Arch Linux on my new laptop

[Judland]

Mi few doubts before switching to ark:

• Which packages are available (I use some software in my previous distro that wont be easy to install on the new one)?
  Where can I see the repositories?
  How is the Laptop support?
  Does it has XFCE?

You might also check out the Arch User Repositories at http://aur.archlinux.org/

This is where Arch users submit the packages they've built for Arch that are not part of the official repositories. This is where you could contribute to the distro., submitting your own packages to help others who may like to use the same applications that you do.

I'd tend to think that installing out-of-the-ordinary applications may be easier to do on Arch than other distros. because it uses source tarballs by default... rather than being RPM/DEB-centric. But that's just my own theory.

[snarkout]

Ark and arch are two different distros - this used to confuse me as well. To see current packages, just go to http://www.archlinux.org and click on the package list for noodle. Those things in Current, Extra, and I believe even Community are the "officially supported" packages -- sort of like Ubuntu has -- though I don't know what that really means in a community distro like Arch. The other repos tend to be testing repos. Community has to be enabled in your /etc/pacman.conf though, so it may not be officially supported after all - again, I have a hard time with this concept.

Other than those, there is a huge wealth of stuff available as compilable packages that pacman will manage in the "AUR" (http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php) -- these are not officially supported but a number of the packages have been signed off on by Trusted Users. This is sort of like ubuntu's Universe and Multiverse taken to the next extreme - people wanted the stuff for themselves, and made a pkgbuild for the software for themselves, and decided to shae it with the community. If software is popular enough here, and has been deemed safe, at some point it may get moved into the Community repository.

There are also a few packages (I had to ask about this on the forums myself) that are like checkinstall. Download the source, run configure, and make, and then the checkinstall-like command (there are a few - I'm using creapkg right now, and have found it quite satisfactory). This gives you a package you can manage with pacman. And FWIW, compiling on arch is a dream. Just remember that /opt is preferred over /usr/local by arch.

I can't speak to lappy support, though if my Workstation Migration goes as planned, it probably wont be too long before I get arch on there as well. Honestly though, Kubuntu works so well OOTB on my lappy, it's probably going to take a while before I get the urge. Or not. I guess we'll see.

Yes, it has XFCE, though IIRC, XFCE has started recommending that you download their installer and just install it yourself.

If you have a testing PC or a spare drive, I'd really recommend trying it out and going from there. It may not be for you, or you may fall in love with the Arch Way. I certainly fall, at least in part, into the latter camp. I've started remembering why I started using Linux in the first place -- I have control over my OS. Yes, there's a fair bit of tinkering that needs to be done, but even a lot of that is voluntary. The defaults work quite well, or at least they have for me so far. IMO, their new hardware detection daemon (is it actually a daemon? Maybe that's a poor choice of words) "hwdetect" is so much better than hotplug, it's like comparing rocks with rock candy. HWD and lshwd are also very impressive and still very useful, too. I'm not at all a boot-time whore, but it's nice to be up and running in under a minute - generally in about half a minute. From me, arch gets two thumbs up.

Also, if you *do* decide to install, get a copy of the new 7.1-pre installer. It's a lot easier to deal with than the 7.0 installer. It takes care of the problems surrounding the devfs to udev conversion, and it also takes care of the newer migrating to initrd. Absolutely painless, especially if you let their automagic disk tool partition your drive for you.

[Jza]

What about skype?

I know there aree some debs but if arch used their own package how can I install that?

[Patrick]

What about skype?

I know there aree some debs but if arch used their own package how can I install that?

There is a package available in AUR but I've been using the version from the skype website without any issue.

[mowestusa]

This question is more for Patrick,

I've listened to TLLTS for 1 and 1/2 years now, and I know that when you moved from Slack to Kanotix you made the comment that you liked Kanotix because of the fact that you were up and running with little effort in just a half hour, without having to configure everything by hand like you did in Slack.

