Page 2 of 4 FirstFirst 1234 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 36

Thread: Arch Linux Install Media Updated For July 2012

  1. #11
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Not every benchs depends on your desktop...

    If you run disk IO benchs, or httpd benchs, then it depends on your kernel, filesystem, hdparms, ...

    I don't think that John the ripper depends on KDE for its performances.

  2. #12
    Join Date
    May 2010
    Posts
    126

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by Yoshi View Post
    Dropping AIF makes it even harder for "beginners" to get Arch up and running...
    I've gotten the impression that they don't want any more users who can't read a wiki and transcribe commands to bash.

  3. #13
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    8

    Default

    @TheCycoONE
    I understand that but the new method is even more complicated, I would say. So maybe the get the complete opposite of what they wanted to achieve. Personally, i'll try out the new method and will see how far i can get with the wiki etc. With AIF i didn't need to look in the wiki at all. So yeah, for me it's a step backwards. But I'm sure i'll learn a lot while trying it out to get it up and running.

  4. #14
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Edinburgh, Scotland
    Posts
    590

    Default

    Sounds like it's turning into Gentoo - without the advantages

  5. #15
    Join Date
    Jul 2011
    Posts
    36

    Default

    Well, the install docs are really small.

  6. #16
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    5,187

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by babali View Post
    Not every benchs depends on your desktop...

    If you run disk IO benchs, or httpd benchs, then it depends on your kernel, filesystem, hdparms, ...

    I don't think that John the ripper depends on KDE for its performances.
    If you happen to use a heavy desktop that steals X % cpu, it will show in any cpu-using bench. Not even mentioning the horrible trackers and indexers.

  7. #17

    Default

    Wow phoronix is so slow, I heard about this days ago on /g/ of all places.

  8. #18
    Join Date
    Dec 2010
    Location
    MA, USA
    Posts
    1,386

    Default

    I'm still torn between Arch and Debian. Both have a lot of packages that the other doesn't (including AUR), both I've encountered an update resulting in an irreparable system, Arch performs notably better, but its such a pain in the ass to set up (but I guess Gentoo is worse).

    I'm not sure how I feel about the new installer. I haven't tried it yet but it almost seems like they're just being lazy. There really needed to be a new install CD (hopefully one that supports GRUB 2) but for someone with a slow internet connection like myself, Arch is just slightly too much of a pain to consider ATM. At least with Debian I don't need any reference guides.

  9. #19
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    1,709

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I'm still torn between Arch and Debian. Both have a lot of packages that the other doesn't (including AUR), both I've encountered an update resulting in an irreparable system, Arch performs notably better, but its such a pain in the ass to set up (but I guess Gentoo is worse).

    I'm not sure how I feel about the new installer. I haven't tried it yet but it almost seems like they're just being lazy. There really needed to be a new install CD (hopefully one that supports GRUB 2) but for someone with a slow internet connection like myself, Arch is just slightly too much of a pain to consider ATM. At least with Debian I don't need any reference guides.
    If you follow the instructions carefully is difficult to fuck up an Arch installation. I don't think that many things can go wrong if you don't mess a lot with your system and read the announcements before updating. (in4b famous last words ).

  10. #20
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    42

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by schmidtbag View Post
    I'm still torn between Arch and Debian. Both have a lot of packages that the other doesn't (including AUR), both I've encountered an update resulting in an irreparable system, Arch performs notably better, but its such a pain in the ass to set up (but I guess Gentoo is worse).

    I'm not sure how I feel about the new installer. I haven't tried it yet but it almost seems like they're just being lazy. There really needed to be a new install CD (hopefully one that supports GRUB 2) but for someone with a slow internet connection like myself, Arch is just slightly too much of a pain to consider ATM. At least with Debian I don't need any reference guides.
    I switched to Fedora when I realized how bleeding edge it was and how often packages update. Debian is great but updates at a snails pace unless you use the unstable stuff (let me stress unstable). Arch is great but requires so much work to maintain or reinstall.

    Using RPMFusion and contributing what I can that's missing really helps fill in the gaps. The downside is I have to reinstall or do a massive update every 6 months to stay on top, which didn't happen when I was with Debian or Arch. On the plus side, I tend to mess up my OS every 6-8 months and because I don't back things up regularly, I'm reinstaling anyway and Fedora seems to be easy to do so.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •