New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

Distro Roundup! - Page 2

post #11 of 108
The AUR is a double-edged sword. It can often contain things that would not be found in most distributions' repos, but the likelihood of the install failing is much higher than a properly maintained and audited package. It is much like Ubuntu's PPA model, but with the advantage of not needing to add an extra repository every time you want to install one strange piece of software or a theme that would otherwise need to be built from source. Debian has no equivalent to this official unofficial packaging model; there are no PPAs and there is no AUR. Of course most software developers will provide a .deb package on their site if it's not in a repo, but I don't really consider this comparable to the other two.

Also, you can't compare Debian's 30k packages to Arch's smaller repos since Debian splits production, debugging and development packages while Arch doesn't.

As for building from source, APT is only able to do this for source that is in a repo. Also, unless the tarball has Debian build rules included (among a potential ton of other files), you won't be able to build a package from it. I don't know about you but I don't trust all developers to include uninstall instructions in their Makefiles PKGBUILDs make it far simpler to build packages that are handled by pacman. For most people this is a minor advantage though and in most cases it won't be a problem.

Any other "advantages" I can give are purely anecdotal. I've never had much luck with Debian Testing personally; it seems to break quite a bit just from upgrades. This is even more true for customised distros like LMDE where new package versions try to overwrite customised configurations. Do I want to replace the file? Maybe, maybe not. Often I have to look up what it is for before deciding if the changes are necessary or not. I've never had a minor version update alter configurations in Arch, because it just doesn't try to automate much. I know that others here have issues with Arch breaking after updates, but I've found it to be the most stable rolling release that I've worked with (although Testing isn't really rolling since it freezes before going to Stable).

Are the advantages of Arch overblown all the time? Sure they are. Linux users are philosophers, don't tell us that our philosophy is wrong when it's really yours that is wrong.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #12 of 108
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer View Post
The AUR is a double-edged sword. It can often contain things that would not be found in most distributions' repos, but the likelihood of the install failing is much higher than a properly maintained and audited package. It is much like Ubuntu's PPA model, but with the advantage of not needing to add an extra repository every time you want to install one strange piece of software or a theme that would otherwise need to be built from source. Debian has no equivalent to this official unofficial packaging model; there are no PPAs and there is no AUR. Of course most software developers will provide a .deb package on their site if it's not in a repo, but I don't really consider this comparable to the other two.

Also, you can't compare Debian's 30k packages to Arch's smaller repos since Debian splits production, debugging and development packages while Arch doesn't.
I have yet to find anything in AUR that i use, that is not already found in Ubuntu's repo's.

With ubuntu's PPA's, if you add them, then they are refreshed and tracked by apt-get, where in pacman only the package that is built from the AUR is tracked.

Granted debian does not offer a ppa type system, but there are plenty of third party repo's that are made by debian users, that function in much the same manner as ubuntu's PPA's, and if you are really daring, you can use ubuntu's PPA's in debian.

even if you remove the "dev/dbg" packages, how many remain? as noted before about aur, i have yet to find anything that i wouldn't expect to find in debians/ubuntu's repo's already.

Quote:
As for building from source, APT is only able to do this for source that is in a repo. Also, unless the tarball has Debian build rules included (among a potential ton of other files), you won't be able to build a package from it. I don't know about you but I don't trust all developers to include uninstall instructions in their Makefiles PKGBUILDs make it far simpler to build packages that are handled by pacman. For most people this is a minor advantage though and in most cases it won't be a problem.
it would also stand to reason if the package/source isn't in the aur, then you would not be able to build it either? so I fail to see the point how if the source isn't in the source repo, aur is better?

APT handles everything you need, from the control file, to the postinstall and postremove scripts, as the source repo's, contain everything that builds the packages. It will build a package, that gets tracked by apt-get, so if you ever need to remove the package, viola, it removes it. unless it has changed since the last time I used it?

It would be the same if you built a bash script (similar to that of the PKGBUILD), and set it up to put the package together and install after it was done. About the biggest difference there, those types of bashscripts aren't readily available in a ubuntu/debian setting, as there is no need for them. I make them, cause I want optimized programs, or remove worthless features I don't use, or add features that aren't included in a generic build. So on one hand, you have a community that supports the use of building from source, using pre-made generic build files, and one that prefers pre-built generic binaries.


Quote:
Any other "advantages" I can give are purely anecdotal. I've never had much luck with Debian Testing personally; it seems to break quite a bit just from upgrades. This is even more true for customised distros like LMDE where new package versions try to overwrite customised configurations. Do I want to replace the file? Maybe, maybe not. Often I have to look up what it is for before deciding if the changes are necessary or not. I've never had a minor version update alter configurations in Arch, because it just doesn't try to automate much. I know that others here have issues with Arch breaking after updates, but I've found it to be the most stable rolling release that I've worked with (although Testing isn't really rolling since it freezes before going to Stable).

Are the advantages of Arch overblown all the time? Sure they are. Linux users are philosophers, don't tell us that our philosophy is wrong when it's really yours that is wrong.
The only problem I had with debian testing, was the fact that every few days, they would roll over xorg from sid, that would force me to reinstall the nvidia proprietary drivers that I installed from Nvidia's site, I however did not have this problem if I used the package that was available for the nvidia drivers, as it was updated when xorg got updated.

If it prompts you for overwriting a configuration file, that it has detected is altered, then it is best to tell it no...unless you know it is okay...I honestly don't know why you even brought that point up, as it does give you the option to overwrite or not, it just doesn't go thru and overwrite it and then leave you with a nice little suprise when you reboot. I have yet have a ubuntu or a debian install get totally trashed from a dist-upgrade, a lot of times when they do happen, it is cause people click yes to overwrite this, or have done something, that the new release simply doesn't understand, and i use a lot of custom boot scripts and i tinker a lot with the boot process of ubuntu, I was able to maintain a ubuntu install from 8.04, to 10.10 or 10.04 i believe (its been awhile, i do remember putting up a satire post here about it, when I finally decided to get rid of it, and start fresh.)
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #13 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
I have yet to find anything in AUR that i use, that is not already found in Ubuntu's repo's.
I'm sure there are some. Ubuntu's repos are pretty good though, I wish Fedora had a few more small things that I like to install which aren't there (or even in RPMFusion repos). The AUR is most useful for small and obscure things or custom builds or certain software. For the most part it serves the same purpose as PPAs.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
With ubuntu's PPA's, if you add them, then they are refreshed and tracked by apt-get, where in pacman only the package that is built from the AUR is tracked.
I'm not sure what you mean here. pacman doesn't track AUR-built packages, only packages from actual repos (official or not), although AUR wrappers like yaourt can do this. It's probably the main downside other than lack of QA with the AUR even if it can be worked around. Unless by "track" you just mean that it is added to the package DB and can be removed easily. It certainly can't be updated automatically when a new version of the PKGBUILD is available without an AUR wrapper.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
Granted debian does not offer a ppa type system, but there are plenty of third party repo's that are made by debian users, that function in much the same manner as ubuntu's PPA's, and if you are really daring, you can use ubuntu's PPA's in debian.
Well I did say that there is no official unofficial 3rd party package model. Those repos might exist but they aren't endorsed in any way. I don't believe they are nearly as common either.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
it would also stand to reason if the package/source isn't in the aur, then you would not be able to build it either? so I fail to see the point how if the source isn't in the source repo, aur is better?
Only because it is easier to write a PKGBUILD script than learn correct Debian packaging. Neither is ideal; if someone else can do the work, good

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
APT handles everything you need, from the control file, to the postinstall and postremove scripts, as the source repo's, contain everything that builds the packages. It will build a package, that gets tracked by apt-get, so if you ever need to remove the package, viola, it removes it. unless it has changed since the last time I used it?
APT only does what it is told to do. The source repos contain properly configured source tarballs with Debian build rules included. Unless I'm mistaken (I often am) you generally can't just run dpkg-buildpackage on an upstream tarball. I think the only packages that you can build from vanilla source are kernel tarballs using make-kpkg (which is brilliant).

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
I honestly don't know why you even brought that point up
Come to think of it neither do I. I don't normally allow the files to be overwritten (I've ended up with an ugly GDM theme from doing it once). NVIDIA drivers have caused me some hassles though. Just installing the packages kills everything when I next reboot. I've had more luck with NVIDIA's own custom install scripts actually. I've also never had the problem on Arch except when I forget to blacklist Nouveau (maybe I forgot to do that on Debian haha). I normally use Nouveau + Mesa/Gallium3D now anyway, but I don't think Testing has that yet and building it from Git isn't fun.

Something just doesn't seem right about Debian Testing when I use it. Stable is pretty nice though, especially with preconfigured distros like #! making my life easier. Then it's just some ntfs-3g/polkit/udev tweaks (I like mounting as a standard user) and we're off!

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
I have yet have a ubuntu or a debian install get totally trashed from a dist-upgrade, a lot of times when they do happen, it is cause people click yes to overwrite this, or have done something, that the new release simply doesn't understand, and i use a lot of custom boot scripts and i tinker a lot with the boot process of ubuntu, I was able to maintain a ubuntu install from 8.04, to 10.10 or 10.04 i believe (its been awhile, i do remember putting up a satire post here about it, when I finally decided to get rid of it, and start fresh.)
Ubuntu is pretty hard to trash. 10.04 is a very solid distro and probably my favourite Ubuntu version along with 10.10 which cleaned up a few things (but isn't supported for much longer unfortunately).

Anyway, I don't really consider any established distro superior to another. They all just do things differently. That's why I only keep one installed for a few weeks and then change. I get bored and want to try something else
Edited by randomizer - 11/3/11 at 9:19pm
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 108
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer View Post
<snip>


I'm not sure what you mean here. pacman doesn't track AUR-built packages, only packages from actual repos (official or not), although AUR wrappers like yaourt can do this. It's probably the main downside other than lack of QA with the AUR even if it can be worked around. Unless by "track" you just mean that it is added to the package DB and can be removed easily. It certainly can't be updated automatically when a new version of the PKGBUILD is available without an AUR wrapper.

<snip>

Anyway, I don't really consider any established distro superior to another. They all just do things differently. That's why I only keep one installed for a few weeks and then change. I get bored and want to try something else
what i meant about PPA's being refreshed and tracked, is this.

i find PPA for xyz program, which is an obscure little program that is not in the repo's. I add the PPA to my sources.list, I run:

sudo apt-get update

my package database gets updated, with including what is in the xyz PPA. Now the PPA maintainer, comes along and decides to update his xyz package, with xyz 1, next time i run:

sudo apt-get update

and a full system update, it will update xyz for me, i don't have to rely on a third party tool, like yaourt, to do this, so i'm not syncing and update from 2 different package database's in essences, and if xyz ever got added to the repo's instead of PPA, apt-get will then suggest updating from the Repo instead of the PPA, if the one in the Repo is of a newer version.

AFAIK, pacman is unable to track that sort of change from a package built from the AUR.

and honestly, i didn't mean to turn this into a "lets bash arch's head in, and make debian/ubuntu better" type thread, i just wanted to try to lay out the difference i saw in the two distro's, and offer up why some regard arch as being better in some fashion, when most of what it does, can be achieved in a distro such as debian or ubuntu.
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #15 of 108
Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
AFAIK, pacman is unable to track that sort of change from a package built from the AUR.
Yes, that's correct, because the AUR holds scripts and not packages. It's not a true repository. It's most certainly a disadvantage. However much of the stuff I use the AUR for doesn't really need an update often, and if I do want to update it I can do so fairly easily anyway. Obviously a true repo is better in this regard, but having to "maintain" a single script vs a whole package is simpler.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Transhour View Post
most of what it does, can be achieved in a distro such as debian or ubuntu.
I think this is true of any distro. The difference is in the means.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 108
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by randomizer View Post
Yes, that's correct, because the AUR holds scripts and not packages. It's not a true repository. It's most certainly a disadvantage. However much of the stuff I use the AUR for doesn't really need an update often, and if I do want to update it I can do so fairly easily anyway. Obviously a true repo is better in this regard, but having to "maintain" a single script vs a whole package is simpler.



I think this is true of any distro. The difference is in the means.
well the one problem i've had with AUR stuff, this was in my previous use of arch. was where i used a pulse-audio version of VLC instead of the one thats in the repo's (can't blame a guy for like pulse ).

when a certian VLC dependency got updated, I was unable to update my install thru pacman, cause it was complaining about this vlc dependency...so i had to uninstall the pulse-vlc package, to do a system update, and then had to edit the pkgbuild when I went to reinstall it. Now, i could've easily uploaded the changes required that I made to the pkgbuild, but I wanted to see how "fluid" the community was in this regard. it took well over a week (almost 2) before anyone updated the pkgbuild.

Now i don't know how often that happens, as it could have been very well a unique problem or the expected thing to do , but it really did put me off from the whole concept of the AUR.

The other thing that bothers me about the AUR, when you search it, it pulls up all sorts of potential matches, with very non-informational descriptions as to what some of it actually is, or it will have "depracated" or "out of date" attatched to it...
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #17 of 108
Like I said, the AUR has no QA/auditing process to it. PKGBUILDS get updated when they get updated... or they don't. Anyone can get their pet project into the AUR as there's no barrier to entry, but there's no guarantee that it will work. I've had the occasional broken script that didn't pull in the right dependencies, but for most things it's fine.

Anyway, I don't want to throw your thread off topic any more than I already have so I might just drop the subject there
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
i7 920 D0 MSI X58 Pro-E GTX 560 Ti 448 3x2GB G.Skill DDR3-1333 9-9-9-24 
Hard DriveHard DriveOptical DriveOS
840 Pro Caviar Black LG BD-ROM Windows 8.1 Pro x64 
MonitorMonitorKeyboardPower
Dell U2713HM Dell U2311H Turbo-Trak (Google it :D) Corsair HX-520 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
CM690 Mionix Avior 7000 Everglide Titan AKG K 242 HD 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 108
One last comment on Arch - due to the non-GUI install, it DOES force the user to learn more to get a working install. And no, you can't just "follow the wiki" and get to the end. It does require some assimilation of information, as nothing will go 100% according to plan, and you'll have to adapt at some point during the install. Much like Slack, Gentoo, or even FreeBSD I guess.

Anyway, what's the next distro?
Little Beast
(12 items)
 
Black 'n' blue II
(15 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4710MQ Nvidia Geforce GTX860M 2GB 16GB Kingston DDR3 1600MHz 240Gb Silicon Power S55/S60 SSD 
Hard DriveOSOSMonitor
1Tb Toshiba HDD 5400rpm Windows 8.1 Linux Mint 18 17.3" LED 1920x1080 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
PCSpecialist Optimus V ST17-860 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK Creative HS800 Fatal1ty 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 860 @ 1.25V MSI P55-GD65 Xpertvision Radeon HD4850 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
150Gb Velociraptor & 1Tb WD Caviar Black Opticon Lightscribe DVD-RW DL Noctua NH-U12P SE2 Vista Home Premium x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Hyundai BlueH H224W 22" LCD Saitek Eclipse II Thermaltake Purepower RX 550 Galaxy III 
Mouse
Patuoxun optical gaming mouse 3200dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
Little Beast
(12 items)
 
Black 'n' blue II
(15 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4710MQ Nvidia Geforce GTX860M 2GB 16GB Kingston DDR3 1600MHz 240Gb Silicon Power S55/S60 SSD 
Hard DriveOSOSMonitor
1Tb Toshiba HDD 5400rpm Windows 8.1 Linux Mint 18 17.3" LED 1920x1080 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
PCSpecialist Optimus V ST17-860 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK Creative HS800 Fatal1ty 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 860 @ 1.25V MSI P55-GD65 Xpertvision Radeon HD4850 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
150Gb Velociraptor & 1Tb WD Caviar Black Opticon Lightscribe DVD-RW DL Noctua NH-U12P SE2 Vista Home Premium x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Hyundai BlueH H224W 22" LCD Saitek Eclipse II Thermaltake Purepower RX 550 Galaxy III 
Mouse
Patuoxun optical gaming mouse 3200dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
post #19 of 108
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by chemicalfan View Post
One last comment on Arch - due to the non-GUI install, it DOES force the user to learn more to get a working install. And no, you can't just "follow the wiki" and get to the end. It does require some assimilation of information, as nothing will go 100% according to plan, and you'll have to adapt at some point during the install. Much like Slack, Gentoo, or even FreeBSD I guess.

