Why do you use Arch linux?

neXTPeer · 2007-01-16 06:20:32

Here is the question: Why do you use arch linux?

I use arch linux, because ARCH is the best distribution which i tryed Why the best? :twisted: Unreal packet manager(pacman). I have what i need, no unneeded crap like on other distros. And many more reasons.

So why do you use this distro? Tell me the reasons, for me its interesting

briancurtin · 2007-01-16 08:21:49

Simplicity is what got me here, and is what's keeping me here.

I've played around with SuSE 9.3, Fedora Core 3 & 4, Ubuntu, and then found Arch and I'm very happy. I've been with Arch for roughly a year and I haven't thought about switching since I started using it.

rayjgu3 · 2007-01-16 10:26:50

build from base
pacman
rolling release
AUR/PKGBUILD

simplicity of it all as compared to other distros which i havent spent much time with so my judgement maybe biased , but thats my choice.
i have ran other os's for a period of time mandrake(1.5yrs pre arch) & BSD(6mo about 9 mo into arch) any other distro was short period of maybe 2 weeks as opposed to the 2.5 years ive been with arch
i havent tried any other distro in about a year now so i guess im comfy here

mucknert · 2007-01-16 11:43:45

Easy answer: it gets out of my way.

Many other Distros try to hold your hand while doing stuff. While this is certainly helpful at times I mostly find it annoying. Arch and its KISS-Philosophy are just my cup of tea.

STiAT · 2007-01-16 12:28:21

It's simple
Rolling releases
Config files instead of buggy gui control tools
AUR
Pacman
Arch community (just nice guys around)

dongiovanni · 2007-01-16 14:24:07

First, pacman is the best package manager I ever used. Arch is simple exspecially the bsd like initscripts and you can do with Arch everything you want!

Tatey · 2007-01-16 14:53:07

It's minimalnessness.

pelle.k · 2007-01-16 15:03:32

* It's developer friendly, as it installs the equivalent of -dev packages. That way i can compile stuff without hunting down stupid build dependancies.
* makepkg is really a breeze to use. simple, yet efficient.
* No strange patches / behaviour to most packages.
* Educated and friendly community.
It takes me pretty much the same time to install arch, as any other distro. This is after a small learning curve though. But it was well worth it. Not very complicated at all, as a matter of fact.

FUBAR · 2007-01-16 15:10:28

I've been using since September 2004 and I've been happy with it most of the time. Mostly because of the reason given above: fast package manager, stays out of my face, lets me handle stuff myself, easy to make your own packages, ...

But lately my wishes / demands regarding a distro have changed: I don't have time anymore to do everything myself, nor to fix a borked system after a pacman -Syu. That's why I switched to Ubuntu on my company's laptop: stuff just has to work, I don't need the bleeding edge anymore. Mind you I didn't install vanilla Ubuntu: I used the alternate install CD and installed a "CLI system". This is very much like Arch: you end up with a minimal base system and you can decide for yourself where to go from there. So far I've been very pleased about Ubuntu.

I still use Arch on my desktop and router. Although maybe I've become more of a Frugalware stable type of user, I can't let go of Arch as it's tought me a lot about Linux.

skymt · 2007-01-16 17:07:57

I tried Arch because of the buzz as a quality distribution. I stayed because of the AUR.

cactus · 2007-01-16 18:27:18

clearly..I am here for the tacos.

jftaylor21 · 2007-01-16 18:29:45

Simplicity
Rolling Release
Doesn't try to hide things from you
pacman
responsiveness

The main thing that has kept me around for so long is....
Stability!

This is surprising since arch is supposed to be bleeding edge, but when it comes down to it, other distros I have tried would have major bugs that would cause the system to not be fully functional. While Arch has had it share of bugs, it seems that they are solved quickly and easily since you can get down "under the hood" and fix them instead of relying on a gui to do the work for you (this is really bad if x is broken).

Well that was a long run on sentence.

hugin · 2007-01-16 18:34:04

pelle.k wrote:

* It's developer friendly, as it installs the equivalent of -dev packages. That way i can compile stuff without hunting down stupid build dependancies.
* makepkg is really a breeze to use. simple, yet efficient.

These are my main two reasons as well. There are a couple of packages I need to build from source because I use a non-standard option for them (gnomad2's mtp support to name one). To get the ease of injecting my own packages into a local repository, while keeping a mostly binary installed system.

It really is a nice system. dpkg is a pain to figure out how to build your own .debs, and checkinstall seems like a dirty hack to get the same results.