Now as you talk about Arch you have made the comment frequently that it takes a fair amount of manual configuration, yet you seem to like Arch better than Kanotix and Slack. I guess I wondering if you have had a change of heart and now believe again that manual configuration is the way to go?

Do you believe that Arch has more or less manual configuration than Slack?

I've been listening to your tales about Arch with interest. You and Judland kind of pushed me over the edge to ditch SimplyMepis for Kanotix, and now you two have me seriously considering Arch, but I still feel like a newbie. I've edited config files and I love the command line, if I know where I'm going and what I need to do there. Even with all the apt-get front ends I still find my self at the commandline doing my apt-gets, just feels more enjoyable. I'm considering because I have yet to do a apt-get dist-upgrade without problems. Under SimplyMepis it messed up the menu structure. Under Kanotix I actually lost x and had to follow some complicated directions on the forums. KDE apt-get installs have just been an unpleasent experience for the last year. Anyway just some questions from a faithful listener and one who has benefited from this forum and TLLTS.

mowestusa

[Patrick]

This question is more for Patrick,

I've listened to TLLTS for 1 and 1/2 years now, and I know that when you moved from Slack to Kanotix you made the comment that you liked Kanotix because of the fact that you were up and running with little effort in just a half hour, without having to configure everything by hand like you did in Slack.

Now as you talk about Arch you have made the comment frequently that it takes a fair amount of manual configuration, yet you seem to like Arch better than Kanotix and Slack. I guess I wondering if you have had a change of heart and now believe again that manual configuration is the way to go?

In general I'm lazy (who isn't). Manual configuration has it's strengths and weaknesses particular to that distro. Slack is great distro but my biggest gripe against it is that it doesn't have an official package management system outside of installpkg, etc. I know there's slapt-get and swaret which both work well but they're not officially recognized by Pat V. Some say that's a strength, I say it's a weakness and holds the distro back. That's my opinion. The biggest weakness of almost all distros is that upgrading to new releases can really screw up your system. I know Dan had a good experience upgrading Ubuntu on his Apple laptop recently.
Arch has packages available in the official repository for about 90% of what I use. Another 5-8% are available via AUR. I don't mind compiling the last 2% or so. Arch gives you the control to build a lean system like Gentoo but you don't have the endless compiling. Arch has packages for the entire OS. Upgrading is a breeze. I upgraded to KDE 3.5 on my test box without any issues. Other people using other distros have not had as much success. I still like Kanotix but I hear that you won't be able to upgrade from the last release. That's means you have to do a fresh install. That's a major pain. You should be able to upgrade to a new release with minimal fuss. If a little extra work upfront means upgrading will be easier later than I'm all for it.

Do you believe that Arch has more or less manual configuration than Slack?

Arch has more manual configuring than Slackware 10.2. I know, I've done installs of both distros recently.

I've been listening to your tales about Arch with interest. You and Judland kind of pushed me over the edge to ditch SimplyMepis for Kanotix, and now you two have me seriously considering Arch, but I still feel like a newbie. I've edited config files and I love the command line, if I know where I'm going and what I need to do there. Even with all the apt-get front ends I still find my self at the commandline doing my apt-gets, just feels more enjoyable. I'm considering because I have yet to do a apt-get dist-upgrade without problems. Under SimplyMepis it messed up the menu structure. Under Kanotix I actually lost x and had to follow some complicated directions on the forums. KDE apt-get installs have just been an unpleasent experience for the last year. Anyway just some questions from a faithful listener and one who has benefited from this forum and TLLTS.

mowestusa

I like apt-get on the command line as well. I would try it out on a spare hard drive to see if it's for you. Hard drives are pretty cheap these days. Let me know if you have any other questions.

[snarkout]

If a little extra work upfront means upgrading will be easier later than I'm all for it.

This sums it up perfectly for me. I also far prefer the "rolling release cycle" over the "Release/Freeze every 6 months cycle."

