Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Antergos: An Easy, Quick Way To Try Out Arch Linux

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Antergos: An Easy, Quick Way To Try Out Arch Linux

    Phoronix: Antergos: An Easy, Quick Way To Try Out Arch Linux

    I decided to give Antergos a whirl to see how this Arch Linux variant works. For those pressed for time or looking at an easy path for setting up an Arch Linux installation, Antergos seems to get the job done well.

    http://www.phoronix.com/vr.php?view=20637

  • #2
    #SOLVED# Cnchi installer issue (Graphic installer)

    Hello,

    You will find in the release 16.06.2014 of Antergos an issue on the Graphic Installer, but you can still make the clean perfect install that Antergos distro offers using the Graphical Installer.
    For this matter I place a link found in Antergos forum of how to address this issue (it is a installer update).


    http://forum.antergos.com/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=1846


    Thanks and Regards.

    Dhiego Silva.

    Comment


    • #3
      You should add Kaosx to the benchmarks, that distro its suppose to be very optimized (only qt, kde and 64 bits, and its not based in any distro), so it should be faster.
      In relation with antergos, it looks good, but its difficult to install it if your internet connection is slow.

      Comment


      • #4
        ArchLinux isn't for you if you have no intention to fiddle with a few config files. Simple as that

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by siavashserver View Post
          ArchLinux isn't for you if you have no intention to fiddle with a few config files. Simple as that
          I feel that it is more an issue of understanding what all the packages in an Arch Linux system do, since you have maintain your own system, and being able to use command line utilities. Config files generally have good defaults, and modifying them during installation is minimal (not to say installation itself is "minimal," which is the other issue).

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by siavashserver View Post
            ArchLinux isn't for you if you have no intention to fiddle with a few config files. Simple as that
            Yes and no: I'm a sysadmin and software developer, but having to install Linux on several machines with different hardware I'm grateful the Antergos installer gives me a working Arch system in a few minutes, that I can then tweak to my liking (and completely customize fiddling with config files for my home pc).

            Comment


            • #7
              The installer do not allow GPT partitioned disks

              Manjaro allows GPT partitioned disks, the Antergos Installer still do not.

              Antergos is pure arch, but with a good installer

              You can test rolling releases as them, Manjaro and Antergos, in this case publish ISOs so you can test only the ISOs versions or to pair it with Ubuntu that is 50% of GNU pairing their current versions at Ubuntu launches nobody would blame you for making the trick to take Ubuntu launching date as benchmark vs "the world" as it is that day

              YES YOU CAN benchmark, at least twice a year , when Ubuntu launches Ubuntu vs the world, Fedora, openSUSE, Manjaro, Antergos, KAOS, Chakra, Slackware, Solyd and Sabayon, at the point they are making the date of reference the ubuntu launch day.

              Even more, if you do, and some other publish it, be sure that non Rolling Releases distributions would work to be specially fine at that 2 dates

              I have Xubuntu and Manjaro installed, Half Life 2 Lost Coast test gave me at 720p with my new NVIDIA GTX 750 Ti that I am very happy with, 100 fps in Xubuntu fully updated and and 150 fps at Manjaro 3.14, and I think it was not only the newer kernel.

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by halo9en View Post
                Yes and no: I'm a sysadmin and software developer, but having to install Linux on several machines with different hardware I'm grateful the Antergos installer gives me a working Arch system in a few minutes, that I can then tweak to my liking (and completely customize fiddling with config files for my home pc).
                Indeed, installing Arch from scratch takes a few hours (mostly RTFMing.)

                That said, I've been using the same Arch installation for >4 years now on a dozen systems. Whenever I get a new system, such as the rMBP I am using right now, I simply boot the Arch installer, create a new EXT4 partition and tar-copy a working installation from a different system. Then it's simply a matter of chrooting into the freshly copied installation and running grub-install.

                Takes about 10 minutes when using gigabit ethernet or an external USB3 disk.

                If I am feeling especially lazy, I use an Ubuntu LiveUSB or VirtualBox (raw partition) to perform the file copy. This way I can keep using the system during the file copy.

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                  Indeed, installing Arch from scratch takes a few hours (mostly RTFMing.)
                  http://www.overclock.net/a/how-to-in...k-and-dirt-way

                  took about 20 minutes first time i tried
                  less than 10 minutes on last iteration
                  it my preferred arch install "cheatsheet"

                  usually i run a manjaro as main desktop/work horse, but i like a headless server to toy with things, it's much easier to get stuff working like a (r|d)ecent nodejs or mariaDB version straight out of AUR, without the fuss. so, if anybody wants to take it for a spin....

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                    Indeed, installing Arch from scratch takes a few minutes.
                    FTFY.
                    1) gdisk/fdisk
                    2) mkfs.ext4
                    4) mnt /dev/sda1 /mnt
                    3) pacstrap -i /mnt base base-devel gnome nvidia syslinux
                    4) genfstab
                    5) arch-chroot
                    6) syslinux-install_update
                    7) create user
                    8) touch 4 config files for localization, hostname, time, bootmanager config
                    9) Enable NetworkManager and GDM
                    10) Done.

                    Voila fully working desktop in 5-15 minutes (dependig on your download speed) with 10-15 commands.
                    Don't get it why people make their life hard and install everything seperately (xorg, gnome, driver etc.). If you want a desktop install it and everything that's needed will get pulled in anyway and -i allows you to even make customizations to the package group defaults along the way.
                    Last edited by blackout23; 06-24-2014, 04:30 AM.

