Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

BLizgreat! · 2017-03-23 06:58:57

Revision:

Think of Arch as pulling your own fingernails out with a pair of pliers and Debian is more like getting a manicure.

OK exaggerating a bit there . Imo what matters is knowledge and learning. Helps o course if someone is really stoked about tech. Just cause x-nixer using Debian doesn't elect to spend 4 hours getting xorg-etc working doesn't mean they lack the skill and just because x-avg-Archer does, doesn't necessarily mean they're l33t.

Still like and really have nothing per se against Arch but the misguided perception and cyber snobbish attitude expressed by many among the userbase does tend to get on my nerves. Jmo.

Vll!

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2017-03-23 06:59:42)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-03-23 07:41:41

Of course Arch is harder to install these days since Alad did away with the Beginner's Guide...

I fully support the change but in practical terms it just means that more people are installing Arch by following one of the many utterly rubbish YouTube "guides" and ending up with a b0rked system that they don't know how to maintain

BLizgreat! · 2017-03-23 08:11:11

^Woah Alad was behind the beginners guide? Speaking of Alad revision to revision my somewhat Arch bash above isn't to say there aren't plenty of kickbutt Archers among the community too.

Like hades out of Alad and have encountered plenty of cool Arch fans. As for doing away w the beginners guide not sure it's so much in Arch's best interest.

Besides the web being the web, probably won't be long before someone takes up the slack and puts up a quality Arch install resource.

Plus guessing the Manjaro userbase is likely to swell. Which hey, heard good things about that distro, shrugs.

Gentoo ftw!

Btw: Hiya's Hoas, hope you and yours are well. OK gotta go, seems like it's been 30 mins and in reality, like 4 friggin hrs have passed!

Also a hearty hiya to all the other cool nixers here among the Bunsenlabs community.

dolly · 2017-03-23 18:57:08

The hybrid ARCHLabs is really nice. Try it! You will like it, promise!

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-03-24 07:25:06

BLwillbegreat! wrote:

Alad was behind the beginners guide?

Alad has contributed a huge amount to the ArchWiki and he is currently one of the Administrators

However, there is no longer a Beginner's Guide for installing Arch Linux because it was decided to instead use the official (ie, non-community-editable) Installation Guide and incorporate links to the necessary information rather than explaining everything in-line (as was the case with the Beginner's Guide).

BLizgreat! · 2017-03-24 08:41:26

^Didn't know, I like Alad, can tell he's a good guy and knowledgeable/experienced nixer.

Nothing against Arch (for sure nothing against any of the kickbutt users of Arch) but do think it's intentionally designed to be overly tedious to set-up.

Initiation kinda thing (dunno) ? Have gone through the process a few times and once someone's jumped through the required hoops, always found it to be good gnu/nix. Though nothing I can't get via Debian net install in a fraction of the time and pita.

To be honest, I just can't see what all the hubbub surrounding Arch is all about. Can be kickbutt gnu/Linux surely but so can so many others.

PS, though hey, one of the rules of the Nixsphere, don't like it (for whatever reason), don't use it, shrugs.

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2017-03-24 09:01:28)

Steve · 2017-03-24 09:16:46

I like arch as its the distro i learnt the most on due to the arch wiki, i use it on my laptop now via the arch revenge installer and have got it running openbox and tint2.

Ive done the arch install the arch way before via the wiki and with help (midfingr) but when it comes something like an installer that works out of the box you cant go past revenge installer for newbs like myself imo. https://sourceforge.net/projects/revenge-installer/

As for bunsenlabs, well im still using it for my media center and it still gets updated when they are available so i will be keeping BL for a long time as it runs a debian base and from research debian is the distro to trust for stable environments.

Last edited by Steve (2017-03-24 09:18:18)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-03-24 21:07:29

Steve wrote:

arch revenge installer

I have never understood Arch "installers" — surely one of the benefits of Arch is that it's quicker and more flexible to install (properly) than it is to have to wade through one of those silly, bloated, bug-ridden GUI interfaces?

To install Arch on my machine now would take a grand total of 10 commands:

# mount -o subvol=Arch /dev/sda3 /mnt
# pacstrap /mnt base # any other packages go here
# arch-chroot /mnt
# ln -sf /usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/London /etc/localtime
# hwclock --systohc
# sed -i 's/#en_GB.UTF-8 UTF-8/en_GB.UTF-8 UTF-8/' /etc/locale.gen
# locale-gen
# echo "LANG=en_GB.UTF-8" > /etc/locale.conf
# echo "Arch" > /etc/hostname
# passwd

Seems a lot simpler and quicker to run those than to spend half an hour messing about with a GUI...

Also, an important part of maintaining Arch is knowing exactly how it all fits together and using an "installer" undermines this considerably.

EDIT: error correction :8

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2017-03-24 21:23:19)

hhh · 2017-03-24 21:31:07

EDIT: error correction :8

So, if one were to have an off-day, one might never realize that they were repeatedly mis-typing one command and never get it installed.

One could repeatedly mis-read one stage of an installer, though.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-03-24 21:39:24

hhh wrote:

EDIT: error correction :8
So, if one were to have an off-day, one might never realize that they were repeatedly mis-typing one command and never get it installed.

Yes but the point of the manual method is that the user knows *exactly* what steps were taken and thus knows *exactly* what and where to check.

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2017-03-24 21:39:56)

damo · 2017-03-24 21:42:24

^ Bummer, you edited out the juicy bit, grasshopper

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-03-24 21:44:31

^ O:) 8o

It's boring being a moderator sometimes...

geekosupremo · 2017-03-24 22:27:59

In defense of the "installer" method. I don't feel like the Debian/Ubuntu installer hides all that much from me. I know the decisions I made while installing the system and generally what to SearchEngine if when I mess up. Further, while using the installer for Debian, and the BSDs for that matter, after the um ... first five or so times I know what settings and how to address the installer, so it's only a matter of minutes to use. The longest wait I have is for the package manager to update. The exception is BSD which is supah quick since it's just unpacking gzip archives of ports folders.

After failing, repeatedly, to install Arch I can say that a well designed installer is not slower than shelving the project because the information has been deemed "too basic" and not worth organizing in a meaningful for someone new to the system. <-- This is spoken in frustration and not meant as any sort of critique of the "Arch way".

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-03-24 22:46:30

geekosupremo wrote:

I don't feel like the Debian/Ubuntu installer hides all that much from me.

Only the messy details:

https://www.debian.org/releases/stable/ … 03.html.en

I still prefer that method over an ISO image

I know the decisions I made while installing the system and generally what to SearchEngine if when I mess up.

It's not so much about the installation itself, with Arch it *will* break at some point and the system knowledge really comes in handy when the box won't boot at all.

the information has been deemed "too basic" and not worth organizing in a meaningful for someone new to the system

The information is all there, you just have to click through the TV Tropes style links to get to it rather than being overwhelmed by a much larger document.

Feel free to open a support thread here about Arch installation.

geekosupremo · 2017-03-25 00:04:42

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

The information is all there, you just have to click through the TV Tropes style links to get to it rather than being overwhelmed by a much larger document.

Hmm, fair points.

Maybe I'm weird, but I like a single large document. In my "day job" I work with an ERP/CRM system, built on Oracle, which has this style of docs and I am constatly fighting the urge to reach through the internet and give the decision maker that came up with this idea a "People's Elbow" from the top of the ropes. When faced with an seemingly endless layer of links I begin to despiar that any of them will tell me what I need to know. I feel like I'm constantly copy-n-pasting the information I think I need into a text file on my desktop which I can use a single source of knowledge on the subject.

This is one of the things I love about the FreeBSD handbook, 99.9% of the info I could possibly want in a single document/location. 8o

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Feel free to open a support thread here about Arch installation.

I might ... just so very dishearted by the whole thing. Bah. Maybe I'm just an over-entitled youngen.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2017-03-25 00:06:20

geekosupremo wrote:

This is one of the things I love about the FreeBSD handbook, 99.9% of the info I could possibly want in a single document/location. 8o

+1

https://www.openbsd.org/faq/

]:D

EDIT: also: https://debian-handbook.info/ O:)

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2017-03-25 00:08:29)

BLizgreat! · 2017-03-25 01:48:08

The 'Arch way'
Design the distro so that people are forced to spend 16hrs of their life, getting basic things config'ed that come with 632 other distros ootb.
All to end up with something that's no better than a ton of other gnu/nix and once x-user is done, they can then snootily tell other nixers how l33t they are running Arch.

Had a #! clone-like Debian sid netinstall and #!-like Arch install side by side and can 100% say Arch was in no way superior. Other than the 8-10hrs I had to dump getting the install setup.

For real gotta vent a bit here. Think the people behind Arch actually go out of their way and intentionally try to be a pain in users butts. Whereas Debian and tonnes of others practically bend over backwards trying to help their userbase.

I don't like Arch, think it's way overrated and intentionally hostile. In addition to many of its community members acting like arrogant leetist cyber-jerkwads. Not so, visit the Arch forums and you'll find no shortage of clearly clueless Nix newbs, just like in any other gnu/nix community.

Though after spending 3dys getting xorg, a de/wm and networking, working. They feel like the deadliest Nix ninja to ever have walked the face of the earth.

And they'll tell people all the built in buttpains are to teach them to follow the Arch way, detailed control over their system (which is not true, you get the Arch base no matter what you prefer. Same as with a minimal Debian net install. You get the Debian base and choose whatever else you prefer from there.)

Personally I just think the folks behind Arch have some sadism-like issues, Jmo though. Again this is not a slight towards the plenty of really cool Archers of the world.

Hoas you me friend are not the avg techie. Highly intelligent, thoughtful and not afraid to roll up sleeves and methodically research/experiment. Am sure Alad could get an Arch install setup in no time flat too.