I have obviously not been using arch long enough to say for sure that it's "best" but I like it better than any of the alternatives right now. I still like Debian a lot, and I still think it makes a *fantastic* server distro (assuming you can live with "stable" software). It's certainly a hell of a lot easier to jump through a hoop for arch every few months than it is to maintain a stable Sid box IMO.

[mowestusa]

Patrick and others,
Thanks for the replies. I'm debating what to put on my new low profile machine that I got from Walmart. It was between Arch and Ubuntu. Since, that machine won't take an extra hard drive, and dual booting with WinXP will fill up the 40 gigs it has, I think I'll go with Ubuntu on that machine. It will be my primary desktop that wife and kids will use, so I need it up and running all the time.

I'm getting a AMD 1.0 Ghz Whitebox from my brother who says something is wrong with it (Last time I looked at it Win98 had its share of difficulties, but Kanotix booted and ran great). He bought a used computer from a relative for $100. So I'll try wiping the hard drive and installing Arch on that box as my testing and development box. Won't have a chance to do anything till after Christmas, I'll have to let you guys know how it goes.

mowestusa

[Chess]

I have also installed Slackware and Arch recently on the same box and I have found the amount of manual configuration needed to get the system to where I like it to be about the same. For example, Arch has the freetype compiled with the bytecode enabled, while Slack does not, so you need to roll your own freetype. Slackware by definition is a true vanilla Linux distro -- no patches at all, no custom artwork, nothing. It's the closest to true UNIX. But that's what makes it so great. Once you get it set up, it's almost like it is your own distro.

Slackware is very, very easy to update between releases. A friend of mine has a box that originally had 8.1 on it released like 3 years ago and he has continually updated it and it now runs 10.2. He has never had a single upgrade problem. Pat V includes an easy to follow README with each release to tell you how to upgrade.

I still find the treatment of security updates and Slackware's issuance of rofficially-sanctioned gpg-signed packages with MD5 signatures to be a major advantage if you plan to run a server. Pat V and the Slackware Security Team take security and patches very seriously, which is why so many people use Slackware on their servers. Maybe not as many as Debian or BSD, but a surprising number.

Don't get me wrong. Arch is really fantastic and I'm enjoying it ALOT on my second box. But Slackware's simplicity, reliability, and history count for quite a bit, too.

[Judland]

Upgrading the system is why I'm switching from Kanotix to Arch. Both are considered "bleeding edge," but Debian bleeding edge seems more prone to breakage than Arch has been. At least from my experiences. It's also the only bleeding edge distro I've tried recently that I've been able to install successfully.

I also like how easily anyone can contribute back into the Arch community. And even if Arch wasn't around anymore, Pacman seems to be a management system than could be maintained locally if need be. I don't think I could say the same for Apt-get.

I like Kanotix's simplicity, but I'm also finding out that it isn't really all that much work to learn what it takes to use Arch. And the stability is a definite pay-off for my extra effort, in my opinion.

I wouldn't recommend Arch to someone who's just curious about Linux or want a test drive. That's what Live distros like Kanotix are for. However, for someone serious about having a Linux box of their own, Arch, or even Underground Desktop (a simpler version of Arch) would be something I'd now recommend.

Personally, I've learned the value of manual configuration (as long as I can follow some simple instructions to do it.... too complicated and I lose interest). The speed Arch performs at, even on my older PC, amazes me. I can now see how "automation" really slows down a machine's performance.

So, I suppose, automation and doing things manually both have their benefits and their place in the OS world. Which matters to you? Only you can decide that.

[Judland]

Well, to quote a favorite movie of mine...

"The last remnants of the old Republic have swept away."

Today I set forth and finally replaced my last Kanotix box (our main household PC) with Arch. Well, Underground Desktop to be accurate.

Had a bit of a hiccup with my Nvidia driver, but was resolved with a quick post to the UD forums.

Finally, I can now upgrade our system to the latest packages without having to worry about troubled SID.