Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

Arch for me is a perfect distro in that sense, that I know exactly, where all configuration is stored, what every file means and where to dig in case of problems.
But this is true only if I don't use major DEs, such as gnome or kde.
So I want to ask the community, what advantages and disadvantages Arch has against other distros with gnome/kde/etc (not counting rolling-release)?
TNX.
edit:
As for me, Arch's main advantage - simple configuration through text files. I guess it is the same for many Arch users. But not for all.
Why people, who prefer to use kde/gnome use Arch?
Last edited by eDio (2009-10-18 21:40:20)

I use ArchLinux with KDE4 because Arch gives me exactly what I want, no less, no more. KDE4 likes to be bloated and come with loads of useless crap, but not on Arch. Arch divides KDE into modules so I only get EXACTLY what i want. This makes my system fast, entirely customized, and yet it still looks good. Also if I want to remove KDE and install something else, it's extremely easy. Lastly, I love how standard Arch is. Packages are extremely standardized, none of this crap "flavoring"(as I like to call it) other distros employ, which cause more issues than they fix. Here everything is "standard linux". Everything conforms and makes sense, manual editing is simple. The AUR and PKGBUILD system is also absolutely fantastic, and probably my favorite part of the distro(along with tools like yaourt and the fact that most AUR packages also follow the Arch Packaging Standard)

Similar Messages

Vim in Arch slower than in other distros

Under my arch system, the vim text editor is much slower than under any distro. I wonder why this is? May it be all the colorschemes I loaded?
May it be that the arch build is too big of a bundle? (w/gvim etc.)
I just want my fav. text editor to be as fast as it is under ubunutu:/
version number for ubuntu is: 7.1.56
version number foir arch is: 7.1.228
Please, if anyone have tips to speeding up my vim, please send me some hints
Last edited by hardframed (2008-01-23 19:10:14)

Hrmm... I use vim daily (if not hourly), but I don't find it to be any slower (or faster really) than on any other distro, including ubuntu and fedora. I would almost be willing to bet though, that due to the high number of dedicated vim users among the Arch developers, that vim is about as optimized as one would expect.
Also, as for as I can tell there are no GUI components (gvim) included with the standard vim build so I'm not sure where you found that info...I could be wrong, of course.
If you have a lot of customizations in your .vimrc and/or have lots of themes, I would definitely try to remove them temporarily and see if there's an increase in performance.
PS: This thread might be more appropriate in the Workstation User category--you may not get a lot of coverage here.
Last edited by thayer (2008-01-23 15:27:21)

Arch Linux hotter than other Distros

Hello,
My Arch Install with Nvidia drivers and KDE is running hot. 60 C when idling. openSuse with Nvidia drivers and KDE runs ~40 C when idling.
I have installed laptop-mode-tools, cpufreq with ondemand and powersaver governors.
My fan is constantly running and never gets a break, even if I don't start X.
The guts of the laptop are dust-free.
Any suggestions to cool things down? Or files to compare between openSuse and Arch to figure out why it's cooler?

This may also be related to the "powermizer" issue, where powermizer reports incorrect temperatures. I would suggest doing the following, which I myself have to do:
Create the following file:
/etc/X11/xorg.conf.d/20-nvidia.conf
and place in it:
Section "Device"
Identifier "NVIDIA GeForce"
Driver "nvidia"
VendorName "NVIDIA Corporation"
Option "RegistryDwords" "PowerMizerEnable=0x1; PerfLevelSrc=0x2222; PowerMizerDefault=0x3; PowerMizerDefaultAC=0x1"
Option "NoLogo" "1"
EndSection
Last edited by manzdagratiano (2011-06-05 03:06:30)

Having to much trouble with arch. What other distros do you recomend?

I've been trying to geet arch running flawlessly on my thinkpad x61 for the last month.
But I've run in to some problems that I can't solve.
The iwlwifi-4965-ucode drivers unstable and gives me kernelpanics. Tried to roll them back but nothing happend.
I'm having problems with my xorg. It worked flawlessly under kubuntu but in arch I get some strange lines when things moving horizontaly on my screen. Like the image is splitting into 2 pieces instead of one. Have been configuring my xorg for weeks without any result.
Feels like I need some other distro.
I like the whole from scratch idea.

timetrap wrote:
I think you misunderstand what a linux distro is. There is no secret sauce that makes one distro better than the other. They all have the same ingredients. What make distros different is how they put the same ingredients together.
I am assuming you went here http://www.linux-on-laptops.com/lenovo.html and looked at this http://pi-ist-genau-3.de/?page_id=344
And I am assuming you looked at this too (regarding your wireless) http://bugs.archlinux.org/task/10984
tried the xorg.conf from "debian on lenovo x61" and its a dualscreen configuration. And I actually had a 1680x1050 samsung syncmaster standing in a closet so I plugged it in and tried to play movies @ both screens and I get the same result on both screens no matter what mediaplayer I run. So something must be wrong with my intel driver?
My xorg.conf before I tested the dualscreen xorg, witch gives me the same problem.
Using xf86-video-intel driver.
And about the wifidrivers. A bug is allways a bug no matter if it's known or not. Still a problem.
Last edited by bredin (2008-08-18 20:14:30)

What Arch does and other distros don't

You know, there's one thing I really like about Arch, which I think isn't noted all that much: this distro actually lets you do an FTP install with floppies! Really, how many other distros let you do that? Not bloody many. This may not sound like a bit issue, I know, but it's definitely a plus for those of us who don't have CD burners and don't feel like waiting 3 weeks to get a CD mailed to us.
So, to the Arch devs: thank you very, very much for giving us folk in the world of outdated hardware a way to do installs with ease and convenience!

Gullible Jones wrote:this distro actually lets you do an FTP install with floppies!
I just recently read a usenet post where someone wanted to install Linux on his old laptop, which had just a floppy drive, and couldn't boot from external cd. This is where floppy+ftp installation becomes handy. But the problem with these cases is that the old machines may not be i686.
So, floppy+ftp install is a nice feature, but I reckon it's rarely needed with a machine with i686 processor...

Can arch binaries be used for other distros

hi,
Can arch binaries be used for other linux distributions like slackware and ubuntu?

Acecero wrote:
karol wrote:
Acecero wrote:
There was a community project that started a while ago where you can create packages for other distros in Arch called unipkg.
Though I don't know if there is any activity anymore...
http://github.com/paradoq/unipkg looks quite fresh.
To me it appears there was no activity since it started 2 months ago. I understand it is a fresh project, just no recent updates.
Ooops, you're right, not much going on there.

Install gnome/kde/xfce to /usr?

Why don't we just put everything into /usr? The /opt serves no purpose since all apps are installed/removed by pacman and not untar/rm. And where should you install an app that needs both of kde and gnome?? /opt/kde+gnome?
The reasons people are against this are summarized below:
· The standard says "Large software packages must not use a direct subdirectory under the /usr hierarchy": BUT kde and gnome are not large packages (like openoffice), but many small packages, just like the rest of linux. The "GNOME" or "KDE" is just a conceptual name for end-users. Any app or user could use 1% of gnome/kde packages and keep away from the other 99%.
· Puting all files into /usr is slow: There isn't any benchmark to confirm that. And a nearly-complete gnome 2.14 installation contains only about 100-200 files in /opt/gnome/bin/, compared to more than 1000 in /usr/bin. It just can't cause any slow down on modern linux filesystems. (it's 1,100+ not 11,000+)

