I finally set up arch! I bid ubuntu farewell.

[dragos240]

Well, on my Desktop anyway. It's working very smoothly, no bugs, not a single issue!:popcorn:

[phrostbyte]

Nice! I never successfully got Arch installed, but it was awhile ago.

You'll be back anyway. :)

[MasterNetra]

Yea I was never successful lol, I'll stick to Ubuntu for now.

[benj1]

when you say 'setup' do you mean installed or do you mean you have also gone through the endless hours of tweaking, modifying etc?

[t0p]

Well, on my Desktop anyway. It's working very smoothly, no bugs, not a single issue!:popcorn:
Bloody hell, not another one!

What's the betting that, in 1 out of 3 of his future posts, the word "arch" will appear?

[dragos240]

when you say 'setup' do you mean installed or do you mean you have also gone through the endless hours of tweaking, modifying etc?

I got all the correct configuring done. So now it looks great. Set it up in 2 nights.

Nice! I never successfully got Arch installed, but it was awhile ago.

You'll be back anyway. :)
I'm not leaving the forums by the way.

[benj1]

I got all the correct configuring done. So now it looks great. Set it up in 2 nights.


see thats where i stumbled i got it all installed and thought i would build a funky custom setup two weeks later i still had a mountain of configuration to do, so installed crunchbang instead, atleast i have a functioning install while i do my tweaks, i do/did like arch but the temptation to tweak everything was too great.

[RiceMonster]

In b4 arch vs ubuntu flame fest

[CJ Master]

In b4 arch vs ubuntu flame fest

Let's see how mature Ubuntu users can be, now. ;)

[pwnst*r]

Well, on my Desktop anyway. It's working very smoothly, no bugs, not a single issue!:popcorn:

cya in a few hours.

[dragos240]

Hehheh. Well after a few months of arch on my netbook, i'd say it's pretty darn stable!

[Ric_NYC]

ArchUbuntu...


:)

[dragos240]

Arch + ubuntu. What would happen?

[xArv3nx]

Let's see how mature Ubuntu users can be, now. ;)
i dont use ubuntu and i still don't like all the arch users being fanboyish here.

[Ric_NYC]

Arch + ubuntu. What would happen?


http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/4874/6a00d8341c730253ef0120a.jpg


:)

[tjwoosta]

Arch + ubuntu. What would happen?

lol Archbuntu, it would be a point and click installable live cd with gnome like ubuntu, but use arch repos and pacman/shaman with arch init and configs.

[dragos240]

http://img12.imageshack.us/img12/4874/6a00d8341c730253ef0120a.jpg


:)

Genetic mutations!

[snowpine]

I got all the correct configuring done. So now it looks great. Set it up in 2 nights.

I'm not leaving the forums by the way.

Good plan... everyone know Arch has the best software, and Ubuntu has the best forums. ;)

[starcannon]

Grats!
Enjoy!
Hope to see you around anyway.

GL and HF

[Sporkman]

Ubuntu is a fine distro.

[dragos240]

Ubuntu is a fine distro.

I do agree. But I can really control my computer better.

[yabbadabbadont]

I do agree. But I can really control my computer better.

In that case, once you are comfortable with Arch, you'll finally be ready to step up to Gentoo... :D

(and for the truly masochistic, LFS :twisted:)

[dragos240]

In that case, once you are comfortable with Arch, you'll finally be ready to step up to Gentoo... :D

(and for the truly masochistic, LFS :twisted:)

I actually tried that once, but, the minimal install disk lacks wpa_supplicant.

[Sunflower1970]

Well, on my Desktop anyway. It's working very smoothly, no bugs, not a single issue!:popcorn:

Congrats :) Feels good to get it set up for the first time. Took me a few tries before I got it, but when I did, I felt like I was Queen of the World...for a few minutes, at any rate.

[yabbadabbadont]

I actually tried that once, but, the minimal install disk lacks wpa_supplicant.

Most veteran Gentoo users will tell you to use SystemRescueCD when doing your install. Actually, you can use any live CD/DVD that supports your hardware and provides chroot.

[MasterNetra]

Arch+Ubuntu = click install Arch with Fugly Brown Theme. The children the two would have scare me! :p

[Sporkman]

Most veteran Gentoo users will tell you to use SystemRescueCD when doing your install. Actually, you can use any live CD/DVD that supports your hardware and provides chroot.

Sounds like fun.

[yabbadabbadont]

Sounds like fun.

Not really. Just tedious. If you are really picky about your USE flags and kernel configuration, you can easily spend a couple of days on the install.

[CJ Master]

In that case, once you are comfortable with Arch, you'll finally be ready to step up to Gentoo... :D

(and for the truly masochistic, LFS :twisted:)

And then creating a totally new kernel :twisted:

[Sporkman]

Not really. Just tedious. If you are really picky about your USE flags and kernel configuration, you can easily spend a couple of days on the install.

I was joking. :)

[Skripka]

Welcome to The Arch Side of Life. The Tacos are better here.

[HappyFeet]

Arch + ubuntu. What would happen?

Just do a minimal install of ubuntu and build it up. Then you have the best of both.

[pwnst*r]

Good plan... everyone know Arch has the best software, and Ubuntu has the best forums. ;)

they do?

[tjwoosta]

I wouldn't say that arch has the best software, because software is software its basically the same across all distributions. Some distros may have newer versions of software, but thats about it. I would however say that arch has the best package management system.

[Sashin]

What are the specific advantages of pacman? And is Arch just as easy to use and maintain as ubuntu after the installation?

And what other advantages are there of using arch?

[CJ Master]

Just do a minimal install of ubuntu and build it up. Then you have the best of both.

No. ;)

[~sHyLoCk~]

What are the specific advantages of pacman? And is Arch just as easy to use and maintain as ubuntu after the installation?

And what other advantages are there of using arch?

The best place to learn about Arch is in the Arch wiki.Arch has the best Linux wiki I have seen till date.;)

[tjwoosta]

What are the specific advantages of pacman?

Well the main advantage of arch package management would probably be the way it handles dependencies. In arch there are not just dependencies, they are broken down into makedepends, depends, and optdepends. The easiest way to explain them is to take some clippings from the PKGBUILD page of the arch wiki


makedepends: This should contain an array of package names that are needed only during the build, but that are unneeded for *using* the package after install. Example: unarj used in a build to unpack some patches

depends: This should contain an array of package names that need to be installed before this program can be run, separated by spaces. The names can optionally be enclosed in single quotes (apostrophes) to prevent possible shell quoting problems, and the array should be enclosed in round brackets. Sometimes a program requires a minimum version of a dependency; In that case, you might want to use the mathematical "larger or equal than" operator, and enclose the whole construct in quotes. Here's an example to add a dependency on the glibc package, and the slang library of at least version 1.8.0: depends=('glibc' 'slang>=1.8.0')

optdepends: This should contain an array of optional packages (and accompanying reasons) that are not essential to the package, but would offer increased functionality or other features when installed. optdepends are currently for informational purposes only and are not utilized by pacman during dependency resolution. The format should be similar to the following: optdepends=('fakeroot: for makepkg usage as normal user')

Basically makedepends are only used for the build process and automatically removed after the package is done building, these are not used at all if your installing a binary but it comes in handy when building from abs or aur. Depends are packages that are specifically required for the package to work at all. Optdepends are not installed automatically by pacman, but instead it will just display the list of optional dependencies along with a description of what function they offer, so if you choose you can install them seperately. In this way arch never installs anything that you don't need without your prior consent.

And is Arch just as easy to use and maintain as ubuntu after the installation?

Yes, after installation and configuration is done its just like any other distro. The difference is that you get updates more often and you never need to install a new version because its rolling release. In my experience arch's updates are very stable as well. I have had the same arch install for over a year and a half, and have never once had an update break my system.


And what other advantages are there of using arch?

BSD style init scripts, centrally located configurations where most configurations are in one file (/etc/rc.conf) including daemons networking modules locale timezone keymaps and much more, ABS is a big advantage in itself, also I would consider the arch wiki another big advantage.


Actually the arch wiki has a really good page comparing arch to other distros that can probably do better then I can
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_vs_Others


I guess the best way to see the advantages would be to give it a try for yourself.

[snowpine]

they do?

Well in my opinion, why else would I have over 2000 posts here if Ubuntu didn't have the best forum? :)

[gn2]

Well, on my Desktop anyway. It's working very smoothly, no bugs, not a single issue!:popcorn:


That's excellent news, why don't you share it with the Arch users at the Arch forums?
I'n certain that they would be delighted to hear about it.

[snowpine]

That's excellent news, why don't you share it with the Arch users at the Arch forums?
I'n certain that they would be delighted to hear about it.

