A Weekend With Arch
Follow us on Twitter
Subscribe to our RSS
A Weekend With Arch
by Kristin Shoemaker - Jan. 11, 2009Comments (14)
Related Blog PostsOn ARM Servers and Portable PCs, Linux Is Growing as a Pre-Loaded OptionThe Electronic Frontier Foundation Has Numerous Issues with Ubuntu 12.10's Dash SearchLinux Mint Makes Money with Minty MerchandiseValve's Steam to Enter Linux Gaming Beta, and Other Players Entering the FrayA New Era of Operating System Competition Dawns
Within a few months of beginning with Linux, it became obvious that I was one of those who have severe difficulties settling on a distribution. This situation presents some unique challenges, but generally, I've found there are more benefits than drawbacks. While I may have favorites, or be more familiar with some distributions than others, they all offer a little something different. A few months ago, I wrote about Gentoo. It's been one of my favorites, as it's a learning experience and exceedingly stable when it's been successfully configured. A few commenters suggested Arch Linux as an alternative. This weekend, I finally got a chance to take Arch for a spin. A basic installation isn't a huge time investment, and while it isn't quite as "under the hood" as Gentoo is, it's a clear canvas for those needing specific tasks and control on their system. By nature, Arch Linux is barebones. It is optimized for i686 and x86-64 architecture chips, and official and community repositories offer the full range of applications you'd expect from any of the "larger" distributions. Of course, the idea behind Arch is that you choose the included applications, development and desktop environments, daemons and services. Arch does a very respectable job making this simple. I opted for a network install of an i686 image via flash drive on my AMD Athlon X2 desktop. I chose this method for a few reasons: Arch recommends network installs to save time updating after the fact, 64-bit operating systems aren't without quirks (nor is booting some 32-bits on 64-bit systems), and a flash drive was handy. Downloading the network install image and getting it on to my USB drive was straightforward, and the initial boot was uneventful (save the not unexpected need for adding 'noapic' to the kernel line in GRUB). Indeed, the common installation guide and efficient approach to the installer made it seem, in many ways, less confusing (if not quite as visually appealing) than some graphical installers. Somewhere in the process, I made a mistake, though. Let me be clear on this: I am one hundred percent sure I made the mistake. It wasn't catastrophic, it was merely annoying. I'm still puzzled exactly where I went wrong, but I have a good guess. It may be that a few configuration files need modification prior to Arch's first boot. This can vary from system to system, depending on hardware and desired use. Most configuration files that Arch throws out here need minimal editing, and are listed to make specific edits simpler and to verify particulars. For whatever reason (likely clumsy keyboard work), my /etc/fstab had duplicate hard disk information, which ended up causing GRUB some confusion (made all too obvious when the splash screen kernel image boot command was punctuated with line breaks). That's the beauty in a system such as Arch, however. Because I had partitioned my drives, and explicitly told GRUB to install on the MBR, the odd appearance of the kernel boot parameters gave me a tip off where things were amiss, and I knew quite well where root was located. Editing from the splash screen had me back in business shortly. Arch boots into a terminal, and that's where the fun begins. Generally adding users and any necessary processes or services that will be required to run applications is suggested at this point. Arch Linux uses Pacman for its package management system. I told Arch to use the Pacman repository I used during install for any updates, but like other package managers, repositories can be changed or added as required. First on the agenda for me was to get a desktop environment on the system. I refreshed and updated Pacman, then issued the command: pacman -S gnome Pacman modestly states it does some basic dependency resolving and handling tasks. It likely has a lot to do with the command line nature and the attention it draws to certain messages, but sometimes basic really is best. Any suggested or questionable issues were explained thoroughly with pertinent information to getting the packages in question to behave as desired. For instance, I was prompted to add fuse to my modules in /etc/rc.conf should I want it to load on boot, otherwise I would need to load it as needed manually with modprobe. In the same vein, Arch doesn't by default use abstraction layers to manage and administer software added to the system. This makes things generally easier for your system to interact with different levels of applications (and ideally keeps extraneous processes out of the picture). It is something to be aware of, however. Where my keyboard would function perfectly with the terminal, changing my