once upon a time, it was simpler and certainly cleaner to put things in opt as we do, and we didnt have a standard telling us what to do. Time have changed since, and it's quite a monumental and time consuming task to move all of gnome, all of kde, and all of the various programs back to /usr, something that just doesnt seem like it will reap any benefit for all the effort. That's the sole reason why things are in opt. Simple.
Sure, there's the standard -- but because there's a standard, doesnt mean we must follow it. Plenty of people get caught up in the word 'standard' and instagib-flame-kinghit-ko-up-left-right-right-down anyone who speaks against a standard irrelevant of the quality or applicability of the standard.
It's not like most distros actually observe the standard anyway. I havn't seen a single distro having httpd serve out of /srv. The standard itself is out of date and contradictory. Xorg moved from X11R6 to /usr a while back now. Besides, why seperate X into X11R6? what makes it so special that it must be seperated yet kde and gnome cannot?
And is having kde and gnome seperate actually a violation of the standard?
It's no difficult stretch of the mind to consider them "Add-on application software packages" after all, they're not required for a system to run, and nor are they installed by default, they are addons after installation.
If we now look at the /usr section of the FHS, we see that:
/usr is the second major section of the filesystem. /usr is shareable, read-only data ..... Large software packages must not use a direct subdirectory under the /usr hierarchy.
It isnt difficult to consider KDE and GNOME large software packages. Saying they aren't large because they're split, is like calling OOo small if we split it up into each of it's components, libraries and programs. If you do decide to use any particular KDE and GNOME app, there exists something known as dependencies. For kde, you'll get a minimum of 30mb from kdebase, and that's just the tarball, not the extracted size.
The desktops themselves are quite large anyway. pacman -S gnome. I havn't got a clean install on me here, but it's surely a reasonable size to install to get a functioning GNOME desktop, KDE is definitely quite big, with kdebase alone being 30mb.
If you look at the actual standard, it's pretty flexible, and it's definition of /opt's purpose is very lofty. The rationale for it, is that "The use of /opt for add-on software is a well-established practice in the UNIX community"
http://www.pathname.com/fhs/pub/fhs-2.3 … REPACKAGES
And we can take their approach here too, not only is it fine to put kde and gnome in opt as they are addon packages, but we can use their own rationale and say "that's how we've always done it"
By no means do I remotely agree with the standard, but if you can use it to argue for putting them in /usr, you can also use it to argue for putting them in /opt. Either way, it negates this standard because of the ambiguity in this area and doesnt change the sole reason why things are in /opt in arch, which I explained first.
James

No Printing in Arch 32 KDE

Hi
not having much luck with Arch lately
first Libreoffice now----
Some of KDE is kaput now in KC module
After my last upgrade which seemed to go OK
Configure Local and remote Printers
The service"Printer Configuration"does not providean interface 'KCmodule with the keyword"system-config-printer-kde/system-config-printer-kde.py" The factorydoes not supportcreating componentsof the specified type.
An error occurred in your last KDE upgrade leaving orphaned control module
You have old third party modules lying around.
I do not know what to do here, looks like KDE in Arch is breaking.
Regards
Zoroid
Last edited by zoroid (2011-11-22 11:29:42)

Has nobody else used KDE with this problem?
At first KDE was fine but some update killed printing yesterday.
Please help, is it a package thing, or what update was responsible I wonder.
Guess we have to expect package breaks in Arch the same as other
bleeding edge distros, but it seems more difficult in Arch, a learning process.
Guess I'll have to try the linux cups printing page, but that only works if
cups is intact and it may not be.
I should mention that I tried Archbang as well and put KDE as the desktop not openbox,
and exactly the same thing happened after pacman -Syu as in Arch, no printing and exactly the same errors
as described above.
So others must surely be affected by this in Arch.
Though maybe I am a solo KDE user,
in other and desktop forum there is no mention of KDE at all, only
those rather unfriendly new Gnome problems.
Regards
Zoroid
Last edited by zoroid (2011-11-23 05:02:01)

