I'm convinced, more than ever, that going with Bridge Linux instead of installing "straight" Arch is the way to go for someone like me. If I had any reason to do a fresh installation, I'd go with Bridge again.
Arch recently came out with a new Pacman version (Pacman 4.1.0 -- see this Softpedia article and the announcement at pacman.git for more info); after pulling that in today, I asked a couple of questions at the Bridge forums and at the Bruno's All Things Linux forums, edited my /etc/pacman.conf file a little bit, and that was pretty much it.
Everything I've seen so far leads me to conclude that the repos and config files I'm using for Bridge Xfce are pretty much the same as what I'd end up with if I installed "straight" Arch and went with Xfce. I don't get bragging rights, since I didn't "build the house from the ground up," but my ego remains intact.
Bridge Xfce is great to use, but the best parts about this "experiment" are getting to see how Pacman works and getting a feel for Arch Linux. I really like Pacman; as for Arch, time will tell. Things look good so far. I can't tell if it's any more or less "unstable" than Debian Unstable or the latest Fedora, or if running it is any more or less of a hassle than running either of those. I think I get more out of running Fedora and Bridge/Arch than I'd get from running Sid, though, because they force me to look at things from outside of my Debian "comfort zone."
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment