Why im going back to gentoo:

swooshonln · 2006-11-17 14:46:23

Let me start by saying this. Arch Linux is amazing. I love it. Hands down. However, I just cant seem to adapt to "pacman". Its slow, and just seems very limited compared to portage. I have been reading alot about the new version of pacman, and will say this. As soon as it comes out I will be the first to try it. So until then, good luck everybody, and nice distro. Ill be back some day!

augustob · 2006-11-17 14:59:18

swooshonln wrote:

Its slow

OK.

swooshonln wrote:

and just seems very limited compared to portage.

Why?

filoktetes · 2006-11-17 15:21:06

Slow? Yes, but if you really care, it can easily be optimised. There are several scripts around in the forum.
And, I'm really curious about what will make compiling everything in gentoo go faster?

phrakture · 2006-11-17 15:41:52

Can you please provide examples? If there's anything you _wish_ you could do with pacman and cannot, it'd help to tell someone (me) so we can remedy that.

Mr Green · 2006-11-17 15:44:31

pacman slow compared to?

/me shakes head

cactus · 2006-11-17 16:13:56

perhaps he uses reiserfs, and experienced the agregiously horrible performance on that filesystem.
The defrag pacman thing apparently helps (note: I don't use reiser anymore..so I don't know).

Mr Green · 2006-11-17 16:25:50

like pacman slow I do not understand compared to compiling every package on your system

open a term type pacman -Syu [as root of course] & let it get on with it

reiser emmm stopped using it

best of luck with Gentoo

swooshonln · 2006-11-17 16:32:50

I use the ext3 file system.

Compiling from source IS alot slower, but the time it takes me to use pacman to download and install open office, I could of just as easily downloaded it via portage and compiled it from source.

Its not that I really think pacman is "limited", it just would be nicer if it was more "portage like". For example, with portage, you can also search through product descriptions.

It would also be very nice to add color to the output in pacman. This would help alot with watching whats going on, and searching/installing packages. And before somebody gets angry and says colors for noobs, let me say this. I work at an engineering company and we use color for EVERYTHING. There is no reason to waste time reading through black/white text when you can have the things you need to stick out, stick out with color. Thats one of the main reasons that I feel that pacman is still limited.

tardo · 2006-11-17 16:38:27

If you can compile openoffice faster than you can download, you need to either get a real connection, or tell me what processor you're using, because I want one now.

cactus · 2006-11-17 16:45:53

swooshonln, I am trying to be as understanding as possible.. but if one of your salient points for preferring gentoo over arch, is that pacman doesn't have colorized output.. umm....

I think I will just leave it there.. so as not to offend any further than I already might have.

Best of luck to you in gentoo land. Say hi to omp for me.

test1000 · 2006-11-17 16:55:05

swooshonln: see my sig. it gives you colors, allows you to search & download from aur etc

johnisevil · 2006-11-17 17:19:31

Pacman *was* slow for me too but that was an easy fix. I credited a 300 meg ext3 partition specifically for /var/lib/pacman. Problem solved.

As an ex-Gentoo user, I can say that in a serious way Gentoo is slower than pacman. Doing an emerge sync takes far longer than anything you can do with pacman so I don't understand why you believe you're getting some sort of speed advantage from jumping distros.

Snarkout · 2006-11-17 17:24:22

test1000 wrote:

swooshonln: see my sig. it gives you colors, allows you to search & download from aur etc

I'm either blind or missing something...

As far as moving from one distro to another, hell, that's part of the fun of linux. Unless something really, really horrible happens, I can't imagine taking arch off my desktop - I love it. I have to admit, though, that I'm finding it more work that I want to go through to run on my lappy sometimes

swooshonln · 2006-11-17 17:24:51

i'm talking about download speeds. I do have a real connection, why doesn't pacman utilize it? I can sit here and download a mp3 at 300Kb/s, and sit here and wait for pacman to download a 3 meg package @ 3-5 kb/s. Maby the pacman server should get a real connection?

I mean im sure you guys know that it IS slow
Its not like sitting here saying "OMG!!! OMFGGG GENTOO IS SO MUCH FASTER THAN ARCH!! OMFG!!1!! LOLOL"

Its a slow server. Thats all im saying. I cant wait 2 days to download a 150meg file, I can compile it form source faster than that. Thats my point.

swooshonln · 2006-11-17 17:30:02

And to cactus, I think its a very valid reason to switch. Because if im going to be spending that much time updating/installing from the terminal, why not want it to have colors and the ability to search more than just names? Theres nothing wrong with that.

tardo · 2006-11-17 17:30:53

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pac … ated_links

Links to *significanly* boost pacman download speeds, and colored output.

swooshonln · 2006-11-17 17:33:17

I already use wget with pacman

cactus · 2006-11-17 17:38:17

Sounds like you have already made up your mind to switch.