Arch users already know it. It is the ignorant Ubuntu users who must be converted to the Arch way. :popcorn:
:popcorn:
:guitar:
:lolflag:

[gn2]

Spoken like a true recently converted Arch evangelist.

Arch = emperor's new clothes, it's no great shakes.

[dragos240]

Spoken like a true recently converted Arch evangelist.

Arch = emperor's new clothes, it's no great shakes.

Well. Arch truely is bare(bones), but it is working great so far. I thought I would join in the fun.

[gn2]

Well. Arch truely is bare(bones) ~

So is Ubuntu if you want it to be.

[dragos240]

Yes, the alternate intaller, that works, but I like the "arch way".

[SuperSonic4]

Arch + ubuntu. What would happen?

No idea but Arch + Kubuntu - Bugs = Chakra

(which is the blue link in my sig)

Glad you could make it to arch though, what DE/WM did you pick?

[dragos240]

No idea but Arch + Kubuntu - Bugs = Chakra

(which is the blue link in my sig)

Glad you could make it to arch though, what DE/WM did you pick?

GNOME, as always. I tried chakra before, it was buggy as heck (the live cd anyways).

[tjwoosta]

Yes, the alternate intaller, that works, but I like the "arch way".

Not just the alternative installer, you would also need to use the --no-install-recommends option for every package that you install. But yes it is possible if you know what your doing. Then again you would still be lacking many of the other advantages arch offers.

[dragos240]

Not just the alternative installer, you would also need to use the --no-install-recommends option for every package that you install. But yes it is possible if you know what your doing. Then again you would still be lacking many of the other advantages arch offers.

Like rc.conf and pacman?

[hoppipolla]

That's cool man :)

My opinion for believing Ubuntu is the best distro though is mainly built on the ease-of-use and simple set-up approaches it adopts, I tried OpenSUSE and Fedora recently and just finf them like many other distros to be either buggy, or unfriendly, or both! lol

Arch I've never tried, and I am now tempted, but it's not more user-friendly than Ubuntu is it?

[sunexplodes]

Just do a minimal install of ubuntu and build it up. Then you have the best of both.


This isn't true. Arch's minimal nature is not its best feature. The Pacman package manager is.

I was using XUbuntu for a couple weeks when I got my new laptop (because I was having trouble getting the display to work with Arch, turned out to be my own dumbassery, something really simple), and the only thing that really drove me up the wall was how SLOW apt is by comparison.

Now I'm happily back with Arch + XFCE.

[Sporkman]

Actually the arch wiki has a really good page comparing arch to other distros that can probably do better then I can
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_vs_Others


It sounds to me like Arch is a FreeBSD wannabe.

:P

[SuperSonic4]

This isn't true. Arch's minimal nature is not its best feature. The Pacman package manager is.

I was using XUbuntu for a couple weeks when I got my new laptop (because I was having trouble getting the display to work with Arch, turned out to be my own dumbassery, something really simple), and the only thing that really drove me up the wall was how SLOW apt is by comparison.

Now I'm happily back with Arch + XFCE.

I would say the AUR is arch's best feature. Install a good frontend and you'll never have to compile again

yaourt -Syu --aur will update via pacman and the AUR installed packages

[dragos240]

That's cool man :)

My opinion for believing Ubuntu is the best distro though is mainly built on the ease-of-use and simple set-up approaches it adopts, I tried OpenSUSE and Fedora recently and just finf them like many other distros to be either buggy, or unfriendly, or both! lol

Arch I've never tried, and I am now tempted, but it's not more user-friendly than Ubuntu is it?

Arch is set up through the command line, and is NOT user friendly, once you set it up (which roughly ranges from a day to a week), it will be great, also you will be using the terminal much more, using pacman (But there is shaman).

[dragos240]

I would say the AUR is arch's best feature. Install a good frontend and you'll never have to compile again

yaourt -Syu --aur will update via pacman and the AUR installed packages

Yaourt is very very usefull, and so is the AUR (Archlinux User Repository?) It has basically everything, and it's very usefull. No more looking for the source of a program that wasn't in the repo.

[hoppipolla]

Arch is set up through the command line, and is NOT user friendly, once you set it up (which roughly ranges from a day to a week), it will be great, also you will be using the terminal much more, using pacman (But there is shaman).

Yeah I have used a few distros like that - I used to be nuts about Slackware lol

For now though, I'm going to stick with a nice easy one lol :)

[sunexplodes]

Yaourt is very very usefull, and so is the AUR (Archlinux User Repository?) It has basically everything, and it's very usefull. No more looking for the source of a program that wasn't in the repo.

