You are not logged in.

#51 2013-08-04 13:45:57

hamhut1066
Member
From: Kenya
Registered: 2013-07-29
Posts: 10

Re: Should I go Arch?

I've been using arch for about 8 months now, moving from ubuntu.
It is so refreshing to be able to actually find the problem.
I have very slow internet where I live so have to wait a month or 2 at a time between updates, and they always go fine!
The only exeption is doing partial upgrades or installing packages without upgrading the whole system (although one can normally get away with it)
The only problem I've had (barring stepping on and breaking my charger) was a trivial fix by simply rolling back to the previous install.


Arch Linux | i3 | mpd | vim
`Everything to those who wait`

Offline

#52 2013-08-17 11:26:36

wstewart90
Member
Registered: 2013-07-13
Posts: 17

Re: Should I go Arch?

Updates tend to be smaller when you do them more frequently. I typicall run updates every night while I'm at work but I only work 3 or 4 days a week so my first day back at work will probably have more updates since I try not to do too much computer stuff outside of work.

Offline

#53 2013-09-01 23:47:04

Jeroen)Mathon
Member
From: Netherlands
Registered: 2013-08-29
Posts: 39

Re: Should I go Arch?

For me Ubuntu was like this (Day1:AWESOME,Day2:Lets add this and that of dont forget that,Day3:SYSTEM CRASH)
So after a few tries i decided to grab that old compiled printed wiki page of the installation for arch and install it.
And i must say its light weight and super fast.

For Arch you do need to be in love with the command line at least that is what i think.
But if what you do needs stability and power i'dd go for Arch.
Only flip side is my graphic card.
As for now AMD "Dropped" Support "<Im not buying that story." For Arch users "What they really mean is that they are fond of using Xorg ==<14.00 Packages"
So Gaming is not really that close as for now unless you want to downgrade.

I don't know for invidia i have Both AMD and Invidia cards so i might try to switch.
For the rest Gaming goes well (I am basicly in love with Stepmania)
But again you do need to be ready for a lot of Wiki research and Q&A's.

To be honest i think your gonna love it!

Offline

#54 2013-09-02 00:21:32

progandy
Member
Registered: 2012-05-17
Posts: 2,146

Re: Should I go Arch?

Only flip side is my graphic card.
As for now AMD "Dropped" Support "<Im not buying that story." For Arch users "What they really mean is that they are fond of using Xorg ==<14.00 Packages"
So Gaming is not really that close as for now unless you want to downgrade.

Use the beta driver (repo "catalyst" or aur "catalyst-test") if the opensource driver is too inefficient.

Offline

#55 2013-09-23 16:50:35

elieobeid7
Member
Registered: 2013-02-01
Posts: 9

Re: Should I go Arch?

My download speed is about 1 MB/s, it decreases as you download, in few months from now I'm subscribing to new ISP, which should give me about 3 to 5 MB/s.

About one year ago, i wanted to try Arch, so i installed Archbang upgraded packman, it messed my wireless drivers, I could no longer connect to internet , i came here for help and the users told me:  "Archbang is not Arch, install Arch and then Comeback and we'll help you. Besides (some users said) it is not recommended to install arch if you have a slow connection (or something like that, I can't locate the thread because the admins deleted it)".

Last Friday, i met a friend, we're both computer sciences students, so we had a small chat, he asked me what OS i have, and i said windows 7 and crunchbang (which is a debian weezy distro, isn't wheezy a rolling release as well?), and he said he has parabola which is an arch distro, so i asked him how is he able to use arch, in our country the ISP give us shitty internet speed. And he said he has 100kb download speed. I was shocked!

As it happens my windows 7 needs to be formatted, and I'm not feeling like formatting and reinstalling everything, and i lost the love for crunchbang, so i'm thinking of removing everything and installing Arch, not another distro, the real deal Arch, otherwise you won't help me, I learnt my lesson, because i like the adventure of installing it.

But the question that I'm concerned about, is there any chance that arch upgrade will  mess up my system? Is the risk too high or is it worth trying?

Offline

#56 2013-09-23 16:57:55

lagagnon
Member
From: an Island in the Pacific...
Registered: 2009-12-10
Posts: 1,076
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

I guess you have to decide how often you need or want to upgrade Arch. As it is a rolling distro you can upgrade at any time, but the general consensus is that "arch does not like to be ignored". In other words, it is better to upgrade frequently rather than infrequently.

Obviously the fewer packages you have installed the quicker the upgrades. Also, you obviously can be doing other things while pacman upgrades.

However, if your sole concern is that the upgrade process will be too slow for you then you are probably better off to stick with a distro that does not need constant upgrading - for instance Ubuntu 12.04 LTS.


Philosophy is looking for a black cat in a dark room. Metaphysics is looking for a black cat in a dark room that isn't there. Religion is looking for a black cat in a dark room that isn't there and shouting "I found it!". Science is looking for a black cat in a dark room with a flashlight.

Offline

#57 2013-09-23 18:24:43

2ManyDogs
Member
Registered: 2012-01-15
Posts: 1,635

Re: Should I go Arch?

elieobeid7 wrote:

i said windows 7 and crunchbang (which is a debian weezy distro, isn't wheezy a rolling release as well?)

No, Debian Wheezy is not a rolling release. Debian sid is an rolling release. There is some disagreement about whether Debian Testing is a rolling release, so I won't get into that here.

If you do decide to install Arch, please don't try to implement some kind of unattended upgrade process because your internet connection is so slow. Unattended upgrades are a recipe for disaster. You can download packages without user intervention, but at some point you need to look at what's happening and make some decisions.

Last edited by 2ManyDogs (2013-09-23 18:26:43)

Offline

#58 2013-09-23 19:26:34

drcouzelis
Member
From: Connecticut, USA
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 3,424
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

elieobeid7 wrote:

My download speed is about 1 MB/s, it decreases as you download, in few months from now I'm subscribing to new ISP, which should give me about 3 to 5 MB/s.

That is plenty fast enough. I'm in the US and my Internet speed is between 0 and 1.5 Mbps, and it's never bothered me. If I could get a slower speed for a cheaper price then I would. hmm

But the question that I'm concerned about, is there any chance that arch upgrade will mess up my system? Is the risk too high or is it worth trying?

What do you mean by "mess up my system"? I've been using the same Arch Linux installation for four years now. Just read the news on archlinux.org, look at the names of the packages that are being upgraded before you install them, make sure you have time to fix / downgrade packages in the rare case that an update breaks your computer (don't upgrade if you don't have time to work on it), and always merge ".pacnew" files.

Offline

#59 2013-09-23 20:37:30

Zamajalo
Member
From: Belgrade, Serbia
Registered: 2013-08-26
Posts: 17

Re: Should I go Arch?

I was using Arch on 512kbps connection around 2008 or 2009, I don't remember well, with no problems... Even did a full network install smile Downloading stuff was slow, but you can survive.

As for updates... I am updating my system on a daily basis (I think I never had update bigger than 100-120MB, after all those years using Arch), and I'm doing like that for years... Never got messed up system (just follow the announcements and read package output) and never had greater problem than reconfiguring Xorg or changing conf file or two. As drcouzelis said, make sure you have time to play in case upgrade creates mess and control pacnew files. My advice is to keep old packages in cache for some period if you can, just in case something goes wrong with newer version.


Using Arch Linux x86-64 (linux-ck-bobcat kernel) on AMD based laptop with HD 7400 series GPU.

dd if=/dev/null of=/dev/everything

Offline

#60 2013-09-23 20:49:50

Trilby
Forum Moderator
From: Massachusetts, USA
Registered: 2011-11-29
Posts: 13,500
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

elieobeid7 wrote:

My download speed is about 1 MB/s ... which should give me about 3 to 5 MB/s.

... But the question that I'm concerned about, is there any chance that arch upgrade will  mess up my system? Is the risk too high or is it worth trying?

Do you mean 1Mb/s and 3-5Mb/s, or do you really mean MB/s (megabits, or megabytes per second?)  If it really is 1 MB/s then that speed will be no issue at all.  Even if you do mean Mb/s, then - as indicated above - this should still not be an issue, but it may not be the most convenient for the initial net-install, but go for a cup of coffee and let it do its thing (note: this is for the download stage of the net install, not regular updates).

As for your direct questions, arch is a rolling release, as such issues can periodically be expected with some updates.  Expect breakage.  But with this great community, you can also expect fixage (there's a fun new word).  As long as you stay on top of updates there will never be much to download in any single update, and any issues will be easy to fix before they cause any real headaches.  But if you can't work with an occasional issue to have to patch up, then arch is not the right choice.

I use arch as my sole OS on all my computers, including a work computer which is absolutely necessary for my work.  But I've also accepted the responsibility of maintaining my systems while learning about what is going on in them.  I've never had an issue that wasn't very quickly solved - but there are ample bumps along the way that a user who wants it to "Just work" would likely be very unsatisfied.

So in short: expect breakage; expect fixage.


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

Offline

#61 2013-09-23 20:55:50

sekret
Member
Registered: 2013-07-22
Posts: 203

Re: Should I go Arch?

*lol* You think THAT is slow big_smile

Last edited by sekret (2013-09-23 20:56:13)

Offline

#62 2013-09-23 22:08:37

frank604
Member
From: BC, Canada
Registered: 2011-04-20
Posts: 939
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

There will be some updates that require user intervention/manual process.  There will be some updates that bring a new version of foo.package which introduces a bug requiring you to downgrade foo.package.  However, there are plenty of threads/replies about maintaining arch and what it will take so I won't repeat since you can google for that stuff. 

Your internet connection seems to be a minor issue depending on perspective.  As to your question if arch is too risky or worth it, the only one who can answer that for you is yourself.

Just do it and experience it, at least in virtualbox first. smile  Good luck and fire away!


github       bible       blog

Offline

#63 2013-09-23 22:17:46

jasonwryan
Forum & Wiki Admin
From: .nz
Registered: 2009-05-09
Posts: 18,315
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

Merging with the Should I Go Arch thread...


