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

The Arch Way

dgeex.de

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 82 posts

Re: The Arch Way

#61

Post by hobarrera »

capt8bit wrote: post #9

"I've seen good documentations, but nothing beats the Arch Wiki. It's the most comprehensive Wiki you could imagine." I have heard this a number of times from Arch Fans, but I think I disagree. While I have referenced their wonderful Wiki often for "cook book" style answers (like how to fix URXVT+Tmux interactions), I do not view it the same as good documentation. I would also not really call it "comprehensive". To m…

The Arch Wiki is a bit of a mix. Part documentation, part how-to guide, but it's still one of the best references to understand how stuff works (and how to use it) in *nix in general.

I do agree though, that OpenBSD has by far the best documentation out there.

Re: The Arch Way

#62

Post by hobarrera »

raziel2p wrote: post #27

If someone made an Arch installer that automatically set up networking and persisted the setup, as well as partitioning/mounting, I would be on board. The argument I've heard against this is, "but it's simple, it's only like 10 commands to set these up". The problem is, it takes like an hour to read through the entire wiki page (and you need to read it all in case there's an important detail that may screw your syste…

> If someone made an Arch installer that automatically set up networking and persisted the setup, as well as partitioning/mounting, I would be on board.

But then, it wouldn't be Arch any more. There'll inevitably come a user that wants a different partition scheme not contemplated (nfs /home? LUKS? LVM across all present drives? etc).

As far a networking: it's even worse. There's several choices of what you can use to manage your network (wicd, NetworkManager, netctl etc). An installer that supports all those, with all possible network configurations, would be a huge pain. It's just easier if the user picks a tool, installs it, and configures it.

It'll also help you greatly in future when you need to reconfigure it, fiddle around, of break it.

> Maybe if you're a full-time sysadmin you're familiar enough with ifconfig, fstab etc.

No need for ifconfig, you do have a lot of helpers, as mentioned above.

Re: The Arch Way

#63

Post by hobarrera »

nextos wrote: post #10

I think the Arch Way really shines if you stick to small applications that do one thing and do it well. This is the essence of Unix. There are periodic surveys among Arch users, and it's pretty interesting to see a majority of them sticks to this ethos: https://docs.google.com/forms/d/1_LisP8224B2yahtZTYB-pnIt0aP... Such a choice would be considered hardcore in some more mainstream distros. I began transitioning to t…

Out of curiosity:

How's connman working for you? Do you have a GUI for it, or just CLI?

Does isync support IDLE? offlineimap has quite a few bugs and I can't wait to change it (I've a very similar mutt+offlineimap+notmuch+opensmtpd setup).

Re: The Arch Way

#64

Post by hobarrera »

tormeh wrote: post #35
crdoconnor wrote: post #28

>Unlike other distributions, on Arch you’re not forced to use a specific Window Manager, a Desktop Environment, a File Manager, and so on. Excuse me?

It's like the people complaining about Unity, not realizing that all the major WMs, DEs and FMs are a single apt-get command away...

It's not that simple. Ubuntu has a lot of patches to make stuff interact nicely, and installing a diferent DE/WM is not as trivial as you'd think.

The opposite is true in Arch: it's extremely simple to change de WM, and chances of breaking anything else are minimal. This is especially due to the fact that you build the system yourself, so you know exactly what changing the WM affects.

Re: The Arch Way

#65

Post by hobarrera »

forlorn wrote: post #39

I'm choosing between Arch and Debian Sid - what would you suggest?

If you like learning about how stuff works: Arch If you want the latest version of everything: Arch If you value flexibility: Arch

If you value simplicity to get this running ASAP: Debian If you're not comfortable configuring stuff yourself: Debian If you want something that won't mutate much over time: Debian

Re: The Arch Way

#66

Post by hobarrera »

yawniek wrote: post #22

i am using arch mostly as a server os and it works very well. if you want to quickly setup a working desktop i can recommend antergos.com, its essentially arch with a nice installer.

I love Arch, but bleeding-edge always intimidates me a bit for a production server. Plus, I've been using OpenBSD for servers since before I knew Arch, so I already have that flexibility (and makepkg is really based on BSD ports).

OTOH, I can't recommend Arch as a desktop OS enough!

Re: The Arch Way

#68

Post by raziel2p »

hobarrera wrote: post #62
raziel2p wrote: post #27

If someone made an Arch installer that automatically set up networking and persisted the setup, as well as partitioning/mounting, I would be on board. The argument I've heard against this is, "but it's simple, it's only like 10 commands to set these up". The problem is, it takes like an hour to read through the entire wiki page (and you need to read it all in case there's an important detail that may screw your syste…

> If someone made an Arch installer that automatically set up networking and persisted the setup, as well as partitioning/mounting, I would be on board. But then, it wouldn't be Arch any more. There'll inevitably come a user that wants a different partition scheme not contemplated (nfs /home? LUKS? LVM across all present drives? etc). As far a networking: it's even worse. There's several choices of what you can use t…

> But then, it wouldn't be Arch any more. There'll inevitably come a user that wants a different partition scheme not contemplated (nfs /home? LUKS? LVM across all present drives? etc).

The old no installer way could still be present. Just give people an option, is what I'm getting at. I'm pretty sure you can manually configure everything in the Debian installer if you choose to.

Your point about networking - there being multiple tools and letting the user choose which to use - is more understandable. However, it's still something I've come to expect to configure once and never again (apart from choosing which wifi to connect to when I'm at a new place).

Re: The Arch Way

#69

Post by raziel2p »

graycoder wrote: post #46
raziel2p wrote: post #27

If someone made an Arch installer that automatically set up networking and persisted the setup, as well as partitioning/mounting, I would be on board. The argument I've heard against this is, "but it's simple, it's only like 10 commands to set these up". The problem is, it takes like an hour to read through the entire wiki page (and you need to read it all in case there's an important detail that may screw your syste…

I think ArchBang tries to do that. It might be a nice in-between for a new arch user's first time. Then again, I think I had a set of other problems when I tried it. I have spent a decent amount of time trying to understand all the steps of the process just so that I can troubleshoot without immediately needing to access the arch-wiki. The knowledge is nice to have, and building familiarity with the system one uses s…

I don't really want a desktop environment + applications installed - as long as networking and disks are in place I can install what I need and set up my configs.

Re: The Arch Way

#70

Post by raziel2p »

dattl wrote: post #29
raziel2p wrote: post #27

If someone made an Arch installer that automatically set up networking and persisted the setup, as well as partitioning/mounting, I would be on board. The argument I've heard against this is, "but it's simple, it's only like 10 commands to set these up". The problem is, it takes like an hour to read through the entire wiki page (and you need to read it all in case there's an important detail that may screw your syste…

What about Antergos or Manjaro?

Antergos looks promising, I'll try that next time.
Post reply on HN