SEARCH

Enter your search query in the box above ^, or use the forum search tool.

You are not logged in.

#1 2010-03-02 05:09:13

vrkalak
#! Die Hard
From: Las Vegas > US
Registered: 2009-09-14
Posts: 1,572

Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

I am loving Openbox, tint2, Nitrogen ... the desktop of #! Crunchbang/Linux 9.04

I have, also, been building a Debian 'testing' from a net.install
In most of my Distro-Hopping over the past year, I have usually chosen to use the Xfce desktop.
I have almost, always used Distros with Xfce DE.

Well, my question is:
With the new distros of #!SqueezeBang (based on Debian 'testing) and #!ArchBang (based on Arch/Linux)
Both with rolling releases and OpenBox . . . which is better?

Not as a comparison, between the two ... but, a which is more configurable and customizable?
Which will satisfy my needs of what I want from a Linux distro?

I have downloaded SqueezeBang, and opened the LiveCD.  I like what I've seen, so far.
Also, have ArchBang 2.0 downloading via Torrent.


Registered Linux User: #497030
my DeviantART page
-- #!Crunchbang- Sid "Animal"  (Fluxbox) -- LMDE Fluxbox Edition -- Manjaro-Fluxbox --

Offline

Help fund CrunchBang, donate to the project!

#2 2010-03-02 06:15:17

anonymous
The Mystery Member
From: Arch Linux Forums
Registered: 2008-11-29
Posts: 9,418

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

vrkalak wrote:

Not as a comparison, between the two ... but, a which is more configurable and customizable?

Define configurable and customizable.

vrkalak wrote:

Which will satisfy my needs of what I want from a Linux distro?

What are your needs?

Also I can say currently is that if you like having bleeding edge packages (latest versions) go for Arch.

Offline

#3 2010-03-02 07:27:20

patrickstein
#! Die Hard
From: Texas, USA
Registered: 2009-01-26
Posts: 501

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

Personally I have given both a look over and I personally prefer Archbang, I am thinking of putting on my netbook as the primary OS.

Offline

#4 2010-03-02 08:24:03

klanger
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2009-02-18
Posts: 596

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

You should ask your self -> do I prefer Arch over Debian, or Debian over Arch... the rest is just #!-style wink

Offline

#5 2010-03-02 09:13:02

Kookaburra
#! CrunchBanger
From: Orléans - France
Registered: 2009-09-03
Posts: 234

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

If you come from Ubuntu or #!, I think the most simple choose will be SqueezeBang. With AchBang (and if you never use an Arch based distro), you will have to learn how Arch it's build, how to install package, how to maintain your system ...

The choose is between : Ease or Novelty (what takes time, needs to think of it, but could be very interesting !) wink

Offline

#6 2010-03-02 11:07:37

vrkalak
#! Die Hard
From: Las Vegas > US
Registered: 2009-09-14
Posts: 1,572

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

I do concur that I am most familiar with Debian-based OS distros.

I already know how Debian works, and am still learning how Openbox works.

Although, I have always wanted to build my own Arch install . . . ?

Still undecided ... but leaning heavily towards Debian 'testing' >> Squeezebang
I'll still have to ArchBang LiveCD ... I can install and play with it anytime.


Registered Linux User: #497030
my DeviantART page
-- #!Crunchbang- Sid "Animal"  (Fluxbox) -- LMDE Fluxbox Edition -- Manjaro-Fluxbox --

Offline

#7 2010-03-02 11:12:26

omns
#! wanderer
From: ~/
Registered: 2008-11-25
Posts: 5,131

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

Use  both, learn both. Expand your Linux knowledge smile

Offline

#8 2010-03-02 11:21:37

klanger
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2009-02-18
Posts: 596

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

You could install Debian based #! and in it, install in VirtualBox Arch based #! (just for testing and knowledge)

Offline

#9 2010-03-02 13:29:12

snowpine
#!-a-roo
Registered: 2008-11-24
Posts: 2,922

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

I am planning to stick with CrunchBang 9.04 until there is an official new release or support ends in October (whichever happens first). smile

I personally find Debian Testing "not rolling enough" and so I use Arch (with full Gnome desktop and all the eye candy) on my one "cutting edge" computer. (I prefer using software that is well tested and stable for everyday purposes and therefore have CentOS on my work computer. However I do find it worthwhile having the latest and greatest for certain tasks, for example if someone sends me an MS Word document, it usually opens better in the latest OO.org)

If there was an official CrunchSqueeze, my hope is it could be easily be up/downgraded to Unstable or Stable by editing the sources. This would be a cool feature allowing individual users to choose their personal level of un/stability. Lenny is looking long in the tooth, but I could see myself using Squeeze for a loooong time once it goes stable.

One thing I do really dig about Debian is smxi.org

(edit) In case I did not make it clear, I think Debian and Arch are both outstanding distros. You can't really go wrong with either! smile

Last edited by snowpine (2010-03-02 14:17:13)


/hugged

Offline

#10 2010-03-02 13:53:03

gutterslob
#! Resident Bum
Registered: 2009-11-03
Posts: 3,081

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

omns wrote:

Use  both, learn both. Expand your Linux knowledge smile

This!!

I've used both.... Squeeze was a smoother experience for me, while a had some small HAL related niggles with Arch.

Personally, if I wanted to hot-rod my install, I'd do the full Hindu and compile Gentoo or Slackware, but since I can't be arsed these days (also because I've got a horrible memory and will probably screw up something), I find Sidux a good middle ground.


Point & Squirt

Offline

#11 2010-03-02 22:32:44

Kookaburra
#! CrunchBanger
From: Orléans - France
Registered: 2009-09-03
Posts: 234

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

omns wrote:

Use  both, learn both. Expand your Linux knowledge smile

I like this advice !

And I think I going to follow it for me !  I have a 10 Go partition I do not use (I have an 9.04 Ubuntu on it, and I never go on it) ... Why not testing and learn Arch ? Very good idea ! smile

I have a question about it, but I going to open another topic for it : http://crunchbanglinux.org/forums/post/57213/#p57213

wink

Last edited by Kookaburra (2010-03-02 22:33:17)

Offline

#12 2010-03-03 14:20:45

mahatman2
#! Die Hard
From: Chattanooga TN
Registered: 2009-09-13
Posts: 550

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

I just installed ArchBang 2.00 RC1...So far it's going well but I've got to figure out AUR soon..


Punch all your friends.

Offline

#13 2010-03-03 15:50:25

klanger
#! Die Hard
Registered: 2009-02-18
Posts: 596

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

mahatman2 wrote:

I've got to figure out AUR soon..

have a look here
http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Yaourt

Offline

#14 2010-03-03 16:07:15

anonymous
The Mystery Member
From: Arch Linux Forums
Registered: 2008-11-29
Posts: 9,418

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

Also there many alternatives to Yaourt:

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/AUR_Helpers

Currently I'm rather liking packer.

Last edited by anonymous (2010-03-03 19:08:57)

Offline

#15 2010-03-03 18:39:34

Zen:Core
#! CrunchBanger
From: Bleeding Kansas
Registered: 2009-11-09
Posts: 195

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

I was on the same fence and most of my experience is from the Debian based side of things. I decided in the end that I wanted to try Arch. I then ran across Chakra Linux. It's an Arch based Distro with KDE-Mod installed. I installed it to learn the inner workings of Arch a little bit and to play with KDE. You know, get my feet wet.

My observations so far are all really positive. I know I haven't done a traditional Arch install yet, so things have been really easy. I've only had a couple of issues here and there, but all the info to fix it was right there in the wiki or the forum. If you're not afraid of the terminal, config files and rolling up your sleeves then Arch is great. The thing I hear a lot is that Arch breaks and can be unstable, but I've been trying to break it and nothing more has happend then what would happen with a bad Ubuntu update. So far.........

I think ArchBang would be worth a first try and chainload grub into #! (just in case). You know, get out of your comfort zone a bit. You'd be surprised at how easy it is. You will probably figure out if it's something you want to pursue pretty quick. If you don't like it then go back to try Squeeze. You have Debian knowledge right? So, you know you can get a Debian system going pretty quick and easy.

If you try ArchBang take an evening and read the Arch Wiki. Learn a bit about pacman and the AUR and hit the ground running. You never know what you might be missing. smile


|My Band: 12 Honest Men|

Offline

#16 2010-03-03 18:58:34

bozhkov
#! Junkie
Registered: 2009-12-29
Posts: 463

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

snowpine wrote:

I am planning to stick with CrunchBang 9.04 until there is an official new release or support ends in October (whichever happens first). smile

I personally find Debian Testing "not rolling enough" and so I use Arch (with full Gnome desktop and all the eye candy) on my one "cutting edge" computer. (I prefer using software that is well tested and stable for everyday purposes and therefore have CentOS on my work computer. However I do find it worthwhile having the latest and greatest for certain tasks, for example if someone sends me an MS Word document, it usually opens better in the latest OO.org)

If there was an official CrunchSqueeze, my hope is it could be easily be up/downgraded to Unstable or Stable by editing the sources. This would be a cool feature allowing individual users to choose their personal level of un/stability. Lenny is looking long in the tooth, but I could see myself using Squeeze for a loooong time once it goes stable.

One thing I do really dig about Debian is smxi.org

(edit) In case I did not make it clear, I think Debian and Arch are both outstanding distros. You can't really go wrong with either! smile

As we're moving steadily to frozen testing (squeeze) repos, I guess there should not be any problems with stability (well, testing is far, far more stable than Arch, at least from my brief experience with the latter), and yep, testing is not exactly "rolling release", sid is somehow more fitting the description, may be because of the lack of freezings before new stable versions smile But if we want "our computers to go #!", I guess Arch is the right way big_smile) as it's way more advanced in screwing things from time to time.

Offline

#17 2010-03-03 20:51:33

omns
#! wanderer
From: ~/
Registered: 2008-11-25
Posts: 5,131

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

bozhkov wrote:

if we want "our computers to go #!", I guess Arch is the right way big_smile) as it's way more advanced in screwing things from time to time.

lol

Offline

#18 2010-03-07 03:06:53

radioactive cheese
New Member
Registered: 2009-09-10
Posts: 9

Re: Which ... SqueezeBang or ArchBang ??

Do both. make a couple extra partitions on your hdd and go at it, swapping distros is a great way to learn. Especially with Arch. I learned tons about what goes on under the hood behind that fancy gui we're all so used to. I installed arch and set up everything manually from the cli. It made me appreciate some of the hard work that goes into a ready to go desktop distribution like #!.

Offline

Board footer

Powered by FluxBB

Copyright © 2012 CrunchBang Linux.
Proudly powered by Debian. Hosted by Linode.
Debian is a registered trademark of Software in the Public Interest, Inc.

Debian Logo