Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Archinstall 2.3 Released For Easily Installing Arch Linux

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

  • #21
    Originally posted by andre30correia View Post

    I doubt it will use the same arch repo, it will become something like manjaro with packages out of date
    Depends. Chrome OS uses Gentoo as a base, but it follows updates under the hood (i.e. belonging to the Gentoo base rather than Chrome OS's GUI) quite well.

    Comment


    • #22
      Originally posted by kiffmet View Post
      Seems like Arch is for normies now. I am using Gentoo GNU/Linux, btw.
      Chrome OS uses Gentoo as a base, so in a sense Gentoo is also for normies now. Better switch to LFS, which will never become normy territory!!!

      Comment


      • #23
        Originally posted by andre30correia View Post

        I doubt it will use the same arch repo, it will become something like manjaro with packages out of date
        steamOS is immutable system. That means, it's closer to fedora silverblue than to arch. I just can't imagine how immutable system works out with archlinux traditional package.

        Also, flatpak is clearly mentioned in the live stream. It's interesting to see how they are going to handle desktop side of things.

        But users are free to install their OS right? I wonder how practical it is... I mean, putting traditional deskop into handheld device definitely will make worse experience than the default OS tailored for the device.
        mirmirmir
        Phoronix Member
        Last edited by mirmirmir; 25 November 2021, 03:38 PM. Reason: more text after 'how pratical it is...'

        Comment


        • #24
          Decided to try it out on a laptop the other day, and there the wi-fi connection has been changed to a more sophisticated IWD. They simplify one thing and complicate another.

          Comment


          • #25
            Arch needs to support secure boot like Fedora/Ubuntu/openSUSE does with the signed shim, disabling secure boot can be problematic and unwanted, I don't get why they don't support it.

            Comment


            • #26
              Originally posted by alex19EP View Post

              if GUI installer could be implemented as a plugin to archinstall IMO that would be nice and welcome thing.
              EndeavourOS is a nice GUI install of Arch with a btrfs subvol partition layout possible

              Comment


              • #27
                Originally posted by Vistaus View Post

                Chrome OS uses Gentoo as a base, so in a sense Gentoo is also for normies now. Better switch to LFS, which will never become normy territory!!!
                I don't know, should we count buildroot? (?)

                Originally posted by lumks View Post

                The plan was to have the graphical installer webbased. Archinstall just spawns a webserver where you can connect from another device, or via custom archiso on a local browser. This was already working prior official release via "archinstall_gui", but was dropped to focus on archinstall first. If this still is a planned thing is something I don't know. A hardcoded installer GUI as we have on Ubuntu is no option, I'm with you on that.
                Let me know if I got it straight. The idea of doing it web based is to enable the tool to be used for headless boxes too, right? That sounds damned cool.

                Comment


                • #28
                  Originally posted by itoffshore View Post

                  EndeavourOS is a nice GUI install of Arch with a btrfs subvol partition layout possible
                  btrfs subvolumes are possible using archinstall

                  Comment


                  • #29
                    Originally posted by rabcor View Post
                    Tbh i don't really see much of a point to this project, the arch installation is already very easy to do and you need to be capable of doing everything it takes to install arch normally to be able to use arch (e.g. follow simple instructions on a wiki), if you can't, you're probably gonna break your installation and not know how to fix it at some point (not that that can't happen even when you can tho).
                    Some people don't want to repeat their installation from scratch. It's not difficult but it is time-consuming. This also is not just an installer but a library, so you can use it to script your installation or ever provide a configuration file for an unattended installation. There are many benefits to having archinstall available and it's an optional tool you don't need to use.

                    Comment


                    • #30
                      Originally posted by hax0r View Post
                      Arch needs to support secure boot like Fedora/Ubuntu/openSUSE does with the signed shim, disabling secure boot can be problematic and unwanted, I don't get why they don't support it.
                      Did you open an issue on the GitHub project requesting this? It might be possible to add in the next release, 2.4.0.

                      Comment

                      Working...
                      X