What are the fast distros that let you choose packages to install?

[Majorix]

Yes, what are the distros that would let you choose the packages to install individually, which are fast, and have a package management system with packages that are updated often?

Ubuntu: Doesn't let you choose packages before installing.
Slackware: Doesn't have a repo afaik.
Gentoo: Doesn't install on my system for some reason.
Arch: Hard to install and isn't updated lately.

So any other recommendations?

[Drakx]

Arch has a rolling release system read the arch wiki :)
also gentoo allows what your looking for though you said it wont install on your system which sounds odd to me.

[Lord Illidan]

Fedora, SUSE..

Although tbh, I find Ubuntu's system best, believe me. I used to like SUSE's kitchen sink format, installing everything, but then it used to take me as long as the installation itself (which used to take a loooong time, btw) to install the upgrades. Ubuntu is smaller..

[ugm6hr]

Ubuntu: Doesn't let you choose packages before installing.

Can't you use the mini .iso and select every package individually?
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/minimal#barebones

Of course, while the Ubuntu repos update regularly, they only offer upgrades with the 6-monthly cycle.

Perhaps Debian might be more what you are looking for?

[Elvish Legion]

Yes, what are the distros that would let you choose the packages to install individually, which are fast, and have a package management system with packages that are updated often?

Ubuntu: Doesn't let you choose packages before installing.
Slackware: Doesn't have a repo afaik.
Gentoo: Doesn't install on my system for some reason.
Arch: Hard to install and isn't updated lately.

So any other recommendations?

Arch is easy to install once you get past partitioning ....everything is in the beginner guide, and its a rolling release they just updated pacman not to long ago, I had a couple of updates today etc. Give it another shot, the forums are really friendly albeit slow

[banewman]

I'd recommend the minimal cd - with fluxbox as a window manager I get much better performance and everything from the repos that I want - not much that I don't want
:)

[Majorix]

Arch has a rolling release system read the arch wiki :)
also gentoo allows what your looking for though you said it wont install on your system which sounds odd to me.
About Arch: I got the answer to it (the same answer actually) in another thread. Arch seems like a candidate to me.

About Gentoo: It shouldn't sound odd, I tried to install it at least 4 times (once with the guide/wiki and other times with the LiveCD) but never succeeded. It is probably my bad luck, but I have developed a dislike for this distro.

Fedora, SUSE..

Although tbh, I find Ubuntu's system best, believe me. I used to like SUSE's kitchen sink format, installing everything, but then it used to take me as long as the installation itself (which used to take a loooong time, btw) to install the upgrades. Ubuntu is smaller..
I forgot to write in my first post, but Fedora doesn't recognize some of my hardware.

But I will look into SuSe.
Can't you use the mini .iso and select every package individually?
http://www.psychocats.net/ubuntu/minimal#barebones

Of course, while the Ubuntu repos update regularly, they only offer upgrades with the 6-monthly cycle.

Perhaps Debian might be more what you are looking for?
I have never thought of Debian but I will look into that too. As a tester, should I download unstable or testing?

[Peyton]

About Arch: I got the answer to it (the same answer actually) in another thread. Arch seems like a candidate to me.

Give it a try, please. I know that in your original post, you dismissed it as hard to install, but the Arch wiki will walk you through the process.

[voteforpedro36]

I have never thought of Debian but I will look into that too. As a tester, should I download unstable or testing?

Unstable, although it's quite stable anyway. I'm not sure about letting you install whatever you want, but Sidux is based on it too.

You may want a netinstall, but you can elect to not install anything from the beginning with the regular CD.

[Majorix]

Isn't it like that in Debian you choose package groups to install and not individual packages? I want it like this: There are a few dozen "required" packages and you add a few of your own on top of them, but individually. Is it possible with Debian or should I look into other distros?

[igknighted]

Fedora, SUSE..

Although tbh, I find Ubuntu's system best, believe me. I used to like SUSE's kitchen sink format, installing everything, but then it used to take me as long as the installation itself (which used to take a loooong time, btw) to install the upgrades. Ubuntu is smaller..

