Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

B-Con · 2008-01-26 23:52:15

If I had to switch away from Arch, I'd probably try Slackware and FreeBSD.

I'll probably give FreeBSD a try eventually, no idea whether I would switch to it or not. While I love stability, I do like having things stay somewhatish "bleeding edge", although I do love stability. 'tis a tradeoff.

I like Debian, but it's not as user-defined/controlled as distro's like Slackware and Arch. It's what I've used for my server in the past, and probably my fail-safe fall-back distro. If I had to switch away from Arch tomorrow, I'd probably go to Debian and use that while I triple-boot Slackware and FreeBSD and experiment with them.

diamondmind · 2008-01-27 00:20:35

B-Con wrote:

If I had to switch away from Arch, I'd probably try Slackware and FreeBSD.
I'll probably give FreeBSD a try eventually, no idea whether I would switch to it or not. While I love stability, I do like having things stay somewhatish "bleeding edge", although I do love stability. 'tis a tradeoff.
I like Debian, but it's not as user-defined/controlled as distro's like Slackware and Arch. It's what I've used for my server in the past, and probably my fail-safe fall-back distro. If I had to switch away from Arch tomorrow, I'd probably go to Debian and use that while I triple-boot Slackware and FreeBSD and experiment with them.

I've wanted to try FreeBSD (or one of the other *BSDs) for a while but never got around to it. If I had to switch tomorrow I'd definitely fall back to Slack and go from there.

CuleX · 2008-02-05 14:38:57

I think, i won't switch from Arch away, or, just in one case: I'm still on a 32 Bit CPU at the point, at which Arch Linux drops the i686 arch. Then, and only then, i will switch to Gentoo and don't repeat my errors with it.

11010010110 · 2008-02-05 15:29:23

Nothing. I will however add gentoo in multiboot if it becomes more 'arch'y (as it was before daniel left)

patroclo7 · 2008-02-05 15:34:01

I would go back to CRUX, so I will retain unique rc.conf, the simplicity of a build system similar to abs and an highly-tunable, non obstrusive distro.
I would miss the rolling release system and the abundance of binaries in arch.

schivmeister · 2008-02-05 19:14:45

How can this be a valid discussion?!

Sjoden · 2008-02-05 19:28:00

I've noticed a lot of people mention Slackware. I moved from Slackware to Arch a little while ago. I don't actually remember the exact reason I chose Arch, but I was tired of Slackware's upgrade process, and the community, well, doesn't compare to Arch's. If I 'had' to chose another distro, I don't know what I'd do. There isn't anything that matches this. This is the distro that fits me. I guess I would probably try some of the BSDs.

alex_anthony · 2008-02-05 19:32:52

I've got another linux partition at the moment, but it's running another arch install. I use it as a testing base for invasive stuff so that I don't break my main one when I need it. At the moment I'm trying mac menubar and seeing how Mac-like I can get OSX (just to show configurability)
next I might try KDE
I find this more interesting than trying other distros which are so similar (havent tried BSD and linux is linux really)
(although I tried Zenwalk recently and periodically test ubuntu - for the family)

Last edited by alex_anthony (2008-02-05 19:33:34)

Bestiapeluda · 2008-02-05 20:28:02

Maybe i would try BSD

floke · 2008-02-05 21:17:46

I run a quad-boot - with Arch and Debian (works out at a 90-10% split for usage), with a partition containing ubuntu (not used anymore) and one with Fedora (used for about an hour) - so effectively with 2 testing partitions. The thing is, I now find it very hard to motivate myself to try new distros at all. I'd sort of like to get Desktop BSD working (no decent 3945 wifi, and no flash) but then I think 'what would I do with it'? I'd do exactly what I'm doing now - so what's the point?

shining · 2008-02-05 22:04:03

Windows

(oh sh*t, I hope Arch never dies then)

fwojciec · 2008-02-05 22:46:51

I've been using Crux on my main desktop for a while now (I still have Arch installed on another partition and on my laptop). It started as an educational project but somehow I ended up using it more and more. Crux doesn't come close to Arch in terms of availability of packages, simplicity of configuration, or ease of maintenance but if you know how you want your system set up it actually works out really nicely.

I wouldn't say that Crux is much faster than Arch overall but little things do work faster and some things are plenty faster (Acrobat Reader, which I use a lot, just flies on Crux for some reason, the difference is especially apparent on large documents like scanned books for example -- which is strange because I basically reused the Arch PKGBUILD to install it on Crux).

Anyways, time will show if it's just an infatuation or true love.

I won't be moving away from Arch in either case, but it's nice to know that there are other Linux distros out there that keep it simple in case something unforeseen were to happen to Arch in the future (knock on wood).

... the penguin is kinda ugly but I couldn't find anything better

B-Con · 2008-02-06 04:50:33

diamondmind wrote:

B-Con wrote:
If I had to switch away from Arch, I'd probably try Slackware and FreeBSD.
I'll probably give FreeBSD a try eventually, no idea whether I would switch to it or not. While I love stability, I do like having things stay somewhatish "bleeding edge", although I do love stability. 'tis a tradeoff.
I like Debian, but it's not as user-defined/controlled as distro's like Slackware and Arch. It's what I've used for my server in the past, and probably my fail-safe fall-back distro. If I had to switch away from Arch tomorrow, I'd probably go to Debian and use that while I triple-boot Slackware and FreeBSD and experiment with them.
I've wanted to try FreeBSD (or one of the other *BSDs) for a while but never got around to it. If I had to switch tomorrow I'd definitely fall back to Slack and go from there.

