Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › [solved] Distro suggestions - work desktop, Arch not picking up NIC
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:

[solved] Distro suggestions - work desktop, Arch not picking up NIC - Page 2

post #11 of 48
Well, you did say you can't waste much more time on it. In my limited experience, installing and configuring Xorg with a desktop environment is the most time-consuming task. I don't know what you do with your workstation though. If it's all CLI/SSH then I can see how that wouldn't be a concern at all.
post #12 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ferrari8608 View Post

Well, you did say you can't waste much more time on it. In my limited experience, installing and configuring Xorg with a desktop environment is the most time-consuming task. I don't know what you do with your workstation though. If it's all CLI/SSH then I can see how that wouldn't be a concern at all.

I've probably touched Xorg's config files maybe once in about 3 years. I can't speak for other distros, but on Arch Xorg seems to be pretty good at managing itself these days.
post #13 of 48
Yeah ArchLinux uses the main Xorg branch and isn't very far behind being latest straight from source. They've been putting a lot of work into auto detection and multiple displays for the past couple years which leads to a very pleasant experience.
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 D0 4.2ghz HT (1.3625v) Asus R3E 2xGTX 460 (non SLi, no overclock) 6x2gb G.skill @ 6-8-6-24-1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD-VR 300GBx1, 2xWD 1tb,2x60gb Agility Some crappy combo burner... Arch x64 3xDell U2410f rev A02 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
X-Armor U9BL TT Toughpower 1200w (NTB more efficient) Mountain Mods Pinnacle 24 CYO Roccat Kone (R.I.P. A4Tech x7) 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Experience I-1 
  hide details  
Reply
    
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Core i7 920 D0 4.2ghz HT (1.3625v) Asus R3E 2xGTX 460 (non SLi, no overclock) 6x2gb G.skill @ 6-8-6-24-1T 
Hard DriveOptical DriveOSMonitor
WD-VR 300GBx1, 2xWD 1tb,2x60gb Agility Some crappy combo burner... Arch x64 3xDell U2410f rev A02 
KeyboardPowerCaseMouse
X-Armor U9BL TT Toughpower 1200w (NTB more efficient) Mountain Mods Pinnacle 24 CYO Roccat Kone (R.I.P. A4Tech x7) 
Mouse Pad
Steelpad Experience I-1 
  hide details  
Reply
post #14 of 48
Agree with both of you. Haven't needed to touch my X.org config files for ages on my Arch machines. Only time I had to was when I set up my 6*1280x1024 display setup, and that was more because it was easier for me to make a template for the first display and simply copy+paste the other 5 and adjust the coordinates where needed ( +/-1280 left -or- right starting from the center, along with the center top ). Could have done it from the GUI, but things aren't always as nice when done through the GUI. Lot of un-needed settings get added and it gets messy quick.

But for most of my systems it's as simple as installing xorg, video drivers ( if needed ), and wm or de... quick restart and off to the races.
post #15 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

Hardware support isn't an issue (it's all intel gear) and FreeBSD has a very impressive number of packages (you'd be surprised at just how good it is - its better than many Linux distros).

My bad. I thought display port and nic issues were at the heart of the problem. Do you mind explaining what Linux distro not only has but can possibly have substantially fewer packages than another?
Quote:
Originally Posted by Plan9 View Post

The reason I discounted Slackware was the same reason I always discount Slackware these days; because it's source based and because upgrades are a pain in the arse.

I do love Slackware as a distro; I genuinely do. But it's too hands on for an office PC where productivity is the first and foremost priority. If Slackware offered a decent binary repository and a way to mix that with sources like FreeBSD and Arch do, then I might have installed it ("might" being the keyword. because I'd have still tried Arch before Slack and I did manage to get Arch installed in the end)

Not to put too fine a point on it, but why do you consider Slackware to be "source based"? It is neither like Gentoo or LFS and there are many Slackware users who never issue "./config&&make&&sudo make install" , ever. Slackbuild scripts are in great abundance on repositories (and they are incredibly easy to make if you can't find one) to automate the the building of a package, which gets placed in /tmp and then installed with "installpkg". Upgrades a pita? It's as easy as 1, 2 , 3.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Slackware Upgrade.txt 

#Note this is an exerpt but is all that is required to do a complete version upgrade

1. Upgrade your glibc shared libraries. This is important, or things
might go haywire during the next part of the upgrade:

upgradepkg /root/slackware/a/glibc-solibs-*.t?z


2. Upgrade your package utilities and related tools:

upgradepkg /root/slackware/a/pkgtools-*.tgz
upgradepkg /root/slackware/a/tar-*.tgz
upgradepkg /root/slackware/a/xz-*.tgz
upgradepkg /root/slackware/a/findutils-*.txz


3. Upgrade everything else (and install new packages):

upgradepkg --install-new /root/slackware/*/*.t?z

DONE !

QED

If you prefer easier, closer to rolling release, and very solid (already has enterprise version) SolydXK is amazingly good. I keep trying to break it or uncover weaknesses and it keeps standing up. The install is also quite lean. I hate to admit it, but on SolydK, the KDE version, it uses substantially less resources than my Slackware installed KDE does though naturally it has had time to "put on some belly fat over the years" (haven't done a clean install on my main in almost 5 years). Just yesterday I checked and the default SolydK KDE desktop with one plasmoid and a fairly complex conky running averaged 2.5% CPU and 630MB ram at idle, and that's with "The Evil Few" fully enabled!. It's fast!
NewMain
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 - 3550 Asrock Z77 Extreme4 Gigabyte GTX 760  4x2GB Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate SATA 2TB x 2  Plextor PX-891SAW CM-Hyper N520 Slackware 14, Studio KUbuntu, OpenSuSe 12.3, Wi... 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
32" Vizio HDTV + DLP Logitech Wireless Corsair HX-850 Antec Sonata I 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Razer DeathAdder 2013 dual ESI Juli@ CoolGear ExtSata Enclosure w/ Optical and 3TB S... 
  hide details  
Reply
NewMain
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 - 3550 Asrock Z77 Extreme4 Gigabyte GTX 760  4x2GB Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate SATA 2TB x 2  Plextor PX-891SAW CM-Hyper N520 Slackware 14, Studio KUbuntu, OpenSuSe 12.3, Wi... 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
32" Vizio HDTV + DLP Logitech Wireless Corsair HX-850 Antec Sonata I 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Razer DeathAdder 2013 dual ESI Juli@ CoolGear ExtSata Enclosure w/ Optical and 3TB S... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #16 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

My bad. I thought display port and nic issues were at the heart of the problem.
Ahh sorry, yes I see where our wires crossed. Yes you're right that there were hardware issues at the heart of the problem, but since all the hardware is Intel, there should be decent enough drivers already. I suspect it was just systemd / whatever being crapola.
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

Do you mind explaining what Linux distro not only has but can possibly have substantially fewer packages than another?
I was talking more about the stuff in their repos. I think you're talking about in general. You're right that pretty much all FOSS will compile on pretty much all desktop distros (bar the more experimental ones perhaps), but since this is a work PC I'd rather have most of the stuff pre-compiled (and a ports repository or yauort type thing for the stuff I'd have to compile because then I don't have to waste time with dependencies and what not).

I do a massive amount of manual compiling of software for my job - so it's not an ability thing. I just can't justify spending as much time keeping my workstation up-to-date as I do the servers I manage.
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

Not to put too fine a point on it, but why do you consider Slackware to be "source based"?
Because it is. Granted I've not used it so much lately, but I used to run it as my main desktop back in the 90s and 00s, so I have some idea what Slackware is and isn't tongue.gif
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

It's as easy as 1, 2 , 3.
QED
Still more involved than FreeBSD and Arch. tongue.gif So it comes back to my point about wanting something that keeps out of my way as much as possible without being dumbed down.
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

