Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

standardsandfreedom.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

11–20 of 59 posts

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#11

Post by Nic0 »

codabrink wrote: post #8

>The installation process may take a while (several hours.. or less) It depends on what you're talking about. With relatively fast internet (I have 20Mb/s), I can have a functional box up with my favorite DE in just an hour or so. It's true that I configure things here and there for the next couple days as I need them, and each configuration is simple and only takes a second or two, but several hours seems a lot long…

It's true that Arch might be fast to install, and can get something working very fast, in less than half an hour, but this post is aims for beginners, and it's probably not that fast for them, so I thing it's better to say "you wanna try Arch? take a day, and do it with the documentation". It seems to me more fair than say 30min top, you have Arch. You probably won't disappointed new users, with wrong surprise when few hours after they still stuck without Xorg running.

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#12

Post by RexRollman »

Nic0 wrote: post #3
udp wrote: post #2

It's pretty stupid, but the only problem I have with using something like Arch on my desktop is I can never seem to get the fonts to look nice (ie. like they do in OS X or Ubuntu) when I've installed/configured Xorg myself.

Have you tried this? https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Font_Configuration Fonts needs some setups indeed before to get something good.

I generally use the Ubuntu patched LCD packages via AUR and this page was very helpful in helping me get it set up. I've heard the Infinality patchset is really good too but I haven't tried it yet.

Personally speaking, since I am so xterm oriented, the best thing I did was install the bitmap font Tamsyn, which I just adore. Easy to read and use. It is available from AUR, but I just download it to a directory in my home folder and use xset to add it to my fontpath.

(And Arch's wiki has an incredible wealth of information. It is one of my favorite online resources, along with OpenBSD's FAQ.)

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#15

Post by botker »

codabrink wrote: post #8

>The installation process may take a while (several hours.. or less) It depends on what you're talking about. With relatively fast internet (I have 20Mb/s), I can have a functional box up with my favorite DE in just an hour or so. It's true that I configure things here and there for the next couple days as I need them, and each configuration is simple and only takes a second or two, but several hours seems a lot long…

My first Arch install took well over a couple hours, and was a pleasurably educational hassle. I think it took me over a day to get the system completely working back then. And that was despite my background using Slackware. But every time I've installed since then, the duration has more-or-less halved, and my most recent install was easily under 30 minutes.

The biggest gotcha for me as a newcomer was trying to install on a laptop, having no ethernet access handy, and not knowing that I'd need to install wireless_tools when running through the initial setup in order to get online.

The amount of time it takes varies greatly according to what you consider to be complete. I never stop tweaking my system, and there are always some points of dissatisfaction with it. But Arch is a great distro. It's very well-documented, and is pretty much delightful to configure.

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#16

Post by sirclueless »

taudelta wrote: post #14
zalew wrote: post #5

"Arch Linux is a very fun and stable distribution that successfully blends the bleeding edge, stability and hackability of Linux" let's define 'stable' http://www.tuxtips.org/?cat=3

I would say it has a bit of both kinds.

Anecdotally, ArchLinux has bitten me before with its rolling releases. They moved the hostname utility to a new package, but pacman (their package manager) didn't prompt or download the new package. This promptly broke my laptop's network stack right before I left for a weekend trip. Now I didn't have internet, and I didn't have internet to find out how to fix my internet. It all worked out fine by writing a bash script named hostname sitting on my path that echoed a constant string, so I could connect and download the new package.

If you are looking for a pain-free linux system, Arch Linux isn't it. You will run into little things like this, living one step behind the bleeding edge (basically someone compiles your software for you, does a sanity check, then you get it ASAP). Don't get me wrong, I love it, and will continue to use it as long as it has the most flexible and clean system, because I appreciate their dedication to simplicity of implementation.

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#17

Post by sunkencity »

I like arch, except for the stupid command line arguments to pacman. I wish they had just kept it more standard. There's nothing wrong with naming "install" install and "search" search. Feels to me like a case of inventing complexity just to make it feel a little more elitist.

   pacman -Ss gnome # searches for gnome
   pacman -S gnome # installs gnome

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#18

Post by sirclueless »

yule wrote: post #10
codabrink wrote: post #8

>The installation process may take a while (several hours.. or less) It depends on what you're talking about. With relatively fast internet (I have 20Mb/s), I can have a functional box up with my favorite DE in just an hour or so. It's true that I configure things here and there for the next couple days as I need them, and each configuration is simple and only takes a second or two, but several hours seems a lot long…

Two things helped me a lot with my Archlinux installation: 1) I previously tried in a virtual machine 2) I had a second machine next to mine to look up stuff in the wiki and follow the installation guide.

I agree. Arch Linux configuration is educational and well worth the few hours it takes on your first try, but you should definitely have another computer with the wiki open while you do it.

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#19

Post by botker »

sunkencity wrote: post #17

I like arch, except for the stupid command line arguments to pacman. I wish they had just kept it more standard. There's nothing wrong with naming "install" install and "search" search. Feels to me like a case of inventing complexity just to make it feel a little more elitist. pacman -Ss gnome # searches for gnome pacman -S gnome # installs gnome

I had the same reaction at first, but its pith became a selling point as I learned the flags. Of course there's nothing stopping you from wrapping the command.

Re: ArchLinux, Not Just For The Elite

#20

Post by Nic0 »

sunkencity wrote: post #17

I like arch, except for the stupid command line arguments to pacman. I wish they had just kept it more standard. There's nothing wrong with naming "install" install and "search" search. Feels to me like a case of inventing complexity just to make it feel a little more elitist. pacman -Ss gnome # searches for gnome pacman -S gnome # installs gnome

Command line tool use much more often -x or --foo arguments that a word. Also -S is still faster to type than install, personally I won't switch for 'install'.

Nevertheless, you may add some alias to change the behavior if it's annoying you.

Post reply on HN