Yeah, Yaourt is awesome.

[Sporkman]

Yeah, Yaourt is awesome.

So is Yogurt.

[Whiffle]

So is Yogurt.

May the Schwartz be with you!

[tjwoosta]

So is Yogurt.

indeed :)

Especially that kind that comes with the Reese's pieces on the lid.

[snowpine]

"User friendly" is a meaningless term.

If you dig "The Arch Way" then Arch will be user-friendly for you:

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/The_Arch_Way

Or, if you're into "Linux for Human Beings" then Ubuntu will be user-friendly for you:

http://www.ubuntu.com/products/whatisubuntu

This whole debate is asinine. But, as long as it's confined to the Community Cafe, that's okay with me. :)

[sisco311]

That's excellent news, why don't you share it with the Arch users at the Arch forums?
I'n certain that they would be delighted to hear about it.

The Community Cafe/Recurring Discussions is the appropriate place for one to share his/her experience with Arch on the ubuntu forums.

[dragos240]

So is Yogurt.

Yaourt is yogurt in french.

[misfitpierce]

I've tried Arch in past and Mandrake/Mandriva and Fedora/Redhat but all in all I always come back to Ubuntu... Been back on Ubuntu for years now and don't plan on going anywhere again. Maybe try out Google Chrome OS when it releases but thats about it. Don't plan on leaving Ubuntu though.

[tjwoosta]

Yaourt is yogurt in french.

Speaking of yaourt...

Sometimes it can be a pain to type out yaourt -Syu --aur or whatever your doing so I thought Id share a method of simplifying the process.

You can add aliases to your ~/.bashrc to make the commands simpler

Here is my .bashrc as an example (if you change your .bashrc I think you need to reboot before the effects take place)



# Check for an interactive session
[ -z "$PS1" ] && return

alias ls='ls --color=auto'
PS1='[\u@\h \W]\$ '

alias update='yaourt -Syu --aur'

alias search='yaourt -Ss'

alias install='yaourt -S'

alias remove='yaourt -Rs'

alias abs='sudo abs'

alias query='yaourt -Q'

alias check='cksfv -vf *.sfv'




With it like this I can update my entire system including packages installed from aur with a single command
update

I can install packages like so
install firefox

Same for removing, searching, etc. And this can be done in any distro, with any commands.

Since yaourt automatically asks for root password if needed you don't even need to use sudo with it, but as you can see with my abs entry you could always put sudo in the alias if necessary.

[dragos240]

Speaking of yaourt...

Sometimes it can be a pain to type out yaourt -Syu --aur or whatever your doing so I thought Id share a method of simplifying the process.

You can add aliases to your ~/.bashrc to make the commands simpler

Here is my .bashrc as an example (if you change your .bashrc I think you need to reboot before the effects take place)



# Check for an interactive session
[ -z "$PS1" ] && return

alias ls='ls --color=auto'
PS1='[\u@\h \W]\$ '

alias update='yaourt -Syu --aur'

alias search='yaourt -Ss'

alias install='yaourt -S'

alias remove='yaourt -Rs'

alias abs='sudo abs'

alias query='yaourt -Q'

alias check='cksfv -vf *.sfv'


With it like this I can update my entire system including packages installed from aur with a single command
updateI can install packages like so
install firefoxSame for removing, searching, etc. And this can be done in any distro, with any commands.

Since yaourt automatically asks for root password if needed you don't even need to use sudo with it, but as you can see with my abs entry you could always put sudo in the alias if necessary.

I really don't mind.

[tjwoosta]

I really don't mind.

Understandable, I just thought Id share in case anyones interested since yaourt is one of those weird words that doesn't exactly flow for some people.

[dragos240]

I don't exactly know how to pronounce it, but this is how I do:

Yow-wert.

[handy]

After installing Arch in March 2008, I have grown more & more familiar with it, to the point that when I try out, or use another distro I find it irritating due to all of the excess stuff that I don't use, & particularly due to the extra complexity involved in the way they are set up & configured.

The simplicity of Arch is its strongest feature for me (I'm sure I'm not alone in that one), due to which even my old & failing memory knows where to go to modify a setting in the rare event I have to.

The rolling release system is just icing on the cake, it really is great to not have to do a fresh install every 6 months or so; the package management system in Arch is from my experience 2nd to none.

