The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

Bralkein · 2014-02-09 13:16:58

Hi guys, I just realised today that I have been using Arch for over 10 years. It was the best then, it's the best now, and I firmly believe that it will be the best for years to come. I use it at home, I use it at work, and I even convinced my boss to use it (he is very picky :-) ).

A million billion thanks to all involved, maybe sometime this decade I will have some spare time to contribute :-S

saif · 2014-02-10 01:07:57

Bralkein wrote:

Hi guys, I just realised today that I have been using Arch for over 10 years. It was the best then, it's the best now, and I firmly believe that it will be the best for years to come. I use it at home, I use it at work, and I even convinced my boss to use it (he is very picky :-) ).
A million billion thanks to all involved, maybe sometime this decade I will have some spare time to contribute :-S

10 years! wow you got to know quite a little bit about it. share your experiences with more detail please!

Bralkein · 2014-02-10 12:03:33

saif wrote:

10 years! wow you got to know quite a little bit about it. share your experiences with more detail please!

Haha, OK... well first, to be honest I am not sure that it is exactly 10 years... but I do know that I'd been using Arch for a while before I signed up to these forums... so it's probably close enough

Prior to Arch, I was switching between Slackware Current and Debian Sid. I liked Slackware's style, but I wanted a proper package manager (slapt-get or swaret or whatever wasn't good enough). I liked apt on Debian, but I thought Debian was a bit too over-complicated, I liked Slackware's simple approach. I also really, really liked rolling release, but I found both Slackware Current and Debian Sid to be too unstable.

I can't remember where I heard of Arch, but it really ticked all the boxes for me. It is rolling-release, but it's also quite stable. There are only minimal changes to packages from upstream, and the configuration is not too overcomplicated by distro-specific tools.

Since then, I guess there have been many changes, systemd and package signing are the big ones for me (big improvements IMHO). However, even though many details have changed, I think Arch has remained true to its KISS philosophy, and the overall "feel" of Arch is quite the same. Of course, it's hard to be sure because I don't have a time machine but I still have the same requirements for a Linux distro, and Arch still meets the requirements very well.

xeekei · 2014-02-11 06:17:47

To me, Arch is the best because it's fast, it's up to date, it's simple, it's all vanilla packages... I also like that I can use either binaries, or source to install everything. Both ways get treated equally. I'm also a fan of systemd. Started out on OpenSUSE in 2006, been using Arch Linux since 2011.

Henrikx · 2014-02-11 11:39:00

drcouzelis wrote:

Arch Linux takes a lot of time to learn.

The structure of Archlinux is very logical and therefore to learn well.
Example:
Package build - Arch vs Debian. ffmpeg / libav
PKGBUILD: Clear structure, easy to understand.
The learning effort is not very high.
https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit … ges/ffmpeg

Debian:
Ever tried a to build a Debain package from a source file, with libs, devs, etc.

ffmpeg -Debian (dget -u http://packages.debian.org/de/wheezy/ff … .10-1.dsc)
http://packages.debian.org/de/wheezy/ffmpeg

More than 30 files!!

90 percent of Debian users have no idea of the package building.
Because it is too complicated and requires too much time to learn.
To understand Arch Linux takes less time..

Last edited by Henrikx (2014-02-11 11:42:42)

Awebb · 2014-02-11 14:18:58

1. 90% of all Arch users have no clue how to write their own PKGBUILD either.
2. 10% of all Debian users probably are 100% or all Arch users (quantitatively).

Last edited by Awebb (2014-02-11 14:19:13)

Henrikx · 2014-02-11 16:10:59

I think you're wrong with : 90% of all Arch users have no clue how to write their own PKGBUILD either.

Online survey might give an answer...

drcouzelis · 2014-02-11 16:28:04

Henrikx wrote:

I think you're wrong

It's OK, regardless of what percentage of users of what operating system know how to do what, your point is still valid: creating packages in Arch Linux is simpler than creating packagen in Debian.

Citation: It's easier for me.

sitquietly · 2014-02-12 17:11:21

Henrikx wrote:

...The structure of Archlinux is very logical and therefore to learn well.
Example:
Package build - Arch vs Debian. ffmpeg / libav
PKGBUILD: Clear structure, easy to understand.
The learning effort is not very high.
https://projects.archlinux.org/svntogit … ges/ffmpeg
Debian:
Ever tried a to build a Debain package from a source file, with libs, devs, etc.
ffmpeg -Debian (dget -u http://packages.debian.org/de/wheezy/ff … .10-1.dsc)
http://packages.debian.org/de/wheezy/ffmpeg
More than 30 files!!...

I agree. I nitpick once in a while in this forum at faults in the Arch packaging, but Arch Linux is built
on a strong base of decisions made by Judd Vinet (the original KISS principles).

The only distro that can compete with Arch for "packaging sanity" is Gentoo. The Gentoo libav
"source" package for libav-9.11 consists of a single file, the ebuild, consisting of only 316 lines (including
header and comments). However Gentoo is not as straightforward (KISS) as Arch in that Gentoo
ebuilds hide a lot of complexity in their ebuild classes. For example, that libav ebuild starts out with
a line

inherit eutils flag-o-matic multilib toolchain-funcs ${SCM}

I often find that in order to understand a Gentoo ebuild I have to read the ebuild class scripts
that it uses. With Arch Linux there is neither hidden complexity nor apparent simplicity. The mess
is right there in the PKGBUILD for the world to see.

Last edited by sitquietly (2014-02-12 19:30:18)

chaonaut · 2014-02-13 10:24:38

i like arch because it’s an excellent construction kit to (re)build exactly what i need.
LFS is too hard to maintain.
gentoo is too self-oriented.
regular ubuntu-style distros require too much effort to figure out how it all works and leave too little space for customization.
and arch is just well balanced.

Awebb · 2014-02-13 10:59:11

As a sidenote, Debian seems to have decided to use systemd from now on (according to LWN), so "I dislike Fedora but want to use systemd" might be an oboslete reason to use Arch in the foreseable future.

od808 · 2014-02-15 08:59:36

hello!

about a mounth ago i decided i want to dive into the linux world...
so i installed ubuntu,fedora and mint on a virtual box on my mac.
I tried to learn some terminal commands, install various applications, shell themes, conky etc… nothing really Serious, just figured out my way in the new os. since then i ditched ubuntu and fedora and stayed with mint which was my favorite of the 3, very clean and "straight forward".
so by now i ended up with a nice desktop, that fits my needs and that is able to run my favorite programs but I don’t feel I really learnt something serious… I feel that I would like to go deeper.
I read about Arch, and it seems like this is the place where the real magic happens,
I know that arch is only recommended for experienced users, but I think that by installing arch by myself and customize it for my needs while encountering problems will force me to read more, try more and eventually learn more, does it make any sense?
Maybe im a linux "noobie" but im quiet experienced with windows and osx, and not afraid of
new things, and since im going for a virtual machine nothing can really go wrong, apart from me wasting my own time.
What do you guys thing, is this a good idea?

jasonwryan · 2014-02-15 09:15:15

Merging with the "Should I Go Arch" thread...

Awebb · 2014-02-15 12:10:45

Awebb wrote:

As a sidenote, Debian seems to have decided to use systemd from now on (according to LWN), so "I dislike Fedora but want to use systemd" might be an oboslete reason to use Arch in the foreseable future.

And now this.

What's next? Windows switching to pacman? Soon, everything will be Arch and then there will be no reason to use Arch but Tacos.

fsckd · 2014-02-15 12:36:54

@Awebb: Windows will switch to systemd. But on there dbus will remain in userspace. Also your "this" link is broken.

@od808: Go for it!

Trilby · 2014-02-15 13:10:57

od808 wrote:

I know that arch is only recommended for experienced users, but I think that by installing arch by myself and customize it for my needs while encountering problems will force me to read more, try more and eventually learn more, does it make any sense?

That makes perfect sense - and arch may be the right place to learn, as long as you are ready (and looking for) some challenges.

I'm not sure if arch is recommended only for "experienced" users. I do know some recommendations say for "competant" users. I'd argue there is a difference. Competance may be from experience, or it may be from an ability/willingness to learn.

Awebb · 2014-02-15 13:16:48

fsckd wrote:

@Awebb: Windows will switch to systemd. But on there dbus will remain in userspace. Also your "this" link is broken.

It originally was intended to point to an article, claiming that Marc Shuttleworth accepted honourable defeat regarding the upstart<>systemd question in Ubuntu.

