Arch Linux

Clouseau

Member

Registered: 2010-12-24

Posts: 112

Thoughts about Arch

Hello,

I have been using Arch form about 6mj. First I installed it at home and now on a PC at work. At work I used Gentoo but the compiling and reading was "exausting" so I switched to Arch. I must say the distro and the posibilitys are great but I miss a more stable aproach of Gentoo. Often I google for various bugs I find and the time I spend on that I could be spending on compiling in Gentoo so maybe I shouldn't switch... Is there maybe a Arch similar distro with not so new and bleeding edge packages? Or maybe a tutorial how to perserve a more stable Arch system? I now that there is a option in rc.conf to IgnorePkg but it isn't resolving dependencies so good and this is why:

I didn't wan't to upgrade kernel becase after 2.6.37 my remote control for DVB-t Volar X was broken which I wrote on Forum and in Bugs section. So I put in IgnorePkgs to ignore kernel and it worked, the kernel was not upgraded. But in next pacman -Syu my nvidia drivers were upgraded and after reboot my xorg wouldn't start because that version of nvidia needed new kernel and new xorg-server (1.10). How can that happen? Doesn't pacman reads dependencies and adjust according to IgnorePkgs? Or I have to put every single package in IgnorePkg? If the later is correct then it's impossible to follow all the upgrades and dependencies of packages and put them in IgnorePkg, the list would grow over time too much. Or that was maybe a bug?

Clouseau

ngoonee

Forum Fellow

From: Between Thailand and Singapore

Registered: 2009-03-17

Posts: 7,360

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Versioned deps are not generally used except in specific cases since they break things just as much as they fix them. And IgnorePkg is not meant to be a cure-all, and should only be used rarely. Its highly unlikely the dev would do additional error-prone work to accomodate the case that someone has the kernel on IgnorePkg (or glibc, or something like that).

Just downgrade the affected package, the kernel and its modules are quite self-sufficient (in general) and the list won't grow over time. IgnorePkg does exactly what it says (ignores one package) and won't do all the rest of the system maintenance for you.

---

Allan-Volunteer on the (topic being discussed) mailn lists. You never get the people who matters attention on the forums.
jasonwryan-Installing Arch is a measure of your literacy. Maintaining Arch is a measure of your diligence. Contributing to Arch is a measure of your competence.
Griemak-Bleeding edge, not bleeding flat. Edge denotes falls will occur from time to time. Bring your own parachute.

Allan

Pacman

From: Brisbane, AU

Registered: 2007-06-09

Posts: 11,648

Website

Re: Thoughts about Arch

The nvidia deps are quite specific

Depends On     : kernel26>=2.6.38  kernel26<2.6.39  nvidia-utils=270.41.06

so it should be very difficult for you to upgrade nvidia without updating the kernel...  I'd be interested to see the relevant portion of your pacman.log

---

PGP Key: F99FFE0FEAE999BD | I develop pacman - buy me a drink!

SanskritFritz

Member

From: Budapest, Hungary

Registered: 2009-01-08

Posts: 1,954

Website

Re: Thoughts about Arch

At the moment nvidia is in very bad shape and some minor problems in KDE force me to hold several packages back. I have to use the older nvidia driver, but decided to upgrade the kernel, so I must recompile the older nvidia version whenever a new kernel comes (quite often I must say). Newer Xorg versions dont work with the older nvidia, so it has to be held as well.
Also the KDE problem hits ntrack, and dbus must be held back because the older Xorg. So...

