Is arch the distro for me?

Hiya all, just want to thank you in advance for your time and advice:D
anyway, my plans are to buy the linux version of the MSI Wind when it is released in a few months.
(http://www.msimobile.com/DetailPage.asp … d_NB_Linux)
I have used SUSE (the distro it ships with) and did not like it too much.
arch was recommended to me by a friend, so I started looking into the option.
basically I need an easy to install distro that will work well enough on the wind to browse the internet, chat on IRC, play quake3, and maybe play starcraft under wine?
does this sound like arch? I've used a little linux, sabayon, ubuntu, suse, but basically I can explain my skill level by saying I was never able to successfully install gentoo (for the life of me I cannot find my way around a text-based install)
also, another bump in the road is that the wind does not have an optical drive, so no cds or dvds for me.
I saw the usb .img install and grabbed it, but as I am in windows vista right now, none of the meathods for writing the .img file seem to work right.
the closes I have gotten was by following this: http://webconverger.org/usb/
but it doesn't seem to want to write to my usb stick for some reason.
I type in the commands but it dosen't seem to do anything.
screenshot here:http://i11.photobucket.com/albums/a157/g35x/arch.jpg
I suppose it would be easier to buy a usb optical drive, as I'm sure I will get tired of having to copy everything to a usb stick to get it onto the wind.
basically I need to know if arch can do the things I've mentioned, will be easy to install, and most importantly will work on the MSI wind. I was unsure about being able to play quake3 and use wine for starcraft because of video drivers, will arch work with the intel onboard video well enough?
again, thank you for your time, I look forward to using arch come time to buy my laptop:D
Last edited by murderbymodem (2008-07-24 21:09:53)

ghostHack wrote:
Looking at the MSI website the Wind uses an Intel graphics chip so you will probably need the 'intel' X.org driver (package xf86-video-intel). For hardware/driver related things it might be a good idea to boot into the Suse distro when you get the computer and find out what drivers etc are being used, that way you will know exactly what you need to install when you put Arch on it.
Also, if you want to post the other areas of the Wiki guide that you have problems with we may be able to help (and improve the Wiki if needed)
sounds like a good idea :]
guess I'll be back here in a few months once the linux version is released (I'm tempted to buy the windows XP version right now, but $100 more for 512mb more ram and bluetooth isn't exactly worth it. looks like I'll be waiting:/)
thanks for all the help guys!
Last edited by murderbymodem (2008-07-24 22:33:29)

Similar Messages

Semi-automatic update/upgrade; is Arch wrong distro for these boxen?

I wanted to post here a semi-automatic update/upgrade solution I--with a lot of help from someone more knowledgeable--came up with in case it might be of benefit to anyone else. It's been working pretty well for me over the course of the last couple of weeks and should aid me in becoming a better Archer. I also want to ask in this thread for confirmation on whether installing Arch on a couple of machines I have that see fairly intermittent use is inadvisable: if so, I'll look into installing some other distro. First the semi-automatic update solution.
To begin with, what do I mean by "semi-automatic?" Mainly I mean something that's only partially automatic. See, I've come to understand that automating updates/upgrades is a bad idea©™. And I think I understand why. Still, I apparently lack the discipline to be a good Archer, upgrading/updating frequently so as to conform with the philosophy. So I thought I should use my computer to help me be more disciplined: that's partly what they're for, after all, isn't it?
I decided I might make the computer help me be more disciplined, first of all, by making it issue reminders at frequent, regular intervals, that it is time to update/upgrade. Of course cron came immediatelty to mind as part of the solution, though I ended up using the remind program instead. In any case, it seemed like a solution that, not only would remind me at regular, frequent intervals would be desireable, but one that would at the same time initiate the process, would be even better. I thought it must be possible to, for example, cause a terminal to open with a message and corresponding menu that would say something like "System update/upgrade needed: proceed now? 1. Yes 2. No"
This latter would be one of the elements that makes the solution semi-automatic (as opposed to automatic). Answering 2. in that terminal would cause the terminal to simply exit. Answering 1., on the other hand, runs the command sudo pacman -Syu. There is a further level of semi-automation at this stage: you are then prompted to enter the root password before pacman -Syu will run. So, no updating/upgrading happens without input at these two stages.
I should mention as I wrap up this description of my solution that there is yet another important element to it that, while independent of it, is nonetheless related: I subscribed some weeks ago to the Arch news RSS feed. I check that daily, so an even further level of semi-automation is in play here.
This seems to me like it will be a very good solution to bringing my behavior into better conformity with the Arch philosophy. It's worked well so far. That said, I'm certainly open to criticisms. I'm also very open to any improvements that might be suggested. Without further ado, here is the script I run every other day from the remind daemon:
#!/bin/bash
PS3='Begin full system upgrade? '
options=("Yes" "No")
select opt in "${options[@]}"
do
case $opt in
"Yes")
echo "Beginning full system upgrade..."
sudo pacman -Syu
exit
"No")
exit
echo "Please choose the corresponding number"
esac
done
Now, to my question about my other machines as possible Arch install targets. The above applies to the desktop machine in my apt. which is almost always powered on and connected to the 'net: what follows applies to two different machines.
One is a laptop that I use primarily when I travel. It often sits powered off for 1-2 months between uses. The other is an alternate desktop machine in my apt. that is also infrequently used: essentially, when both the wife and I want to work on-line separately--which is not all that frequently (she prefers knitting to computing during her time at home)--it gets fired up. Again, it often sits for 1-2 months without being used.
Now, it seems to me these machines are poor targets for an Arch install because they are far more frequently off-line than on-line, powered down than powered up. Thus they are very unlikely to be updated/upgraded on any kind of regular basis, and certainly never regularly and frequently, as seems to be recommended for Arch machines.
Am I correct in assuming I should be looking for some other distro to install on these infrequently-used machines?
Thanks,
James
Last edited by jamtat (2013-02-11 22:50:09)

