OK kids, so after 2 days of swearing and re-installing, i've finally got Arch installed on a Vertex 2E as my main OS.
I would have used dd and just imaged my Fedora 12 image across but thats 32 bit and i want to go to 64 bit so i figure why not go Arch on recommendation of tntcoder and Rainmaker
My thoughts are as below:
1. The GUI - very confusing, the guides to installing gnome as a gui are less than intuitive (arch wiki). I had to look around a few sites to find out that i had to uncomment an extra line to load gdm and not command line to log in etc.
2. "pacman" - naturally, coming from Red Hat going to a new package manager was going to be a challenge. I'm getting to grips with it, but i have to say at first look it appears great. However, when you dig into the functionality, i find it lacking in a few aspects, such as "yum search..." / "apt find" alternative. Its also not great at tracing dependency hell.
3. Hellanzb/Lottanzb - Its a massive pain installing anything python based, as i found primarily with Hellanzb, sabanzbd, etc. I *still* cannot get it working now, after much F'ing and blinding.
It feels very responsive and a great little OS, but installing the things i actually use has left a bit of a sour taste so far. If i can find a way to install hella/lottanzb and conky, then i'll be happy. Other than i just need to get Skype which looks straight forward in the wiki.
For me, it needs a better package support base, a search function (there may be one, i just havent found it *yet*) on packages, and this is more Linux than Arch, but SORT OUT PYTHON !! Im sick to death of "you have python2 and you need python" why the frelling hell isnt it backwards compatible. Grr..
Overall, so far, Arch gets a 6/10 for me. With Fedora getting a better 8/10 due to package management.
SMN
I would have used dd and just imaged my Fedora 12 image across but thats 32 bit and i want to go to 64 bit so i figure why not go Arch on recommendation of tntcoder and Rainmaker
My thoughts are as below:
1. The GUI - very confusing, the guides to installing gnome as a gui are less than intuitive (arch wiki). I had to look around a few sites to find out that i had to uncomment an extra line to load gdm and not command line to log in etc.
2. "pacman" - naturally, coming from Red Hat going to a new package manager was going to be a challenge. I'm getting to grips with it, but i have to say at first look it appears great. However, when you dig into the functionality, i find it lacking in a few aspects, such as "yum search..." / "apt find" alternative. Its also not great at tracing dependency hell.
3. Hellanzb/Lottanzb - Its a massive pain installing anything python based, as i found primarily with Hellanzb, sabanzbd, etc. I *still* cannot get it working now, after much F'ing and blinding.
It feels very responsive and a great little OS, but installing the things i actually use has left a bit of a sour taste so far. If i can find a way to install hella/lottanzb and conky, then i'll be happy. Other than i just need to get Skype which looks straight forward in the wiki.
For me, it needs a better package support base, a search function (there may be one, i just havent found it *yet*) on packages, and this is more Linux than Arch, but SORT OUT PYTHON !! Im sick to death of "you have python2 and you need python" why the frelling hell isnt it backwards compatible. Grr..
Overall, so far, Arch gets a 6/10 for me. With Fedora getting a better 8/10 due to package management.
SMN
