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

Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

giacomo.coletto.io

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

91–100 of 139 posts

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#91

Post by ritcgab »

3np wrote: post #72
geoka9 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same, but with Debian for almost 20 years. Don't remember how I did it before, but the last few migrations were just `dd if=/dev/sda.old of=/dev/sda.new` and then gparted to enlarge the root partition to fill out the new disk.

How do you know you're not propagating bitrot over time? Feels like a binary here and there may accumulate mismatching checksums over the years from bad hardware or some filesystem error... Not to speak of malware. All it takes is once... Feels a lot safer to do the system- and package installation from scratch and then rsync/dd only /home and /etc.

The base system and packages are usually smaller than home, so the possibility of a bitrot is actually lower. Package files' integrity can also be automatically checked by some tools. In addition, they are much easier to reproduce, as you said, one can always just reinstall the system and download all packages again.

Your home and /etc actually matter more.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#92

Post by matheusmoreira »

hughesjj wrote: post #80
matheusmoreira wrote: post #73

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I think it's great. You clone a git repository which is amazing since you can just pull in new commits to get updates. Then you read and understand the PKGBUILD. When you are satisfied that it's not malware, you basically just run makepkg and it does everything . Then you vote on the package so that it's more likely to be included in the official repositories in the future.

> Then you vote on the package so that it's more likely to be included in the official repositories in the future. Out of curiosity, do you count community as official?

Depends on what you mean by "community". There used to be a repository named "community", it is now called "extra" and it is indeed an official repository.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Official_repositories

It is maintained by a group of trusted users who need to be sponsored by at least two other maintainers. This creates a web of trust rooted at the Arch Linux developers.

https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Package_Maintainers

The Arch User Repository is what I consider to be a "community" repository. It is essentially the programming language package manager model. You create an account and push whatever packagers you want.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#93

Post by matheusmoreira »

mlindner wrote: post #46
scandox wrote: post #28

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I really think that's unfair. The install docs are quite long but they try to give people options. It's not gate keeping to provide a lot of detail.

The install wiki is full of outdated information that causes people to install outdated and old methods of doing things. So I wouldn't advise people to use it, other than the fact there's no other option.

I find that hard to believe. I've always found the Arch Wiki to be excellent and very up to date. Do you have any examples of articles which document outdated ways to do things?

If you have found incorrect information, please edit the wiki to improve it.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#94

Post by matheusmoreira »

Foomf wrote: post #60
Keppl8R wrote: post #3

ArchWiki: your source for Arch Linux documentation on the web. https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Main_page

I'm getting some mixed messages in this thread alone. Who do I believe? https://imgur.com/a/ylkWLfQ

I recommend reading the wiki and judging for yourself.

When I contributed a binary QR code decoding feature to zbar and the new version landed in the arch repositories, the first thing I did was edit the arch wiki with usage information.

I also documented a process for encoding and decoding PGP keys to and from QR codes using that feature by editing the paperkey article on the arch wiki.

When I installed arch on my laptop, I wasn't able to configure my screen's brightness. Searching the arch wiki revealed that by default the kernel's Intel iGPU drivers would set brightness by PWMing the screen which doesn't work over eDP connections which is what my laptop used, and also documented the exact kernel command line option I needed to make it work.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#95

Post by matheusmoreira »

cubano wrote: post #51
elromulous wrote: post #4

This was the process I followed: 1. Downloaded EndeavourOS 2. Installed it as easily as Ubuntu Edit: the arch documentation is second to none

Isn't the pain of installing Arch the point?

Not at all. The point is to have a rolling release, up to date, mostly unpatched Linux distribution.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#96

Post by geoka9 »

kelnos wrote: post #89
geoka9 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same, but with Debian for almost 20 years. Don't remember how I did it before, but the last few migrations were just `dd if=/dev/sda.old of=/dev/sda.new` and then gparted to enlarge the root partition to fill out the new disk.

Debian too, but for some reason I just feel good about doing a fresh install whenever I get a new laptop. I do rsync over my home directory and a few other things, but it just feels nice to have a fresh machine with a minimal amount of packages on it, where I can install stuff as I need it, and leave out anything I haven't used in a long time and have forgotten I'd even installed.

I like running a debfoster session every once in a while.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#97

Post by yjftsjthsd-h »

mlindner wrote: post #43
Levitating wrote: post #33

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Just as an example, this guide suddenly assumes that "yay" is installed. Even though AUR helpers like yay aren't officially recommended by ArchLinux and also aren't trivial to install.

The design decisions around AUR befuddle me to this day. It's utterly arcane in how to use it. Or rather it feels like it wasn't designed at all and simply evolved. I highly recommend people to use "yay" and similar helpers that make a lot of the problems simply go away.

The AUR makes either perfect sense or no sense depending on what you think it is. If you think it's an extra repo with more software, then it's a bit odd: Why no binaries? Why the antagonistic view of AUR helpers? Heck, why doesn't pacman just have an option to automatically use the AUR? Just add it as another repo next to extra. On the other hand, there's another viewpoint, where the AUR is what happens if you provide a free-form place for random users to post build scripts. Not packages, really, just "here's the commands I used to build this software on Arch". In that view, you're not expecting a streamlined experience, and binaries are a ridiculous idea; you grab someone's notes, read them over, and if they seem reasonable enough then you execute them (because the notes came in executable format). Or if they don't quite look right, you edit them into shape and then run them, and that's expected because this is just a way for a bunch of hackers to pass around suggested build steps.

And to be clear, I think the AUR certainly started as the second thing, but it's often viewed as the first, and maybe it even should be the first thing. But if you assume it came from the second option then all its design choices make sense.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#98

Post by ac29 »

freeqaz wrote: post #21

Nit picking a bit but I prefer btrfs even if it's slower. Easier to work with. What bootloader is this using? Or is it just straight EFI booting? I helped write a guide a few years back that still is what I do using systemd-boot. https://github.com/lunasec-io/lunasec/blob/master/docs/blog/... How is Wayland support these days? I love i3 but I know Sway promises to be close enough.

> How is Wayland support these days? I love i3 but I know Sway promises to be close enough.

Pretty darn good. So good in fact that my personal computers have run with xwayland disabled for years (YMMV, there is certainly some Linux software that still requires X).

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#99

Post by pabs3 »

3np wrote: post #72
geoka9 wrote: post #17

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Same, but with Debian for almost 20 years. Don't remember how I did it before, but the last few migrations were just `dd if=/dev/sda.old of=/dev/sda.new` and then gparted to enlarge the root partition to fill out the new disk.

How do you know you're not propagating bitrot over time? Feels like a binary here and there may accumulate mismatching checksums over the years from bad hardware or some filesystem error... Not to speak of malware. All it takes is once... Feels a lot safer to do the system- and package installation from scratch and then rsync/dd only /home and /etc.

On Debian at least you can check for modified, removed or added files using cruft-ng.

Re: Installing Arch Linux on a Laptop

#100

Post by prmoustache »

cubano wrote: post #51
elromulous wrote: post #4

This was the process I followed: 1. Downloaded EndeavourOS 2. Installed it as easily as Ubuntu Edit: the arch documentation is second to none

Isn't the pain of installing Arch the point?

Some people might just like the rolling release model, huge software library through AUR and good documentarion.
Post reply on HN