I like pacmatic (as suggested at https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Pa … _pacmatic). What is supposed to be wrong with it?
It doesn't ignore updates, by the way. It does two things. First, it checks the news and tells you about important news items as soon as you run e.g. pacmatic -Syu. Then it runs the upgrade in the normal way. For example, a news item today concerned lvm2, dev-mapper and linux being upgraded together. It gave me the news item. Then it did the usual paman upgrade routine and upgraded everything, including those packages. Second, every time you run it, it reminds you of any *.pacnew files you haven't dealt with and asks if you want to deal with them now. At least, it asks about most. It never mentions kdmrc.pacnew for some reason.
It's just a wrapper for pacman. From the script:
Pacmatic is a pacman wrapper that takes care of menial but critial tasks.
These include
Checking the archlinux.org news
Summarizing the arch-general mailing list
Reminding if it has been a while since the last sync
Reporting pacnew files
Editing pacnew files
Personally, I've installed an alternative distro on machines which I'm not sure I will be using very regularly. (Also, I like having distinct distros just in case something goes wrong in one case - even if it is a bit of a faff sometimes.)
Last edited by cfr (2013-02-13 01:49:24)

Arch based distro for mame cabinet

hi all folk,
I'm a retro gaming aficionado!!
I made a cabinet on my own and installed mame and some other emulators on.
the system is a win xp "modded" to boot directly to the frontend instead of explorer.
but I would like to have an open source system.
I think that archlinux could be the right distro to build a mame machine.
anyone of you would to joinor help with this project?

I found this in arch wiki:
Arch Linux uses AIF aka 'Arch Linux Installation Framework' to perform installations.
This tool - written in bash - consists of some libraries to perform various functions (installing packages, setting up disks etc) and some so called procedures which use these libraries to provide an easy means to do an installation or to smaller related tasks ('partial procedures'). These procedures are shipped by default:
interactive: An interactive installation procedure, which asks you some questions, guides you through an installation and helps you configuring the target system by automatically changing some settings for you depending on what you did earlier (eg network settings)
The installed system will initially have only a customisable set of "base" packages installed with whatever utilities and drivers you need to get online.
Then once you've successfully booted the installed system, you'll run a full system upgrade and install any other packages you want. (aliased as /arch/setup)
automatic: An automated, deploy-tool-alike procedure designed for low-to zero interactivity.
uses profiles for configuration of the target system.
See /usr/share/aif/examples/ for example profile files. The examples implement quite generic scenarios but you're free to change them how you like to install extra packages, do configuration tweaks, etc.
base: basic, little-interactivity installation with some common defaults.
This procedure is used by the others to inherit from, it is NOT meant to be used directly by end users
partial-configure-network: exposes the network configuration step from the interactive procedure, to help you setup the network in the live environment
partial-disks: Process disk subsystem or do a rollback
partial-keymap: change your keymap/console font settings. (aliased as km)
The benefit of procedures such as partial-keymap and partial-configure-network over direct usage of tools such as loadkeys or ifconfig is that when running the interactive procedure, you will get asked if you want to apply your settings to the config files of the target system.
If you want to go further, you can also:
write your own procedures from scratch or by overriding certain parts of other procedures
write your own libraries, to provide new, reusable functionality
create your own configs for the procedures that support them (eg automatic)
For more information, consult the readme of AIF.
is there any how to for this?
anyone has experienced this kind of tool

Arch ended search for distro, what ends the WM search?

Dusty wrote:I'm getting tired of WMI and am renewing my search for the perfect window manager once again. Every day I pray I will discover a window manager that will end this search in the same way that Arch ended my seach for the perfect Linux distribution.
http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?p=95872
The quote of Dusty is not something new but quite many users, I believe, do same shifting/searching for the perfect WM. This thread is NOT about comparing WMs and DEs but what do we want a WM to do? Can we use the same things what made Arch perfect also for a WM? Does it have to be a WM or can it instead be a PM (program manager)? What's an ideal whatever it would be?
EDIT
Let's try not to mention any WM/DE names. Here we want to discuss ideas not what a particular WM does.

rasat wrote:
iphitus wrote:
rasat: I think a search for a 'perfect' wm is futile.
Everyone has their own perception of what a 'perfect'
wm is. If we were to include everyone's idea of a perfect wm into one, it would be huge, which would conflict with some people's liking of lighter WMs.
Why do we think a perfect WM includes everyone's liking and preferences? That's not the Arch Way!
A perfect WM is a base what doesn't include everyone's liking but allows everyone to setup and configure how they want. That's why Arch Linux is perfect for many users.
no, but to have one that will setup and configure how everyone wants, it's going to need to include all of the capabilities of doing what everyone wants. pixmaps, and that'll add size, which the minimalists dont like. Sure we could modularise it, but once you start doing things like that, it makes the situation much more complex, how you would distribute the addons, and avoiding conflicts between those addons.
newbies will want a wm that will just work right off, which means that the wm would need to come with GUI confs etc, others would want one that doesnt have those, which means we'd have to distrobute them seperately, which means that the newbies wouldnt have them if they just installed it.
otherwise, you're just asking for fvwm, from what i've heard and seen, it can do practically anything, and can be configured to do nearly anything. and if it doesnt do it, you can make a plugin for it.
iphitus

