Arch is a very capable distro. If you want a fast, lightweight distro that puts you in the driver’s seat, Arch is your best bet, says the review at NewsForge.
Arch Linux Review
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
(Without reading the review)
Archlinux is really a great Distro with a nice package manager and a streamlined, lightweight design based on the king of minimalists: Crux. It doesn’t overhelm you with unnessecary config tools (Yast, debconf) is fast und JUST WORKS!
I’ve used Crux on the PowerPC and have been rather impressed by the package manager. This is primarily because it makes builds easy and doesn’t try to manage too much. There is nothing worse than trying to maintain a minimalist system only to discover that one program installed half a dozen (or more!) dependencies.
Anyway, I’m asking for comments on how Archlinux (something I do not know) compares to Crux (something which I’m familiar with) since an x86 recently fell into my hands.
The other nice thing is that the packages provided are not patched in any way
Why is that a good thing? If a bug or security problem is discovered in a package, wouldn’t you want it to be patched against such a problem until the next release comes out?
Hmm… According to distrowatch.com page hit counter, interest in Arch Linux is definitely rising.
http://distrowatch.com/stats.php?section=popularity
Apparently the general concept behind Arch promises something that many users are currently looking for. You install first just the base system (the *BSD style installation) and then add only the programs you want using a capable package manager that can handle dependencies. This way you end up with a system that has minimal amount of unnecessary extra fluff. Still, the review is right in reminding that this is not a distro for inexperienced Linux users.
Anyway, I’m asking for comments on how Archlinux (something I do not know) compares to Crux (something which I’m familiar with) since an x86 recently fell into my hands.
Arch is very similar to Crux (as I understand it), but Arch DOES have a package management system, which, while minimalistic, does autoresolve dependencies. Arch keeps it very simple and light, though.
You can check out the intro here, also:
http://www.archlinux.org/docs/en/guide/install/arch-install-guide.h…
<IT>Why is that a good thing? If a bug or security problem is discovered in a package, wouldn’t you want it to be patched against such a problem until the next release comes out?</IT>
Arch Linux does not have distribution-specific patches.
The Arch Linux package developers, however, are very aggressive in applying security and feature-enhancement patches. In other words, Arch Linux packages are up-to-date.
Also, the ABS (Arch Linux package build system) makes it VERY simple to build your own (patched or otherwise) packages.
no one uses kde or gnome in arch ;-p xfce or e17!
Got lost, I need a good verbose walkthough to get it installed but I don’t
I don’t understand why everyone (the Arch website included) claims that Arch is for the “competent” or “experienced” user. I’ve only been using linux for about 4 months and basically went straight to it from Fedora Core 3. In no way would I consider myself an experienced user, but I found the installation very easy to use. For the few problems I ran into, the forums/wiki/chatroom were very helpful. Maybe I’ve just been lucky or have natural talent
but I think people are making it seem harder than it seems.
Archlinux isn’t perfect, but no distro is these days. It does provide a really fast desktop. I also use gentoo, but am switching to archlinux now, because it’s easy to maintain (no compile times and auto dependancy solver), works just as fast, and because I have to keep a second computer up-to-date.
Only downside is that not all my favourite programs are supported yet. Via the forums one gets a lot of unofficial supported packages though
>I don’t understand why everyone (the Arch website included)
>claims that Arch is for the “competent” or “experienced” user.
Because the “installation” is only a part of the process. To really use Arch as a modern user you need to go dirty with the udev rules, you need to edit hotplus scripts to use a scanner or a digicam, you need to create your own xorg.conf file (if you can’t copy/paste it from elsewhere) etc etc etc.
Arch is not difficult to install. But to make it really usable from a modern user’s point of view, requires extra manual work, which is not easy to do.
I am on my way to try Archlinux. I am a Gentoo user, but I am bored of long compilation times, and I want some distro, which is as flexible as Gentoo is. Te alternatives which I do look at: Ubuntu and ArchLinux.
To really use Arch as a modern user <- how do i use my system as a modern user ?!
you need to create your own xorg.conf file (if you can’t copy/paste it from elsewhere) etc etc etc. <- just: xorgcfg -textmode or install hwd pacman -S hwd and run it
you need to go dirty with the udev rules <- i don’t know a thing about udev and have been using it since ever
you need to edit hotplus scripts to use a scanner or a digicam, <- hotplus ?! maybe hotplug ? how do you have to edit hotplug files ? hotplug just works !!
requires extra manual work, which is not easy to do <- myself as “Unix like” system user and lover don’t find editing well documented and commented text files “not easy to do” i find it faster and more friendly then going with the gui menu thing on most ocasions and i’m not even a native english speaker
have you ever used arch at all ?!?! or do we have here a mandrake/windows user complaining about not knowing a thing about basic unix ?!