Suse installs the kitchen sink? Don't you have that backwards? In ubuntu the liveCD dumps everything on there without asking, while in Suse the single CD installer lets you choose exactly what packages to install (could be a simple fluxbox wm only system, or a full KDE system), pulling packages from the CD and online if needed. The only way to mimic this in Ubuntu is to get the server CD and install the base, and then pull in packages via apt... far less user friendly IMHO. But to each their own.

Isn't it like that in Debian you choose package groups to install and not individual packages? I want it like this: There are a few dozen "required" packages and you add a few of your own on top of them, but individually. Is it possible with Debian or should I look into other distros?

Debian, Fedora (using the DVD installer, not the live disks), Suse and even Ubuntu (using the server CD as I mentioned above) are all capable of this.

[Majorix]

Fedora doesn't recognize some of my hardware like I mentioned. I already downloaded the SUSE install DVD, and the Arch install CD. I will also download the Debian netinstall image. Installing from barebones is not for me though, so Ubuntu is out :(

[Lord Illidan]

Suse installs the kitchen sink? Don't you have that backwards? In ubuntu the liveCD dumps everything on there without asking, while in Suse the single CD installer lets you choose exactly what packages to install (could be a simple fluxbox wm only system, or a full KDE system), pulling packages from the CD and online if needed. The only way to mimic this in Ubuntu is to get the server CD and install the base, and then pull in packages via apt... far less user friendly IMHO. But to each their own.

You're right, I made a mistake there. But what I meant is that SUSE encouraged me to install everything there. You know, just tick every checkbox, because the description sounded good, etc..but then face a hell of a lot of upgrades and broken packages later. Ubuntu doesn't have a lot of packages, just a base system.

[ugm6hr]

I will also download the Debian netinstall image. Installing from barebones is not for me though, so Ubuntu is out :(

These 2 procedures are basically the same, aren't they?

The barebones Ubuntu approach can be done with Gnome with the gnome-core package on a barebones install (with gdm & xorg). That would leave it entirely up to you what other programs you wanted.

[Lord Illidan]

I tried Arch Linux, not a bad distro. I had a bit of trouble due to my sony laptop and wierd hardware at first, but the community is very good, even on irc.

[Majorix]

Well I believe I was hit by an Arch bug: I couldn't connect to the net because it said dhcpd wasn't installed, even though I am 99% sure it was, because the guide wanted you to make sure it was on the install list.

Anyways, I removed it, and I am installing a fat (as in number of packages) openSUSE install (donno why I went with a lot of packages.. I believe I was hungry for a DVD installer :p), and now I have a second (and last) slot for another OS. I believe I will install Ubuntu Barebones there as suggested, since it is more familiar to me than Debian is and in my 1 year of its usage it didn't cause me major problems even though I mostly tested in this period.

Anyways enough talk, I will let you know how it goes with the Ubuntu barebones (will bring them up if I face any problems, I think I will go for an Xubuntu install btw) and the openSUSE install.

[Majorix]

Guys thanks to everyone for their replies.

I am settled with openSUSE for now. Trying to get my ATI card to work with it using 3D acc.

[RebounD11]

Late entry to the list :D

Try Sabayon minimal install disc... you install the minimal requirements and then you add the packages you want. It's gentoo based ==> very stable, it has great hardware support, but since it compiles all its packages it will take a while to install everything, but it will be worth it :D

(Best version for me was 3.3b - even if it was supposed to be beta... 3.3f is also good, 3.4 - not so much... I kind of wondered away from that one, but it's still super-fast and very extremely up-to-date)

[andrew.46]

Hi,

Saw your post while trawling for Slackware material:

[...] Slackware: Doesn't have a repo afaik.


True, but don't forget the amazing slackbuilds.org which has a very large number of scripts that are for the most part beautifully written.

Andrew

[mauud777]

for me

Arch very good distro because its : fast up2date (more then ubuntu :lolflag: ) greet community

if you played with arch you will love it

[mauud777]

Hi,

Saw your post while trawling for Slackware material:



True, but don't forget the amazing slackbuilds.org which has a very large number of scripts that are for the most part beautifully written.

Andrew

you can install slapt-get in slackware with linuxpackages repo :)