Lone_Wolf · 2014-02-15 14:50:06

awebb : http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/1316

od808 : it sounds like you did your homework, go for it !

paulnblacklock · 2014-02-18 02:35:31

IsSuE wrote:

Running Arch for quite a few years now, never had any serious downtime that was not fixable withing half an hour.
Just one thing to remember: never --force !

hah, that's funny... I ended up "--force" my Arch install just 2 days ago when I decided to move from Ubuntu. Had I not, I would probably still be there trying to figure out how to correct the install errors. I couldn't find a definitive answer in google (aka the Arch forms and wiki) and honestly I was afraid I wouldn't get much help anyway if I posted in the forums because, I kept reading posts that pretty much said if you can't figure it out perhaps Arch isn't for you. Heh...not that I would have been able to ask the question anyway given that silly bot registration requirement and I thought I hated CAPTCHAs.

HungGarTiger · 2014-02-20 02:06:52

paulnblacklock wrote:

IsSuE wrote:
Running Arch for quite a few years now, never had any serious downtime that was not fixable withing half an hour.
Just one thing to remember: never --force !
hah, that's funny... I ended up "--force" my Arch install just 2 days ago when I decided to move from Ubuntu. Had I not, I would probably still be there trying to figure out how to correct the install errors. I couldn't find a definitive answer in google (aka the Arch forms and wiki) and honestly I was afraid I wouldn't get much help anyway if I posted in the forums because, I kept reading posts that pretty much said if you can't figure it out perhaps Arch isn't for you. Heh...not that I would have been able to ask the question anyway given that silly bot registration requirement and I thought I hated CAPTCHAs.

That doesn't bode well for the future of your install my friend, I'm curious about what you felt the need to "--force" as this install process is simply just a matter of following the guide.

On a side note: I don't think I've ever read someone saying "If you can't fingure it out, then it's not for you"... Maybe you meant more along the lines of "If you're having trouble following the guide..." as it is all spelled out pretty simply. But again if people have legitimate questions and have taken the time to try and solve them on their own, before coming here, the response is almost universally positive.

punkrockguy318 · 2014-02-20 18:10:57

Arch has really come a long way over the past decade and I wanted to thank all of the developers, contributors and donors that keep this project continually improving. I realize that it may be easy to take things for granted so I wanted to take a moment to step back and thank everyone involved (even if only through a bbs thread). Arch Linux would not exist in its current state today if it wasn't for the efforts of the everyone involved. If you have contributed to Arch Linux, I want to thank you for your contribution.

Thanks!

Inxsible · 2014-02-20 18:34:19

merged punkrockguy318's thread

punkrockguy318 · 2014-02-20 19:48:43

thanks; sorry about that

TheOldFellow · 2014-03-05 15:13:24

Got the final thing I needed working today - goodbye Ubuntu forever. Lots of AUR, but then I'm a bit like that. Thank you all.

BradPJ · 2014-03-18 19:03:05

Originally I loved Arch because I was able to get a system with only applications that I installed and required and the customization options that then open up due to that. Now I love Arch because of how much it has taught me about the actual system I am using. Normally my system boots in around 20 seconds (systemd-analyze, so I understand it is actually longer than this, but this is my benchmark) and recently has been booting in a minute and a half. After some investigating I have dropped my most recent boot back to 16 seconds. The ability to troubleshoot this and get my system running well again is something I never would have been able to achieve had I not started using Arch back in July.

Arch Linux

#876 2014-02-09 13:16:58

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#877 2014-02-10 01:07:57

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#878 2014-02-10 12:03:33

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#879 2014-02-11 06:17:47

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#880 2014-02-11 11:39:00

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#881 2014-02-11 14:18:58

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#882 2014-02-11 16:10:59

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#883 2014-02-11 16:28:04

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#884 2014-02-12 17:11:21

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#885 2014-02-13 10:24:38

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#886 2014-02-13 10:59:11

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#887 2014-02-15 08:59:36

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#888 2014-02-15 09:15:15

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#889 2014-02-15 12:10:45

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#890 2014-02-15 12:36:54

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#891 2014-02-15 13:10:57

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#892 2014-02-15 13:16:48

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#893 2014-02-15 14:50:06

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#894 2014-02-18 02:35:31

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#895 2014-02-20 02:06:52

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#896 2014-02-20 18:10:57

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#897 2014-02-20 18:34:19

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#898 2014-02-20 19:48:43

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#899 2014-03-05 15:13:24

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

#900 2014-03-18 19:03:05

Re: The Official Unofficial 'Arch is Best' Thread

Board footer