3 ms·

A little on the side: Is it possible nowadays to install an Archlinux that out of the box can do about as much as a fresh installed Ubuntu (Gnome, Firefox, a Te

by erikb 11y ago

A little on the side: Is it possible nowadays to install an Archlinux that out of the box can do about as much as a fresh installed Ubuntu (Gnome, Firefox, a Terminal, Git, mostly)? I've always wanted to try it. But since I'm working full time I don't get around to start an installation with manual FS setup and networking, both topics which I mostly know a few little basics about. Altogether Arch looks much nicer, and I agree that you should have as much control of your system as possible. But I think the approach should be that you can choose to learn only little chunks here and there until you have most of the ideas in your head and fingers, then setup everything as you desire. That's why I'm still stuck on Ubuntu.

nextos 11y ago
I think it took me less than 2 hours to do a full install reading the wiki 5 years ago. Now, with systemd doing mostly everything it's a lot simpler. I think it can be scripted in 10 lines of code. I use Arch because I'm quite lazy and I find it straightforward. It doesn't hide anything and there's little magic. It's all about getting your components well chosen. Arch might work well with Gnome, but I think it really shines using a minimal setup with no desktop environment.
- erikb 11y ago
  I bet you can script it. But for that first you need to know enough about it. That's where the trouble comes in getting started. E.g., a colleague suggested me to put "noatime" into my fstab. Now you might say that's about 5 seconds. But if you don't know what it is and you take responsibility for your system, then what you first do is read about it. So I spent about 10 hours reading and discussing about noatime and then decided not to put it into my fstab because I learned that the default is already "relatime" which is a little slower but much more compatible with some tools. Instead of 10 seconds I've spent 10 hours and in the end didn't change my config at all. That's what I would expect when I get started scripting the setup myself. If I don't do it then using a sensible, community decided default would be better than doing something without investigating. Would you agree?
  - BFay 11y ago
    I know what you mean - I installed arch a month or two ago, and the hardest thing for me was setting up the boot partition (I wanted to dual-boot the laptop with windows). My familiarity with grub and the UEFI boot-process was really limited. The beginner's guide and the rest of the Arch wiki are extremely useful, and I was able to get everything set up, but it did take several hours. Then, a couple of weeks later, my system broke with a kernel update. I hadn't properly set up my fstab to point /boot to the correct partition, so I had a separate /boot directory in the same partition as my root system... stupid on my part. It was a bit of a pain to fix, because I couldn't boot into the system. I ended up using the USB installer that I had setup Arch with. Now things seem to be running fine again (except that recently "suspend" and "hibernate" randomly disappeared from the shutdown options in my Cinnamon DE... weird). But yeah, Arch forces you to learn the things that you can just overlook on something like Ubuntu. I takes time, but at least you learn how to fix them when they break. I've shot myself in the foot a few times, but it's been with a BB gun instead of a shotgun.
raffomania 11y ago
Have a look at Antergos [0], it might just be exactly what you need :) [0] http://antergos.com/ http://antergos.com/
adrusi 11y ago
The arch beginners' guide on the wiki will walk you through the installation process even if you don't know what you're doing. Still not as easy as Ubuntu, but should be feasible.
nly 11y ago
Try Manjaro, it's Arch based, batteries included, lightweight and pretty. Has an installer I recommend the XFCE flavour as, imho, KDE Plasma 5 isn't ready. https://manjaro.github.io/ https://manjaro.github.io/
- erikb 11y ago
  Oh I heard of that one a few times before. I think I'll give it a shot. Thanks!

by erikb 11y ago

nextos 11y ago

I think it took me less than 2 hours to do a full install reading the wiki 5 years ago. Now, with systemd doing mostly everything it's a lot simpler. I think it can be scripted in 10 lines of code. I use Arch because I'm quite lazy and I find it straightforward. It doesn't hide anything and there's little magic. It's all about getting your components well chosen. Arch might work well with Gnome, but I think it really shines using a minimal setup with no desktop environment.

erikb 11y ago
I bet you can script it. But for that first you need to know enough about it. That's where the trouble comes in getting started. E.g., a colleague suggested me to put "noatime" into my fstab. Now you might say that's about 5 seconds. But if you don't know what it is and you take responsibility for your system, then what you first do is read about it. So I spent about 10 hours reading and discussing about noatime and then decided not to put it into my fstab because I learned that the default is already "relatime" which is a little slower but much more compatible with some tools. Instead of 10 seconds I've spent 10 hours and in the end didn't change my config at all. That's what I would expect when I get started scripting the setup myself. If I don't do it then using a sensible, community decided default would be better than doing something without investigating. Would you agree?
- BFay 11y ago
  I know what you mean - I installed arch a month or two ago, and the hardest thing for me was setting up the boot partition (I wanted to dual-boot the laptop with windows). My familiarity with grub and the UEFI boot-process was really limited. The beginner's guide and the rest of the Arch wiki are extremely useful, and I was able to get everything set up, but it did take several hours. Then, a couple of weeks later, my system broke with a kernel update. I hadn't properly set up my fstab to point /boot to the correct partition, so I had a separate /boot directory in the same partition as my root system... stupid on my part. It was a bit of a pain to fix, because I couldn't boot into the system. I ended up using the USB installer that I had setup Arch with. Now things seem to be running fine again (except that recently "suspend" and "hibernate" randomly disappeared from the shutdown options in my Cinnamon DE... weird). But yeah, Arch forces you to learn the things that you can just overlook on something like Ubuntu. I takes time, but at least you learn how to fix them when they break. I've shot myself in the foot a few times, but it's been with a BB gun instead of a shotgun.

raffomania 11y ago

Have a look at Antergos [0], it might just be exactly what you need :) [0] http://antergos.com/ http://antergos.com/

adrusi 11y ago

The arch beginners' guide on the wiki will walk you through the installation process even if you don't know what you're doing. Still not as easy as Ubuntu, but should be feasible.

nly 11y ago

Try Manjaro, it's Arch based, batteries included, lightweight and pretty. Has an installer I recommend the XFCE flavour as, imho, KDE Plasma 5 isn't ready. https://manjaro.github.io/ https://manjaro.github.io/

erikb 11y ago
Oh I heard of that one a few times before. I think I'll give it a shot. Thanks!