As previously mentioned, the Arch wiki is brilliant, as opposed to the unfortunate state that the Ubuntu wiki is in. :(

In the end it all comes down to personal preference. What suits one person is poison to another, & both perceptions are completely valid in themselves.

It is the immature mine is the best attitude that just leads down the boring path of tit for tat. There's no need for that; use whatever suits you best, Arch works for me, others really dislike Arch intensely... That's ok.

[gn2]

The Community Cafe/Recurring Discussions is the appropriate place for one to share his/her experience with Arch on the ubuntu forums.

I disagree.
In my opinion there is no appropriate place in these forums for testimonials about Arch since other OS talk was removed.

[snowpine]

I disagree.
In my opinion there is no appropriate place in these forums for testimonials about Arch since other OS talk was removed.

With all due respect, that is not your decision to make, and people don't like being told to shut up. I might counter argue that: "In my opinion there is no appropriate place in these forums for telling people to stop discussing Arch already" but my opinion doesn't really matter since I'm not a moderator. It is a circular, pointless argument. :)

[sisco311]

I disagree.
In my opinion there is no appropriate place in these forums for testimonials about Arch since other OS talk was removed.

Since this thread was moved here by a mod(and was not closed), I have to assume that this is where it belongs.

We are going off-topic (if this is possible in the recurring discussion), we should debate this in a new thread in Forum Feedback & Help.

[tjwoosta]

I disagree.
In my opinion there is no appropriate place in these forums for testimonials about Arch since other OS talk was removed.

The Ubuntu forum is not just a purely support forum where we discuss nothing but ubuntu. It is also a friendly community where people come together to discus many subjects from everyday life to technology and much more.

[dragos240]

The Ubuntu forum is not just a purely support forum where we discuss nothing but ubuntu. It is also a friendly community where people come together to discus many subjects from everyday life to technology and much more.
except religion and politics.

[handy]

Sadly some people have chauvinism hard wired into their brains.

Unfortunately the existence of this inflexible us vs them, chauvinistic attitude, could be the end of us all...

It certainly would be much better for humanity if everyone grew out of it.

[xArv3nx]

lol.

i like arch, it's nice. the only problem i see is how ridiculous most arch linux users are.

#archlinux is good times though. :)

[handy]

lol.

i like arch, it's nice. the only problem i see is how ridiculous most arch linux users are.

#archlinux is good times though. :)

Welcome to the club. :)

[tcoffeep]

In that case, once you are comfortable with Arch, you'll finally be ready to step up to Gentoo... :D

(and for the truly masochistic, LFS :twisted:)


*props*

[C!oud]

It sounds to me like Arch is a FreeBSD wannabe.

:P

Not really.

[Greg]

Not really.

Arch is definitely heavily BSD influenced- a ports like system, BSD init scripts...

[C!oud]

Arch is definitely heavily BSD influenced- a ports like system, BSD init scripts...

But it's no freebsd wannabe or really anything even remotely close to *BSD. The BSD like init scripts in Arch are indeed similar in that most of your init scripts are in rc.d but the similarities stop there. The *BSD rc.conf is completely different and as well as the seperation of user installed init scripts in /usr/local/etc/rc.d. Also while the ABS system is like a ports tree in that it's a set of build scripts within a directory it's pratically competely different from the FreeBSD ports system or NetBSD pkgsrc in numerous ways.

[scragar]

when you say 'setup' do you mean installed or do you mean you have also gone through the endless hours of tweaking, modifying etc?

I did that with ubuntu, never bothered with arch :p

[handy]

I did that with ubuntu, never bothered with arch :p

A common benefit with the Arch rolling release system, is that you install once, you never install again until you have a serious hardware failure that forces you to reinstall. (Like a drive failure)

In the meantime you can upgrade the entire system multiple times a day if you like, change DE/WM whatever you want to do. No need to reinstall & no potential trouble as is possible when upgrading non-rolling release systems.

Rarely, a bug comes down from upstream, & we have to deal with it. Which is the only negative thing I can think of regarding the rolling release system.

If you do install a troublesome package; provided you keep a copy of the currently installed packages in your cache, it is a pretty quick & easy thing to downgrade to where you were before you upgraded into trouble.

Then you go to the Arch news page & the forum & see what's going on. When you know the bug has been fixed, you carry on upgrading.

Since 1986 I've been computing, & there has never been a system in my experience that is so easy to maintain as Arch.

