Help finding a Distro

[BlackStar]

your point?

That energyman has been reiterating the same moronic argument for months.

Arch's versioning scheme is working perfectly. The package manager reports the correct version; you can install any version side-by-side; you can change the name to "look ma, no hands" and it will still work fine.

This argument was stupid when energyman made it last year. It's still stupid now.

[AdrenalineJunky]

Erm, fail

andrew@Serenity:~$ pacman -Qi kernel26 | grep -i version
Version        : 2.6.30.5-1

It doesn't add the minor release version to the kernel name however

andrew@Serenity:~$ uname -r
2.6.30-ARCH

...but that's a name, nothing more.

your point?

[Mora]

arch can't even properly version their kernels.

Erm, fail

andrew@Serenity:~$ pacman -Qi kernel26 | grep -i version
Version        : 2.6.30.5-1

It doesn't add the minor release version to the kernel name however

andrew@Serenity:~$ uname -r
2.6.30-ARCH

...but that's a name, nothing more.

[deanjo]

Nope, openSuSE state of now is too gnome centric.

openSUSE at the moment is de neutral. SLED in gnome biased and as energyman says don't be surprised if KDE becomes the default desktop again soon in openSUSE.

https://features.opensuse.org/306967

• Votes: 550
• Positive: 426
• Neutral: 8
• Negative: 116

[energyman]

Nope, openSuSE state of now is too gnome centric.

might change soon. Opensuse users told novell that they are pissed off with all the gnome crap.

[energyman]

arch can't even properly version their kernels.

if you want 'easy' go opensuse. Good KDE. Pretty recent software. Easy to use.

[t.s.]

Slackware and openSuSE are the best KDE-based distros out there. Slackware is faster, bloat-free and more secure. But its package management is less intuitive compared to openSuSE and you need fair amount of experience with Linux (any UNIX-like OS) to be comfortable with Slackware. openSuSE has an excellent GUI control center for everything from package management to server administration.

Nope, openSuSE state of now is too gnome centric.

[BlackStar]

2. The defaults configs are generally well documented/commented

3. Once you set it up once, it's easy to set it up again

++

The first time might take a couple of hours and some confusion until you get how everything is set up. The next time, you'll have a complete system up and running in less than 1 hour (provided you have a good internet connection and a fast hard drive ).

The arch wiki is excellent and explains everything you might wish to know. The community is very active and supportive and you'll find PKBUILD scripts for everything you might need (and if you don't it's *trivial* to make a script yourself).

Arch: where the beer is good and the software is up to date!

[cjr2k3]

Using ARch on work and is working very nicely!!!

Sadly the new kernel don't support Catalyst (Or the other way around :P ) so keeping Ubuntu @ home and hoping for a new ATI Catalist release!

[yesterday]

Don't the let the "configuration" of Arch throw you off.

1. If you know your way around Linux, it's not particularly hard to setup

2. The defaults configs are generally well documented/commented

3. Once you set it up once, it's easy to set it up again

4. KDE will be for the most part completely packaged and setup with a vanilla install


However, the biggest problem with a rolling distro is that you always have to stay on top of it. You always have to be watching what's coming up and potential changes, since it's not necessarily advisable not to upgrade