Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 17th Feb 2009 17:34 UTC
Linux The ArchLinux Release Engineering Team announced the official release of the 2009.02 ISO after a long period of intense development. This distribution is among the first to officially support the new Ext4 filesystem. I've always noticed that Arch seems to be quite popular among OSNews readers, and I'm interested to know from our Arch users: why? What makes Arch such a good Linux distribution?
Thread beginning with comment 349571
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[2]: Arch Pro Bullet List
by TheMonoTone on Tue 17th Feb 2009 21:19 UTC in reply to "RE: Arch Pro Bullet List"
TheMonoTone
Member since:
2006-01-01

Well I've rarely had issues with unpatched software straight from the software developers themselves. In comparison I've had many more problems with the patched versions.

Lets take the X patches that recently made quite a stir.

Originated from Fedora, and the Ubuntu packages also have them.

Results... oh look at that! corrupted system tray icons.

Lets compare to the Arch/Mostly Unpatched packages... yep thats right. It works just fine.

Just one example of thousands of crappy patches that get applied every release and cause many more problems then they solve. Let the project developers do what they do best, fix the problems with their project. Thats my opinion anyways.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Arch Pro Bullet List
by ralsina on Tue 17th Feb 2009 23:18 in reply to "RE[2]: Arch Pro Bullet List"
ralsina Member since:
2007-08-14

I think of downstream patches like when a studio cuts the movie instead of the director.

It may be better, it will probably be worse, and most certainly it's not the same thing.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[4]: Arch Pro Bullet List
by sbergman27 on Tue 17th Feb 2009 23:37 in reply to "RE[3]: Arch Pro Bullet List"
sbergman27 Member since:
2005-07-24

I think of downstream patches like when a studio cuts the movie instead of the director.

I think of patching by downstream providers as representing a cooperative effort. The upstream providers are quite rightly concerned about the maintainability of the code. The downstream providers are quite rightly concerned about customer satisfaction.

The patches will either be integrated into the next upstream release, be improved and integrated into the upstream release, or turn out to be a mistake and get discarded, entirely.

Your "movie analogy" just doesn't click with me. Not at all. It's a different thing.

Reply Parent Score: 3