By the way, and though a bit off-topic:
I wonder if anyone here have given Frugalware an Arch Linux fork a try?
http://frugalware.org/
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=frugalware
I only recently learned about Frugalware on Distrowatch and know nothing much else about it except that it seems a very young project yet and that they use a lot of the stuff from Arch Linux, like Pacman for package management. (Yep, Arch Linux has grown big enough to have its own forks & derivatives…) If I’ve understood right from their homesite, they aim to provide a bit more newbie friendliness but otherwise the differencies are not yet clear to me. Anyone else have some more info?
“have you ever used arch at all ?!?! or do we have here a mandrake/windows user complaining about not knowing a thing about basic unix ?!”
Hey dude, did you check who you’re replying to… Eugenia is the site editor, you know, the one who seems to be constantly testing various OS’s and distros. According her comments Arch seems to be her latest favorite Linux distro, so she should know a thing or two about it… And even I know that she has used a few more operating systems than just Mandrake & Windows… 😉
great to see more distributions are using pacman since it’s a great package manager
it would be nice to have a more graphical distribution (meaning a gui installer and basic system configuration gui enabled conf tools) based on arch to let people who are not interested in learning how to use a Unix system benefit from a OSS operating system with the quality of arch
until then ubuntu seems to be looking very good =:)
i was replying to a post, just that. and that post did’t seem like from a person used to work with a unix system
to sum it up: arch is VERY friendly to unix users as is slackware or debian. it has a great rep, great package manager, very updated software and well documented configuration text files
IT IS NOT friendly to NON-unix users, people who don’t want to learn the unix way or just wan’t to jump to a GNU/Linux OS before learning anything about it should go for something like Ubuntu, they even ship cds to your door for NO MONEY, so there’s no excuse for not trying it =;)
I just replaced FC3 on my laptop with Arch 0.7. I used Arch about a year ago, but stopped as it was really too buggy to use back then.
Things have really improved with 0.7: it’s fast and works well on my old laptop (p3-500, 192MB) using XFCE4.2. It required some fiddling to get working, but then so did FC3. I think I’m going to stick with it for a while.
is that Arch linux is i686 binaries only, no mmx, no see, no 3dnow, better hope they provide binaries for NPTL, and all the latest packages, might as well run i386 packages, works on more computers. Still, x86 only is very limiting
Conversations with Linux apologists tend to have three distinct phases:
1) Very erudite-sounding discussion of your problem in terms of software projects which are either pre-alpha vaporware or, more likely, entirely theoretical ideas once floated on Slashdot. (“Yes, what would solve your problem would be the integration of Samba into the kernel with the correct RFS extensions. I think that this is a problem that Alan Cox is working on in the unstable release of Debian 4.9.01a”)
2) Grudging acceptance that there is no very good or workable solution to your problem under Linux, coupled with castigation of the iniquities of the software industry. (“Well, of course the real trouble is that HP won’t open the driver source specifications so the project has to be carried out on the island of Nauru. Damn that DMCA! I heard Bruce Perens talking about a secret data repository under the sea like in this Neal Stephenson novel ….”
3) Banging on for hours and hours about how fucking wonderful Apache is, if you let them. (“… and even Microsoft runs it for 83% of their intranet servers according to recent Gartner surveys and it really shows that Free Software works in the business environment and it was just put together by this bunch of guys and it just goes to prove ….”
@Octavian: And what’s your point on the news?
I think part of the problem is that people have a hard time believing that they are wrong.
Take for instance your typical linux apologist: He’s been working for MONTHS on just getting his operating system installed and his computer somewhat working again. He’s spend HUNDREDS of dollars and WEEKS of reading books trying to figure out how to perform the various tasks required to run linux. (As you mentioned)
Now this guy.. is he going to have the guts to look back on the last six months of his life and say “God, what a fucking waste of time. Now where’d I put my Windows 2000 install disc?”
Nope. He’s going to say “That was time well spent. Now I’m going to try to learn how to use Emacs/vi/XWindows/etc” then proceed to waste the next sixth months doing something he could have done in six minutes on Windows or Macintosh.
People have a hard time criticizing themselves.. telling themselves they made a mistake and wasted time. So instead they convince themselves that they in fact are right and to reassure themselves of their rightness they go around and tell everyone else how great it is. Yet, in fact, they fucked up.
