Linux - DistributionsThis forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on...
Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
I'm about to get an i7 laptop into gear. Maybe I could emerge KDE - but why ?.
Been a while since I looked at gentoo - I need to compile a lot of test kernels, and Arch does me just fine. Just downloaded the _64 CD in fact; have an install to do.
My old clunky AMD 2500+ (Barton) took about 6 hours to compile kde-base... which is all you need to "start" using kde (yeah you can likely do it on a package by package basis and decrease that time even more but I couldn't be bothered )
However I quickly removed it as it kept causing crashes and stuff.
I've never used arch so my vote would be for Gentoo, the community and the documentation rocks!.
Arch really lacks focus on security and overall reliability.
Here's what Allan McRae, one of the main Arch developers, is saying about Arch:
Quote:
I think I know every distribution using pacman as a package manager and (unless there is an enterprise level distro I am missing) if peoples lives depend on one of these distros, then I am sorry to say it but in my opinion they are stupid and deserve to die.
As far as I know - they are both bretty much the same. The biggest difference - in Gentoo you need to compile everything while Arch has binary packages in repos and installation goes very fast. I also heard that Arch has better /etc/rc.conf. Plus Arch is more bleeding edge which mean less stability and newer software. Arch is my choice.
I've used both for quite a while. There is no "better" only that which is right for you. I prefer Gentoo now for maximum control but Arch has some convenience and has the same level of control potentially (ABS - you can compile everything yourself should you prefer) and as commonly used a level of control which is very near Gentoo.
Compiling isn't that bad (perhaps with the exception of the initial setup). Remember that with the proper settings you can easily compile programs in the background while still working. I browse through Firefox while updating Gentoo all the time and usually don't notice any lag and I'm on a P4 Prescott system with 2 GB Ram.
Quote:
Originally Posted by mikropolip
Arch really lacks focus on security and overall reliability.
Here's what Allan McRae, one of the main Arch developers, is saying about Arch:
I'm not sure how fair it is to share this without putting it in context within the message like this. Besides most developers keep that sort of attitude in that they attempt to under-promise when it comes to security. If a developer said "Yes, our distribution is the most secure ever and users can stake their lives on this fact." then they could be ethically and perhaps legally responsible when tragic things occur which prove the claim to be false.
Besides 90% of the responsibility for security or lack thereof when running a distro lies between the chair and the keyboard. This is even more true when it comes to a distro such as Arch Linux or Gentoo because you tend to be more in control.
I'd choose Gentoo over Arch for one simple reason. Arch lacks package signing. Even if Arch were better than Gentoo in every other aspect, that one fact would keep me away from it.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.