Distro-hoppers anonymous

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-12-28 00:28:10

Solus 1.0 just released:
https://solus-project.com/2015/12/27/so … -released/

The Budgie desktop looks very interesting, it uses the GNOME stack with a very elegant UI not a million miles off the #! look

deleted0 · 2015-12-28 00:48:09

^ In short: It’s awesomely amazing open source sparkly wonderness for your computerboxen.

8bit

Last edited by deleted0 (2015-12-28 00:49:40)

Snap · 2015-12-28 07:31:43

Manjaro is horrible, just stick to Arch.

Totally agree, I had far more issues with Manjaro "stable" than I have ever had with Arch and the testing repos enabled.

I have to agree too. My former experiences with them are just like that. But this was a "get it now" OpenRC test (lazy me) into a Virtual machine plus wanting to know what the Manjaro dmenu tweaks give. Arch and Antergos have been always smoother than Manjaro and Chakra at least on my own installs.

This is my second test and I still don't see the point of OpenRC. It makes dealing with services somewhat easier than going with plain sysvinit, but... Really I don't see why I need this. Next stop trying Runit in Debian. Anyhow, I want to put together a test VM with systemd, sysvinit, OpenRC and runit onboard. Doing a direct comparison on the very same system. Then choosing my poison. At this point runit already feels like a winner, but want to do this test anyway.

Last edited by Snap (2015-12-28 07:47:20)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-12-28 10:42:53

@Snap -- next time I install Linux From Scratch I'm going to try using busybox as /sbin/init

See section 6.8.2 of this link:
http://etutorials.org/Linux+systems/emb … alization/

Here is a working example from one of the Arch forum members:
https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 3#p1378903

deleted0 · 2015-12-28 13:48:26

Here's an OpenSUSE spin that's getting positive reviews, GeckoLinux.
Aimed at new users and ease of use. I've not done a lot with the SUSE family, but I've liked their style. Best looking boot menu ever. Not that one spends a lot of time at the menu, just nice attention to detail.

8bit

g33zr · 2015-12-28 13:51:58

FWIW, I've been running Manjaro (Xfce and Cinnamon) as my main distro on metal since last March and have experienced NO issues after numerous updates and system upgrades. The distro has been rock-solid stable for this noob.

There was a time when I ran Manjaro 0.8 and 0.9 when I had difficulty installing it on my iMac, but I had far more problems with Antergos (once known as Cinnarch) and other Arch spins. I have noticed, however, that many complaints about issues on the Manjaro forums seem to be related to Manjaro's KDE version, as well as with some community editions, but these issues are often related to the hardware and drivers.

Last edited by g33zr (2015-12-28 13:52:54)

nobody0 · 2015-12-28 14:17:47

^^ Some guys here wrote how nice Manjaro is, so I thought I'd look in. I have Arch installed, so I only wanted to look inside Manjaro. Also, I had a look at an old Arch iso, from the days of linux26. Arch had an installer then. Looking at those installers, I cannot find a reason why Arch stopped issuing an installer with their (new) monthly releases (snapshots). It maybe that the Arch guys wants to keep their geeky (in their mind) distro/os only to the geeky users.

Arch can be installed through an installer, and such installers can be found in the net. Arch installer is a bash script, so can be adapted and/or modified. This had been proven by the few Arch based live installable distro developers. Two of them are in the screenshot (#220). All those Arch based distros can be moved to become pure Arch installs, once installed. (You cannot move Ubuntu to become Debian.)

You can also make the live iso (for example the Manjaro 15.12 Xfce) look for Arch, rather than Manjaro even at the live iso state, not a big change, once you know what to change. Those guys at Manjaro had done a lot of work to get the "geeky" Arch to ordinary users, even to those who don't know how to use the terminal, and that has to be commended.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-12-28 14:22:40

ostrolek wrote:

I cannot find a reason why Arch stopped issuing an installer with their (new) monthly releases (snapshots). It maybe that the Arch guys wants to keep their geeky (in their mind) distro/os only to the geeky users.

For the record: the official Arch installer was dropped simply because nobody wanted to maintain it.

If you want to know why Archers discourage the use of a third-party installer (generally speaking), I suggest that you spend some time reading about "The Arch Way":
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php?ti … Principles

EDIT: I think this section sums it up best (emphasis mine):

Whereas many GNU/Linux distributions attempt to be more user-friendly, Arch Linux has always been, and shall always remain user-centric. The distribution is intended to fill the needs of those contributing to it rather than trying to appeal to as many users as possible. It is suited to anyone with a do-it-yourself attitude that's willing to spend some time reading the documentation and solving their own problems.

What have you contributed to Arch recently?

If you want an installer, write one and submit it to the Community Contributions section of the Arch Wiki, I'm sure some will find it useful

It is probably worth noting that several forum members here have created their own Arch installation scripts, it is very simple to do and can be tailored to fit the user's circumstances exactly.

This also illustrates the tremendous flexibilty inherent to the officially-recommended installation process and demonstrates why it is actually the *preferred* option for most Arch users.

Last edited by Head_on_a_Stick (2015-12-28 14:35:13)

nobody0 · 2015-12-28 16:54:40

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

If you want to know why Archers discourage the use of a third-party installer (generally speaking), I suggest that you spend some time reading about "The Arch Way":

When I installed Arch the first time, Judd Vinet was still there. Then, I dropped it for Ubuntu , then Ubuntu for Debian, now using Arch more than any.

What have you contributed to Arch recently?

I haven't yet, have you?

If you want an installer, write one and submit it...

There are enough out there in the net. Even the old installer is still good, only you have to change few words/lines. I'm not a coder, but I can adapt/modify some bash/python scripts.

It is probably worth noting that several forum members here have created their own Arch installation scripts, it is very simple to do...

Otherwise, those Arch based distros won't come out.

This also illustrates the tremendous flexibilty inherent to the officially-recommended installation process and demonstrates why it is actually the *preferred* option for most Arch users.

The "officially-recommended installation process" keeps lot of people away from Arch, simply because they don't have the geeky abilities. So, the "normal" users (like the Windows ones) would try their hand with Archbang, Chakra, Manjaro, KaOS and so on.

According to DWW, Manjaro is much more popular than Arch. I have nothing against Manjaro. I actually like the manjaro aesthetics.

Now, HoaS, this being the distro-hopper thread and an off topic one, I wrote about what I did about another distro. I actually installed Manjaro 15.12 XFCE today, so I've distro-hopped. It is really pretty. Only, it won't stay there too long as Manjaro. I am not very good at being restricted, so if it is going to stay, it'd be moved to Arch.

(That's how the guy gave up the leadership, https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 35#p285735)

Last edited by nobody0 (2015-12-28 17:06:49)

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-12-28 17:06:09

ostrolek wrote:

The "officially-recommended installation process" keeps lot of people away from Arch, simply because they don't have the geeky abilities.

If the user does not have the technical ability to follow the official installation instructions then using Arch is a really bad idea as it *will* break eventually and at that point using a third-party installer actually makes system administration *more* difficult and time-consuming rather than less.

Popularity is not a consideration for the Arch developers, they would rather not have users who do not have the technical ability to contribute to the development of the distribution.

They would prefer to have a user community comprised of content creators rather than content consumers

nobody0 · 2015-12-28 17:09:09

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

ostrolek wrote:
The "officially-recommended installation process" keeps lot of people away from Arch, simply because they don't have the geeky abilities.
If the user does not have the technical ability to follow the official installation instructions then using Arch is a really bad idea as it *will* break eventually and at that point using a third-party installer actually makes system administration *more* difficult and time-consuming rather than less.

It is not a 3rd party installer, but the same one, only with few changes, say like vmlinuz26 to just vmlinuz. (You can add few line and delete few lines in a bash script and try it to see if it works.) Once you install, Arch simply works.

