Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Arch-Based Antergos Linux Distribution Calls It Quits

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

  • #31
    I don't get why people would want Arch that's not Arch. Arch is easy to install (takes 20 minutes tops), and yes it has an installer, what else would you call pacstrap?

    With Debian, I get why you would want Ubuntu, because Debian stable is very old. But with Arch, everything is fresh, and what gets broken (in packages) is usually fixed in 1-2 hours, at most a day. Using Arch-based distros just gives you less fresh repos.

    Comment


    • #32
      Originally posted by AndyChow View Post
      I don't get why people would want Arch that's not Arch. Arch is easy to install (takes 20 minutes tops), and yes it has an installer, what else would you call pacstrap?

      With Debian, I get why you would want Ubuntu, because Debian stable is very old. But with Arch, everything is fresh, and what gets broken (in packages) is usually fixed in 1-2 hours, at most a day. Using Arch-based distros just gives you less fresh repos.
      While that's true for distros like Manjaro that has their own repositories (that are usually lagging behind), Antergos was using the standard arch repos - ie pure arch with easier setup and some distro-repos with things like wallpapers, icon packs, base configurations and whatnot. Imo 5 minutes afk:ing with the Antergos installer is the same as 30 minutes manual labor of setting up normal arch - end result is exactly the same. There's no right or wrong way of doing it, but I prefer the former.

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by AndyChow View Post
        I don't get why people would want Arch that's not Arch. Arch is easy to install (takes 20 minutes tops), and yes it has an installer, what else would you call pacstrap?

        With Debian, I get why you would want Ubuntu, because Debian stable is very old. But with Arch, everything is fresh, and what gets broken (in packages) is usually fixed in 1-2 hours, at most a day. Using Arch-based distros just gives you less fresh repos.
        Because we started using arch The Arch Way (which is to basically be similar to a BSD simplicity wise and run a Linux kernel)... then they went left field and became like an unstable ubuntu with a side of slackware. Arch started out as basically a no frills distro like Slackware, except with excellent package management and a bit of instability due to being rolling release.

        Nowadays I use Gentoo almost exclusively but would consider an arch fork for a slower machine that can't be bothered to compile as much as I do with Gentoo.

        systemd is like the antitheses of the Arch way that many of us liked and wanted to keep. Due to this needless drama many of us barely give arch a thought these days.
        Last edited by cb88; 05-21-2019, 04:49 PM.

        Comment


        • #34
          Originally posted by cb88 View Post
          systemd is like the antitheses of the Arch way that many of use liked and wanted to keep. Due to this needless drama many of us barely give arch a thought these days.
          What the fuck are you talking about? How can systemd be or not be the "Arch way". Although I'm pretty sure the Arch way isn't to ship outdated software.

          If you hate systemd that's fine, go hate somewhere else rather than posting on a thread that has zero todo with systemd.

          Comment


          • #35
            Originally posted by AndyChow View Post
            I don't get why people would want Arch that's not Arch. Arch is easy to install (takes 20 minutes tops), and yes it has an installer, what else would you call pacstrap?

            With Debian, I get why you would want Ubuntu, because Debian stable is very old. But with Arch, everything is fresh, and what gets broken (in packages) is usually fixed in 1-2 hours, at most a day. Using Arch-based distros just gives you less fresh repos.
            I've never gotten a broken package in Arch (besides Linux 4.18 issues with Core 2 Duo CPUs, it was in the upstream release anyway), as they're tested before they're rolled out. You can expect breakage when you're using the testing repo, but that will apply to every distribution out there. If there's anything that needs manual attention, information about it is posted in the official RSS feed. Arch is pretty stable and it's low maintenance, which boils down to upgrading packages often, and maybe using pacdiff to take care of configuration changes in software you use once in a while.

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by Britoid View Post

              So never.
              Don't be dense... when systemd goes belly up which it eventually will, if whatever replaces it does not involve Lennart Pottering I may consider it. I'm not tied to openrc or sysvinit or whathaver you but that dude is a detriment to the ecosystem.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by Britoid View Post

                What the fuck are you talking about? How can systemd be or not be the "Arch way". Although I'm pretty sure the Arch way isn't to ship outdated software.

                If you hate systemd that's fine, go hate somewhere else rather than posting on a thread that has zero todo with systemd.
                You joined this forum in 2013 so I assume you never used old Arch... if you like new Arch that is fine, but it completely went about face in 2011-2012 and was no longer a distro I wanted to use *at all* as it did not respect my desires as a user.

                Also you are the hateful one with the foul language you hypocrite.

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by davidbepo View Post

                  why not use manjaro, im pretty happy with it
                  Manjaro lags behind on the repositories, while Antergos used ArchLinux repositories directly. This are sad news.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by cb88 View Post

                    Don't be dense... when systemd goes belly up which it eventually will, if whatever replaces it does not involve Lennart Pottering I may consider it. I'm not tied to openrc or sysvinit or whathaver you but that dude is a detriment to the ecosystem.
                    I thought it was supposed to be going belly up ever since it came out?

                    Ironically, speaking about something else coming along, there's no reason an alternative system can't read systemds unit files, which are one of the reasons distributions (arch no longer has to add service files downstream) and users prefer it.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by cb88 View Post

                      You joined this forum in 2013 so I assume you never used old Arch... if you like new Arch that is fine, but it completely went about face in 2011-2012 and was no longer a distro I wanted to use *at all* as it did not respect my desires as a user.

                      Also you are the hateful one with the foul language you hypocrite.
                      Well I want it to be sunny all the time but I guess that's just life.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X