IgnorePkg   = nvidia nvidia-utils lib32-nvidia-utils xf86-input-evdev xf86-video-vesa xorg-server-common xorg-server ntrack  dbus-core dbus

I just have to wait until nvidia fixes the driver (nouveau doesnt work here), in the meanwhile the list grows. Welcome to Archlinux, my edge is bleeding

---

zʇıɹɟʇıɹʞsuɐs AUR || Cycling in Budapest with a helmet camera || Revised log levels proposal: "FYI" "WTF" and "OMG" (John Barnette)

Clouseau

Member

Registered: 2010-12-24

Posts: 112

Re: Thoughts about Arch

The nvidia deps are quite specific

Depends On     : kernel26>=2.6.38  kernel26<2.6.39  nvidia-utils=270.41.06

so it should be very difficult for you to upgrade nvidia without updating the kernel...  I'd be interested to see the relevant portion of your pacman.log

I made the mistake, this was the case: I added kernel and nvidia to IgnorePkgs, and that didn't upgrade and that was ok. After I did pacman -Syu the xorg was upgraded to 1.10. After reboot it wouldn't start because he needed nvidia 270.x.something, the latest one. And that nvidia wanted kernel minimum 2.6.38... So that was a chain reaction... I could live with kernel, nvidia and xorg in ignorepkgs, if that would stay that small

Also now, my skype start crashing after reboot, kde is loosing panels although I see them when I move cube in Compiz, my USB stick sometimes puts computer in stall and my kbg starts flashing and I have to use a kill switch... My dolphin very slowly copies files over sftp/fish protocol etc.etc. At home everythuing works good, but here at work collapse

The hardware at work is very recent HP Elite 8200 with i5 2500 so maybe that is the major problem...

Clouseau

Member

Registered: 2010-12-24

Posts: 112

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Ok, I have downgraded the following packages and put them in pacman.conf:

IgnorePkg   =  kernel26 kernel26-headers xorg-server xorg-server-common xf86-input-evdev nvidia nvidia-utils

Will see the behaviour of usb sticks, skype etc. tomorrow... And holpefully in future there will be no package that's gonna be installed and then won't start because he depends on bigger version of any of the package in IgnorePKG

Scars

Member

Registered: 2011-05-01

Posts: 10

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Is there maybe a Arch similar distro with not so new and bleeding edge packages?

Slackware would probably be the closest thing.

hauzer

Member

From: Belgrade, Serbia

Registered: 2010-11-17

Posts: 279

Website

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Debian?

---

Vanity of vanities, saith the Preacher, vanity of vanities; all is vanity.
What profit hath a man of all his labour which he taketh under the sun?
All the rivers run into the sea; yet the sea is not full; unto the place from whence the rivers come, thither they return again.
For in much wisdom is much grief: and he that increaseth knowledge increaseth sorrow.

ArchArael

Member

Registered: 2005-06-14

Posts: 504

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Slackware? Archlinux? Debian?

Unfortunatelly there is not such a thing like the perfect distro. I have switched many times. My last hop had been Salix OS which I ran until three days ago. I thought that a Slackware based distribution would be more stable than Arch but in the end this happened to be just delusion. I had crashes even on Slackware. Same thing applies to Ubuntu 10.10 which is the last one I tried on my workstation (month or so ago).

Stability? Not sure any more what this term means.

Every distro has merits and flaws. You just need to find one that is a lesser pain in the ass.

For a moment I'm on Arch and I hope I will find some peace. If not maybe I'll try Crunchbang. In the end I must admit that there is not a solution to the distro dilemma. You really just need to opt for one that is less problematic for you.

Just my two cents

Last edited by ArchArael (2011-05-20 12:17:37)

tlmiller

Member

Registered: 2009-06-10

Posts: 93

Re: Thoughts about Arch

If stability is the most important thing for you, go with CentOS, Debian, or another "highly stable and outdated" distro.  You'll have very few issues with stability, but you're going to have seriously outdated packages.

Misfit138

Misfit Emeritus

From: USA

Registered: 2006-11-27

Posts: 4,189

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Slackware? Archlinux? Debian?

Unfortunatelly there is not such a thing like the perfect distro. I have switched many times. My last hop had been Salix OS which I ran until three days ago. I thought that a Slackware based distribution would be more stable than Arch but in the end this happened to be just delusion. I had crashes even on Slackware. Same thing applies to Ubuntu 10.10 which is the last one I tried on my workstation (month or so ago).

Stability? Not sure any more what this term means.

Every distro has merits and flaws. You just need to find one that is a lesser pain in the ass.