It's also about as bleeding edge as they come. Just my list, take with a grain of salt. (and a taco ^__~)

/swogs

Mr Green · 2007-01-16 19:15:02

its community.. and the beer

phrakture · 2007-01-16 19:20:28

Mr Green wrote:

its community.. and the beer

Free as in Mr Green (TM)

Mr Green · 2007-01-16 19:31:13

7

byte · 2007-01-17 01:34:35

Yeah, what the others already said.

Another thing I like (this mostly relates to "Simplicity") is that you could pretty much find everything relating to Arch on *.archlinux.org. There ain't dozens of different sites you'd need to know, in order to get docs/help or to see the options mplayer got compiled with.
Everything is just a few clicks away.

skale · 2007-01-17 02:26:09

I use it because it is actually quite easy to use, surprisingly. A lot to do with the lack of gui tools, I suppose. After you lose your need of them, they become more of a nuisance. Ubuntu has so many files in /etc/ that I never used, or even thought about, that navigating through that was a pain. And, getting rid of 70% of packages after an install was a serious pain. I used ubuntu server for a month or so, until I found Arch.

I couldn't care less about the rolling release, as app-3.2-1 and 3.3-2 do the exact same thing. Every once in a while, though, I get a new feature in some app that I never even expected, which is nice.

The main reason, though, is that after using Arch, I cannot use any other distro without getting irritated, like the yellow man that follows.

:x

deficite · 2007-01-17 02:34:43

I use Arch because I want to be able to use Linux without my distro getting in the way and throwing wrenches in my system's wheels. It has a huge collection of packages that are, on the most part, bleeding edge and maintained.

So basically, everything just works the way I expect it to.

Dusty · 2007-01-17 04:54:39

cactus wrote:

clearly..I am here for the tacos.

Geeze, that was quick.

Dusty

chaosgeisterchen · 2007-01-17 07:02:25

Arch is bleeding edge but still stable, provides me a slick and lightning fast system which is always up to date because of the rolling release system.

And, too, the community seems great to me.

hehejo_ · 2007-01-17 10:36:40

I wanted a distro with a packagemanager like apt.
Telling what I want and then simply get it.
Next I looked for optimization on cpu-model. i686.

I skimmed through some distributions and found arch and fell really immetiately in love with it.

The installation was quick and easy. I found a very clean and cool system.
I like the rc.conf. If I need to change things -> one file.

Next I like to be real root. There's nothing if I don't do it.

Next I like the rolling release system. Always new software but a little bit tested. No more debian unstable...

And not to forget - the cool pacman & abs.
I like to compile from source AND install it with my pakagemanager.
That's quite cool!

helleborus · 2007-01-17 11:39:10

Main reasons to try Arch:
+ no/less compile time (not all packages as bin available)

Mainly I use Gentoo:
+ lots of packages
+ I know how to configure it :-)

japetto · 2007-01-17 15:56:32

Arch just really makes sense to me. Both the KISS principle and community are great as well.

Misfit138 · 2007-01-17 18:50:31

Speed (fastest Linux bootup, most responsive distro I have ever used)
Simplicity (much akin to FreeBSD concept)
Package manager (on par with apt)
Stability (even a dope like me can't break it)
Bleeding edge (new packages are a must for my desktop machine)
Taught me the most (forces you to learn, if you want to use it)
Built from base, like FreeBSD and Gentoo, but not from source.
Perfect dependency management
Binaries, no compiling.

I think Arch is an amalgamation of the best tools and philosophies of Debian, Gentoo, Slack and FreeBSD, all combined into the perfect distro.
It works like I expect it to.
Am I just repeating all of you?

Arch Linux

#1 2007-01-16 06:20:32

Why do you use Arch linux?

#2 2007-01-16 08:21:49

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#3 2007-01-16 10:26:50

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#4 2007-01-16 11:43:45

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#5 2007-01-16 12:28:21

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#6 2007-01-16 14:24:07

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#7 2007-01-16 14:53:07

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#8 2007-01-16 15:03:32

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#9 2007-01-16 15:10:28

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#10 2007-01-16 17:07:57

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#11 2007-01-16 18:27:18

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#12 2007-01-16 18:29:45

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#13 2007-01-16 18:34:04

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#14 2007-01-16 19:15:02

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#15 2007-01-16 19:20:28

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#16 2007-01-16 19:31:13

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#17 2007-01-17 01:34:35

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#18 2007-01-17 02:26:09

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#19 2007-01-17 02:34:43

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#20 2007-01-17 04:54:39

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#21 2007-01-17 07:02:25

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#22 2007-01-17 10:36:40

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#23 2007-01-17 11:39:10

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#24 2007-01-17 15:56:32

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

#25 2007-01-17 18:50:31

Re: Why do you use Arch linux?

Board footer