So, Linux apologists, isn’t it about time you be honest with yourself?
Just wait for the troll to go away and his pointless troll messages get modded down. No use replying such troll emails especially when they have just nothing to do with the subject (Arch Linux review) at hand. (I wonder if he send his comments to a wrong thread/site? Or why he has [email protected] as his email address? A funny joke maybe?)
Linux apologists’ minds are so simple:
if (I_do_not_agree_with_post()) {
….yell(“TROLL! TROLL! TROLL! TROLL! TROLL! TROLL!
“);
}
else {
….continue_masturbating();
}
I often have other people, unfortunate souls who use Windows XP and Microsoft Word, come to use my printer. Now when they try to download their word document from their webmail, Firefox snaps into action and recognizes that the document probably should be opened with OpenOffice.org, and does so. It’s the little things that count.
Right and this has to do with arch how now ?
“no one uses kde or gnome in arch ;-p xfce or e17!”
I’ve just started using Arch and I installed both KDE and Gnome. I’m sticking with Gnome because I enjoy its functionality (not to mention gdesklets).
To me it just felt like CRUX w/ a package management system. Oh! and w/ more color during boot
I’m a ports guy myself, so I really see now point in using Arch. ‘prt-get depinst packagename’ is all i need.
Honestly though, Arch is a good Distro and I am sure it will be around for along time to come…
Shit, back to the drawing board, I’ve only spent a max of 48 hours getting my Arch Linux distro to where I wanted it for a desktop. Most of that was package downloading on a mediocre connection, ISP probs.
I will admit, I had to look up a couple of boards to get Nvidia working in a DVI/TV dualview setup but, gee, this installation includes
Office software (latest Open Office)
Image manipulation software
Current drivers
Audio apps and configuration
Video/DVD playback capabilities on TV out as well as LCD
Red Orchestra
Doom3
All software with current patches or updates applied.
Now for Windows appologists like your self
I don’t have to run a Virus Scanner
I don’t have to run Files System Utilities
I don’t have to run a file cleaner
I don’t have to run Regestry cleaner/defragger
I have a fully functional system with piss ass easy update capabilties that make Windows update look the pain in the ass it really is. Does Windows update update all your productivity software as well as the OS?
My advise to you is piss off and leave us Linux appologists alone to enjoy what we do. Some things in Linux for full functionability ain’t easy but once setup, Linux kills Windows as far as OS maintenance goes and setup is getting easier and easier everyday.
i am an apologist of OSS and it has nothing to do with how easy it is to work with or how better it is. it’s about FREEDOM
if you don’t value your freedom keep using proprietary software!! go ahead and pay for getting locked to closed standards and platforms !!! I WILL NOT !
i’m using arch right now and i’m much more productive then with windows ! everything just works for me !! i didn’t have to dowload any drivers and i don’t have to leave my terminal to search or install software just pacman -Ss search-string and pacman -S package-name and i’m done
as you can see YOU don’t get well with GNU/Linux and spend months trying to figure it out… but that’s YOU !! if you feel like you can not adapt to a difrent OS just DON’T ! no one forces you to!
I’ve been using Linux since the days of RedHat 4.2, and I’ve messed around a bit with a couple of the BSDs over the years. When I saw that Arch Linux 0.7 had been released, I got a little curious and said, “Hey, why not!” and I gave it a shot. I have to admit that I think I’m in love. If you can make it though the installation manual (not that it’s a bad manual, it’s just that you actually DO have to read it for the first time though, unlike some other more automated Linux distro installs) then the end result can be very rewarding. Despite being a Linux person for so long, I had always been lazy in the respects of getting things like hardware 3D working, or printing and scanning. Arch surprised me in how easy it was to learn. There is a lot of good information out there, especially on the forum site and the wiki.
While the software repository is a little lacking compared to some of the bigger distros, it makes up for it in the ease of use. I know that things like apt-get, urpmi, *BSD’s ports, and Gentoo’s portage get a lot of the spotlight, but the one thing that I LOVE about pacman is that it not only has dependancy checking for installation, but also for UNINSTALLING software. It’s been a long time since I’ve used apt-get, and I’ve never used urpmi, so I can’t speak for those, but I know that in Gentoo, if you install KDE or GNOME, you better hope that you definitely want to continue using it, because there is no simple way to pull all of that stuff back out afterwards. (NOTE: I’m not trying to trash Gentoo. It’s great in a lot of respects, but software removal isn’t one of them. I did several reinstalls from scratch just to clear out the cruft of trying things out) Arch’s pacman, on the other hand, can pull it out just as easily as it put it there in the first place. That’s a real boon for trying out new software. Knowing that there won’t be any cruft left in the system from installing something just to try it out once is one of the best aspects of Arch.
Also, it’s nice that it’s a i686 optimized distro. It may not have a lot of aggressive optimizations, but it feels nice and fast overall compared to distros that aren’t optimized at all.
If you’ve ever been curious to try Arch out, but haven’t yet, I’d definitely suggest it.
I like Arch Linux. I’d be running it if I wasn’t already happy running FreeBSD. AL seems to be the distro that best captures the original spirit of Linux.
I think you’ll find Arch’s Build System to be quite familiar. If I remember correctly, Judd (the Arch founder-dude) was a big-wiggy in Crux devel.
I’ve used Arch for almost 2 years now (off and on, ’cause I like to experiment) and really enjoy it. I also use FreeBSD a lot as well. Arch is comparable to Gentoo speed-wise, but only takes a minute or two to update all programs. Also, it seems very secure, because very few services start up in the default config.
Jeremy,
emerge –depclean should remove packages not linked to any other package on Gentoo.
The keyword in your sentance is should. In reality, I never had much success with –depclean, especially when you mess with your USE flags.
I kept Gentoo on my home server since I won’t fix what is not broken but the issues I have encountered with package removal was one of the reason for replacing it with distros with better (IMHO) package management.
I did tried Archlinux some months ago but I had some issues with broken packages. Anyway, I’ll give another try next week…
Octavian, your post has touched one of my pet peeves, and gosh darn it, I don’t think that you’re a troll; so I will respond sincerely.
You said: Take for instance your typical linux apologist: He’s been working for MONTHS on just getting his operating system installed and his computer somewhat working again. He’s spend HUNDREDS of dollars and WEEKS of reading books trying to figure out how to perform the various tasks required to run linux. (As you mentioned)
Now this guy.. is he going to have the guts to look back on the last six months of his life and say “God, what a fucking waste of time. Now where’d I put my Windows 2000 install disc?
This is exactly how I view the time that I spent learning Windows. I started with Windows286, then worked my way through 3.0, 3.1, 95, and 98 before converting completely to Linux at home (but have had to use 2000 and XP at work). When I first started with Windows, I had to spend a lot of time learning about the 640K barrier, extended RAM, EMM386.EXE, DEVICEHIGH etc. I also had to learn how to hack win.ini so that we could upload Postscript fonts to a printer (such that it would do it once after boot rather than with every print job). And what about those Registry hacks with Windows95 and after? All of this knowledge, of course, is completely obsolete and useless now.
Do I regret wasting my time with Windows? Not really. I put in that time because I wanted a certain functionality out of Windows, and I used that OS for over a decade. Admittedly, when I switched to Linux, it took me about a year before I felt as proficient as I had been with Windows. But, to me, learning about Linux is enjoyable for its own sake.
What about regular, non-geek folk? You’re right; they don’t want to learn about operating systems. For example, my wife. She started with Windows286 along with me, and moved up to WindowsXP. Despite having over 15 years experience with Windows, can she troubleshoot a network or install a driver or hack the Registry? Absolutely not! For her, the computer is just a tool, and she learned the bare minimum to allow her to use the applications.
Can she use Linux? Well, it was actually her idea to completely switch at home. One day, Windows just refused to work with our system, but Knoppix ran fine (I eventually discovered that the problem was with the combination of my motherboard, video card driver and Windows). She suggested that if Knoppix worked fine, why not replace Windows with it. Since then, she’s been a happy Linux user, with an zero learning curve; she has not read a single man page, or read a single article, or picked up a single book on Linux. She has Firebird and Thunderbird, OpenOffice, MPlayer, XMMS and Frozen Bubble (especially Frozen Bubble) and she’s good to go.
Most people are like my wife; they just want to sit in front of the computer and use their applications. If your system is a single computer connected to a broadband modem, then using Linux is a simply a matter of popping in a Knoppix or Ubuntu CD and using it. Even less hassle than WindowsXP.
If you want more out of your system, such as running an http server or nfs or ssh or bash/perl/python scripting or Reiser4 or whatever; then, yes, you need to learn. Obviously, everyone reading this article about Arch Linux falls into this latter category.
I think I just might try Arch; it looks like fun.