Arch + dwm   •   Mercurial repos  •   Github

Registered Linux User #482438

Offline

#64 2013-09-23 22:55:13

Texas
Member
From: Dallas, Texas
Registered: 2010-09-10
Posts: 117

Re: Should I go Arch?

satanselbow wrote:
andmars wrote:

Follow the Beginner's Guide and you'll be fine - it's what it is there for  big_smile

Yes.  May the wiki be with you.

Offline

#65 2013-09-24 05:46:08

Kolt Penny
Member
Registered: 2013-09-12
Posts: 107

Re: Should I go Arch?

I've been using Manjaro for less than two weeks, despite that, I already installed and uninstalled a lot of programs and made some minor tweaks here and there but I feel that it came with too much installed and it didn't give me the possibility to do a lot of stuff, plus, it came with a lot of software I don't recognize, such as Qt4 a suite. I'm not an expert in Linux but I've always been a fast learner and catch up real quick with software whereabouts. Is Arch a distro for me? (I already run it once in a VM and really liked it but I didn't have the time to give it a full try at that time).

Offline

#66 2013-09-24 05:46:58

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

Offline

#67 2013-09-24 06:04:35

jasonwryan
Forum & Wiki Admin
From: .nz
Registered: 2009-05-09
Posts: 18,315
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

Merging...


Arch + dwm   •   Mercurial repos  •   Github

Registered Linux User #482438

Offline

#68 2013-10-06 00:57:46

jpenguin
Member
Registered: 2013-09-29
Posts: 13

Re: Should I go Arch?

I still use kubuntu on my school lappy, but have arch on my desktop annd love it!  The install was really easy (used cfdisk + mkfs)   and the only distro that let me use f2fs for root

Offline

#69 2013-12-30 17:12:30

ggeo
Member
Registered: 2013-12-30
Posts: 8

Re: Should I go Arch?

Hello,

I wanted to ask.
I use sabayon linux whicj is rolling distro.And I use KDE.
If I use arch linux will I get some other advantages?Because I will again use KDE.
We say that arch is light and fast distro.But I will install a lot of packages (and as I said KDE) .Will I have any differences from using sabayon?


Thank you!

Offline

#70 2013-12-30 17:27:56

drcouzelis
Member
From: Connecticut, USA
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 3,424
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

You can decide for yourself. You already know about Sabayon Linux. Just read about Arch Linux and maybe try it for yourself. Also, Arch Linux works great in VirtualBox.

You can read about Arch Linux compared to other operating systems here:

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Ar … tributions

Is there a reason you want to stop using Sabayon Linux? Is there something you don't like about it?

Offline

#71 2013-12-30 17:37:01

jasonwryan
Forum & Wiki Admin
From: .nz
Registered: 2009-05-09
Posts: 18,315
Website

Re: Should I go Arch?

Merging with the 'Should I Go Arch?' thread...


Arch + dwm   •   Mercurial repos  •   Github

Registered Linux User #482438

Offline

#72 2013-12-30 17:57:48

ggeo
Member
Registered: 2013-12-30
Posts: 8

Re: Should I go Arch?

Is there a reason you want to stop using Sabayon Linux? Is there something you don't like about it?

I am about to buy a laptop and I just wanted to try sth else.Generally,I am satisfied with sabayon but what if arch is more fast for example?

Offline

#73 2013-12-30 18:52:52

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

Re: Should I go Arch?

ggeo wrote:

I am about to buy a laptop and I just wanted to try sth else.Generally,I am satisfied with sabayon but what if arch is more fast for example?

Don't change something that you are satisfied with. "More fast" is subjective --- as compared to what??


Forum Rules

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

Offline

#74 2013-12-30 19:48:59

ggeo
Member
Registered: 2013-12-30
Posts: 8

Re: Should I go Arch?

Don't change something that you are satisfied with. "More fast" is subjective --- as compared to what??

That is what I am thinking.Also , I was just thinking of using sth else.
But as I can see ,installing some packages (that are not in repositories) needs additional work.And I think I don't have the time for this right now..

Offline

#75 2013-12-30 20:23:22

MALsPa
Member
From: albuquerque
Registered: 2013-12-10
Posts: 8

Re: Should I go Arch?

ggeo wrote:

I use sabayon linux whicj is rolling distro.And I use KDE.
If I use arch linux will I get some other advantages?Because I will again use KDE.
We say that arch is light and fast distro.But I will install a lot of packages (and as I said KDE) .Will I have any differences from using sabayon?

I'm running both distros here. One thing that stands out, updates with pacman are a lot faster than with Entropy (equo commands, Rigo). On the other hand, you'll probably have to get used to the AUR if you want to be installing a lot of packages in Arch. Both are great distros, and both can be fast -- for example, I use Fluxbox a lot in Sabayon, so it's very light and fast in that case. I'd say I like Arch better right now, mainly because I like the package management better.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB