in ~30 minutes I will go offline to install arch
got a new ssd
I want to check the current plan with you
>installing arch from usb on to 512GB crucial mx100
use btrfs for the file system
create top level subvolume named @, the ID 5 one
then mount @ subvolume with mount flags
defaults, noatime, ssd, discard , ssd, autodefrag, compress=lzo, space_cache
create subvolumes inside @
/home /boot /var /tmp
install the arch in to this - pacstrap
finish the rest of the installation by the beginners guide
>I booted in to to arch successfully
- create user and sudo and all with it
- install alsa
- install xorg stuff
- install xf86 inputs and video drivers
- install mesa
install i3, dmenu, termite
actually I much prefere helmuthdu
and chunk of my installation steps I took right out of his script
Anyway, I want to do this one installation purely with all the stuff by myself
for the rest of them I will always use helmuthdu or antergos
Care to give examples on what normal person shit is? In order to deem this AUR valuable enough to sacrifice a distro that has earned a reputation over 20 years of stability, one has to prove that it isn't merely an excuse for developers to be lazy.
>it isn't merely an excuse for developers to be lazy.
It's meant as a last resource thing to get binaries you want without the hassle of going to github and do the compiling yourself; certainly not an argument to fight off Debian but not completely useless neither.
aptitude is awesome, but still slower than pacman, specially for searches. Also, the search syntax is needlessly complicated and searching by tag is cumbersome and not many people even know about it.
Try making a search with aptitude then do it with pacman.
The speed is similar if you use apt-cache search instead, but aptitude offers a lot of neat filters that pacman already has.
It took 2 and a half seconds to update its cache then spat out a list of all programs it could find before I could blink. Apt-cache does not update the cache therefore one doesn't have to wait the 2 and a half seconds. Are you saying that pacman takes less time to update its cache and is more efficient? Still, I doubt it has an ncurses based interactive mode sort of like Synaptic.
>It took 2 and a half seconds
That's what I'm talking about.
Looking at the pacman wiki, it appears I overestimated its search, it's less complete than aptitude. The search is similar in speed and features to apt-cache search.
>Still, I doubt it has an ncurses based interactive mode sort of like Synaptic.
Yeah, it doesn't.
Because that's what hacking means and that's a common practice to name these hacking. You're probably confusing the term with cracking.