Some don't like it though, so horses for courses. ;)
_____________

@Dragos240: You might like to have a look at the link below? (I know you have been using Arch on your notebook ;))

It currently has seven important how-to's for Arch, which are spread over two pages of other assorted how-to's. These Arch how-to's can save an enormous amount of trouble for those that don't know about them. I had to learn about them the hard way. :)

http://www.ostalk.org/forumdisplay.php?fid=18

[sunexplodes]

Since 1986 I've been computing, & there has never been a system in my experience that is so easy to maintain as Arch.


This is how I feel. The initial install and configuration might be daunting (to some), but once it's up and running, it's a lot easier and saner than anything else I've used.

[Daisuke_Aramaki]

It's funny how the whole statement 'BSD style init scripts' is exaggerated time and again. Since Cloud pointed out already, I won't do the same again.
Just because a Linux distro uses such init scripts, doesn't make it a complete OS like BSD.

By the way, for the interested, please have a look at this document, for a better understanding of the differences between BSD and Linux, before bringing up the BSD style script thing again.

http://www.over-yonder.net/~fullermd/rants/bsd4linux/bsd4linux1.php

[~sHyLoCk~]

Arch users already know it. It is the ignorant Ubuntu users who must be converted to the Arch way. :popcorn:
:popcorn:
:guitar:
:lolflag:

I'd say register yourself to Arch forums and goto offtopic and see a thread named "I'm getting bored of Arch". What you/the OP/many users here are suffering from is called "Distro-hopping fever". Don't worry you will get over it after trying out a few other distros and finally settle with one that you feel more comfortable and useful for you. ;)

@ gn2

I agree with you. This is the exact reason why some people here blame Archers of filling the threads with Arch discussions whenever they get an opportunity. I'm an Archer myself, but preaching about another distro in a forum of another distro and criticizing it by comparing how better Arch is over ubuntu is not right. All I can say is, as i said earlier, read the Wiki for learning more about arch. And before flaming me, know that I'm not asking anyone to stfu, I don't have the authority to, but it's getting a bit ridiculous.

[mdsmedia]

Understandable, I just thought Id share in case anyones interested since yaourt is one of those weird words that doesn't exactly flow for some people.
Thanks for the aliases. I've got a relatively new Arch install and had never used aliases in Bash, so wasn't sure how they worked.

I also haven't yet setup AUR or installed yaourt, but when I have done so that script will be great :).

[CJ Master]

I disagree.
In my opinion there is no appropriate place in these forums for testimonials about Arch since other OS talk was removed.

If you hate Arch topics so much there's a simple way to never see them again, don't click on them. ;)

[slakkie]

when you say 'setup' do you mean installed or do you mean you have also gone through the endless hours of tweaking, modifying etc?

What do you mean by tweaking and modifying arch?

[gn2]

If you hate Arch topics so much there's a simple way to never see them again, don't click on them. ;)

If only it were so easy.

Hate is too strong a word, I just find it irritating when people incessantly bang on about Arch in this forum.

I just can't see why anyone would want to post in the Ubuntu forum about their success installing Arch.

If I installed Mandriva would I post in the openSUSE forum to tell openSUSE users how smart I had been installing Mandriva?

There is a better place for discussion of Arch, it's the Arch forums.

[handy]

If only it were so easy.

Hate is too strong a word, I just find it irritating when people incessantly bang on about Arch in this forum.

I just can't see why anyone would want to post in the Ubuntu forum about their success installing Arch.

If I installed Mandriva would I post in the openSUSE forum to tell openSUSE users how smart I had been installing Mandriva?

There is a better place for discussion of Arch, it's the Arch forums.

Some of us still remember the good old days when there was an Other OS sub-forum here.

Old habits die hard it would seem.

You would be best off to get used to it, because its not going to change. People are always going to talk about other systems in what the administration has deemed to be the appropriate parts of the Ubuntu forums to do so.

The Linux community is such a nice place to be. :)

[kelvin spratt]

gn2
Actually you can post such things on the Arch linux forum, Just read a thread i'm bored with Arch Linux, and they are talking about moving to Mandriva.
The only difference is Slagging other distros is not tolerated in the Arch Linux forums that is good forum practice.
Yes I use Arch, Bsd, Windows, etc, I'm a member of the Ubuntu forums, so I have a right to post on this forum on any subject including Arch Linux as do any other members.

