My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

smitty · 2008-01-17 12:33:05

I tried to get Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD installed on my machine. To save a lot of searching I heard from many other forums it is best to use the Vesa drivers vs the nv or ati ones. I don't know, however, what the other distros do to make theirs work. At any rate, I went through the entire install with Vesa drivers, except for the part where comes to compile kde, gnome, etc. I opted to install everything. I wanted to be able to boot whichever manager I wanted to. The compilation took so long and it was so slow that it even timed out, it seemed. I don't know what I did or didn't do to make it not work. I haven't tried the text install, though. I heard Gentoo was supposed to be fast and optimized to your hardware. This distro (ArchLinux... There, I said it!) is the second closest. IMHO to that (except other source based, such as Sorcerer Mage Linux and Lunar Linux). ArchLinux so far has worked best for me for speed and simplicity (despite my constant re-installs in not following the directions to the T!) I may later install it, because I am curious as to how optimized it can get on my hardware.

kensai · 2008-01-17 13:16:56

Well, if you installed Gentoo with the livedvd graphical installer then, it sucks, I always told the developers the Graphical installer would be a failure, they always argued it was not and at the end we won, it is a failure. Gentoo is meant to be installed the text way, just grab any livecd like ubuntu, or the minimal Gentoo and do it, thats the better way.

But, you are right Arch Linux is the best binary distribution, is the fastest in my opinion. And is better to stay off Gentoo for now, until they accept Daniel Robbins as president again, since Gentoo is pretty much not existent legally and have no foundation nor leader. Packages in stable are as outdated as packages in Debian stable (and it never used to be like that back in the days), now packages never get out of testing and stable remains without updates for too long. If you want an updated system you need to use Gentoo Testing and that is going to break sometimes. I like Gentoo and all and I would like to keep using it but it has too many problems that keeps me away from it.

As much as I love source based distributions there is not any good one anymore, just CRUX is the only one staying up to date and in constant development, SOurce mage and Lunar Linux are in constant stall, not releasing updated install media and in a source distribution it is really needed. If you want a good source distribution use CRUX, or FreeBSD my personal favorite.

Anyways, Arch is always going to stay on my system. Is just the most customizable binary OS.

Weteor · 2008-01-17 13:46:02

I would second kensai .

But on a side note if you want to install gnome and kde it will take quite some time to compile. Gnome took 6 hours on my 3 GHz CPU/ 512 MB RAM ... if you want to install kde, gnome and maybe another WM compiling could easily take half a day (depending on your hardware), The gentoo system may be fast, but installing software can take some time.

oli · 2008-01-17 18:16:40

You could use ccache to gain more performance on UP systems or ccache+distcc etc. for MP systems. Furthermore for compiling at least 1G of memory is essential.

lilsirecho · 2008-01-17 18:32:27

Look into FaunOS which is downloaded from faunOS.com and installed with dd command.

It loads ~500 arch-based packages (pacman included) in a 1GB usb flash drive(or a DVD) boots in 45 secs and can save session. It uses aufs for pacman downloads into tmpfs. It includes copy to ram...ram intensive and you can remove packages with pacman as desired(altho no kernel based packages). It boots to KDE.

To permit best use of the OS a 2GB flash drive is recommended.

If booted into root, it runs with archlinux desktop, which provides means for modifications like a rescue CD, and has full archlinux capability in KDE.

Some reading will be helpful in deciding how to do......Good forum!

Try it, you will like it!
EDIT: The kernel in this distro is custom and pacman cannot attack it. You can play with the distro all day and as long as you don't save session, it will reboot to the normal FaunOS/archlinux condition.

Last edited by lilsirecho (2008-01-17 18:56:13)

smitty · 2008-01-18 08:05:46

yeah, Kensai. I know what you mean. How exactly was your experience with Crux? Is it more complex than ArchLinux? And speaking about Crux, has anyone had any experience with LFS? Is this a good distro to learn more on what's on the inside of Linux? I heard there are different distro build kits to learn the innards of Linux, but I'm not sure what to experiment with. I want something that is definitely going to be supportive and not gone the next day, so to speak. Any comments would be appreciated.

P.S. I checked out FaunOS, but I don't see the advantage when you install it on the hard drive. Perhaps I am not enlightened enough about it.

Last edited by smitty (2008-01-18 08:06:44)

kensai · 2008-01-18 13:36:51

About CRUX is a very good distributions, I mean it combines Linux with FreeBSD ports system in a unique way, but has not as many packages as one would like sometimes. And well, yeah the maintenance is a bit complex, but when I had it installed I liked it a lot. Is just that now Arch does everything for me so I don't have to waste much time on maintenance. Gentoo is my second favorite but is in a pitiful state nowadays.

Zer0 · 2008-01-18 20:04:03

AFAIK crux is what Judd used back before he started Arch. As for LFS, I would guess it's the perfect way to out the "down and dirty" details of making Linux tick. I read up on it a bit but in the end decided that it was a lot more work then I was ready to take on. If you use LFS, you are creating a Linux system from the ground up.. they just help you with the more difficult parts.

smitty · 2008-01-18 23:37:46

Zer0 wrote:

AFAIK crux is what Judd used back before he started Arch. As for LFS, I would guess it's the perfect way to out the "down and dirty" details of making Linux tick. I read up on it a bit but in the end decided that it was a lot more work then I was ready to take on. If you use LFS, you are creating a Linux system from the ground up.. they just help you with the more difficult parts.

Are you implying that there would be more work that you would do, even compared to Gentoo?
And is my understanding correct in stating that Arch has a much larger user base when compared to Crux, therefore perhaps more support for more apps, more volunteers, etc.?

Last edited by smitty (2008-01-18 23:42:26)

Zer0 · 2008-01-19 22:28:10

Oh for sure LFS requires more work then Gentoo.. Gentoo has a package manager even if it is source based.. LFS is exactly as the name says.. Linux From Scratch.. you start with nothing and build from the ground up, the way you want!

kensai · 2008-01-20 01:30:27

smitty wrote:

And is my understanding correct in stating that Arch has a much larger user base when compared to Crux, therefore perhaps more support for more apps, more volunteers, etc.?

Yeah, is correct. Well in fact about user base it cannot be definitely said that we have more users, in fact not even ubuntu can say they have more users than any other distro, since what we see on the net is mind share not market share. But, there are mor packages on Arch and more developers and volunteers, thats for sure.

Arch Linux

#1 2008-01-17 12:33:05

My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#2 2008-01-17 13:16:56

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#3 2008-01-17 13:46:02

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#4 2008-01-17 18:16:40

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#5 2008-01-17 18:32:27

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#6 2008-01-18 08:05:46

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#7 2008-01-18 13:36:51

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#8 2008-01-18 20:04:03

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#9 2008-01-18 23:37:46

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#10 2008-01-19 22:28:10

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

#11 2008-01-20 01:30:27

Re: My Gentoo 2007.0 LiveDVD experience

Board footer