runlevel, rebooting, and starting the display manager would give me a log in screen, a blinking cursor, and a completely immobile mouse and keyboard. This was due to the HAL (Hardware Abstraction Layer) daemon not being called when my graphical interface was looking for the hardware needed to interact with it. While it may seem foreign at first to not automatically start such processes, the idea is to have a system that behaves in exactly the manner you'd expect. As more components interact, knowing exactly what's running, why, and how these pieces have behaved previously keeps the system running faster, and with more stability. It's hard to explain what Arch Linux, when it's up and running, really is. The idea, of course, is that it's what you make it. After installing the GNOME meta-package, and a few extras, I had a "core" system -- with a GNOME desktop. It's up to me to take it where I need it go next, and it pledges to keep a step back, and not try to be something I don't need it to be. It's not something that will appeal to everyone, and that's fine (and as it should be). Arch's power is ironically both in its quick and dirty optimized core system and its completely blank slate approach to making it what you want it to be. Arch isn't for those completely new to Linux -- nor does it claim to be. There is a definite appeal, though, for those interested in a customized system without the "heavier" extras found on some Linuxes -- and who haven't quite the time needed to get other "bare" distributions working to their liking. Those needing a no frills distribution for quirky hardware, or looking to streamline tasks from systems administration and development to advanced desktop computing might find that Arch is exactly what they've had in mind.
open source linux distribution gentoo Arch ArchLinux custom
Previous: Google Chrome Pre-Be...Next: Canonical and Micros... Browse Blog
Mark Walker uses OStatic to support Open Source, ask and answer questions and stay informed. What about you?
by an anonymous user on Jan. 12, 2009I'm a longtime gentoo user.
I bought a netbook and put archlinux on it because I didn't want to have to deal with compilation on a non dev machine.
It has its quirks, but I definitely like Arch very much.
The configuration is clear, simple and direct, less over engineered than gentoo's has become. The community seems pretty active at this point too.
I definitely suggest arch as an alternative to gentoo or debian.
by Dudemullet on Jan. 12, 2009to any reader out there afraid of some processes nots tarting automatically or whatnot and afraid to give this a go, the installation guide in the wiki is amazing! explains everything just over the top so you know what to put where, and it even divides sections as to what you would prefer, gnome or kde, ati or nvidia. Seriously arch excels with its community.
by amnesiacandres on Jan. 12, 2009I also had the chance to install Arch to an old PC in my house (P4, 256 RAM). I had a very similar problem with GRUB, very easy to fix, but I was also unaware of when I made such change that made it not possible to start for a few moments.
Besides that everything was a complete bliss :), it was like bringing the computer back to life, the pc had having trouble running xubuntu which is "light" and now multi-tasking is THE hip :) haha
I would point also that Arch is a great distro to learn more about linux conf files and how they are usually ignored by other distros (or partially edited in other not-so-geeky manners) and I recommend it to all mid-level linux users that want to learn more in a very practic way.
by Sharon on Jan. 13, 2009I recently came across your blog and have been reading along. I thought I would leave my first comment. I don't know what to say except that I have enjoyed reading. Nice blog. I will keep visiting this blog very often.
by mandog on Jan. 13, 2009Arch is a superb distro it gives a base to build on its not biased to 1 desktop you choose it does run kmod4 very well at the other extreme LXDE has blazing speed. Most problems can be solved in the Wiki or forums just read first before posting the forums don't like answering the same Questions over and over.
by talishte on Jan. 13, 2009I a nice and documented Distro I try to install using the net install with wireless card but the driver for th ipw2200 not work fine, i will try again in a near future.
by Heema on Jan. 14, 2009check out the chakra distro if you want a easy to install arch distro
its from the people that makes kdemod
by Dusty Phillips on Jan. 14, 2009I spend a lot of time trying to define, understand, and promote the underlying principles behind Arch Linux. I know how hard it is to capture it in words and I wanted to compliment you on capturing the true essence of Arch Linux in such an accurate (IMHO) review.
by an anonymous user on Jan. 14, 2009Great review. Does Arch still have rolling updates? That would be another reason to give it a try.
by an anonymous user on Jan. 16, 2009@anonymous:
yes. that's an essential element of arch.
by jcci on Jan. 19, 2009Arch also finished my searh for the perfect distro.
If the Chakra live CD should really make the installation easier for beginners there would be no reason not to start with Arch. Pacman is quite convenient and you may use Shaman for graphical abstraction.
The author didn't mention the great AUR community offering tons of software easily accessible by "Yaourt" (pacman with some extras).
Whoever misses compilation from Gentoo may use ABS. You can install any Arch package by compiling from the source.
Stability, community and wiki is second to none!
by knuthy on Jan. 25, 2009Hello,
It's the same case here, after long time going from distrib to an other, I finaly stayed on ArchLinux since the Dontpanic, it's a really nice distro.
Even if some users say "for advanced users only", I disagree with them, as it's really simple to use (for those who like terminal based configuration) , the number of avaible packages is awesome, and as @jcci said, AUR is here for those who'd like to download the source and compile them. The community is a really active one.
You all should give it a try.
by Dave Crouse on Feb. 04, 2009Nice review. As Dusty said, you captured it pretty well. :)
I've been using Arch on all my home Desktops, in a Business enviroment, and for my web servers. I don't want to have to use anything else.
by lutfi on Feb. 12, 2009Last weekend i installed arch. In fact i first decided to install gentoo but after digging forums and reading some articles i decided to install Arch.
I'am a regular linux user (even i have dual-boot laptop with XP i only use XP at work not at home because of windows depended products) i tried openSuse, Fedora, *Ubuntu, PCLOS, Sabayon, Mandriva and if you want me to rank this distros, be sure Arch is No.1.
First, i (and i'm sure even a beginner also can) easily installed it and during installation i learned so much thing about my system. It is as easy as installing openSuse if you follow the documentation.
Second, it is the fastest linux system that i've used.
Third, i can solve any problem i face during day-to-day usage of my system, everything is organized very simple (conf files, etc.).
Last but not least pacman is the best, easiest package manager (since i did not need ABS i can not say anything about it now).
Just try it, you won't regret
Share Your Comments
If you are a member, Sign in to have your comment attributed to you. If you are not yet a member, Join OStatic and help the Open Source community by sharing your thoughts, answering user questions and providing reviews and alternatives for projects.
Email Address (kept hidden)
Your Comment *
Promote Open Source Knowledge by sharing your thoughts, listing Alternatives and Answering Questions!
Explore Software in this Blog Post
archlinux has 0 reviews2 users
custom has 0 reviews2 users
arch has 0 reviews1 user
Your cloud solution managed 24/7
Expert cloud management & monitoring services starting at $9/mo.
Explore the plans
Featured MembersViewShailesh PatelI am Shailesh Patel, who has 4+ years of experienc...
ViewMark WalkerLinux and FOSS practitioner; always trying new apps.
Preferred Linux distribution: Fedora
Get answers and share your expertise.
Have a question? Ask the community
Seriously, OSTatic! This is plain annoying!
By McKinsey - Oct 17, 2012
Installing Linux from Live CD
By Dineshrawar - Apr 09, 2012
Scheduling backups to the cloud server
By Alvin Pieterson - Sep 16, 2011
Happening Now on OStatic
Fozzly Bar commented on LibreOffice Pushes Back, Releases 3.6.3
anonymous commented on Is LibreOffice Exaggerating User Data?
Sum Yung Gai commented on LibreOffice Pushes Back, Releases 3.6.3
Terms of Service
Powered by Vox Holdings
© 2011 OStatic. Design by smallTransport. Built on fine Open Source Software from projects like
Sign in to OStatic
Not a member? Join NowI forgot my password
A Weekend With Arch