For a moment I'm on Arch and I hope I will find some peace. If not maybe I'll try Crunchbang. In the end I must admit that there is not a solution to the distro dilemma. You really just need to opt for one that is less problematic for you.

Just my two cents

Hear, hear. Unfortunately, the one distro which is less problematic for you now, may be less problematic next month. Operating systems can make you crazy if you let them.
My advice: Try as hard as you can to keep it simple without spending inordinate amounts of time on system maintenance. Can be tough sometimes to strike a balance.

---

Amiga 1000 restomod
IBM PCjr restomod
C=64 restodmod
Sauengard

ArchArael

Member

Registered: 2005-06-14

Posts: 504

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Hear, hear. Unfortunately, the one distro which is less problematic for you now, may be less problematic next month. Operating systems can make you crazy if you let them.
My advice: Try as hard as you can to keep it simple without spending inordinate amounts of time on system maintenance. Can be tough sometimes to strike a balance.

Thank you for the advice Misfit138. You are right. Finding a balance is tough and I know that Arch is stable now but it may fail in the near future. Maybe I should just stop switching and give up on finding a good distro. Even the Good Distro is a fallacious concept. The last Slackware experience taught me that.

I used to be a tweaker in past but right now the only thing I need is a good, stable and flexible system that doesn't require a lot of compiling.

I try to limit my system maintenance time because I have work to be done.

Last edited by ArchArael (2011-05-21 19:12:46)

Clouseau

Member

Registered: 2010-12-24

Posts: 112

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Gentoo is the best for me... it really is the very powerfull distro, has excellent tools for system maintenance and keeping everything pretty stable... But I'm still on arch, it's very simple and I cannot go back to watch the output of emerge : ))

bwat47

Member

Registered: 2009-10-07

Posts: 638

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Hear, hear. Unfortunately, the one distro which is less problematic for you now, may be less problematic next month. Operating systems can make you crazy if you let them.
My advice: Try as hard as you can to keep it simple without spending inordinate amounts of time on system maintenance. Can be tough sometimes to strike a balance.

Thank you for the advice Misfit138. You are right. Finding a balance is tough and I know that Arch is stable now but it may fail in the near future. Maybe I should just stop switching and give up on finding a good distro. Even the Good Distro is a fallacious concept. The last Slackware experience taught me that.

I used to be a tweaker in past but right now the only thing I need is a good, stable and flexible system that doesn't require a lot of compiling.

I try to limit my system maintenance time because I have work to be done.

Have you tried debian?

ArchArael

Member

Registered: 2005-06-14

Posts: 504

Re: Thoughts about Arch

Have you tried debian?

Yes, I have, many years ago. But at that time I didn't really liked the system V so after a couple of weeks I installed something else. If remember well I switch back to Slackware. It was 8 or 9 years ago.

At the moment Arch is quite stable. I hope it continues this way.

Last edited by ArchArael (2011-06-06 11:24:49)

KimTjik

Member

From: Sweden

Registered: 2007-08-22

Posts: 715

Re: Thoughts about Arch

If stability is the most important thing for you, go with CentOS, Debian, or another "highly stable and outdated" distro.  You'll have very few issues with stability, but you're going to have seriously outdated packages.

CentOS is unfortunately not as an obvious candidate as in the past. I haven't seen any real signs of whether the project is back on track, or still dragging.

Suggestions from many have been to look at Scientific Linux instead, which just as CentOS follows the stable releases of RedHat. Scientific Linux keeps up the pace though.

tlmiller

Member

Registered: 2009-06-10

Posts: 93

Re: Thoughts about Arch

If stability is the most important thing for you, go with CentOS, Debian, or another "highly stable and outdated" distro.  You'll have very few issues with stability, but you're going to have seriously outdated packages.

CentOS is unfortunately not as an obvious candidate as in the past. I haven't seen any real signs of whether the project is back on track, or still dragging.

Suggestions from many have been to look at Scientific Linux instead, which just as CentOS follows the stable releases of RedHat. Scientific Linux keeps up the pace though.

I always forget the name of Scientific.  I knew there was another one.