Partioning question for dual booting arch+ another distro

I have a 320 partition w/ 100gigs win7 and 20 for /root arch, and rest for /home arch and a 500gig hd with data,media, pictures etc on it..
I was thinking of dual booting Mint + arch.. mint for compatability, ubuntu base and stability and arch for bleeding edge+ speed
I was thinking about 20 /root arch, 140 /home arch, 20 /root mint, 140(rest of hd) /home mint.. and using gparted to grab a 5 gig piece of the 500gig hd for /swap for both distros ( i have 6 gigs ram, i usually set swappiness to zero anyway, but i'm sure a swap is just a formality anyway)... and making the rest of the 500 accessable to both distros for my media and other stuff i have.
is the above a good scheme ^^, does the size/order matter for what I want above? or should it be /root mint /root arch /home mint, /home arch.. 20/20/140/140 (sizes are approx of course)
or would there be a "real advantage for making the 320 mint, 500 for arch.. and make 250 gigs of the 500 shared for media etc.. (20 arch / and 230 for /arch home)..
I posted this in the newbie section, because of so many possibilities and I've read alot about partitioning, I just wonder whats the best, effecient way to do this, i'm sure some of you here dual boot 2 distros (hopefully on the same hd so my question is at least relevant)
Thanks in advance for any help
Last edited by binskipy2u (2013-01-02 10:32:43)

It's your machine, so do whatever you want, because it's a very subjective matter. I have a 10 GB root ext4 without a separate /boot or /home (meaning that these folders are part of the root fs). But man, sometimes, a separate partition for /home can be a god-send. I experienced space issues countless times. Of course, it also depends on how much crap you install. If you install full-blown KDE and a bunch of games instead of something minimal like Openbox or a tiling WM, 10 GB are not enough. Wine also uses ~/.wine for games and such.
See: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Partitioning
I would probably share the home partition between the distributions (except with different user names, so that the settings don't overlap between bleeding-edge versions of the same packages).
Have fun.
You may also wanna look into LVM, which will allow on-the-fly resizing of the partitions.
Last edited by DSpider (2013-01-02 11:59:34)

I cannot seem to find the DE for me

See one problem that happens to many Linux users is that they become nomads. (My friend has fallen to this fate. Arch's simplicity isn't the solution to everyone I guess.) Distro hoppers. Liking parts of one distro and parts of others and changing their distro all the time.
I have found my home in archlinux though. It seems to be the best distro for a desktop user who uses an Intel processor.
But I cannot find the DE/WM that is right for me.
I like xfce the most, but I cannot get icons working with it. (on 4.4) One day when I tried to install a theme xfce went kablooie. I also have to enable testing to download it, which means unstable stuff gets sent down my way and my computer screws up. (Unless I do something smart like only enabling testing to install xfce rather than pacman -Syu'ing the whole testing repo.)
I hate gnome. I just never understood anything about it, other than gnome dependancies that infect many programs. (Sorry if I am using harsh words, gnome lovers will hate me.)
I don't like KDE so much either, I just got it today but I already am looking to change it. I like it because of two things. Konqueror is the best file manager hands down. It isn't too bloated, it does files and executes things properly *glares at rox*. It also has a sense of fashion and you can put a backgroun image on it. (which I have done.) The other thing is the kdesktop is nice, no other virtual desktop app seems to be anywhere near as good as it. Maybe Enlightenment is the answer I seek, but it feels complicated and I'm too lazy to learn it. I also can't seem to get Japanese input support in Qt apps working at all, only gtk apps. The other problem is that KDE is a little bloated, I don't like things that take up memory, but Arche has a lot of ram, so some stuff Marc is saying is getting into my head. But KDE in general is hard to use, it is user friendly and user friendly things are hard to use. (Ironic isn't it?)They make expectations of you and things never work the way you want them to work. My Devil's Pie scripts fail in KDE. I cannot even seem to pin Kopete to all workspaces, and I feel it might be the same for all Qt apps. When I ran zsnes only to find that after I open a game the window borders come back despite my scripts telling it to not be there I was upset. Sure, this problem has an easy solution, use KDE but configure alternatives to use Openbox or something that doesn't get in the way of my scripts as a WM. But then I have the other KDE problems.
So then all the DE's are out of the question and I have to go for a WM. The proplem with WMs is that things don't work well together. You are also stuck on things like file managers and stuff that seem to always come with DEs.
I'm tempted to go back to xfce, but then I'll be back where I started, and I'll have testing enabled again. Unless I get the old version of xfce, I can use gkrellm to moniter my system so the system moniter isn't needed so much but xffm sucks. I have an ok terminal now with Japanese support so screw a file manager and well when I look at things the path looks green.
The point is, I'm going in circles when it comes to my desktop environment. I need help. T_T What do you guys use for your desktop? Especially from the people who use window managers, how on earth do you get everything to fit together? WMs are the best solution, but the hardest to get working. (Or so I believe.)
I also need a web browser, Opera is nice and all but it is non-free software. It also uses Qt so Japanese support isn't great. I haven't gotten any emails from my Japanese friends today but how would I write Japanese emails if my browser has no Japanese support. Firefox is getting to use a lot of memory, and all the other browsers may be fine but they need gnome/kde dependancies.
I remember reading the Archlinux forums about a browser that didn't need gnome/kde dependancies. It had a Japanese name if I'm not mistaken, I can't find it anymore. If anyone knows it it would be helpful.
Anybody can help me?

here's mine. It's a bit of a mess at the moment and the menus are in a separate file. I'm trying to integrate FVWM with ROX at the moment, but haven't had much time for it.
#FVWM Config
# Set Environment Variables
# Filepaths first
SetEnv fvwm_wallpaper $[HOME]/Wallpapers
SetEnv fvwm_icon $[FVWM_USERDIR]/theme/pixmaps
SetEnv fvwm_script $[FVWM_USERDIR]/scripts
SetEnv fvwm_theme_img $[FVWM_USERDIR]/theme/deco
SetEnv fvwm_mini_x %50.25
SetEnv fvwm_icon_size 100
SetEnv fvwm_mini_scale 50
# Place for icon images
ImagePath $[fvwm_icon]:$[fvwm_icon];.png:+
# Virtual Desktops
DesktopSize 2x2
EdgeScroll 100 100
EdgeResistance 50 50
EdgeThickness 2
EwmhBaseStruts 0 0 40 0
# Mouse and Focus
ClickTime 350
MoveThreshold 3
Style * SloppyFocus, RaiseTransient, !borders, Handles
*FvwmEvent focus_window Raise
# Startup Functions
DestroyFunc StartFunction
AddToFunc StartFunction
+ I Module FvwmBacker
+ I Module FvwmEvent
+ I Module FvwmButtons Launcher
+ I Module FvwmButtons WinCtrl
+ I Exec exec tilda
DestroyFunc InitFunction
AddToFunc InitFunction
+ I Nop
DestroyFunc RestartFunction
AddToFunc RestartFunction
+ I Exec exec "killall tilda"
#Window Functions
DestroyFunc WinClose
AddToFunc WinClose
+ I Current Destroy
DestroyFunc WinMax
AddToFunc Winmax
+ I Current Maximize 100 100
DestroyFunc WinIconify
AddToFunc Winiconify
+ I Current Thumbnail
#Program Functions
DestroyFunc Editor
AddToFunc Editor
+ I Exec exec geany
DestroyFunc Browser
AddToFunc Browser
+ I Exec exec firefox
DestroyFunc Filer
AddToFunc Filer
+ I Exec exec rox
DestroyFunc Music
AddToFunc Music
+ I Exec exec audacious
DestroyFunc Terminal
AddToFunc Terminal
+ I Exec exec mrxvt
#Basic Styles
Style * IconBox 1200x1024-25+100, IconFill top left, SloppyFocus
Style * Padding 300 100
Style * NoIconTitle
Style "mrxt" NoTitle, !Handles,
Style "audacious" NoTitle, !Handles
Style "pypanel" NoTitle, !Handles
#Colorsets
Colorset 2 fg black, bg f8/00/00,
Tint rgb:f8/00/00 35, TiledPixmap $[fvwm_icon]/himenu.png
#Setting of Desktop and Page backgrounds
DestroyModuleConfig FvwmBacker: *
*FvwmBacker: Command (Desk 0, Page * *) Exec exec feh --bg-scale $[fvwm_wallpaper]/LinuxForce.jpg
#Pager Configuration
Style "FvwmPager" NoTitle, !Handles, !Borders, Sticky, WindowListSkip,
CirculateSkip, StaysOnBottom, FixedPosition, FixedSize, !Iconifiable, NeverFocus
DestroyModuleConfig FvwmPager: *
*FvwmPager: Geometry 100x100-0+0
*FvwmPager: Colorset * 2
*FvwmPager: Icons
*FvwmPager: UseSkipList
*FvwmPager: Rows 0
*FvwmPager: Columns 0
*FvwmPager: MiniIcons
*FvwmPager: Font none
*FvwmPager: NoDeskHilight
#Window Controller
Style "WinCtrl" NoTitle, !Handles, !Borders, Sticky, WindowListSkip,
CirculateSkip, StaysOnBottom, FixedPosition, FixedSize, !Iconifiable, NeverFocus
DestroyModuleConfig WinCtrl: *
*WinCtrl: Geometry 240x40-512+0
*WinCtrl: Colorset 2
*WinCtrl: Rows 1
*WinCtrl: Columns 5
*WinCtrl: (1x1, Icon 32x32/apps/xkill.png, Action(Mouse 1) `WinClose`)
*WinCtrl: (1x1, Title "Max", Action(Mouse 1) `WinMax`, Action(Mouse 3) `WinIconify`)
*WinCtrl: (1x1, Title "Expose", Action(Mouse 1) `FvwmExpose` Action (Mouse 4) `ScrollThroughWindows 4`, Action(Mouse 5) `ScrollThroughWindows 5`)
Style "Launcher" NoTitle, !Handles, !Borders, Sticky, WindowListSkip,
CirculateSkip, StaysOnBottom, FixedPosition, FixedSize, !Iconifiable, NeverFocus, Pixmap $[fvwm_icon]/kicker-020.png
DestroyModuleConfig Launcher: *
*Launcher: Geometry 360x24+0+0
*Launcher: Colorset 2
*Launcher: Frame 0
*Launcher: Font "Shadow=1:xft:Georgia:Bold:size=10:antialias=True"
*Launcher: Rows 1
*Launcher: Columns 60
*Launcher: (12x1, Title "System", Action(Mouse 1) Menu SysMenu rectangle +1+24 +0 +0
*Launcher: (15x1, Title "Programs", Action(Mouse 1) Menu ProgramMenu rectangle +72+24 +0 +0
*Launcher: (11x1, Title "Places", Action(Mouse 1) Menu PlacesMenu rectangle +162+24 +0 +0
*Launcher: (15x1, Title "Windows" Action(Mouse 1) `Expose`, Action(Mouse 3) Menu WindowMenu rectangle +228+24 +0 +0
Action (Mouse 4) `ScrollThroughWindows 4`, Action(Mouse 5) `ScrollThroughWindows 5`)
#Bindings
Mouse 1 R A Menu RootMenu
Mouse 3 R A Module FvwmPager -transient
Mouse 1 1 A Menu WindowMenu
Mouse 1 2 A Current Delete
#Menus
Read $[FVWM_USERDIR]/conf/menu.fvwm2rc
#Window Decorations
Style * Button 1, Button 2, Button 4, Button 6, GrabFocusOff
Style * Colorset 0, HilightColorset 1
Style * Font "shadow=1 C:xft:Georgia:Bold:pixelsize=16"
#Colorsets
# Inactive windows
Colorset 0 fg lightgray, bg lightgray, sh lightgray,
fgsh darkgray, RootTransparent buffer
# Active windows
Colorset 1 fg rgb:05/46/a0, bg white, sh white,
RootTransparent buffer
DestroyDecor Default
AddToDecor Default
+ BorderStyle Simple -- HiddenHandles NoInset
+ TitleStyle LeftJustified Height 28 -- flat
+ ButtonStyle Reset
+ ButtonStyle All Active (Colorset 0 -- flat) Inactive (Colorset 1 -- flat)
+ AddButtonStyle 1 AdjustedPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/fvwm_bw_small.png -- flat
#+ AddButtonStyle 1 MiniIcon
+ AddTitleStyle Active MultiPixmap LeftButtons AdjustedPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_leftend.png,
LeftEnd AdjustedPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_titlelefton.png,
Main TiledPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_titlemainon.png,
RightEnd AdjustedPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_titlerighton.png
+ AddTitleStyle Inactive MultiPixmap LeftButtons AdjustedPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_leftend.png,
LeftEnd AdjustedPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_titleleftoff.png,
Main TiledPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_titlemainoff.png,
RightEnd AdjustedPixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_titlerightoff.png
+ AddButtonStyle 6 Active Pixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_minon.png -- flat
+ AddButtonStyle 6 Inactive Pixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_minoff.png -- flat
+ AddButtonStyle 4 Active Pixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_maxon.png -- flat
+ AddButtonStyle 4 Inactive Pixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_maxoff.png -- flat
+ AddButtonStyle 2 Active Pixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_closeon.png -- flat
+ AddButtonStyle 2 Inactive Pixmap $[fvwm_theme_img]/tb_closeoff.png -- flat
#Colorset 3 fg black bg Wheat
#Colorset 4 fg wheat bg Black
#DestroyDecor WinDeco
#3AddToDecor WinDeco
#+ TitleStyle Height 25
#+ AddButtonStyle 1 Title "Menu"
#+ TitleStyle Flat
#Style "*" UseDecor WinDeco
#Style "*" Colorset 4
#Style "*" HilightColorset 3
#Style "*" Font "xft:Georgia:Bold:size=10:antialias=True"
#Functions
#Scroll windows by mouse
DestroyFunc ScrollThroughWindows
AddToFunc ScrollThroughWindows
+ I PipeRead `[ $0 -eq 4 ] && echo "Prev (CurrentPage, AcceptsFocus) FocusAndRaise" || echo "Next (CurrentPage, AcceptsFocus) FocusAndRaise"`
DestroyFunc FocusAndRaise
AddToFunc FocusAndRaise
+ I Focus
+ I Raise
#Show Window Screenshots in Pager
DestroyFunc GenerateMiniIcon
AddToFunc GenerateMiniIcon
+ I PipeRead "xwd -silent -id $[w.id] | convert -scale 100 -frame 1x1
-mattecolor black -quality 0 xwd:- png:$[HOME]/.fvwm/tmp/miniicon.tmp.$[w.id].png
&& echo WindowStyle EWMHMiniIconOverride, MiniIcon $[HOME]/.fvwm/tmp/miniicon.tmp.$[w.id].png
|| echo nop"
DestroyFunc DestroyMiniIcon
AddToFunc DestroyMiniIcon
+ I PipeRead "rm -f $[HOME]/.fvwm/tmp/miniicon.tmp.$[w.id].png"
*FvwmEvent: raise_window GenerateMiniIcon
*FvwmEvent: destroy_window DestroyMiniIcon
*FvwmEvent focus_window FocusAndRaise
#Thumbnailer
*FvwmEvent: deiconify DeThumbnail
SetEnv fvwm_icon_size 150
DestroyFunc Thumbnail
AddToFunc Thumbnail
+ I Raise
+ I SetEnv Icon-$[w.id] $[w.IconFile]
+ I ThisWindow (!Shaded, Iconifiable, !Iconic) PipeRead "xwd -silent -id $[w.id] | convert -scale $[fvwm_icon_size] -quality 0
xwd:- png:$[HOME]/.fvwm/icon.tmp.$[w.id].png;
echo WindowStyle IconOverride, Icon $[HOME]/.fvwm/icon.tmp.$[w.id].png"
+ I Iconify
DestroyFunc DeThumbnail
AddToFunc DeThumbnail
+ I PipeRead "echo WindowStyle IconOverride, Icon \$\[Icon-$[w.id]\]"
+ I UnsetEnv Icon-$[w.id]
+ I Exec exec "rm -f /$[HOME]/.fvwm/icon.tmp.$[w.id].png"
# FvwmExpose
DestroyFunc Expose
AddToFunc Expose
+ I AddToMenu ExposeMenu "e x p o s e" Title
+ I + DynamicPopDownAction DestroyMenu ExposeMenu
+ I All (!Iconic !Shaded AcceptsFocus)
PipeRead "echo Raise;
xwd -silent -id $[w.id] | convert -scale $$(($[w.width]/10)) -quality 0 xwd:-
png:$[FVWM_USERDIR]/tmp/icon.exp.$[w.id].png
&& echo AddToMenu ExposeMenu
%$[FVWM_USERDIR]/tmp/icon.exp.$[w.id].png%\'"$[w.name]"\' WindowID $[w.id] WarpToWindow 50 50
&& echo AddToMenu ExposeMenu \"\" Nop
|| Nop"
+ I Popup ExposeMenu rectangle 512x48+228+24 +0 +0
+ I Exec exec rm -f $[FVWM_USERDIR]/tmp/icon.exp.*
# composite -geometry +5+5 $[w.IconFile]
# $[HOME]/.fvwm/icon.tmp.$[w.id].png $[HOME]/.fvwm/icon.tmp.$[w.id].png;

Is Arch Linux right for me?

Arch seems like a pretty awesome distro, and I think I would like it a lot. But is it right for me?
I was first introduced to Linux and Unix-based systems last summer when I took a course at my local community college. Since then, I have installed Ubuntu on my HP laptop. In the past months, I have learned and taught myself a lot about the way linux works: downloading and installing software, Unix command line prompt, etc.
Ubuntu is a fantastic distro for linux beginners, but I feel like I'm ready to take the next step and I'm always itching to see a little more of what goes on behind the scenes. I read a guide on Arch over at LifeHacker and skimmed the "Getting Started" guide on Arch Wiki and I generally understood everything that was going on; nothing seemed way over my head. So I think I could handle Arch. What do you guys think?
If you think I should take Arch for a spin, is it practical to install it as my main OS on my main machine? Should I dual-boot it next to Ubuntu or similar? I am planning on building a PC this summer and am currently debating over which OS to use; Arch is a main candidate. My main uses for this computer will be surfing the net, listening to music (integration with my iPod would be great), a little video editing, some casual gaming, and general programming/tinkering with my computer.
I know y'all probably get a lot of these but I appreciate your feedback.

Check out the Beginner's Guide and The Arch Way in the wiki. It's important to note that what really distinguishes Arch from most other distros is that it isn't a distro in the most common sense of the term. Ubuntu, Fedora, SuSE, Sabayon, Mandriva, PCLOS, etc. have graphical installers that pre-configure everything for you; the choices are made for you, and you'll have to work around anything you don't find to your liking. You can easily add and remove programs, but always limited by what they've provided: packages that are patched in order to work in the way they've deemed appropriate, and an init system that's opaque to users (remember the fuss over certain graphics drivers not rendering Plymouth splashes correctly? I've never had that issue in Arch). Arch, on the other hand, is essentially a set of tools--the Arch Installation Framework, a couple init scripts, about six config files (give or take), repos, the ABS tree, the kernel and a package manager--that allow a user to craft their own operating system to their liking. A couple of the things I just mentioned are even optional as it is; at least three of those config files have never been touched by me, as I don't need them. Combine this sense of freedom and control with the DIY philosophy (which I find empowering as well, but hell--I enjoy research, learning and problem solving) and the close-knit community, and you've got my favorite distro. Ultimately, it's the choices of the developers that make a distro what it is; the software--at least in principle--rarely changes. In the case of Arch, most everything comes straight from upstream, goes in the testing repo briefly, then ends up in the standard repo, only altered if deemed necessary for security or basic functionality.
I left Ubuntu after switching to KDE and finding Kubuntu not to my liking; I also found that many of the "conveniences" of Ubuntu (and the 9-12 other distros I tried afterward) just got in the way. For example, why use the Ubuntu USB Startup Disk Creator or Unetbootin when "dd" is faster and easier? How much frustration could I have avoided installing the Catalyst driver in Ubuntu or SuSE if I'd done so manually (with a number of console commands I can count on one hand) rather than mess around with a GUI, thus knowing exactly what I did wrong? To me, it just seems better to start with what I absolutely need and build up piecemeal, rather than add a bunch of crap I don't need/want/even know is there in the first place and hide it all behind extra GUI's, then try and pick it apart. Ultimately, you make Arch what you want it to be. No one can tell you if it's right for you, or if you should install it (there are rare cases where folks here would flat-out say "No," but yours doesn't seem to be one of 'em ). Check out those wiki articles I mentioned; if it seems like something that interests you, give it a whirl!

Arch based distro - same repository?

hey,
i got a question.
let's say i'm making a new ,archlinux based distro. must i use own repositorys then or can i just use archs repositories? i won't really make a new distro (no time for that) but i always asked myself this question.
pure curiosity.

Ιf it's rolling, I guess there is no problem, but you need to make it clear (on the distro site for example) that the most of work done is thanks to the Archlinux devs, if you are gonna use the official repos.
Chakra-project for example is Arch+KDEmod, thus it currently* uses the official repos.
*they are gonna make their distro, afaik, non-rolling.

Arch VPS (looking for a comparable plan/host) JaguarPC Business

I have used JaguarPC in the past and love it's packages, it irks me that they don't have a handful of distro's like other hosts but offer a lot of bandwidth space.
This is what I was going to order but I rather stick to the OS I know, and a tip for people thinking about using arch use ABS for packages and always, always, always ask questions before updating or keep an eye on the wiki/abs to make sure it's stable.
This is JaguarPCs Business VPS plain, I'm looking for a comparable plan with a host that offers Arch or even Gentoo Linux. I don't hate debian, I do not like CentOS and RPMs, arch is a cleaner OS imo.
100 GB Disk Space
5,000 GB Bandwidth
2048 MB RAM
4096 MB Burst RAM
Equal CPU (2 core min.)
The price is $50/mo and I'd like to stick around that price if possible but I can go higher if needed, just don't want to pay more just cause of a different OS.

Where are you located? FanaticalVPS is what a friend and I use, but it is located in Germany. Sometimes the lag is higher than you might want but for the most part it is fine. I made a post in this thread about some of the other downsides. And some of the upsides Make sure you look into the uptime thing though, it may be unacceptable to you.
You'd need a Huge for $30/month and a $10-$20/month RAM upgrade to get the specs you want. I don't know about the CPU stuff, you'd have to talk to support or look at their page. Bandwidth is "fair-usage unlimited." If you're paying that much I'm sure you'd get 5TB out of it, but best ask to be sure. I pay for a Mini and fair usage for that is like 1.5TB. They support Arch of course.
Edit: Forgot to mention! There's a wiki page about VPS's that support Arch.
Last edited by jac (2012-06-07 18:32:37)

Arch influenced distros?

What are the Arch influenced distros? Not distros necessarily based directly in some way upon Arch Linux, but influenced by Arch Linux?
For example, Alpine Linux uses the Arch build system. Does anybody know of other distros that are "inspired" by Arch in a similar fashion?
Frugalware comes to mind, because it uses pacman. But it seems that pacman-g2 is a fork of an early beta-release of what is now pacman 3.x. Is this enough to meet the standard of "Arch influenced" distro?
If folks can make a good case in this thread for a distro being influenced by Arch, I'll add it to the appropriate section on the Arch-based Distros wikipage.
Thanks everyone.
Last edited by lseubert (2009-06-23 11:08:37)

PJ wrote:
I was woundering if there should be a category for custom repositories? I mean that is IMHO somthing more in the spirit of Arch Linux since Arch is a meta-distribution. If that's the case I think ArchVDR might be a good candidate to be included in that kind of category.
ArchVDR
http://sourceforge.net/apps/trac/archvdr/
Actually, I think custom repositories deserve an entire wikipage of their own. (Guess I have another wikipage to work on now ;-)
That said, what is the difference between a custom repository and an Arch-based distro? For most Linux distros, this is pretty easy to figure out. But as you rightly point out, Arch is more of a meta-distribution. You install a very small core set of packages, and then build your own distro on top of them. Thus, 'extra' and 'community' are, technically, custom repositories and only 'core' is the "One, True Arch Linux" - to get pedantic about it.
But seriously, what distinguishes an Arch distro from a custom repository? Where do extra, testing, and community belong in the grand scheme of things? What about kde-mod and Chakra? What about something like 'http://repo.archlinux.fr/', which is the repository for yaourt, among other things?
Also, on the Arch-based Distros wikipage, I listed larch and archiso-live as meta-distros, because they are used to build a custom install .iso or .img file. But given your point that Arch itself is really a meta-distro, should I use some other word to describe larch and archiso-live?
PJ wrote:Not really sure about this but after reading a bit more it seems to be a more integrated qt desktop environment on top of arch linux:
eth-os
http://eth-os.org/
http://code.google.com/p/eth-os/
To me, this seems to be a custom repository, but it is somewhat hard to tell. They haven't actually released anything yet, so there isn't anything to evaluate right now. I'll keep an eye on it though, and write it up upon release of something official.

Stopping cheeky gits from selling your distro for profit

OK, as you may or may not know we are currently startup the AEGIS project. We have licensed the project under the GPL as required by the GPL license that Arch is distributed on. However, as I understand it, the individual applications contained in the CD are still covered by their own license. I have not yet had a chance to check all the licenses for the software we intend to include, hopefully they are all freely distributable but I also hope one contains a not-for-profit clause.
Why?
People that burn and sell ISOs of linux distributions without permission make me sick. Anyone can do it and profit from others hard work. In most cases I think distros go along with it because it gives them more exposure.
Not-for-profit is a core tenant of the AEGIS Project so I want to protect it from people profiting from it's distribution. Under the GPL you may "charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy".
If I want to prevent blatent profiteering I can envisage two ways. Include software that is free to distribute but contains a non-profit clause OR simply include one document, e.g. our getting started document, which is licensed in such a way as to prevent distribution for a fee without permission. With this file on the ISO non-one could sell it straight off the ftp site without editing the ISO first.
Legal action is a good way to make money for the project after all!
How does that sound to everyone?

dibblethewrecker wrote:As I understand the BSD license someone can take the same ISO change the name and charge $500 for it - I fail to see how that helps. Beside the project is Arch based and Arch is GPL therefore all Arch based projects must be GPL - as I understand it. And what is this about owning it? When have I said that?
I meant that if you were using purely bsd software, you could change the name and put it under a new license..one that would enforce a "no pay, but free use" license. It was provided as an example only.
Sorry?! How on earth am I trying to do any of that? The ISO will be freely distributable, there will be no "lock". How am I hijacking anything? By wanting to prevent people from selling it to line their own pockets without making any contribution? I don't want to create a monopoly, I just want to avoid exploititative practices. Let me reiterate - not-for-profit, for anyone.
I misinterpreted your position as trying to attempt to restrict other people from reselling the iso (prepackaged software): be it shipping cost, or otherwise.
Which type of non-free are you talking about? There's free and free, speech vs beer - we all know that. Freely distributable and not-for-profit do not have to be mutually exclusive, do they? Maybe I am wrong.
Not-for-profit, could be considered to be not freely distributable (as in you are free to do with it what you will). It would be freely (as in cost) distributable. A nitpick on my part, I guess.
It does seem like it would be putting a restriction on what people can do with it (ie. not able to sell it).
I read some of your links - they basically say "Yeah, charge for your software to make some cash." It doesn't say exploit all the people making free software to line your own pockets!
Well, the market would not bear (sp?) such a thing anyway. If joe charges $400 for the exact same thing that sally charges $1 for...guess who sells more of them?
And I never inferred that people should be exploited.
What it does say is that under the GPL you may charge a fee. As this project HAS to be licensed under the GPL that means that people may charge a fee for it - there is no way around that it seems.
I would agree.
I will freely admit to not having a good grasp of this license business. However, based on what I have already read, and the links, cactus provided I think my question has been answered.
Yeah. I grasp a little bit of licensing, enough to know that I easily get confused by it. I recommend you contact the FSF, and ask them for some literature on the matter if you are as concerned about this issue as you seem to be.
ps. sorry if I upset you. It was not my intent.

ArchLinux chosen a default distro for our faculty.

I'm happy to inform that we decided to make ArchLinux a default distro for our student workstations (approx. 200) and main servers (12) at the Faculty of Mathematics and Information Sciences, Warsaw University of Technology. Previously we've been using Gentoo for those purposes. For workstations the new choice was obvious. For the servers - it was not. Honestly, we are a little disappointed with ArchLinux migrated to systemd. Personally, we are not convinced in systemd advantages and worry about possible future incompatibilities with other systems/distros and security issues. However, we finally decided that other advantages of the ArchLinux distribution outbalance any doubts related to systemd. We believe it's a good choice.
Thanks to ArchLinux developers; keep your good work!

quayasil wrote:I'm happy to inform that we decided to make ArchLinux a default distro for our student workstations (approx. 200) and main servers (12)
We are facing a similar big decision: Using Arch Linux as the distribution for a "thin client with good offline capabilities". The numbers are comparable (approx. 250 clients). The problem is that the clients are spread across the country and are not easily reachable by IT staff.
Our test setup and results (approx. 5 computers) so far:
We use a dual boot setup: One recovery partition with a bare minimum install (only base group + some tools) and a script to save and restore another partition. This other partition has a full installation with Xorg, LibreOffice, Firefox, rdesktop/RDP etc. Let's call this the "production system"
By default the production partition is booted by GRUB and the recovery partition can be manually selected from the GRUB menu
The recovery partition (when booted) is accessible by SSH (the production system also)
The "production" partition can be backed up with an rsync script and can be restored from the recovery partition if an upgrade of the production partition goes wrong and the production system does not boot anymore
Even the recovery partition can be backed up and updated from the production system (arch-chroot) if it can be guaranteed that the production system is booting the next time
The 5 computers are in a real-world test setup since a few weeks and well, it works ;-)
Some unresolved problems/questions remain:
How do we test possible updates for all clients? Maybe in a virtual test machine...
How do we update all or most of the clients at once? I'm thinking of a local/custom repository and using parallel ssh or something.
How do we deal with special setups (other packages, other configuration? Perhaps using someting like cfengine...
How should the user accounts be configured (we have LDAP)? Well, that's not an Arch specific problem ;-)
@quayasil perhaps we can share our thoughts/work and create a blog/wiki or something about such a setup if the results are usable?
Some thoughts?
Mario

Did the installation for UEFI but no grub

I have windows 8.1 installed
Had ubuntu 14.04 and replaced it with arch
I did what the guides/wiki suggest in order to work with UEFI all the steps were made successfully... but I don't see grub on boot OR a boot path in the bios like it has for windows.
What am I missing?
Here are the steps I followed in the end and worked (means without errors)
http://wood1978.techarea.org/~wood/word … ent-page-1

Was that a good learning experience? Have you noticed that most all distro's use /boot/efi as the mount point for the ESP? That has you end up with /boot/efi/EFI/BOOT as a directory on the ESP and seems less that well thought out to me. So Arch tells you to use /boot as the mount point instead of /boot/efi. But as you may imagine some of the documents for bootloaders and such expects /boot/efi. You just have to make sure all paths in your commands during installation match your ESP mount point. I thought this issue had been fixed in the wiki but I'll review that. Correct me if I'm wrong but I believe this all resulted from the grub-mkconfig command putting grub's config file in a directory not on the ESP, /boot/grub/grub.cfg. When grub loads, prior to a choice being made to load Arch, how would it find it's config file on the Arch partition? Anyway I'll look through all of this on the wiki since I need to make sure I'm up to speed for a new install I need to do.
Grub doesn't create a UEFI NVRAM entry for Arch but a tool used in it's installation does. That is efibootmgr and it's not hard to use. man efibootmgr is all you need to see what you should use to tell it to make or change or delete entries. Olive is right about using efibootmgr. I would be careful with it but not scared of it.
Really just using rEFInd if your UEFI implementation doesn't present a bootmanager without manual intervention gives you a good bootmanager function if you desire it. Grub is a bootloader and while it can be helpful in some cases, there's really no need most often. The EFISTUB kernel boot is the option with the fewest moving parts but the least well understood. Should you choose to move on that, here is the link.
https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/EFISTUB

What is the BAPI for setting "deletion flag" in IW32?

What is the BAPI for setting "deletion flag" in IW32? Thanks!

Hello
There seems to be no BAPI to set deletion flag for MO.
Quick Approach:
You can copy an existing BAPI module BAPI_ISUSMORDER_SETSTATUSTECHN, for example, to Y_BAPI_MORDER_SETSTATUSDEL, and then edit this copy
change the code in the existing lines for screen 3000
PERFORM BDC_DYNPRO USING 'SAPLCOIH' '3000'.
PERFORM BDC_FIELD USING 'BDC_OKCODE' 'LVMS'. (Instead of current 'ARCH')
It should hopefully work.
fyi: The orders can be set with Del flag only when they are in CLSD status
Rgds
Kartik

Which linux distro for ASM

Hi,
I have just purchased a new PC and would like to use oracle ASM, could anyone suggest the best free linux distro for this purpose.
I have read recently that there are problems when trying to use ASM on Ubuntu,.... does anyone have any suggestions of a suitable distro?
Thanks in advance

806595 wrote:
Hi,
I have just purchased a new PC and would like to use oracle ASM, could anyone suggest the best free linux distro for this purpose.
I have read recently that there are problems when trying to use ASM on Ubuntu,.... does anyone have any suggestions of a suitable distro?
Thanks in advanceWhat do you plan on doing with it?
If you're looking to learn Oracle then i would ditch ASM as a starting point (it'll complicate your life to begin with) and go with just installing the database, working from there. A simple and effective installation i've done a couple of times is Oracle XE on Ubuntu (very smooth installation, never a problem). This is a great lightweight installation suitable for learning.
I have CentOS running Oracle 11.2 on a PC at home with ASM (did it for a learning experience) and it was quite a pain to get going (though i'm admittedly no DBA with minimal *nix experience ... was a great learning experience though). Once going it's pretty smooth, though every time the kernel gets upgraded i have to head out to find new RPM's for ASM to be able to properly communicate with the Kernel (if you don't do this, you perform a kernel upgrade and reboot your machine you're going to be without a database).
So it really depends on what your level of experience is, how much patience you have, and what you're looking to get out of the experience.

Is arch the distro for me?

Similar Messages

Maybe you are looking for