Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst 12345 LastLast
Results 21 to 30 of 42

Thread: Arch Linux 2009.08 Benchmarks

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    OK, that just sounds funny, a DAY to install an OS for minimal gains.
    If you like bloated os, default vendor configuration, a bitch to compile source code then you are right.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    831

    Default

    I used gentoo for years because i did like the rolling releases and that i can install most stuff with one command even if itīs commercial stuff, but it takes to much time for me. Its not just the compiling, there are conflicts file collitions, managing masking and useflag lists... its ok if you want to learn much about linux but not if you dont want to invest to much time for it all the time. As example kernel updates, even with genkernel it takes to long to get it running and booting, also sometimes the compile times stinks.

    So i went to Ubuntu last years (used debian before i went to gentoo), the 6 month release-cycles are aceptable even if i use since a few months karmic But there are not too much problems.


    But i like to have a linux where i can install very new stuff without the possability to brack my main linus, so i installed arch linux yesterday in a kvm vm (is that redundant ^^) and I liked it, so I moved it to a lvm lv (again?) on my system-raid and made it bootable (directly outside a vm). Most stuff is very basic i think its because its a very young distribution? Most stuff is very basic and the installer just gathered lvm and mdadm support. But you have in less minutes a running system very less configuring a good wiki and no big edges so far.

    I think its a good second distribution, if the gentoo devs donīt change much i will not look back. Maybe someday i try out again a saboyan or funtoo (have installed it in a chroot, but with no kernel, uses git for syncing portage that makes it 2-3x faster) but if the kernel-configuring compiling will not be made fully automated (optional) and some other things change. its not worth for me.
    Last edited by blackiwid; 08-14-2009 at 04:55 PM.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Posts
    26

    Default

    I used gentoo for years because i did like the rolling releases and that i can install most stuff with one command even if itīs commercial stuff, but it takes to much time for me. Its not just the compiling, there are conflicts file collitions, managing masking and useflag lists
    I rarely had conflicts in Gentoo and I was running ~ARCH.


    Most stuff is very basic i think its because its a very young distribution?
    No, Arch is a lot older than Ubuntu. Arch was created back in 2001.


    @Phoronix
    How can you make a benchmark with different kernel versions and different filesystems?

    If you want to make a VALID benchmark, go test the boot speed, package management and so on although it's not possible anyway, because Arch is a rolling release distro, Ubuntu not.

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,791

    Default

    How is the benchmark not valid? It uses default distro settings (what most people end up using.)

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    574

    Default

    Nvidia vs AMD .... when can we see this?

  6. #26

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by FallenWizard View Post
    No, Arch is a lot older than Ubuntu. Arch was created back in 2001.
    right, arch being basic is a deliberate design decision, not because they haven't implemented more yet.

    thats the way its supposed to be.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Location
    Toronto/North Bay Canada
    Posts
    877

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by vince View Post
    If you like bloated os, default vendor configuration, a bitch to compile source code then you are right.
    then the majority of linux users like the above. I am one of them. A line in the sand must be draw between what brings us our computing desires and what gets us outside.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,791

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by L33F3R View Post
    then the majority of linux users like the above.
    Not necessarily true. They might actually hate the above, but have no real knowledge on how to prevent it. Arch is not usable by people who don't know anything about the CLI. Arch and Gentoo are for people who want full customization of their OS. If people don't know how to do that, they HAVE to live with the bloat.

    But all things considered, "bloat" isn't really the worst of the Desktop Linux user's problems right now.

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    208

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Not necessarily true. They might actually hate the above, but have no real knowledge on how to prevent it. Arch is not usable by people who don't know anything about the CLI. Arch and Gentoo are for people who want full customization of their OS.
    Yup, gentoo and arch complement each other to some degree. I run gentoo on my 4 and 8 core dev systems and arch on everything else. gentoo is easier for grabbing and checking out little dev libraries and. arch's typical packages are a bit generic.

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Under the bridge
    Posts
    2,142

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by RealNC View Post
    Not necessarily true. They might actually hate the above, but have no real knowledge on how to prevent it. Arch is not usable by people who don't know anything about the CLI. Arch and Gentoo are for people who want full customization of their OS. If people don't know how to do that, they HAVE to live with the bloat.

    But all things considered, "bloat" isn't really the worst of the Desktop Linux user's problems right now.
    Bah, I've successfully converted about 50% of my close circle of friends to Linux. All but a single one will not touch the terminal with a 10 foot pole - much less compile things from scratch!

    Truth is, I don't like compiling things either. I'd rather use a well-tested, patched and precompiled Firefox package from a trusted maintainer than spend half a day compiling my own. Distros like Gentoo and Arch make the process more bearable, but it's still sub-optimal.

    It's simple, really. What is a better way to spend your time: getting work done or compiling a package thousands have compiled before?

    Obviously, there are many legitimate reasons to compile from source, especially if you are a developer. However, this is nothing but a tremendous waste of time for the average user - unless he's doing that as a hobby!

    A quick question to Gentoo users: do you consider your Gentoo installation a hobby? I could certainly understand that: while I don't use Gentoo myself, I do use Arch and like to install & test various distros on bootable USB sticks as a hobby (time-wasting but fun!)

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •