Arch 0.8 far away?

fk · 2006-09-06 19:53:06

@ Cotton

It's Done

rayjgu3 · 2006-09-06 21:34:42

Lontronics

i can assure you the b44 module is there as i have used it for years (on & off because my laptop is mostly connected wirelessy)
i can say the b44 module has been in there since 0.6{widget}

as for keeping it lean & mean start with a base install look over packages being installed if you dont want either grub or lilo then uncheck it same as nano or vi
if you do not intend to use wireless take out wireless-tools ...so on & so forth
you will have arch on your machine with bare minimum then install whatever DE/WM you want if it loads packages you dont want as dependencies like ppp or rp-ppoe remove them pacman -Rd package i would read up bout it before removing though.

now for upgrading to new versions just bout every time you pacman -Syu youll find most config files that are new are named ***.pacnew the old ones ***.pacsave ( i may be wrong on this if so im sure ill be corrected soon)
i would say that keeping up with this is fairly easy cause if you look over the print out of pacman -Syu it tells you when things are written as .pacsave/.pacnew. plus i would say any issues i have had from
pacman -Syu was because i did not read either the print out on the terminal or check the message board or news section before doing so like the switch to udev from devfs. in my boot loader & fstab i still had the old naming scheme for sometime before i had problems & had to boot a live cd or install cd & mount my arch to make appropriate changes
when you dont read these things & update, you run into problems . i learned the hardway ,well id like to think i learned anyway, sometimes i still ignore the warning then have to get out some cd's to fix it

enjoy

Lontronics · 2006-09-07 17:44:56

I will

But because the situation is not 'urgent' I think I will wait till 0.8 is released before I install it on my laptop system.

For another base system this will be different

Thanks for all replies and comments about 0.8 or installing Arch on a new system.

Jan.

Romashka · 2006-10-01 22:31:53

dtw wrote:

Never gonna happen - let's forget about it and concentrate on the things above:
Romashka wrote:
Archie is official Arch Linux LiveCD

http://www.archlinux.org/static/newslet … ar-19.html

Apparently the Archie livecd is on its last legs. We've decided that we want it to keep going, so we're going to make it an official project. We'll probably base the 0.8 install cd off of it.

iphitus · 2006-10-02 09:43:48

Romashka wrote:

dtw wrote:
Never gonna happen - let's forget about it and concentrate on the things above:
Romashka wrote:
Archie is official Arch Linux LiveCD
http://www.archlinux.org/static/newslet … ar-19.html
Apparently the Archie livecd is on its last legs. We've decided that we want it to keep going, so we're going to make it an official project. We'll probably base the 0.8 install cd off of it.

You do realise that dtw is one of the main developers on archie? Maybe there's something else coming.... greater than archie.....

James

johnisevil · 2006-10-02 10:42:56

I don't know why so many people ask about when new Arch releases are going to be out. Considering Arch is a distro that uses a rolling release system, I often say "it'll be released when it's ready to be released". The system I'm using now is based on a 0.5 install from 3 years ago that's been kept up to date by running pacman -Syu once every few days. So if I can still use my original 0.5 based install that's kept up to date, there's no reason people can't just install the latest 0.7 release without asking for 0.8.

tpowa · 2006-10-02 10:52:48

for those who want to install with an up to date 0.7.2 iso use these isos:
http://www.archlinux.org/~tpowa/newisos/

Romashka · 2006-10-02 11:00:31

johnisevil wrote:

I don't know why so many people ask about when new Arch releases are going to be out. Considering Arch is a distro that uses a rolling release system, I often say "it'll be released when it's ready to be released". The system I'm using now is based on a 0.5 install from 3 years ago that's been kept up to date by running pacman -Syu once every few days. So if I can still use my original 0.5 based install that's kept up to date, there's no reason people can't just install the latest 0.7 release without asking for 0.8.

I know it. And I never upgrade my Arch boxes from ISOs.
But you just forget about people that installs Arch for the first time.

Many of my friends and co-workers want to try Arch Linux, but there are several problems with 0.7.2 ISOs, that's why I was waiting for new release.
My personal PC has Arch installed from 0.6. It's not a problem with new release for me, but for newbies that want to try Arch.

While there's no new release, I'm already downloading latest ISOs from tpowa...

Kenetixx · 2006-10-02 11:33:32

Will there be much difference in 0.8 or not really just updated packages, spose there is no need if you update every week anyway?

brazzmonkey · 2006-10-02 13:52:34

johnisevil wrote:

I don't know why so many people ask about when new Arch releases are going to be out. Considering Arch is a distro that uses a rolling release system, I often say "it'll be released when it's ready to be released". The system I'm using now is based on a 0.5 install from 3 years ago that's been kept up to date by running pacman -Syu once every few days. So if I can still use my original 0.5 based install that's kept up to date, there's no reason people can't just install the latest 0.7 release without asking for 0.8.

i second that. i can see valid 2 reasons for issuing a new release, though :
- major base system changes,
- new installation process (read : changes in installer)

generally speaking, who cares about a "new" release when using rolling system ? are you guys gonna do a new arch installation when 0.8 is out ?

fyi, i wasn't able to install arch using 0.7.2. i used 0.7.1 instead and it worked flawlessly. so all you need is a working installation cd. no matter which one.

patroclo7 · 2006-10-02 14:12:58

I would list another event which can justify the will of a new release: better support in newer linux kernels for network chipsets. To finalize an installation it is quite important to have an active network connection.

brazzmonkey · 2006-10-02 14:31:01

this is probably in what i called the "base system".

there's another point : frequent releases with distrowatch announcements increase archlinux page hits on distrowatch. by the way, arch lost 1 rank at distrowatch.

but should we really care about distrowatch ??

tpowa · 2006-10-02 14:43:17

until 0.8 arrives use those isos:
http://www.archlinux.org/~tpowa/newisos/

Lontronics · 2006-10-02 17:24:39

I think it is important to have a new release on regular base.
Regular base can also be every half a year ofcourse.

But, the last months several important updates are implemented in distro's like Arch.
For example the new Xorg-7.1, udev, the latest 2.6.18 kernel with it's new features, bugfixes etc....

When installing 0.7.2 it would be a lot of work to update scripts, packages etc.... to be on the same level.

Another important point is hardware detection.
The 0.7.2 installer is very poor in handling hardware.
The latest iso's of tpowa are much better and could be a good base for a new 0.8 in combination with the latest software, when not already implemented

So, in my eyes, it is really time for a new release.
0.7.2 is outdated, and although it is possible to update to the latest packages, especially for a rolling distro like Arch, it should be possible to come with a fresh and up-to-date release with a nice, handling hardware much better, installer.

Jan

johnisevil · 2006-10-02 22:19:20

brazzmonkey wrote:

johnisevil wrote:
I don't know why so many people ask about when new Arch releases are going to be out. Considering Arch is a distro that uses a rolling release system, I often say "it'll be released when it's ready to be released". The system I'm using now is based on a 0.5 install from 3 years ago that's been kept up to date by running pacman -Syu once every few days. So if I can still use my original 0.5 based install that's kept up to date, there's no reason people can't just install the latest 0.7 release without asking for 0.8.
i second that. i can see valid 2 reasons for issuing a new release, though :
- major base system changes,
- new installation process (read : changes in installer)
generally speaking, who cares about a "new" release when using rolling system ? are you guys gonna do a new arch installation when 0.8 is out ?
fyi, i wasn't able to install arch using 0.7.2. i used 0.7.1 instead and it worked flawlessly. so all you need is a working installation cd. no matter which one.

Those 2 reasons are perfect examples of the importance of new releases. My issue is that I don't see any reason for constantly asking the developers for new releases. They'll be ready when they're ready. As I said, what I'm using now was originally a 0.5 install from 3 years ago and I haven't needed to download new Arch release ISOs since then. Arch is a distro that just works and unless you have no intention of running pacman -Syu, I don't see why people can't just install a previous version of Arch then update if there are problems with the latest ISO. That's the beauty of a rolling release system distro.

Romashka · 2006-10-03 09:18:44

brazzmonkey wrote:

generally speaking, who cares about a "new" release when using rolling system ? are you guys gonna do a new arch installation when 0.8 is out ?
fyi, i wasn't able to install arch using 0.7.2. i used 0.7.1 instead and it worked flawlessly. so all you need is a working installation cd. no matter which one.

Do you think most of people who wants new release post to this topic because they want to bother devs? :?
Do you really think they are going to reinstall their systems from ISO when 0.8 will be here???
Did you read my post above?
New releases are needed not for existing users, but for new users! I'm getting tired of repeating this...

Yeah, they could use even 0.6 ISOs, but wouldn't there be less problems with new hardware, initcpio etc. when there will be new ISOs? And most newbies don't know about tpowa's ISOs, especially those who visit our website for the first time. I'm sure most of them will try to download Arch from Get Arch section before going to forums (and even then there is <10% chance that they will notice new ISOs on forum). And then we have posts from newbies about problems with 0.7.2 installation. Making regular releases (say, every 3-4 months) with fixes for hardware support and initcpio and other stuff that is needed to make system bootable will eliminate many of newbies' problems with installation. Updated packages are not so important. Only fixing and updating of install process is!

That's why new releases are important!
I hope I explained it quite clearly.

Lontronics · 2006-10-03 09:34:45

Amen

Arch Linux

#26 2006-09-06 19:53:06

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#27 2006-09-06 21:34:42

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#28 2006-09-07 17:44:56

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#29 2006-10-01 22:31:53

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#30 2006-10-02 09:43:48

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#31 2006-10-02 10:42:56

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#32 2006-10-02 10:52:48

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#33 2006-10-02 11:00:31

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#34 2006-10-02 11:33:32

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#35 2006-10-02 13:52:34

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#36 2006-10-02 14:12:58

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#37 2006-10-02 14:31:01

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#38 2006-10-02 14:43:17

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#39 2006-10-02 17:24:39

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#40 2006-10-02 22:19:20

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#41 2006-10-03 09:18:44

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

#42 2006-10-03 09:34:45

Re: Arch 0.8 far away?

Board footer