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

My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

sadanand-singh.github.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 78 posts

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#61

Post by microwavecamera »

viraptor wrote: post #44
microwavecamera wrote: post #40

Earlier quoted context omitted.

https://wiki.debian.org/grsecurity Just install it yourself. I don't get what the big deal is. If you have to edit a bunch of config files then just do it yourself. If you want something straight forward there are better options. If you want something closer to traditional *NIX there are better options. If Arch is your thing that's cool, but as an oldish (41) Linux user that's been using Linux primarily since the lat…

I said grsec was available in few distros prebuilt. Debian was in that group as well. It may not be for you. I ended up packaging new libraries every few weeks on other distros. Debian experimental included. Arch solves that problem for me. I guess Gentoo, nixos, and others would do that as well. But this one's my choice.

Like I said I'm not knocking Arch, I just don't quite get it, but yea I am old school so I'm sure that has something to do with it.

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#62

Post by aruggirello »

Zancarius wrote: post #38
vondur wrote: post #19

I've taken a liking to KDE lately. Looks nice and the file manager is top notch. I cheated and used Antergros to install Arch.

I have to admit, this is one of the things I miss most whenever I boot to Windows. Explorer lacks an awful lot of the conveniences present in Dolphin. Dolphin can be a bit unstable and has some UI warts, but tabs/tab views, the drag-and-drop copy/move/link dialog, and tree view in the file list pane are some of my favorites. Right-click copy to/move to are also hugely useful.

Dolphin rocks! Double panel, tabs, filter, and F4 for the built-in shell which is kept in sync with the current folder... and then there are the additional columns in table view, where you can see image resolution (OK Explorer has it too) or number of lines for text files...

BTW there's also the additional information during long file operations (like bandwidth used, etc), and (I believe) it's the only system I know of, where I can pause a file transfer operation, and resume it later...

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#63

Post by mxvzr »

klodolph wrote: post #29
mxvzr wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Encrypting the home directory ensures the privacy of your data should someone get his hands on your machine. Under the same scenario, full disk encryption would also gives you the guarantee the system hasn't been tampered with.

That's profoundly incorrect: full disk encryption provides no guarantees that your system has not been tampered with. I don't see how that would even be possible.

If the machine is turned off and only the home directory is encrypted, I am at liberty to patch the kernel or binaries, update your package manager or dns settings, or anything in between really. I can do none of that with FDE (assuming I don't already know the key of course).

What am I missing here?

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#64

Post by Zancarius »

aruggirello wrote: post #62
Zancarius wrote: post #38

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I have to admit, this is one of the things I miss most whenever I boot to Windows. Explorer lacks an awful lot of the conveniences present in Dolphin. Dolphin can be a bit unstable and has some UI warts, but tabs/tab views, the drag-and-drop copy/move/link dialog, and tree view in the file list pane are some of my favorites. Right-click copy to/move to are also hugely useful.

Dolphin rocks! Double panel, tabs, filter, and F4 for the built-in shell which is kept in sync with the current folder... and then there are the additional columns in table view, where you can see image resolution (OK Explorer has it too) or number of lines for text files... BTW there's also the additional information during long file operations (like bandwidth used, etc), and (I believe) it's the only system I know…

> BTW there's also the additional information during long file operations (like bandwidth used, etc), and (I believe) it's the only system I know of, where I can pause a file transfer operation, and resume it later...

I think Explorer does that too (bandwidth; don't remember about pause--I think it has that feature), but Dolphin certainly had it first. The task tray integration for background copying is also quite nice and useful if you're on a different virtual desktop (to me, anyway!).

You're absolutely right: Almost everything else is anemic compared to Dolphin!

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#65

Post by Zancarius »

microwavecamera wrote: post #47
Zancarius wrote: post #36

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Why not just run Slack or Debian if you want a barebones full distro? Slack and BSD's are closer to old school UNIX. Arch is after my time, am I missing something? I can't speak for other Arch users but to me, selecting it as my primary OS has been a natural evolution. I first cut my teeth on OpenBSD. Probably not the best choice, but it was the late 90s when I was first exposed to Unix-like OSes, and a friend of m…

Thanks for the detailed response. I just don't know myself. I'm sure me looking at the issue through the lens of my old ass perceptions (yea I'm old) is a factor. I read the guide in the article and other stuff online about Arch and it seems to involve a significant amount of manual work. I came from an era when there was no other option. You just had to do it. It seems to me that much of setting up Arch involves rea…

There's nothing wrong with preferences. It's why I don't care much for Debian-based distributions (Debian/Ubuntu make some weird choices, IMO, some for historical reasons and some because it's just the way they do things). Although I will counter that Arch is substantially less "manual work" than certain other popular distros, like Gentoo! Likewise, much of the Arch wiki centers on third party software--and sometimes more advanced installation options like mdadm, etc. (Although I will concede that the latter is much easier to configure under Ubuntu during installation; the difference is that under more manual distros, you're essentially forced to learn the tool at an earlier stage.) To be honest, I don't think it's a matter of "better" options for learning/manual installations as much as there are different options (Gentoo is more manual; LFS would be "better" in terms of understanding ground-up distributions).

Please don't take me as being contrarian! I just happen to really like Arch. I'm also fond of Gentoo and FreeBSD, and begrudgingly use Ubuntu for situations its better suited for, because sometimes you don't want to upgrade to the newest version of a package (Arch's recent OpenSSL bump from 1.0.2 to 1.2.x can cause some issues).

Anyway, I appreciate your opinions! Everyone's different and has different preferences for different reasons (past experiences, patience levels, familiarity, etc)--and that's a good thing! Arch certainly isn't for everyone, but I think it fills the rolling release without long build cycles (with just the defaults, please) niche quite well. However, I still recommend Ubuntu for newcomers or for people who simply don't want the headache!

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#66

Post by [deleted] »

klodolph wrote: post #30
Hydraulix989 wrote: post #13

Arch is just too much time for me doing sysadmin and keeping up with breaking changes (it's a rolling distro, so all kinds of system configurations are possible, many are untested or just bleeding edge). If you like using an unstable bleeding edge system where you have to configure everything yourself by hand with absolutely zero tolerance for user error, use Arch. If I'm on a tight schedule with doing mission critic…

That's my experience too—I used to use Arch, but switched to Debian because I have better things to do with my time. I know quite a few people IRL who have made the same switch (or to Ubuntu).

[deleted]

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#67

Post by eikenberry »

mxvzr wrote: post #63
klodolph wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's profoundly incorrect: full disk encryption provides no guarantees that your system has not been tampered with. I don't see how that would even be possible.

If the machine is turned off and only the home directory is encrypted, I am at liberty to patch the kernel or binaries, update your package manager or dns settings, or anything in between really. I can do none of that with FDE (assuming I don't already know the key of course). What am I missing here?

Once "they" have your machine you have to assume it is compromised. If they have the ability to install kernel patches or custom binaries, they most certainly have the ability to install monitoring hardware and/or modify your bios. That is, no matter what you encrypt your machine is compromised and your only recourse is to recover the encrypted data and move on to a new system. Here "they" is someone who would take your machine, modify it, and get it back to you maybe without your knowing.

If you are just concerned with identity thieves and basic asset protection then as long as that stuff is encrypted you are fine, whether that is whole system, home directory, ~/Private directory, or just those specific files.

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#68

Post by Hydraulix989 »

RealityVoid wrote: post #20
Hydraulix989 wrote: post #13

Arch is just too much time for me doing sysadmin and keeping up with breaking changes (it's a rolling distro, so all kinds of system configurations are possible, many are untested or just bleeding edge). If you like using an unstable bleeding edge system where you have to configure everything yourself by hand with absolutely zero tolerance for user error, use Arch. If I'm on a tight schedule with doing mission critic…

I thought the same thing but I set up arch on my main machine a couple of months ago and apart from the setup pain, it has been a much smaller hassle than I anticipated. It's pretty stable, didn't have any breakage until now. I love it! But I do admit the initial setup was pretty intense, I loved the learning experience. I'm also using Cinnamon, on Arch. It's quite clean and nice. :)

Yes, I remember once I needed to print something on my laptop and I realized I hadn't set up printing yet on my Arch system (a non-trivial process that requires at least 30 minutes of time reading the Wiki) because I hadn't printed anything in years. The thing I was printing was an important legal document for my startup, and it was very frustrating to my other founders that everyone on their Macs had already printed and signed their copies right away but me. Now, if I want to print something on Mint/Ubuntu, all I have to do is just plug the printer into my USB port, and it Just Works.