My fallback OS is Debian, being as how it's the other OS I'm most familiar with. Trying Slack is on my to-do list, but only after FreeBSD. But school+girlfriend are first priority. :-P

And, now that I read the above posts, I'd probably try Crux, just to see what it's like.

k2t0f12d · 2008-02-17 03:18:22

I have not yet even tried Arch; however, I do use the pacman tools for package management in a rolled-it-myself-from-source-code system whose build system I am designing. I primarily am familiar with Debian-based distros and dpkg management. I keep a complete Debian repository for i386 on my local system to service my machines. Unfortunately, because I only have satellite service, I can only manage large downloads during certain hours of the day without being involuntarily throttled by the ISP. It took me several weeks and a lot of custom scripts to manage a local .deb tree in the first place. Now I can cron to keep my current tree current from the server.

From here I plan to go fully from-source with a build system I design/derive myself from LFS, DIY Linux, and the pacman tools. I would have choosen dpkg except that I found its build to be an unmitigated nightmare from hell. Ultimately, one I have become satisfied with my overall knowledge of systems implementation in GNU/Linux, and provided I do not choose to flesh out what I've designed to something very user-friendly, I might relax and use other people's source-based distros.

I'm also interested in FreeBSD, but mostly only as a side project. While it is very interesting, FreeBSD and the other *nix bear such similar likeness to one another that I feel no real advantage moving my focus from GNU/Linux, and am content to limit myself to just picking tidbits up along the way.

Last edited by k2t0f12d (2008-02-17 03:20:32)

mfolnovic · 2008-02-17 10:17:08

none, arch is best

venky80 · 2008-02-17 12:08:26

iam looking at slax...i love the modular approach....some one here also made modular arch with lzm compression
but Arch will always be there in my main computer

eerok · 2008-02-17 15:32:43

There's a lot of interest in the BSD's around here, and coincidentally I've felt the itch to try it out again. I used to love FreeBSD 4.x -- but it wouldn't install when I got a new box: some disk controller problem. Now I've semi-retired that box and have a new one ...

I'm really very happy with Arch. It's the nicest linux install I've ever had. In the past I've also loved Debian (except for all the blasted politics) and Gentoo (except for all the blasted compiling), but I think Arch is brilliant and the community is great.

There's still that itch, though, and I'm curious to see what's happened with FreeBSD over the years. (For that matter, I'm curious about how Dragonfly has turned out as well.)

Reasons · 2008-02-18 17:15:46

Gentoo recently popped into my head. Not going to lie, it was a gentoo video with a guy running gentoo with gnome and compiz and it was much snappier. I figure the next time I have a good four days to kill I'll give it a shot. Might just go and put it on the spare computer first. .

jdhore · 2008-02-18 17:57:19

Reasons wrote:

Gentoo recently popped into my head. Not going to lie, it was a gentoo video with a guy running gentoo with gnome and compiz and it was much snappier. I figure the next time I have a good four days to kill I'll give it a shot. Might just go and put it on the spare computer first. .

Honestly, I've run Gentoo (and for the record, i have a system that is MUCH faster than baseline i686) and the speed difference between Gentoo and Arch is negligible. Especially when you count in the time it takes to compile everything and the fact that pretty much no BinHosts work. Basically, on a 2.4GhZ P4 system with 1GB RAM (I've installed Gentoo and Arch on other systems, but the 2.4 P4 is my main dev system), it takes about 8 hours to compile GNOME and X. Compare that with about 15 minutes to install GNOME and X on Arch.

ruhar · 2008-02-19 01:44:38

ralvez wrote:

I've made up my mind ... Arch is my last distro. But ... if for any reason I was unable to get it anymore I would go back to where I came from : Slackware.

+1. Slackware is the only distro I'd go back to.

Romashka · 2008-02-19 02:03:24

Probably DIY Linux - because it is based on LFS and Pacman.

sevenfourk · 2008-03-31 15:30:32

never used gentoo, maybe sometime will test it. maybe some BSD.

Zibi1981 · 2008-04-01 21:24:46

I'm not planning to change Arch for something else, although I'm using it simultaneously with Mandriva

Allan · 2008-04-01 23:13:41

Something English speaking...

disturbed1 · 2008-04-02 04:05:55

If by chance something happened to Arch, I'd continue using it.

The base system is already here, only updates are needed. It's too easy to change the pkgbuild to updated versions. If your a Gnome Head like myself, there's always Garnome for new releases. Though I haven't seen much of a change between 2.18 and 2.22.

I'd never go back to Debian. I like to make my own software choices, and not be forced into using what they think is right. I want an un-neutered ffmpeg, cdrecord, and firefox, not ffmpeg minus mp3 and aac, not iceweasel, not wodim and icedax.

Arch Linux

#151 2008-01-26 23:52:15

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#152 2008-01-27 00:20:35

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#153 2008-02-05 14:38:57

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#154 2008-02-05 15:29:23

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#155 2008-02-05 15:34:01

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#156 2008-02-05 19:14:45

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#157 2008-02-05 19:28:00

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#158 2008-02-05 19:32:52

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#159 2008-02-05 20:28:02

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#160 2008-02-05 21:17:46

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#161 2008-02-05 22:04:03

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#162 2008-02-05 22:46:51

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#163 2008-02-06 04:50:33

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#164 2008-02-17 03:18:22

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#165 2008-02-17 10:17:08

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#166 2008-02-17 12:08:26

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#167 2008-02-17 15:32:43

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#168 2008-02-18 17:15:46

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#169 2008-02-18 17:57:19

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#170 2008-02-19 01:44:38

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#171 2008-02-19 02:03:24

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#172 2008-03-31 15:30:32

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#173 2008-04-01 21:24:46

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#174 2008-04-01 23:13:41

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

#175 2008-04-02 04:05:55

Re: Which will be your next distro after Arch Linux?

Board footer