Linked by Shahar Weiss on Thu 1st Mar 2007 18:58 UTC
Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu I've been an Arch user for roughly 3 years. I'm pretty much familiar with it all - The way it boots, its configuration and its package management. I've also heard a lot of good things about Ubuntu, and wanted to try it for a long time. So, two weeks ago, I took the plunge. These are my findings.
Thread beginning with comment 217899
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
da_Chicken
Member since:
2006-01-01

Again, as I said, just because Arch is different doesn't mean it doesn't comply with standards. By the definition of the LSB, large, standalone, 3rd party add-ons should be installed in /opt (take a look at the link I posted earlier, as well as any number of discussions on the FHS).

The FHS link you provided doesn't say that "large, standalone, 3rd party add-ons should be installed in /opt". Instead, it says that "Add-on application software packages" go under /opt. What is considered "add-on applications" remains a matter of interpretation. Very few distros seem to think that important applications like Mozilla and the DE's are merely "add-ons" -- and hence they don't install those applications in /opt.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Filesystem_Hierarchy_Standard

Need to find a Gnome/KDE/Mozilla-related file? It's a hell of a lot easier with the /opt layout than the /usr/each_project_has_its_own_whacked_out_structure layout.

I just find it easier if the application executables go all consistently under /usr/bin, and so on. It's a matter of personal preference, I guess. I just don't like the Arch-specific way.

As always, I'd recommend checking the AUR and the main package search. It only takes a moment and prevents you from being able to claim that Arch "doesn't have many packages".

Hmm... Is it possible to search these AUR archives via web browser? If I can find all my favourite apps (or their functional equivalents), I might give Arch another go (despite the weird /opt policy) when 0.8 comes out.

Reply Parent Score: 3

monodeldiablo Member since:
2005-07-06

It's a matter of personal preference, I guess. I just don't like the Arch-specific way.

That's fine, I didn't like it either, when I first used it. Our mutual dislike doesn't make it any less standards-compliant than any other distro, though (I believe RHEL is the only truly LSB-compliant distro, by the way).

Hmm... Is it possible to search these AUR archives via web browser?

It most certainly is! Take a gander at the main package search ( http://www.archlinux.org/packages/search/ ) and the AUR search ( http://aur.archlinux.org/packages.php ). Bask in the warm glow of package-consumption bliss.

I might give Arch another go (despite the weird /opt policy) when 0.8 comes out.

Go for it. You might even like it. Don't bother waiting for 0.8, though. Arch has a rolling release system, so the numbers only indicate a new installer or ISO. You could install 0.7.2-base (or 0.1, for that matter) and then update all your packages to their most recent form with a single command (`pacman -Syu`).

It really is that simple ;)

Reply Parent Score: 1

da_Chicken Member since:
2006-01-01

Thanks for pointing out the search engine for the packages in AUR. AUR seems to have many (but not all) of the packages I missed in the repos (current & extra) that were automatically enabled after a fresh Arch installation.

However, most of the AUR packages seem to be located in the "unsupported" repository. That sounds a bit scary. I was able to find a reference that explains what this "unsupported" repo is: "The [unsupported] repository is not really a repository. Unlike the other repositories, it does not provide binary packages. It is used to refer to the collection of PKGBUILDs in AUR which are submitted by regular users, thus the [unsupported] repository is unofficial."
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Official_Repositories

The same ArchWiki reference also warns normal users against enabling the official "testing" repository because it "can have name collisions with any of the other official repositories" and "your system may be broken after you update with [testing] enabled".

Just thought I should maybe share this piece of information. ;-)

Reply Parent Score: 2