FAQ Search Today's Posts Mark Forums Read
» Video Reviews

» Linux Archive

Linux-archive is a website aiming to archive linux email lists and to make them easily accessible for linux users/developers.


» Sponsor

» Partners

» Sponsor


 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
 
Old 09-27-2012, 08:54 PM
phani
 
Default Iinstallation program

On Fri, 28 Sep 2012 00:54:21 +0530, mike cloaked <mike.cloaked@gmail.com>
wrote:



...
So all in all this seems to me very much in the spirit of "The Arch
Way" and was not too much of a learning curve. Yes for someone
inexperienced in using linux this would take a whole lot longer.

However I believe that it was useful going through the process of
doing an install manually - and there is enough information on the
arch wiki to provide everything I needed to get the system up and
running - which is I believe what many others are likely to be doing
as well?
...



i'm very new to arch and have installed it only twice: once via the aif
script (if that's the name), and once without.


yes, the first time went a bit faster, since the install script took some
decisions for me that otherwise i would have had to research, but very
soon afterwards i had to read up on all those things anyway.


the second time around didn't take that much longer (since i was a little
familiar with arch by then), but if my first time had been without the
script, it would have taken a bit longer.


IMO that's a good thing though. as far as i understand, arch isn't meant
for complete linux newbees, or people who just want to use the distro,
without understanding hardly anything about how it works.


i've been using openSUSE earlier, and to me it appears they (oS) are
trying too much for a compromise: suitable for all types of users, geeks
as well as those without any technical inclination or understanding.


this leads to a lot of unnecessary complexity, for both types of users. i
don't believe every linux user should be forced to become a 'geek' -- but
there's plenty of distros that focus on the non-geek market already.
they're much further away from the 'bleeding edge,' but for somebody w/o
technical interest or inclination, that shouldn't matter too much.


on the other hand, arch is the first distro i experience that's pretty
darn close to current development, while delivering a very stable system
for only a little bit investment of time & energy to understand how things
work.


i don't have any vote or voice in this, but i'm perfectly happy with the
way arch is right now, with or without a rudimentary install script. for
those who just want to use their system, there's other distros, or arch
derived ones that (are supposed to) make life easier. (no idea if or how
that works.)


openSUSE would be a good choice for those who find arch too demanding,
since it allows one to run a standard (non-bleeding-edge) system without
knowing much, or, after getting used to it, add other repositories from
OBS (open build service) to spice things up.


for those who are sure they want to undertand at least the basics and take
some trouble to get more up-to-date programs & libraries, arch makes life
easier by purposely not providing all the hand-holding that others are
famous for.


--
phani.
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:23 PM
Fons Adriaensen
 
Default Iinstallation program

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:24:21PM +0100, mike cloaked wrote:

> There seems to be quite a lot of fuss about the installer - however I
> have installed arch on a laptop two days ago that was running a
> non-arch distro until then - I have to say that once I had done the
> necessary reading so that I was happy I could go through the steps
> needed the entire initial install only took me a short time.

Having done a few installs with the new system I can confirm
this, and I must say do like it and prefer it over the previous
'automatic' installer. It's much more open and you know exactly
what's happening. It may scare off some novices, but otoh if
they 'bite the bullet' they will learn a lot.

Ciao,

--
FA

A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:29 PM
Philipp Kiersch
 
Default Iinstallation program

On 09/27/2012 11:23 PM, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
Having done a few installs with the new system I can confirm this, and
I must say do like it and prefer it over the previous 'automatic'
installer. It's much more open and you know exactly what's happening.
It may scare off some novices, but otoh if they 'bite the bullet' they
will learn a lot. Ciao,


It really shouldn't scare off anyone. If you have access to the
beginner's guide (and no deficits in reading comprehension), the
installation is a no-brainer.



Philipp
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:35 PM
 
Default Iinstallation program

On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 09:23:04PM +0000, Fons Adriaensen wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 08:24:21PM +0100, mike cloaked wrote:
>
> > There seems to be quite a lot of fuss about the installer - however I
> > have installed arch on a laptop two days ago that was running a
> > non-arch distro until then - I have to say that once I had done the
> > necessary reading so that I was happy I could go through the steps
> > needed the entire initial install only took me a short time.
>
> Having done a few installs with the new system I can confirm
> this, and I must say do like it and prefer it over the previous
> 'automatic' installer. It's much more open and you know exactly
> what's happening. It may scare off some novices, but otoh if
> they 'bite the bullet' they will learn a lot.
>
> Ciao,
>
> --
> FA
>
> A world of exhaustive, reliable metadata would be an utopia.
> It's also a pipe-dream, founded on self-delusion, nerd hubris
> and hysterically inflated market opportunities. (Cory Doctorow)
>
Hi,

I also agree. The installer is made for people that are willing to take
the time and read. Also, for each device, it should only need to be
installed once, unlike the other distributions being discussed, as Arch
is a rolling release distro. Granted, most people install it on every
computer and toaster they can get their hands on if they want to, but to
have a fully working arch system for the rest of a computer's life, you
need only go through the install once. I think the choice for taking a
bit of extra time vs. taking away our complete freedom is quite an easy
one.

William Giokas (KaiSforza)
 
Old 09-27-2012, 09:44 PM
Jude DaShiell
 
Default Iinstallation program

One thing I like about the current arch install methodology is that it's
incremental. If you don't have time to finish the install in one sitting
all you need do is remember which step last completed then start up the
computer and carry on from there at some later time. Since alternatives
exist for boot loaders if one doesn't work you can go and try another and
when that works and everything else has worked before that in the install
process you're good to go. A single install program might get the
intelligence to try to install multiple boot loaders to find out which
ones will work and which won't, but I've never encountered any single
install program that did that as a routine matter yet.


---------------------------------------------------------------------------
jude <jdashiel@shellworld.net> Adobe fiend for failing to Flash
 

Thread Tools




All times are GMT. The time now is 05:58 AM.

VBulletin, Copyright ©2000 - 2014, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO ©2007, Crawlability, Inc.
Copyright 2007 - 2008, www.linux-archive.org