Non-Latin characters in Sylpheed's subject when in gnome/kde

So, this is curious and i'm not expecting an answer, but anyway i post it:
Sylpheed 0.9.5 [simple, not claws], works ok when opened in fluxbox or window maker; but when opened in gnome or kde, following curious behaviour shows: in the "Subject" field, when I switch over to greek keyboard layout, it doesn't show greek characters but some not identified encoding, probably iso8859-2 or so. This is mirrored everywhere where "Subject" field shows [ie in the headers on top of the message]. But then, if i type some greek characters in "Subject" field (which show weird there) and then copy-paste them in the message body (when composing a message), then they show allright as the greek characters i intended to type. In the message body everything shows as it should be, ie greek, there's no problem there or when composing a message, only the subject (and only in kde & gnome). Needless to say that this "subject" encoding behaviour also shows in message list, so most messages of mine cannot be identified via message list in sylpheed.
Every locale setting in Arch is correct, so please don't focus there. This doesn't happen in slackware 9.0 or 9.1 or in debian sid, so it's probably either a gnome/kde problem or a sylpheed problem.
I'm interested to know if there's someone else facing the same problem with sylpheed in arch [and probably with gtk+1.2 apps]. By this i don't neccessarily mean with greek but say with cyrillic or some other character set and encoding.
So, this is it. Any clues?

The funny thing is that bold font [when message unread in message list] shows OK, ie in greek, but when i click on unread message, it is assumed to have been read, so it changes over to medium [non bold] and the encoding changes as well into the one that is not greek and thus unreadable. In ~/.sylpheed/sylpheedrc the fonts are:
widget_font=
message_font=-microsoft-sylfaenarm-medium-r-normal-*-*-160-*-*-p-*-iso8859-7
normal_font=-monotype-arial-medium-r-normal-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-7
bold_font=-monotype-arial-bold-r-normal-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-7
small_font=-monotype-arial-medium-r-normal-*-12-*-*-*-*-*-iso8859-7
In /etc/gtk, for gtk1.2 apps the file refering to greek encoding [el] seems to be fine [exactly the same as in slackware 9.1].

File manager options in Arch/GNOME

Hi!
This is my first post here - I'm an Arch user for about three days now. I migrated fro mWindows XP to Ubuntu about six months ago and decided to move to a different distro because I was fed up of the shocking speed (which, admittedly, was a lot faster than XP), not being encouraged into the terminal (everything has a shiny interface) and everything constantly breaking (I think i've typed dpkg-reconfigure xserver-xorg more times than my name now). I really like what I see - it's super fast and lightweight and installing Arch, X and GNOME was super smooth (apart from a 36 hour bad-patch where I got my network cards confused ). The only major gripe I have with it is that nautilus is an absolute pita here - it's the only thing I can honestly say was better in Ubuntu. Nautilus here has no sidebar, status-bar or navigation bar and opens every folder in a new window. Whenever I'm moving around anywhere other than in home I like to use the terminal, but I do a lot of browsing in my home directory and find it's pretty essential to have a good file manager so I thought I'd post a thread and see if anyone had any reccomendations for good file managers for Arch/Gnome. What's popular, what works well and what looks good? (I need something easy on the eye, screenshots would be nice) - can anyone pass on a reccomendation?
Cheers
Pete

The only major gripe I have with it is that nautilus is an absolute pita here - it's the only thing I can honestly say was better in Ubuntu. Nautilus here has no sidebar, status-bar or navigation bar and opens every folder in a new window. Whenever I'm moving around anywhere other than in home I like to use the terminal, but I do a lot of browsing in my home directory and find it's pretty essential to have a good file manager so I thought I'd post a thread and see if anyone had any reccomendations for good file managers for Arch/Gnome.
you can configure nautilus doing that:
open nautilus->edit->preferences; select Behaviour and mark Always Open in browser windows.

Is it possible to use Arch like a source-based distro?