[gn2]

~ what the administration has deemed to be the appropriate parts of the Ubuntu forums to do so. ~


I thought Other OS talk had been removed with the intention that discussion of other OSs should migrate to it's natural habitat....?

Here's why I think this (http://ubuntuforums.org/forumdisplay.php?f=147).

[bruno9779]

@gn2

For a lot of people here, Ubuntuforum is Linuxforum, and in a way for me too.

I find way more fun-boyish getting upset because people share their Arch experiences, than sharing said experiences.

And, come on, the post is in the community cafe, There you can talk about your favorite football team if you like, so why not about aother OS?

I personally like testimonial about Arch, Gentoo, and even non-linux like Haiku. Talking about Haiku, if it wasn't for said testimonials I would have never found out about if, and I am having a good time trying it out and bugreporting

[scragar]

Even though I've been using arch linux for a while I still come here, and I still put "ubuntu" into things I'm searching, because the results are often better(It's rare a search with ubuntu in turns up anything more than a year old, which searches with arch in turn up all sorts of strange results(more often than not about compiling for this architecture or how to do something in a virtual machine), and with linux I find a lot of the results are from 2 or 3 years ago and thus not always completely relevant).

[handy]

I thought Other OS talk had been removed with the intention that discussion of other OSs should migrate to it's natural habitat....?

My understanding was that firstly with the Backyard, it was closed basically because as the Ubuntu forum user base population was growing the strain on the staff became too much. The Backyard became far too expensive to run.

As far as the Other OS sub-forum was concerned, we were told that changes had to be made to the Ubuntu forums as the server(s) were under strain. So some bits were chopped off the Ubuntu forums.

Now, whether this is the whole truth, or the truth at all, doesn't matter anymore. Its happened, its history & all of us who had an addiction broken here have got over it, we are recovered.

Though as a result, many very knowledgeable Linux users who were very helpful to the Ubuntu community (with huge numbers of contributions to their credit) no longer frequent this forum, that was just part of the price, which is in reality negligible as far as a forum this size is concerned.


Anyway, if the CoC says we are not allowed to talk about any other systems here, then that's it, done finished.

Until then, we do, so enjoy it as best you can?

[Sporkman]

I'm a member of the Ubuntu forums, so I have a right to post on this forum on any subject including Arch Linux as do any other members.

No, you have no such right.

[gn2]

~ As far as the Other OS sub-forum was concerned, we were told that changes had to be made to the Ubuntu forums as the server(s) were under strain. ~

Indeed, why should the Ubuntu forums be burdened with discussion of another distribution?
The intent was for discussion of other distributions to move away from the Ubuntu forums, at least that's my interpretation of the announcement I linked to.
Did you read it...? (deja vu here)

It would seem that for some reason users of Arch have failed to take this on board and persist in posting here.

Like you say, until there's an outright and explicit ban I suppose we'll just have to put up with it.

[RiceMonster]

Indeed, why should the Ubuntu forums be burdened with discussion of another distribution?
The intent was for discussion of other distributions to move away from the Ubuntu forums, at least that's my interpretation of the announcement I linked to.
Did you read it...? (deja vu here)

It would seem that for some reason users of Arch have failed to take this on board and persist in posting here.

Like you say, until there's an outright and explicit ban I suppose we'll just have to put up with it.

You know, you talk about how annoyed you are with arch users here, but I find the people who feel the need to complain every time someone brings it up as on par with the people who never stop bringing it up. For a while it was the cool thing to be switching to Arch, now it's the cool thing to complain about it constantly.

Either way, we'd be better of if people could get over themselves, stop preaching about Arch every second, and stop whining whenever someone brings it up.

[handy]

Indeed, why should the Ubuntu forums be burdened with discussion of another distribution?
The intent was for discussion of other distributions to move away from the Ubuntu forums, at least that's my interpretation of the announcement I linked to.
Did you read it...? (deja vu here)

It would seem that for some reason users of Arch have failed to take this on board and persist in posting here.

Like you say, until there's an outright and explicit ban I suppose we'll just have to put up with it.

You have demonstrated yourself to be a chauvinist. That's ok, the world is full of them.

You'll have to start lobbying the forum council to have the code of conduct modified to suit what certainly look like your very narrow minded set of needs.

Many of us are Linux (& other OS) users. We welcome communication & the growth of community spirit, we share our enthusiasm, we ask questions, we get answers, we help to grow each others knowledge.

It sure is nice to feel welcome in this world.