For people who might come across this later:
I believe there are some options to improve download speed, other than simply choosing a better mirror. you might try the thing that downloads from multiple repos at once.. little chunks. Almost like a one way torrent.

Can't remember what it was called, but phrakture was telling me about it once day.. *head scratching*

metalink? aria?

EDIT: oh snap. Wiki to the rescue.
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Imp … erformance
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Fas … _Downloads

Stinky · 2006-11-17 17:38:20

swooshonln wrote:

i'm talking about download speeds. I do have a real connection, why doesn't pacman utilize it? I can sit here and download a mp3 at 300Kb/s, and sit here and wait for pacman to download a 3 meg package @ 3-5 kb/s. Maby the pacman server should get a real connection?
I mean im sure you guys know that it IS slow
Its not like sitting here saying "OMG!!! OMFGGG GENTOO IS SO MUCH FASTER THAN ARCH!! OMFG!!1!! LOLOL"
Its a slow server. Thats all im saying. I cant wait 2 days to download a 150meg file, I can compile it form source faster than that. Thats my point.

Wow. That is slow. However! All you need to do is re-arrange your mirror list.

vi /etc/pacman.d/current

and find a faster server and move it to the top. Do the same with extra and any other repo you use. I get download speeds > 800KB/s all the time. Took me 15 minutes to do a 350MB update the other day.

test1000 · 2006-11-17 18:01:50

oops here's my sig:

codemac · 2006-11-17 18:48:10

If you just use a loopback file for you pacman db, it's as fast or faster than portage.

And the reason we are asking so much about why you don't like pacman is because pacman3 is well on it's way to being released, and if there is something small we can do to make your user experience that much better, we'll do it in a heartbeat.

You gotta give us more than "I like colors" and "It's slow".

Borosai · 2006-11-17 19:11:18

It appears that the mirror you are using is the problem for your download speed, and not pacman. I am able to download at full speed (which isn't much in my case, but it works fine).

As far as colors go, that's a personal thing, and really isn't a big deal either way. In my case, I don't care either way...there isn't enough output to get lost in, but it also wouldn't hurt, and there's nothing noobish about it.

swooshonln · 2006-11-17 19:23:17

And really, I love arch. I am goign to try those few wiki links when I get home to see if I can get at least a constant 20Kb/s. If I can just get it to download faster I have no reason to go back to gentoo really (I can search for packages on the website). Dont get me wrong, Im not a gentoo fanboy. Plus, what other distro can compete with under 1min boot times? really?

Stinky · 2006-11-17 19:37:39

swooshonln wrote:

And really, I love arch. I am goign to try those few wiki links when I get home to see if I can get at least a constant 20Kb/s. If I can just get it to download faster I have no reason to go back to gentoo really (I can search for packages on the website). Dont get me wrong, Im not a gentoo fanboy. Plus, what other distro can compete with under 1min boot times? really?

Find a fast mirror. Pacman troubles over.

scarney · 2006-11-17 19:45:01

resort/change your mirrors for one thing. use one of the many tut's i have seen to add color. Boom!, prob solved.

Arch Linux

#1 2006-11-17 14:46:23

Why im going back to gentoo:

#2 2006-11-17 14:59:18

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#3 2006-11-17 15:21:06

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#4 2006-11-17 15:41:52

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#5 2006-11-17 15:44:31

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#6 2006-11-17 16:13:56

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#7 2006-11-17 16:25:50

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#8 2006-11-17 16:32:50

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#9 2006-11-17 16:38:27

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#10 2006-11-17 16:45:53

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#11 2006-11-17 16:55:05

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#12 2006-11-17 17:19:31

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#13 2006-11-17 17:24:22

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#14 2006-11-17 17:24:51

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#15 2006-11-17 17:30:02

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#16 2006-11-17 17:30:53

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#17 2006-11-17 17:33:17

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#18 2006-11-17 17:38:17

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#19 2006-11-17 17:38:20

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#20 2006-11-17 18:01:50

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#21 2006-11-17 18:48:10

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#22 2006-11-17 19:11:18

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#23 2006-11-17 19:23:17

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#24 2006-11-17 19:37:39

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

#25 2006-11-17 19:45:01

Re: Why im going back to gentoo:

Board footer