But for many, it's outright painful and I think that's by design and kinda resent it.

Though all's fair in love, war and gnu/Linux. So I should probably quit bytchin.

No way I'm taking the time to ever install Arch again. Just to find myself always booting Debian and ending up overwriting another Arch install.

PS, sorry if made anyone's eyes bleed reading all this junk and yeah I know I'm an opinionated bastid. You want as close to total control over your gnu/nix OS, install Gentoo or LFS. Both of which am sure would make installing Arch feel like a walk in a sunny park.

Lol... or for those who don't want to wind up ripping handfuls of hair out but still want some involvement, Slackware perhaps ?

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2017-03-25 02:05:34)

johnraff · 2017-03-25 02:20:56

geekosupremo wrote:

I like a single large document.

Me too. Pages like that take longer to load in a browser, but it's all text, so not that long. Once it's there you can easily search for the bits you want. Commercial sites prefer the multi-page approach because it lets them serve more ads, but that shouldn't apply to FOSS.

Steve · 2017-03-25 05:42:15

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Steve wrote:
arch revenge installer
I have never understood Arch "installers" — surely one of the benefits of Arch is that it's quicker and more flexible to install (properly) than it is to have to wade through one of those silly, bloated, bug-ridden GUI interfaces?
To install Arch on my machine now would take a grand total of 10 commands:
# mount -o subvol=Arch /dev/sda3 /mnt
# pacstrap /mnt base # any other packages go here
# arch-chroot /mnt
# ln -sf /usr/share/zoneinfo/Europe/London /etc/localtime
# hwclock --systohc
# sed -i 's/#en_GB.UTF-8 UTF-8/en_GB.UTF-8 UTF-8/' /etc/locale.gen
# locale-gen
# echo "LANG=en_GB.UTF-8" > /etc/locale.conf
# echo "Arch" > /etc/hostname
# passwd
Seems a lot simpler and quicker to run those than to spend half an hour messing about with a GUI...
Also, an important part of maintaining Arch is knowing exactly how it all fits together and using an "installer" undermines this considerably.
EDIT: error correction :8

The revenge installer took me around 10 - 15 minutes to get to an openbox desktop with a login manager, only because i have a good internet speed though.
Ive done the arch way before and came out the other end with a workable xfce desktop. Ive done the arch way a few times just so i could get used to and memorise what to do but i always go back to the notes i wrote or printed out, just cant get it done from memory completely which is why i suppose an installer is good albeit lazy way to go as you are presented with options in an automated way.

So with your reasoning on "Also, an important part of maintaining Arch is knowing exactly how it all fits together and using an "installer" undermines this considerably.." what about the Debian installer, surely that would do the same or am i missing something? Or is it a case of learning from the inside out rather than the outside in?

Last edited by Steve (2017-03-25 05:46:00)

BLizgreat! · 2017-03-25 05:59:39

Have some more observations but had better keep em 2 myself cause. A. I'm typing on an Android keyboard and B. Probably going to have a bunch of muscle bound Arch geeks knock on my door n beat heel outta me. At the very least assassinate my tech-goodies.

Besides on the other hand I kind of get it. Someone spends a bunch of their time, effort, skills and however much $, then distrib it freely, it's natural and reasonable to want to know and expect the endusers will have to put forth some effort themselves.

Also get and agree with the this distro isn't a democracy. If I (group of however many others) do the work maintaining xyz theoretical distro, then we make the decisions about how it's going to be.

The whole you don't work, ya don't eat approach. Don't like x-choice, change it yourself, don't like that's the way it is, hit the road.

Look @ Debian and all the hades those kickbutt nixers caught over systemd vs sysV, many of the crap heads whining the loudest have never contrib'ed a dime to Debian and it was obvious a good majority of them don't even have a clue what a fricken init system is.

Try to see both sides of things. So could be aspects of the Arch way, I just don't appreciate fully too.

Also as pointed out, am sure people who invest the effort, get used to it and they may not understand why so many less experienced users have so many probs w Arch.

Shrugs, either way Vll!

Last edited by BLizgreat! (2017-03-25 06:14:44)

#41 2017-03-23 06:58:57

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#42 2017-03-23 07:41:41

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#43 2017-03-23 08:11:11

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#44 2017-03-23 18:57:08

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#45 2017-03-24 07:25:06

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#46 2017-03-24 08:41:26

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#47 2017-03-24 09:16:46

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#48 2017-03-24 21:07:29

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#49 2017-03-24 21:31:07

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#50 2017-03-24 21:39:24

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#51 2017-03-24 21:42:24

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#52 2017-03-24 21:44:31

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#53 2017-03-24 22:27:59

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#54 2017-03-24 22:46:30

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#55 2017-03-25 00:04:42

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#56 2017-03-25 00:06:20

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#57 2017-03-25 01:48:08

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#58 2017-03-25 02:20:56

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#59 2017-03-25 05:42:15

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

#60 2017-03-25 05:59:39

Re: Arch Linux vs Bunsenlabs

Board footer