You just made it to being the first person I have ever put in my ignore list. Congratulations gn2.

[snowpine]

No way man, Arch forums are boring, so I'm going to keep posting here. Like I said, Ubuntu has the best forums bar none. What other Linux support forum on the internet has a 6,000 post thread about how to count to 200?

ps In the last hour, there were 12 threads mentioning Arch, 4 threads on Puppy, 24 on Debian, 15 on Fedora, etc. here on Ubuntu Forums. Why single out Arch for all the negativity? Plus, clearly people want to discuss operating systems other than Ubuntu, and will continue to do so for as long as it is allowed. So don't be a buzzkill, maaan!

[~sHyLoCk~]

Please post a thread saying "I finally set up gentoo! I bid arch farewell." in the arch forums and let's see the reaction. :lolflag:

[hessiess]

No way man, Arch forums are boring, so I'm going to keep posting here. Like I said, Ubuntu has the best forums bar none. What other Linux support forum on the internet has a 6,000 post thread about how to count to 200?

Agree, I am an Arch user and haven't used Ubuntu in a year, however the community hear is much better.

[SomeGuyDude]

Arch settled my distro-hopping ways, after having leapt about from Ubuntu to Dream to Mandriva to Zenwalk to a comically-failed attempt at Lunar. Juuuust the right balance of do-it-yourself and don't-worry-we-can-handle-that.

However I, unlike I think a lot of others, will not claim that Arch is objectively a better distro. Hell I'd argue the opposite. For a wide-release type of affair, Ubuntu beats the pants off it. GUI controls that make sense, a great package manager front-end, it's good stuff. But for me, I like a more pared down machine. Plus the rolling release business and the AUR.

Is Arch faster? I don't think. More stable? Nah, I had a few problems with each. Better package managing system? That's pretty subjective. It's just a few little personal things.

And as for "difficulty", please. I can get it all set up and rolling in about an hour or so and then never touch it again. Except for running updates and a few really minor odds and ends I almost NEVER open the terminal.

[gn2]

You have demonstrated yourself to be a chauvinist. ~

Not at all, that is merely your interpretation of a few of my posts.

You'll have to start lobbying the forum council to have the code of conduct modified to suit what certainly look like your very narrow minded set of needs.

No need for anything so extreme, like I said before, we'll just have to put up with it.
I will not be campaigning for any ban, nor would I protest it if one was imposed

Many of us are Linux (& other OS) users. We welcome communication & the growth of community spirit, we share our enthusiasm, we ask questions, we get answers, we help to grow each others knowledge.

Does anyone seriously look to the Ubuntu forums as a source of knowledge about Arch?

You just made it to being the first person I have ever put in my ignore list. Congratulations gn2.

Your loss, you might miss something useful to you in the future.
(like the time when I told you who your avatar was (http://ubuntuforums.org/showpost.php?p=1594830&postcount=6))

[keplerspeed]

Discussing other distro's is good and healthy, and makes sure that the entire linux community knows whats going on. Otherwise I probably wouldnt know of of Arch.

I think most people will agree that other OS discussion is good, but its hot topic, lots of threads and when let loose will crash servers. Thats the main reason other OS discussion would be encouraged in other places.

[sunexplodes]

This is absolutely ridiculous. Nobody's posting in the support forums for Arch support, we're talking about linux-related topics in the chat-oriented subforums. Ubuntu Forums for me is a great place to talk about generally-linux-oriented topics because it's a very large, active community.

I use Arch Forums for my support, and Ubuntu Forums for interesting conversations. If you don't like Arch or discussions thereof, it's a simple matter not to open the topic.

If you have a problem with Arch topics here, don't open them. Otherwise, you're just looking for a fight and you have NO excuse whatsoever.

[gn2]

If you have a problem with Arch topics here, don't open them.

Like I said before it isn't always as easy as that.
Not all threads that end up being about Arch have the word Arch in the title.

[Penguin Guy]

I finally got Arch installed and working great and then I realized that that was the easy part. To make it usable I would have to: write a script to add menu entries for newly installed programs, write a script to regularly update the computer, write a script to clean up orphaned packages, etc. I got rid of it and am now continuing to use Ubuntu, however I still use a small Arch partition for backups - although I am having difficulty with that (http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=1263009) at the moment.

[Artificial Intelligence]

Closed for review.

[Artificial Intelligence]

The thread will stay closed as most of the posts are turned into a "versus" thread.