Posts tagged ‘Arch’

[testing] ArchBang 2.00-RC1

Care to test the latest and the finest and the smoothest release yet? 😉

ArchBang now has an installer! That’s right! Besides copy2ram, we are introducing an installer with which you can install it on your hard disks! Did we n00bify it? Are we trying to re-invent the wheel? Are we making Arch “easier for the masses” like most graphical distributions? Heck no! We are keeping Arch as it is! K.I.S.S all the way! That old and familiar ncurses based installer,we can’t live without it! ❤

We need your help in testing this release! Do test it and give us your feedback. Please understand that we are short on staff, just two developers, so any voluntary testing and feedback will help us progress further.  🙂

Download: 32 Bit md5sum: d00be4c07ae844adbe26b8701a856d7e

Mirrors: 32Bit 32Bit 32Bit Torrent: 32Bit

Download: 64 Bit md5sum: be1e261b94a3e3b28e0a285708b7a423

Mirrors: 64Bit 64Bit Torrent: 64Bit









Create User

Arch config

Mkinitcpio in action




After install, if you can’t login to X,then re-install nvidia in following way:

pacman -Syy && pacman -Sd nvidia nvidia-utils --noconfirm

If you would just like to get to the desktop and you are ok with using the “nv” driver then:

X -configure && mv /etc/X11/xorg.conf && sed -i -e "s/nvidia/nv/" /etc/X11/xorg.conf

[screenshot] A simple screenshot with conkyrc

I am using the following: Compiz, tint2 and 2 conkys. That’s it!

Here is the top conkyrc :

And the right conkyrc:

I’ve not written the gmail, weather and calender scripts and have not shared.

You can Google them easily!


[howto] Re-install / Replicate an Arch Install

This was asked in the LinuxQuestions forum and I replied there. The main idea is to make an exact copy of Arch Linux install from machine A to machine B. This includes all the packages of Machine A [excluding AUR] to be installed in Machine B. Why can’t we do that using AUR? SInce technically you are not using pacman to download and then install them, you are rather compiling the AUR packages yourself and installing them using pacman to keep a track of this package in your machine. Alright, let’s proceed. All your cache packages are stored in /var/cache/pacman/pkg by default unless you set another directory in your /etc/pacman.conf.First do this in your Machine A where Arch is installed with all your packages:

1. Get root privilege using “su”.


cp -r /var/cache/pacman/pkg/  /path/to/your/backup/dir


comm -13 <(pacman -Qmq | sort) <(pacman -Qqe | sort) > /path/to/backup/dir/pkglist

4. Now, install Arch in Machine B as you do.

5. Copy paste the contents of pkg from your backup directory to the /var/cache/pacman/pkg of your newly installed Arch in Machine B or create a custom repo. How to create a custom Arch repo? Simply edit /etc/pacman.d/mirrorlist and add at the top:

Server = file:///path/to/your/pkgs

Now pacman will look for packages from your backup directory instead of an internet mirror.

6. Finally re-install everything of Machine A to B [if you just want to install selected packages, either edit pkglist file that you had backed up previously or issue individual commands as you would do normally.]

pacman -S $(cat pkglist)

And done!

[rant] Arch or Gentoo?

I received an email yesterday from a member at LQ forum. I won’t reveal his name/email ofcourse, but he asked me which one to choose, Arch or Gentoo?

Here’s the email:

> I can see that you use both.
> I’ve been reading the Gentoo docs for some time now. I’m just garnering the
>  pluck to install it. I’m sure it will be a blast. On the other hand, I’ve
>  started reading about Arch. It looks so cool.
> I’m not posting an open question on the forums to avoid flame wars.
> I’ll probably try both. I just would like to know what your feelings are
>  when comparing these two distros head to head.
> Cheers

This was my reply:


It’s probably better to ask your question in the forum for more exposure. Just
word it in a better way, like “Which one should I use “Arch or Gentoo?” instead
of “Arch vs Gentoo”.
However, I will give you my opinion.
I use gentoo for my server. I used it for my desktop for a while but compiling
things gets a bit annoying and time-consuming after sometime.
I use Arch with windows XP and openSUSE 11.2 for my desktop and openSUSE in my laptop. [for the eye-candy ;P ]
Arch is simple. Binary installation. Although you can compile from source
stuffs that you need using ABS, but it’s not compulsory/necessary.
Advantages of gentoo over Arch? None at all. Optimization of packages by
compiling them locally in your machine for performance boost isn’t that noticeable, I have observed it myself. But obviously, gentoo users will disagree.
Even if you get the slightest benefit by comping from source, ask yourself
this question: Is it worth compiling the whole system, which can break anytime if you’re careless, to gain that slight optimization? And if it breaks, another 2-3days of compiling and customizing? Not to mention on
updates you have to recompile installed packages to newer versions. Then there are gcc upgrades which will require you to recompile the entire system
toolchain and then all the packages. My opinion: So not worth it.
Go with Arch if you want a distro which is simple, fast and easy to


If you disagree with my opinion, feel free to comment. Maybe there’s some advantages of a source-based distro I am unaware of.

Triple Booting Arch,Ubuntu and Windows

So I wanted to install Ubuntu 9.10 and see how it “fails to” perform on my hard disk [as previously I tested he RCs in vbox within Arch]. Ubuntu boots up quite slow. At first a white ubuntu orb like logo appears and then the xsplash kicks in and after a while login screen comes and then it takes you to your desktop. However, the shutdown and reboot are way faster than any others’ I have seen. Just click and bam you are out of ubuntu. Anyway, I had Arch and Windows pre-installed on my hard disk and I just wanted to install ubuntu in a spare partition I had. Here is the partitioning scheme:

df -h
Filesystem            Size  Used Avail Use% Mounted on
/dev/sda3              28G   19G  8.1G  70% /            <—–Arch’s Root
none                 1005M  140K 1004M   1% /dev
none                 1005M     0 1005M   0% /dev/shm
/dev/sda5             7.4G  3.1G  4.0G  44% /pkg
/dev/sda1             9.4G  5.9G  3.5G  64% /windows
/dev/sda2             9.2G  3.2G  5.6G  37% /ubuntu
/dev/sda6   swap        <——– Common swap of 2Gb for both Arch and ubuntu

So I burnt the Ubuntu 9.10 amd64 [64bit version] ISO in a DVD-RW and boot my pc from it. When the partition option comes be careful not to select anything other than the partition you want to select ubuntu on and the swap will auto-detected. Now after entering the details and everything the final overview of the installation process will appear. Click on “Advanced” tab below and deselect “install grub” option. That’s right make sure that Ubuntu doesn’t install it’s grub on your hard disk. It’s useless. I find Arch’s Grub2 much more customizable, easy to apply custom backgrounds and icons,etc. So let ubuntu install without letting it install grub anywhere. Now after all’s done reboot your computer and go to Arch. Modify the /boot/grub/grub.cfg

Read more…

[screenshot] My Peaceful KDE Setup

KDE 4.3.3

[news] KDE 4.3.3 is here

One of the great perks of being an Archer is that you get to try out the latest of everything before everyone else. With the Maintenance release of KDE4.3.3 today, surely Arch Linux was ready to provide me with the brand new fresh KDE packages. All I had to do is a “pacman -Syu”.

Many non-Archers/Ubuntu users/People not familiar with rolling release model will go huh? :O That’s it? No new distro release? No re-installation? No formatting? Yup, that’s the beauty of Arch Linux being a Rolling release distribution. Kudos to KDE and Arch developers.

So the upgrade went smooth and then I recompiled the kde-extragear-plasmoids 4.3.3 from AUR. Don’t expect much changes since 4.3.2 as this is not a version upgrade but only a maintenance release. Enjoy the new KDE 4.3.3.