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by blackout23 View Post
                      FTFY.
                      1) gdisk/fdisk
                      2) mkfs.ext4
                      4) mnt /dev/sda1 /mnt
                      3) pacstrap -i /mnt base base-devel gnome nvidia syslinux
                      4) genfstab
                      5) arch-chroot
                      6) syslinux-install_update
                      7) create user
                      8) touch 4 config files for localization, hostname, time, bootmanager config
                      9) Enable NetworkManager and GDM
                      10) Done.

                      Voila fully working desktop in 5-15 minutes (dependig on your download speed) with 10-15 commands.
                      Don't get it why people make their life hard and install everything seperately (xorg, gnome, driver etc.). If you want a desktop install it and everything that's needed will get pulled in anyway and -i allows you to even make customizations to the package group defaults along the way.
                      That's for an experienced user on a machine that is well known. Problems with your analysis:

                      1) gdisk/fdisk
                      2) mkfs.ext4
                      Seems a bit of an oversimplication. What if you want btrfs? I had to read up on that before I used it recently. You seem to have brushed over swap partitions, the possibility of separating your home directory, that sort of thing.

                      3) pacstrap -i /mnt base base-devel gnome nvidia syslinux
                      Gnome is crap, but I'll leave that. I have nothing to back this up, but I think most people would go with grub over syslinux. But the real problem is with 'nvidia'. The fact is you need to figure out what graphics driver you're going to use, and if you're not on Intel you have to figure out whether you want open source or proprietary drivers. Most people on this forum understand this decision, but it's something others would have to research.

                      6) syslinux-install_update
                      I've never used syslinux so I don't know how easy or difficult it is, but with grub there's a whole bunch of considerations that are a complete minefield. It's very easy to follow the wrong directions depending on whether you're doing the bios or uefi method. And if you're going uefi, you have to have already accounted for the fact that you needed to create a GPT partition thing when you did your partitioning (I forget what it was, type EO2 or something, some small 2mb partition at the start of the disk). I imagine this has caused a few 'scrap it and start again' moments when people got to this stage in the Arch install wiki.

                      9) Enable NetworkManager and GDM
                      You meant KDM, right? Oh yeah, Gnome. Gotcha. But NetworkManager sometimes isn't that simple, especially if you don't want to use dhcpcd. And networkd is probably a more forward-thinking choice for Arch users.

                      I love Arch, and I think more people should use it. But I disagree with your characterising it as easy to install. I've installed it many many times, and it's never that quick.

                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
                        But the real problem is with 'nvidia'. The fact is you need to figure out what graphics driver you're going to use, and if you're not on Intel you have to figure out whether you want open source or proprietary drivers. Most people on this forum understand this decision, but it's something others would have to research.
                        I don't think that is a real problem (or at least not a major one) - I don't think anyone's expecting people with no Linux experience to go with Arch as their first step. I haven't encountered many people with reasonable experience (a year or two, say) who haven't picked up at least the basic choices to be made with drivers.

                        And in this case, it would install VESA and at least function until they did some basic research anyway.

                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Originally posted by kaprikawn View Post
                          That's for an experienced user on a machine that is well known. Problems with your analysis:



                          Seems a bit of an oversimplication. What if you want btrfs? I had to read up on that before I used it recently. You seem to have brushed over swap partitions, the possibility of separating your home directory, that sort of thing.



                          Gnome is crap, but I'll leave that. I have nothing to back this up, but I think most people would go with grub over syslinux. But the real problem is with 'nvidia'. The fact is you need to figure out what graphics driver you're going to use, and if you're not on Intel you have to figure out whether you want open source or proprietary drivers. Most people on this forum understand this decision, but it's something others would have to research.



                          I've never used syslinux so I don't know how easy or difficult it is, but with grub there's a whole bunch of considerations that are a complete minefield. It's very easy to follow the wrong directions depending on whether you're doing the bios or uefi method. And if you're going uefi, you have to have already accounted for the fact that you needed to create a GPT partition thing when you did your partitioning (I forget what it was, type EO2 or something, some small 2mb partition at the start of the disk). I imagine this has caused a few 'scrap it and start again' moments when people got to this stage in the Arch install wiki.



                          You meant KDM, right? Oh yeah, Gnome. Gotcha. But NetworkManager sometimes isn't that simple, especially if you don't want to use dhcpcd. And networkd is probably a more forward-thinking choice for Arch users.

                          I love Arch, and I think more people should use it. But I disagree with your characterising it as easy to install. I've installed it many many times, and it's never that quick.

                          It is easy to install if you know what you want. I have used NetworkManager on basically every desktop so far with static ips, dhcp, encrypted wired connections, wifi. Worked every time. If you want some super dupper special setup with encryption and some super experimental file system some standardized GUI install won't get you far aswell. And yes syslinux is way more KISS and easier to install than GRUB. That's why it's the most used bootloader . https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=174790&p=7

                          But the real problem is with 'nvidia'. The fact is you need to figure out what graphics driver you're going to use, and if you're not on Intel you have to figure out whether you want open source or proprietary drivers.
                          Right that's super hard to figure out what to install when you have an NVIDIA card. Is it older than 7 years? No? Install the nvidia package. Done.
                          Last edited by blackout23; 06-24-2014, 07:24 AM.

                          Comment


                          • #14
                            Originally posted by BlackStar View Post
                            Indeed, installing Arch from scratch takes a few hours (mostly RTFMing.)
                            The Arch installer won't even start on a couple of recent notebooks I have. I'd rather do more productive things with my time and let Antergos do the dirty work while I'm working.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Originally posted by halo9en View Post
                              The Arch installer won't even start on a couple of recent notebooks I have. I'd rather do more productive things with my time and let Antergos do the dirty work while I'm working.
                              You can install Arch from arbitrary linux dist or live medium.

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X