Last edited by nobody0 (2015-12-28 17:10:10)

Döbbie03 · 2015-12-28 17:09:17

g33zr wrote:

FWIW, I've been running Manjaro (Xfce and Cinnamon) as my main distro on metal since last March and have experienced NO issues after numerous updates and system upgrades. The distro has been rock-solid stable for this noob.
There was a time when I ran Manjaro 0.8 and 0.9 when I had difficulty installing it on my iMac, but I had far more problems with Antergos (once known as Cinnarch) and other Arch spins. I have noticed, however, that many complaints about issues on the Manjaro forums seem to be related to Manjaro's KDE version, as well as with some community editions, but these issues are often related to the hardware and drivers.

When I used Manjaro I had major issues with the Gnome version. The KDE was solid as a rock for me. Gnome-Shell is my preferred choice so I moved on to Antergos then finally on to Arch.

nobody0 · 2015-12-28 17:13:52

^ KDE, XFCE and the NET are the "official" versions, and the rest are community editions.

Head_on_a_Stick · 2015-12-28 17:14:31

ostrolek wrote:

What have you contributed to Arch recently?
I haven't yet, have you?

I wasn't going to answer this but it occurs that some may want to know how to contribute to the Arch project.

In my case, I have over 3,000 posts on the Arch forums (the vast majority are support-related posts), I have made several corrections to the Arch Wiki and contributed this section, I was also running [testing] so as to pick up any early bugs (never had any though).

All fairly minor efforts admittedly but my technical skills are limited and I have no formal IT training.

nobody0 · 2015-12-28 17:22:30

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

ostrolek wrote:
What have you contributed to Arch recently?
I haven't yet, have you?
I wasn't going to answer this but it occurs that some may want to know how to contribute to the Arch project.
In my case, I have over 3,000 posts on the Arch forums (the vast majority are support-related posts), I have made several corrections to the Arch Wiki and contributed this section, I was also running [testing] so as to pick up any early bugs (never had any though).
All fairly minor efforts admittedly but my technical skills are limited and I have no formal IT training.

Excellent!

C#Coder4ever · 2015-12-28 18:27:49

ostrolek, the manjaro advocate

nobody0 · 2015-12-28 20:33:45

^ He, he...I think you should read my posts from #208. You might at least understand something.

For others, that Manjaro I installed had already become Arch. The installed system has Manjaro themes, icons, wallpapers etc, but is an Arch system. There is nothing much to talk about it now.

Last edited by nobody0 (2015-12-28 20:34:11)

C#Coder4ever · 2015-12-28 21:49:13

ostrolek wrote:

that Manjaro I installed had already become Arch.

screenfetch or it's a baloney statement.

Last edited by C#Coder4ever (2015-12-28 21:49:58)

deleted0 · 2015-12-28 22:15:55

/me makes popcorn

8bit

nobody0 · 2015-12-28 22:35:55

C#Coder4ever wrote:

ostrolek wrote:
that Manjaro I installed had already become Arch.
screenfetch or it's a baloney statement.

I really think you should read my posts from #208. You might at least understand something.
I install distros bit differently than you do. https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic … 9166#p9166 , https://forums.bunsenlabs.org/viewtopic … 955#p11955 So, I don't have to prove it to you. I don't claim anything, for its sheer fun digging through.

Its done, and my interest in Manjaro is practically gone, other than in their very pretty themes, icons, wallpapers and of course Pamac.

#221 2015-12-28 00:28:10

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#222 2015-12-28 00:48:09

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#223 2015-12-28 07:31:43

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#224 2015-12-28 10:42:53

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#225 2015-12-28 13:48:26

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#226 2015-12-28 13:51:58

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#227 2015-12-28 14:17:47

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#228 2015-12-28 14:22:40

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#229 2015-12-28 16:54:40

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#230 2015-12-28 17:06:09

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#231 2015-12-28 17:09:09

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#232 2015-12-28 17:09:17

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#233 2015-12-28 17:13:52

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#234 2015-12-28 17:14:31

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#235 2015-12-28 17:22:30

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#236 2015-12-28 18:27:49

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#237 2015-12-28 20:33:45

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#238 2015-12-28 21:49:13

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#239 2015-12-28 22:15:55

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

#240 2015-12-28 22:35:55

Re: Distro-hoppers anonymous

Board footer