Anyway, what's the next distro?
i'm thinking Sabayon, i've heard some conflicting information about this distro.

i've loaded it once or twice in vbox, but its package manager was extremely slow and often crashed on me, i hope it works better installed vs being in a virtual environment.

i want to try out "non-mainstream" distro's, to see what these distro's are doing. I do plan on giving gentoo another go (grr)
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
Bazinga Punk
(12 items)
 
ooh shiny!
(6 items)
 
 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Xeon 3440 AsRock P55 extreme Evga 8800 GT 512 MB Gskill Ripjaws 
Hard DriveCoolingOSMonitor
Western Digital Blue Antec Khuler 620 Ubuntu 11.10 Asus vw264H 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
GIGABYTE KM7600 CORSAIR TX 650 Cooler Master 590 GIGABYTE GM-M6800 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel Core I5 6500 Gigabyte z170xp-SLI Nvidia 970gtx Corsair 16gb ddr4 2666mhz  
Hard DriveOS
250gb Samsung Evo 850 Windows 10 & Ubuntu 15.10 
  hide details  
Reply
post #20 of 108
Ugh, Sabayon. I can't see why anyone uses it, it's got all the disadvantages of other distros, but none of the pros. It's seriously bloated, and the package manager is slow because it's a source-based distro (so, everything is compiled from source). It's a lazy man's Gentoo in a way, but it loses all the advantages through bloat. I guess it's the equivalent of Ubuntu or Fedora in that it's "easy" (no terminal use necessary), and the packages are cutting-edge. But there's no reason to use it as it's so much poorer than the others.

I think you should do Debian Testing or Linux Mint Xfce, especially as they are practically the same (as I understand it now?)
Little Beast
(12 items)
 
Black 'n' blue II
(15 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4710MQ Nvidia Geforce GTX860M 2GB 16GB Kingston DDR3 1600MHz 240Gb Silicon Power S55/S60 SSD 
Hard DriveOSOSMonitor
1Tb Toshiba HDD 5400rpm Windows 8.1 Linux Mint 18 17.3" LED 1920x1080 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
PCSpecialist Optimus V ST17-860 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK Creative HS800 Fatal1ty 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 860 @ 1.25V MSI P55-GD65 Xpertvision Radeon HD4850 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
150Gb Velociraptor & 1Tb WD Caviar Black Opticon Lightscribe DVD-RW DL Noctua NH-U12P SE2 Vista Home Premium x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Hyundai BlueH H224W 22" LCD Saitek Eclipse II Thermaltake Purepower RX 550 Galaxy III 
Mouse
Patuoxun optical gaming mouse 3200dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
Little Beast
(12 items)
 
Black 'n' blue II
(15 items)
 
 
CPUGraphicsRAMHard Drive
Intel Core i7-4710MQ Nvidia Geforce GTX860M 2GB 16GB Kingston DDR3 1600MHz 240Gb Silicon Power S55/S60 SSD 
Hard DriveOSOSMonitor
1Tb Toshiba HDD 5400rpm Windows 8.1 Linux Mint 18 17.3" LED 1920x1080 
CaseMouseMouse PadAudio
PCSpecialist Optimus V ST17-860 Logitech MX518 Steelseries QcK Creative HS800 Fatal1ty 
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 860 @ 1.25V MSI P55-GD65 Xpertvision Radeon HD4850 4GB G.Skill Ripjaw 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
150Gb Velociraptor & 1Tb WD Caviar Black Opticon Lightscribe DVD-RW DL Noctua NH-U12P SE2 Vista Home Premium x64 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
Hyundai BlueH H224W 22" LCD Saitek Eclipse II Thermaltake Purepower RX 550 Galaxy III 
Mouse
Patuoxun optical gaming mouse 3200dpi 
  hide details  
Reply
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux, Unix