I installed Gentoo on a spare box recently, and rather liked the idea of a source-based distribution. It's nice to think that the natively compiled code is optimized for my processor, even though even many Gentooists admit that the practical performance gains are minimal. However, Gentoo is less KISS-oriented and less bleeding edge than Arch, and I love Arch too much to switch anyway. I was wondering if one could recompile an entire Arch system using processor-specific optimizations like Gentoo, and maybe even have some equivalent of Gentoo USE flags? I can't manually recompile every package, and then do it again every time there's an upgrade - that would be too tedious. So, is there some automated method - to essentially use Arch like a source-based distribution? Can ABS help, or maybe a community-contributed tool? And finally, for a source-based and yet Arch-like distribution, what do you guys think of CRUX? Given that their documentation and community is much smaller than ours, is it very bothersome to install and maintain a desktop system using CRUX?

Xyne wrote:
Rebuild everything from source:
bauerbill --build-all -S $(pacman -Qq)
Build all available upgrade from source, including dependencies:
bauerbill --build-all -Syu
Install new package by building from source, including dependencies:
bauerbill --build-all -S <pkgname>
Bauerbill also provides an "AutoPatch" option that enables you automatically apply patches to PKGBUILDs and install files when building from source so you only have to edit a PKGBUILD once.
*edit*
Of course, you could simply enable "BuildAll" in the configuration file and skip the flag.
@Xyne
So bauerbill will build all the deps for packages from source too [dependency resolution] and build from source packages from groups [ex. xorg, gnome, kde, xfce4, etc]?? I'm having a hell of a time with pacbuilder as it's not as functional as I had hoped, so I am thinking of using bauerbill, if it does what I need or is actually functional as pacbuilder but more functional [deps, patching, etc] then i'll use it exclusively! Thanks for any help.
Last edited by Chaniyth (2010-08-19 02:49:14)

What's the difference between gnome, kde and xfce?

What's the difference between gnome, kde and xfce? Today I heard someone said gnome and kde have more software than xfce. Is that real?
Thank you.
Last edited by thesimpsons (2009-04-02 01:50:28)

Its really a matter of taste, really. KDE is know to be configurable like hell, GNOME very easy to use, and XFCE lightweitgh.
Keep in mind that whatever desktop environment (DE) you choose, you can use any application in any DE. For example, firefox, a "GTK" application, works without problem under KDE. Or Kile, a latex front-end for KDE, works perfect under Gnome.
Personnally I prefer KDE. But I mostly prefer KDE applications like the editors (Kate/Kwrite) and file manager (dolphin).
KDE is slower to start on my EeePC (really small machine) but because it is full featured, I can cut on number of packages installed, so in the end, with the same functionality, I have more room on my disk then using XFCE!
Just try them, and choose the one you like

[SOLVED] PKGBUILD equivalents for other distros

I'd like to package some of my tools for other distros - mainly .deb and .rpm based for now. Ideally, I'd like to not have to build full packages for each distro, but instead host build scripts or equivalents of PKGBUILDs for other distros. As I am not nearly as well versed in other distros as I am with arch, I'm not sure how to find the needed information to accomplish this.
To take .deb as an example, the pacman rosetta page suggests debuild is the equivalent tool to makepkg. However, the debuild man page indicates that debuild can simply be run within the source tree to build a package. Certainly this can't be the case, unless there are distro-specific files within that source tree that debuild finds and uses. That man page does not indicate what these files are and how they are written.
I have found documentation for creating full binary packages for debian-based distros, but is there an equivalent to a PKGBUILD? I know for Gentoo, ebuilds are well documented and should be quite doable. But frankly I'm pretty sure most gentoo users wouldn't need my help with those. I'm currently primarily targeting .deb as many novice linux users that I'd like to make a couple of my tools available to seem to use ubuntoo.
I suspect I may just be missing the proper documentation and/or am not using the right search terms. Any nudges in the right direction would be appreciated.
(edit: marked 'solved' as I now have the information I needed to get started working on this - but more input can always be handy.)
Last edited by Trilby (2014-01-08 20:34:26)

I recently discovered Debian's `checkinstall` which is very close to what I was looking for. One can easily create a script that will download and install a "non-debianized" source package as a .deb that can be managed by dpkg/apt-get.
Allegedly it can also create rpm packages, but I'm not going to worry about trying that out for a while.
A simple example of a script to allow debian/*buntu users to install one of my packages can be seen here. There is an executable script called `makedeb` - guess what it does. There is also a package-specific file called DEBBUILD - guess what that's for . With just those two files, a debian user could run the script which would get the needed info from the DEBUILD to install the needed dependencies, download and build the source, install under the watch of checkinstall to a temp directory, have checkinstall build a .deb package, remove the builddeps (and optionally all deps installed during the build), and leave them with a *.deb file ready for dpkg.
This instance of makedeb was intentionally made generic so it could work for other packages, however it is also *very* simple and so will not work for all other packages. A DEBBUILD is nearly identical to a PKGBUILD, except the dependency names need to be converted to the debian deps (and there may be many more deps needed as you cannot assume our base/base-devel components are there ... and split -dev packages suck).
Making this DEBBUILD + makedeb made me wonder how hard it would be to convert our own makepkg over to work on top of apt-get/dpkg. I've installed debian (crunchbang) on one of my systems to experiment with this. I've realized there may not be much to it really. I've just completed my revision to the actual makepkg script (and makepkg.conf) to make a full featured makedeb and makedeb.conf. It is not yet tested - and once I test it I may find it is not nearly as complete as I had hoped. But the goal is to allow PKGBUILD -> DEBBUILD conversions to be quite easy (just change the deps).
I may post my full featured makedeb in "community contributions" if/when it passes a few basic tests. It will not run on arch, but it is suited for archers who need to make debs. It may eventually run on arch (there are dpkg is in the AUR, and so is checkinstall, though it is very broken ATM), but this is not a goal of mine.
Last edited by Trilby (2014-05-30 17:37:40)

Arch 64b/KDE 4.5.2- No sound after Skype installation

Hi,
I've a fully updated Arch 64b/ KDE 4.5.2 system.
Initially, sound worked fine till I installed, from repositories Skype (and needed 32b libraries).
Afterwards, every time the system boots and I log in (in KDE), I do not hear KDE's sounds and get the following error:
"Removed Sound Device:
KDE detected that one or more internal sound devices were removed.
Do you want KDE to permanently forget about these devices?
This is the list of devices KDE thinks can be removed:
Output: HD-Audio Generic, ATI HDMI (HDMI Audio Output)"
Needless to say, Skype doesn't work either, at least the speakers, although I can hear myself knocking on the Mic through the speakers. Skpe's option provide local Pulse Audio server as the sole audio device both for input and output.
My new hardware consists of a Gigabyte GA-890FXA-UD5 (ver 2.0) MoBO, with an on board Realtek ALC889 audio codec, and an HDMI complient PCIe graphic card (Radeon 5670). My speakers are connected to the rear audio ports of the MoBo (currently I don't use the HDMI audio capability).
I've searched the ALSA Wiki and added some relevant outputs-Sorry for the long input below!
Both alsa-utils and alsa-oss are installed.
Running alsamixer I initially get Pulse Audio card at 90% for Master (Only channel displayed). Selecting the sound card (F6) provides 2 options (besides the default): HDA ATI SB and HD-Audio Generic.
Selecting the HDA option I get all Realtek channels at 75-100% level with only the S/PIDF muted.
Selecting HD-Audio generic selects the graphic card and displays only S/PIDF @ zero.
Is my problem related to the fact that lspci (see below) does NOT list the 889 module, and instead I see an Intel?? module?
Please advise!
Thanks!
-------------relevant terminal outputs per ALSA Wiki-
lspci | grep Audio
00:14.2 Audio device: ATI Technologies Inc SBx00 Azalia (Intel HDA) (rev 40)
01:00.1 Audio device: ATI Technologies Inc Redwood HDMI Audio [Radeon HD 5600 Series]
$ ls -l /sys/module/snd/holders
total 0
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_hda_codec -> ../../snd_hda_codec
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_hda_codec_realtek -> ../../snd_hda_codec_realtek
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_hda_intel -> ../../snd_hda_intel
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_hwdep -> ../../snd_hwdep
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_mixer_oss -> ../../snd_mixer_oss
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_pcm -> ../../snd_pcm
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_pcm_oss -> ../../snd_pcm_oss
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_seq -> ../../snd_seq
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_seq_device -> ../../snd_seq_device
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_seq_oss -> ../../snd_seq_oss
lrwxrwxrwx 1 root root 0 Oct 18 12:12 snd_timer -> ../../snd_timer
$ cat /proc/asound/modules
0 snd_hda_intel
1 snd_hda_intel
I do NOT have a ~/.asoundrc file!
$ aplay -l
**** List of PLAYBACK Hardware Devices ****
card 0: SB [HDA ATI SB], device 0: ALC889 Analog [ALC889 Analog]
Subdevices: 1/1
Subdevice #0: subdevice #0
card 0: SB [HDA ATI SB], device 1: ALC889 Digital [ALC889 Digital]
Subdevices: 1/1
Subdevice #0: subdevice #0
card 1: Generic [HD-Audio Generic], device 3: ATI HDMI [ATI HDMI]
Subdevices: 1/1
Subdevice #0: subdevice #0
$ lsmod|grep '^snd' | column -t
snd_hda_codec_atihdmi 2739 1
snd_hda_codec_realtek 269269 1
snd_seq_dummy 1463 0
snd_seq_oss 28792 0
snd_hda_intel 22285 4
snd_seq_midi_event 5436 1 snd_seq_oss
snd_seq 50146 5 snd_seq_dummy,snd_seq_oss,snd_seq_midi_event
snd_seq_device 5297 3 snd_seq_dummy,snd_seq_oss,snd_seq
snd_hda_codec 77223 3 snd_hda_codec_atihdmi,snd_hda_codec_realtek,snd_hda_intel
snd_pcm_oss 39189 0
snd_hwdep 6110 1 snd_hda_codec
snd_mixer_oss 17106 1 snd_pcm_oss
snd_pcm 71445 3 snd_hda_intel,snd_hda_codec,snd_pcm_oss
snd_timer 19265 2 snd_seq,snd_pcm
snd 57626 19 snd_hda_codec_realtek,snd_seq_oss,snd_hda_intel,snd_seq,snd_seq_device,snd_hda_codec,snd_pcm_oss,snd_hwdep,snd_mixer_oss,snd_pcm,snd_timer
snd_page_alloc 7249 2 snd_hda_intel,snd_pcm
ls -l /dev/snd
total 0
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 0 Apr 8 14:17 controlC0
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 32 Apr 8 14:17 controlC1
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 24 Apr 8 14:17 pcmC0D0c
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 16 Apr 8 14:17 pcmC0D0p
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 25 Apr 8 14:17 pcmC0D1c
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 56 Apr 8 14:17 pcmC1D0c
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 48 Apr 8 14:17 pcmC1D0p
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 1 Apr 8 14:17 seq
crw-rw---- 1 root audio 116, 33 Apr 8 14:17 timer
$ ls -a /dev/snd/
. .. by-path controlC0 controlC1 hwC0D0 hwC1D0 pcmC0D0c pcmC0D0p pcmC0D1c pcmC0D1p pcmC0D2c pcmC1D3p seq timer
Only the default part of my alsa.conf is
# defaults
# show all name hints also for definitions without hint {} section
defaults.namehint.showall off
# show just basic name hints
defaults.namehint.basic on
# show extended name hints
defaults.namehint.extended off
defaults.ctl.card 0
defaults.pcm.card 0
defaults.pcm.device 0
defaults.pcm.subdevice -1
defaults.pcm.nonblock 1
defaults.pcm.ipc_key 5678293
defaults.pcm.ipc_gid audio
defaults.pcm.ipc_perm 0660
defaults.pcm.dmix.max_periods 0
defaults.pcm.dmix.rate 48000
defaults.pcm.dmix.format "unchanged"
defaults.pcm.dmix.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.dmix.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.dsnoop.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.dsnoop.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.front.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.front.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.rear.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.rear.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.center_lfe.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.center_lfe.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.side.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.side.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.surround40.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.surround40.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.surround41.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.surround41.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.surround50.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.surround50.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.surround51.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.surround51.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.surround71.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.surround71.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.iec958.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.iec958.device defaults.pcm.device
defaults.pcm.modem.card defaults.pcm.card
defaults.pcm.modem.device defaults.pcm.device
# truncate files via file or tee PCM
defaults.pcm.file_format "raw"
defaults.pcm.file_truncate true
defaults.rawmidi.card 0
defaults.rawmidi.device 0
defaults.rawmidi.subdevice -1
defaults.hwdep.card 0
defaults.hwdep.device 0
defaults.timer.class 2
defaults.timer.sclass 0
defaults.timer.card 0
defaults.timer.device 0
defaults.timer.subdevice 0
# PCM interface
# redirect to load-on-demand extended pcm definitions
pcm.cards cards.pcm
pcm.default cards.pcm.default
pcm.front cards.pcm.front
pcm.rear cards.pcm.rear
pcm.center_lfe cards.pcm.center_lfe
pcm.side cards.pcm.side
pcm.surround40 cards.pcm.surround40
pcm.surround41 cards.pcm.surround41
pcm.surround50 cards.pcm.surround50
pcm.surround51 cards.pcm.surround51
pcm.surround71 cards.pcm.surround71
pcm.iec958 cards.pcm.iec958
pcm.spdif iec958
pcm.hdmi cards.pcm.hdmi
pcm.dmix cards.pcm.dmix
pcm.dsnoop cards.pcm.dsnoop
pcm.modem cards.pcm.modem
pcm.phoneline cards.pcm.phoneline
Last edited by mibadt (2010-10-18 10:32:49)

I had problems before with KDE also asking me about forgetting a device. I believe what happened in my case was that when the system booted up, the order of the sound cards (card0, card1, etc; as listed in `aplay -l`) kept changing. So for example, one time it would boot up and KDE would use the mobo's sound (which i want it to), and on the next bootup, the system would think my webcam was card0, so KDE would try and use the webcam for sound output rather than the mobo.
I fixed the issue by setting the order of sound cards as done here: http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Als … sound_card
Hope this helps

[Solved] "Clean" font for other distros

as mentioned in this thread, https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=69155 and a few others, the font called "Clean" can be installed from xorg-fonts-misc... but i want this font in debian based crunchbang as well as my arch and gentoo installs. though i have the font in gentoo and arch, i cannot seem to find a font file to copy to my debian.
where can i acquire this font to take with me to my other distros?
or does it simply not exist anywhere as a regular font file?
Last edited by Digit (2011-09-30 23:34:29)

thnx whitehorn, that was the first thing i tried, and i got the same. i too have proggyclean (and several other prog* fonts), but it's not the one i'm looking for.
thnx karol. xlsfonts seems handy. still cant seem to find "Clean" though.
thnx thisoldman. i'm not looking for "one of the clean fonts". i'm looking for "the font called "Clean"", of which, there's only one i'm aware of. from what i could tell, from putting clB6x10.pfc (+.gz) in my fonts directory, it's not the one.
the specific font i'm looking for, shows up in font selection lists, simply named as "Clean". it never changes size (8pt i think), is mono-spaced, and is always pixel perfect.
i've found http://dev-sham.blogspot.com/2011/02/using.html (after searching "font called clean"), but it didnt seem to work.
... i think i'll take this to a more relevent forum... i thought it'd be a simple case of someone telling me "you can get it from /usr/share/somewherelessobvious".

Arch + gnome|kde against other distros

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for