Heh, very funny those wallpapers. 😉
The traditional Unix or Unix-like systems do appear at first insanely difficult on purpose, especially if you don’t like to learn how the system works. But it starts to make sense once you study it a bit. And there are easier GNU/Linux distros than Arch for those of us who don’t like to spend time and effort to learn the insides of operating systems. Try Linspire or Xandros — the pay versions.
I’ve just reformatted my laptop and erased the WindowsXP installation. It was a bit sad moment because Windows makes such a powerful desktop, but it’s nowadays just too much trouble to maintain a Windows system (updates, anti-virus software, spyware removal, security tweaks, etc.) and GNU/Linux and *BSD are just easier to maintain. Unix-like systems used to be the insanely difficult option but now Windows is the more troublesome option, IMO.
Now that we’re feeding the pro-Windows anti-Linux troll anyway (and OS News not modding him down though they maybe should), and not discussing Arch Linux (it seems)…:
Both Linux and OS News are all about OS choice and about giving people alternatives, right? A Windows mono-culture wouldn’t be about choice but about market monopoly which can only be bad to everyone in the long run, right (even to MS itself, though they really cannot see that far themselves…)? That alone is enough of a reason to be looking for OS alternatives.
What alternative operating systems we have in the world that can realistically be considered for desktops, servers, for embedded aplications etc. etc.? Mac OS, Linux, BSDs, Solaris, maybe QNX and a few others. Now just let the free markets and people choose for themselves what is best for them. The fact is that more and more people seem choose Linux. You have companies and organizations from state governments to big corporations considering and switching to Linux. Trust me, Ocatvian, they know what they are doing, and don’t need your advice…
Arch Linux is mainly meant for geek like users who know what they need to do to configure the OS manually. It’s really not that they’re too stupid to know better but that they want it that way. In other words: they’re geeks…
But there are, on the other hand, also other Linux distributions that do make Linux quite easy even for non-geeks: Xandros and others. Windows is still often easier to use than Linux, and MS does pay a lot attention to usability, but the gap is getting more and more narrow all the time, and sometimes, for example, the Linux desktop encironments may have even passed Windows in usability.
So what really is your problem, Octavian? You made some funny, ironic points, but otherwise your comments really just pure trolling and hate mail almost without any constructive content, not to mention that they would have had something to do with Arch Linux. Did you just had some bad experiences with some Linux distribution, maybe Arch, and now ended up screaming to the whole world how frustrated you’re are…?
We all have indeed had our bad moments with operating systems and computers, whether Linux, Windows or some other, but it is not the end of the world… Windows may have its security, stability and other issues, Linux distros may have their problems, but both are actively developed and the OS problems are often even solvable by ourselves. Maybe you should just calm down a little, sit back and try to solve your particular problems instead of just letting the whole world know how angry you’re now against everything Linux – you might even learn something useful in the process.
To say that something is a natural monopoly is to imply that the economic system it sits upon is itself natural. No, if a monopoly is natural within a given economic system, then this is a sign that the economic system itself is flawed.
I agree, most people don’t care that there’s an operating system running beneath their desktop, or even hardware powering that operating system. However, people do care when something gets in the way of their work. That includes viruses, spyware, corrupted registrys, dropped drivers, trojan horses, and remote exploits.
Don’t worry, it’s alright to admit that you only troll because you’re afraid to admit you’re frustrated and crave an alternative.
Ah well, it was worth a try, but some people aren’t capable of coherent thoughts. Others are just dicks. Some, unfortunate souls, are both.
Wrawrat,
If you play around with your useflags frequently, then you can append the –newuse flag to the emerge commands, and portage will do the right thing. I haven’t had any problems with depclean. Portage has become pretty intelligent of late.
Yeah, I did used –newuse on my server. I didn’t used it with depclean though as I don’t add packages often. Nevertheless, I don’t think I will put Gentoo back on my main computer since I don’t see the point of compiling everything anymore. Perhaps I’m just slow but I never felt any performance increase even with tons of flags that would make ricers proud…
But that’s still nice to see that they are doing some efforts.
Arch Linux is the best distro i seen in years, it’s definetly the future. It’s even simpler than Slackware, how cool is that? Anyone who love Linux will love Arch period.
I have installed Arch on a few machines. After the base install, I install nano, X, Blackbox and Dillo. After that, it’s “pacman -S whatever” as I need it. It’s minimal, lean and quick. No complaints here.
I only miss the Pentium4 or (insert your specific architecture here) optimized multimedia software that can be installed on Gentoo, other than that, Arch is fantastic.