We also had an intern who could code but never used Arch who spent the majority of his first month learning how to set up and use Arch. Not very productive time spent. Arch is fine if you're looking to use a hobby distro (I had the showstopper problem once where I was trying to work remotely and couldn't connect to wifi but I didn't have wifi to read the Wiki to figure out how to troubleshoot it and so I was screwed -- after all, who remembers how to use wpa_supplicant by heart from command line?), but for getting shit done, it's far from ideal.

This was a simple auth based network too where my Mac user founders were just typing in the username and password they got from the receptionist and they were good to go. Meanwhile, I was still trying to figure out what the hell mschapv2 is, unable to get any real work done for at least a half hour. By the time it was working (I was using the GUI wifi frontend recommended on the Arch Linux and it still required me to manually select from every permutation of encryption possible instead of autodetecting like any friendly OS does for you -- how would the receptionist possibly know if the network uses WPA2 Personal, WPA2 Enterprise, ...), my brain was already wore out from the troubleshooting and frustration and so I really wasn't able to write as much code as I wanted to -- we had to leave shortly after anyways, so effectively, I got nothing done.

I also remember Arch choking on connecting to a wifi network that had an ampersand (&) in the password. I was stuck using NetworkManager because I needed to connect to wifi in command line to unbreak Xorg (NVIDIA driver update hosed it), and while I was perfectly able to connect to this wifi network from the GUI (the only one I had access to in the vicinity -- this was a desktop computer), I just couldn't connect to it at all from command line no matter what escape sequences I tried (quotes, \&, etc.) and no amount of troubleshooting trying to Google and read Arch Wiki and manually copying and pasting on my 4" phone screen (since I had no Internet access otherwise) could fix it. Even the guys on Arch Linux's IRC channel were stumped.

Yeah, I'm just going to continue using Mint.

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#69

Post by eikenberry »

Zancarius wrote: post #43
RealityVoid wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I thought the same thing but I set up arch on my main machine a couple of months ago and apart from the setup pain, it has been a much smaller hassle than I anticipated. It's pretty stable, didn't have any breakage until now. I love it! But I do admit the initial setup was pretty intense, I loved the learning experience. I'm also using Cinnamon, on Arch. It's quite clean and nice. :)

> I thought the same thing but I set up arch on my main machine a couple of months ago and apart from the setup pain, it has been a much smaller hassle than I anticipated. It's pretty stable, didn't have any breakage until now. I love it! As an Arch user of ~5-6 years, I do have some advice outside the obvious realm of "keep regular (working) backups" that can help minimize future headaches (not necessarily for you s…

One concern I've had with Arch was how they would handle the big C/C++ library ABI changes. It only seems to happen about once a decade, but when it does it is a giant pain. Last time this happened while I was using Debian testing you had to pin a ton of packages for many months while everything moved over to the new ABI. How does Arch manage these core library ABI changes?

Re: My Arch Linux Setup with Plasma 5

#70

Post by viraptor »

Tomte wrote: post #49
likeclockwork wrote: post #46

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Nothing you've pointed at is a failure, it's simply the process. How can you call up in two hours, rapidly tested and brought to 100% shortly thereafter, a failure? How can using the software you want to use immediately after its release ever be called a failure? Success is waiting for two months for a release window? No thank you.

I'm not saying that anyone did something wrong. I simply find it remarkable that someone actually chose this failure for his advertising. There are certainly many instances of quick turnaround times that don't center on failure.

Why do you keep repeating it was a failure? Do you consider betas of software failures as well? The they're not perfect immediately either.
Post reply on HN