is wrong...Jasonwryan
----
How to Ask Questions the Smart Way

Offline

#29 2012-10-24 17:11:11

Inxsible
Forum Fellow
From: Chicago
Registered: 2008-06-09
Posts: 9,059

Re: Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

icmp.request wrote:

Thanks pogeymanz. I believe my main point is not only the nature of devs but if arch does hire new devs if they fit the criteria and are needed, and also how devs are open to user's contributions (patches, bugfixes, etc.).

A new dev was included in the team just 2 days ago.


https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail … 23860.html


Forum Rules

There's no such thing as a stupid question, but there sure are a lot of inquisitive idiots !

Offline

#30 2012-10-24 17:12:44

karol
Archivist
Registered: 2009-05-06
Posts: 25,423

Re: Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

Inxsible wrote:
icmp.request wrote:

Thanks pogeymanz. I believe my main point is not only the nature of devs but if arch does hire new devs if they fit the criteria and are needed, and also how devs are open to user's contributions (patches, bugfixes, etc.).

A new dev was included in the team just 2 days ago.

A dev leaves https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail … 23045.html
A new one appears https://mailman.archlinux.org/pipermail … 23860.html

Offline

#31 2012-10-25 08:06:23

juna
Member
Registered: 2012-04-02
Posts: 16

Re: Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

icmp.request wrote:

What are most guys that didn't like the new Gnome3 doing? Just jumping back to Gnome2? KDE? XFCE?

This thread https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=85535 might give you a rough, incomplete idea. It suggests most arch users don't like DEs at all wink.

Offline

#32 2012-10-25 10:41:39

Trilby
Forum Moderator
From: Massachusetts, USA
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 13,479
Website

Re: Arch Linux 32x64 bits, Developers and Window Managers Support

"Most" as in more than 50% in a very unrepresentative poll, perhaps.  This does not mean there is not a very large portion of archers who do use the full DEs.  Quite a substantial portion do use Gnome or it's offshoots.  From my admittedly outsider view, it seems that many who liked Gnome2 but were unhappy with Gnome3 are using Mate.

Just because it's not in the "official" repos doesn't mean it is hard to install or has any real problems.  Most archers do use many AUR packages all the time.  But if compiling Mate is undesirable, I think there is a unofficial repo (with the precompiled binaries) for a full mate DE.

Last edited by Trilby (2012-10-25 10:42:00)


InterrobangSlider
• How's my coding? See this page.
• How's my moderating? Feel free to email any concerns, complaints, or objections.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB