What is the BSD equivalent of Arch Linux

Cthulhux said:
I have set up a new Gentoo machine last week, and while they also have an option for precompiled packages now, much of it still isn’t.
Click to expand...
yeah i really like that it's quite conservative compared to Arch, i'm pretty sure the precompiled ones they ship is because the originals would take forever to compile on average hardware
 
ruby R53 said:
i'm pretty sure the precompiled ones they ship is because the originals would take forever to compile on average hardware
Click to expand...

They provide binary packages for everything nowadays, unless you change any flag (which you usually do). But for those who are into bad software, the precompiled LibreOffice surely helps, I guess.
 
I imagine you both know this but you can edit /etc/portage/make.conf and put in a thing prefer binary. If you do, run getuto first, as that will get the keys for said packages. As for Arch and Gentoo, a friend who used to really like Arch and now likes Gentoo, has said in passing that Arch doesn't seem to be checking their packages (probably the AUR stuff) as well as Gentoo does. He didn't go into detail and I didn't ask.
Looking at the Arch installation guide at https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Installation_guide, I get the impression that they still expect one to install it manually. Though looking at https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Archinstall it seems archinstall might be right there. I might try it on a VM and see what happens.
 
scottro said:
I've not used the Arch installer. I feel like I should try it though the manual install takes me less than 10-15 minutes, probably what an Ubuntu GUI install takes.
As for Gentoo, that takes me about 20 some minutes, using binary packages.
Click to expand...
I also came into the state where i can speed run Arch install without any manual in just a few minutes. Im not proud.
scottro said:
May as well spam my guides here
Click to expand...
In your Arch manual you are missing instructions on how to install Grub on systems running legacy BIOS.
 
scottro said:
I imagine you both know this but you can edit /etc/portage/make.conf and put in a thing prefer binary. If you do, run getuto first, as that will get the keys for said packages. As for Arch and Gentoo, a friend who used to really like Arch and now likes Gentoo, has said in passing that Arch doesn't seem to be checking their packages (probably the AUR stuff) as well as Gentoo does. He didn't go into detail and I didn't ask.
Click to expand...
yeah that really does seem to be the case, the AUR equivalent of Gentoo is the Guru repository which you can easily add to your repository list, unlike arch's AUR where you have to update it separately or install a helper to manage what you installed from there
that makes the system a lot more consistent in my opinion
 
Well, I just tried archinstaller, and I prefer manual. Mostly because with the installer, I found it difficult to select extra packages I wanted, it took a long time to navigate up and down, so in the end, I gave up, just did a pretty minimal install and used pacman to get what I wanted, such as vi. I guess for someone new to arch the archinstall would be easier but like MrBSD it's gotten easier to manually install Arch, for me, anyway. Also MrBSD, yeah in the Arch quick guide of mine, it does say in the first paragraph that it's for a UEFI boot. I should make it plainer that it covers a specific type of install, thanks for noticing. It should be fixed shortly.
 
yeah it was far easier for me to install Arch with the installer than manually, i found it a lot more straightforward too
 
Nothing against Arch Linux, but I am not a fan of their "community" or systemd. Both issues are resolved for me by using Artix Linux instead (most of my systems are FreeBSD anyhow) - much friendlier and more helpful community and a choice of sane init systems.
 
When I was still using Linux, I considered using a non-SystemD version, but since the standard is now SystemD, I figured I would run into incompatibilities with apps and such, since it is a non-mainstream version.

But now I use FreeBSD, so it is not a problem.
 
I don't know of their current community, but for awhile, at least it seemed to consist of fans bordering on the "too much", and a bit nasty, especially if someone thought someone was overly complex. There was a guy who would nastily close threads for reasons that I, at least, thought unreasonable. No idea if it's still like that. The wiki, as I think many of us will agree, is excellent.
 
scottro said:
I don't know of their current community, but for awhile, at least it seemed to consist of fans bordering on the "too much", and a bit nasty, especially if someone thought someone was overly complex. There was a guy who would nastily close threads for reasons that I, at least, thought unreasonable. No idea if it's still like that. The wiki, as I think many of us will agree, is excellent.
Click to expand...
Im going to sound elitist (i hate this word), and im going to be hated for saying this but, i absolutely support ruthless behavior on Arch forums. Especially toward absolute beginners. Such people have no business using Arch in a first place, let alone asking questions. If you chose DIY distro, but then start a thread asking how to start desktop, you should be instantly banned. These people clearly lack any desire to learn something. They just want to get from point A to point B as quickly as possible, and with zero effort. They are lazy, and they justify their laziness by saying they have no time, or they are too old to read. Instead of installing Ubuntu and move along with their day, they stare at the blinking cursor on their monitor while hitting refresh on their phone hoping that someone has replied to their thread. I have no problem helping someone that clearly put an effort into problem solving and exhausted all options. But if you are lazy, you are going to get rtfm`ed hard.

Please dont kill me.
 
Im going to sound elitist (i hate this word), and im going to be hated for saying this but, i absolutely support ruthless behavior on Arch forums. Especially toward absolute beginners. Such people have no business using Arch in a first place, let alone asking questions. If you chose DIY distro, but then start a thread asking how to start desktop, you should be instantly banned. These people clearly lack any desire to learn something. They just want to get from point A to point B as quickly as possible, and with zero effort. They are lazy, and they justify their laziness by saying they have no time, or they are too old to read. Instead of installing Ubuntu and move along with their day, they stare at the blinking cursor on their monitor while hitting refresh on their phone hoping that someone has replied to their thread. I have no problem helping someone that clearly put an effort into problem solving and exhausted all options. But if you are lazy, you are going to get rtfm`ed hard.

Please dont kill me.
Click to expand...

Interesting, this is exactly the way I feel about any of the BSDs. I feel they should be strictly for server use. They shouldn't even offer any graphical packages in their repositories. However, as much as I hate that OpenBSD has those annoying X sets I have to deselect every time we do upgrades, at least they won't back down from their principles in favor of bringing in new users. Can't really say that about any of the other BSDs.
 
MrBSD: this is exactly the attitude I mean. However, you get that from tools on many Linux forums that know much less than they think. 90% attitude, 10% knowledge. I rather prefer the friendly and supportive forums of FreeBSD or Artix.

@Igrant: the Artix project bears the pain of addressing any compatibility issues, the user can stay blissfully ignorant about this. The only real incompatibility I have found so far is that Artix no longer supports the GNOME desktop - good riddance, in my opinion.
 
MrBSD, I doubt anyone will kill you for that. :) I think we all dislike help vampires (probably a link to a post on are you a help vampire on the Arch Forums.) I mean the attitude (again, I haven't frequented those forums in a long time), of, for example, closing a thread with little or no explanation, where the poster's sin was ignorance, not laziness. It made me feel that the forum was basically angsty teens. On the opposite side, I've seen posts where users (probably a mod) Trilby, was very helpful to someone inexperienced, so like many groups. there were (and are) many good and bad ones, again, my opinion.


My guess is you are thinking of the type of post like, Hi, I want to set up postfix. Please guide me step by step. I would also give such users short shrift, though I might give a gentler explanation of why one should do more of the work themselves then ask when they get stuck.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top