If you prefer easier, closer to rolling release, and very solid (already has enterprise version) SolydXK is amazingly good. I keep trying to break it or uncover weaknesses and it keeps standing up. The install is also quite lean. I hate to admit it, but on SolydK, the KDE version, it uses substantially less resources than my Slackware installed KDE does though naturally it has had time to "put on some belly fat over the years" (haven't done a clean install on my main in almost 5 years). Just yesterday I checked and the default SolydK KDE desktop with one plasmoid and a fairly complex conky running averaged 2.5% CPU and 630MB ram at idle, and that's with "The Evil Few" fully enabled!. It's fast!
I might give that a try one day in the future.
I do like Slackware - a lot. More so than Arch in fact. But I have to be pragmatic about this since it's a work PC and not something I'm building for the love of Linux.

Plus part of the incentive of running Arch at work is that I'm running it on one of my personal laptops too. So I can guinea pig any breaking changes on that (and learn how to avoid / fix them) before risking updates my work.
post #17 of 48
I'm glad you got Arch Banged and de-Banged and are back up and running. It is no fun having to "change horses midstream" on a work PC. Although it has evolved away, and as I'm sure you know, Arch originally was forked from Slackware which is one reason I asked.

Regarding "source-based" either we define that differently or you don't consider a package manager that doesn't resolve dependencies for you a "real" package manager since, although Slackware does come with all the source files on the DVD (as an alternative) the installer uses nothing but .tgz and .txz packages, requiring nothing but the PkgTool suite to install it all.
NewMain
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 - 3550 Asrock Z77 Extreme4 Gigabyte GTX 760  4x2GB Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate SATA 2TB x 2  Plextor PX-891SAW CM-Hyper N520 Slackware 14, Studio KUbuntu, OpenSuSe 12.3, Wi... 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
32" Vizio HDTV + DLP Logitech Wireless Corsair HX-850 Antec Sonata I 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Razer DeathAdder 2013 dual ESI Juli@ CoolGear ExtSata Enclosure w/ Optical and 3TB S... 
  hide details  
Reply
NewMain
(16 items)
 
  
CPUMotherboardGraphicsRAM
Intel i5 - 3550 Asrock Z77 Extreme4 Gigabyte GTX 760  4x2GB Corsair Vengeance 
Hard DriveOptical DriveCoolingOS
Seagate SATA 2TB x 2  Plextor PX-891SAW CM-Hyper N520 Slackware 14, Studio KUbuntu, OpenSuSe 12.3, Wi... 
MonitorKeyboardPowerCase
32" Vizio HDTV + DLP Logitech Wireless Corsair HX-850 Antec Sonata I 
MouseMouse PadAudioOther
Razer DeathAdder 2013 dual ESI Juli@ CoolGear ExtSata Enclosure w/ Optical and 3TB S... 
  hide details  
Reply
post #18 of 48
Quote:
Originally Posted by enorbet2 View Post

Arch originally was forked from Slackware which is one reason I asked.

Arch seems to disagree with you...

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/FAQ#Q.29_What_distribution_is_Arch_based_on.3F
Quote:
Q) What distribution is Arch based on?
A) Arch is independently developed, was built from scratch and is not based on any other GNU/Linux distribution. Before creating Arch, Judd Vinet admired and used CRUX, a great, minimalist distribution created by Per Lidén. Originally inspired by ideas in common with CRUX, Arch was built from scratch, and pacman was then coded in C.
post #19 of 48
Thread Starter 
To be honest, dependency management is the must have feature of a package manager in my opinion. But everyone has their own preferences when it comes to Linux smile.gif
post #20 of 48
Thread Starter 
Quote:
Originally Posted by Shrak View Post

Arch seems to disagree with you...

https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/FAQ#Q.29_What_distribution_is_Arch_based_on.3F

There is a Slackware fork which features Arch's pacman; I wonder if that was what enorbet2 was thinking of?
New Posts  All Forums:Forum Nav:
  Return Home
  Back to Forum: Linux, Unix
Overclock.net › Forums › Software, Programming and Coding › Operating Systems › Linux, Unix › [solved] Distro suggestions - work desktop, Arch not picking up NIC