ArchLinux Vs Gentoo Opinions

gentoo vs arch This is a topic that many people are looking for. is a channel providing useful information about learning, life, digital marketing and online courses …. it will help you have an overview and solid multi-faceted knowledge . Today, would like to introduce to you ArchLinux Vs Gentoo Opinions. Following along are instructions in the video below:

” s it goin youtube. So discussion video arch linux versus gen2. You know being fairly fairly well seasoned. In both distributions.

I ll give you my opinion on the pros cons of both versus each other. So. What is the pros of arch linux artfulness. Users will know my list.

Very well latest and greatest software available promptly in the official repositories and some are say that is a pro. Some will say that that is a cond. It pretty much comes down to whether you the user wants the very latest and greatest for some reason or if you want to make sure you ve got a stable system and only want to use tested proven stable software. So you will have newer software in arch linux.

Pretty much as soon as it becomes available versus gen. To jj is not that far behind. But yeah. It s not bleeding edge out of the box.

Not that there is a out of the box experience on gender you can add the unstable repo if you want to but you know what i mean arch linux documentation is second to none. I mean gen 2. Documentation is pretty damn good too. But whenever you are curious about something you can always find the answers on the arch linux wikis.

Another pro about arch linux is of course. A you are if you can t find a package in the main repository. You can always search and find multiple versions of whatever package. You re looking for in the aur.

You ll be pretty hard pressed to you know to not be able to find something in there. It s massive. Now the pro about arch. Is it has a great packaging system called make package and it s not too difficult to actually learn how to build your own packages.

If you re willing to put in a bit of time and effort. It s not that hard to learn how to make your own package builds so you can grab some source code. You know you can work out what dependencies you need for it and all that and easily make a binary for it and upload it to a you are so that s a pro making your own packages is pretty easy arguably a lot easier than making your own builds and gentle. The pro of arch.

Linux is it s fairly simple to manage the system. Easy to learn how to use pac man to install update. Rollback and all that stuff you know in comparison to gen. 2.

You don t have to worry about all these other little things like like updating configuration files all the time. Whenever you update certain packages. Most things are handled automatically in our clinics so there s my pros of arch linux vs. Gen 2.

If you ve got any of your own drop them in the comments below. So what are the cons of arch linux in my opinion. Our this might you know upset some arch fanboys and it really depends on you know the system that you ve got to know what you ve got on there for your default desperate environment and what applications you ve got on there. But it is my opinion that arch linux is unstable a good example is if you re using kde on arch linux.

Right now. There s no dispute that our salinas is a bleeding edge. And i m sorry got bleeding edge software brings about bugginess it brings about instability it doesn t go through a vigorous testing phase. They do test packages and then upload it into the official rep.


Oh. But it s not bigger ously. Tested and proven to be stable. So it s bleeding edge.

There s no argument about it if you re using kd on ash right. Now you know for months. Now you would have been pulling in lots of plasma fire stuff. And that s definitely not stable so it really depends on what you ve got on there at the time.

If you ve got katie on there you will likely have a pretty unstable system. I m a cater you user look you know i m not insulting kde on the same plasma. 5 is unstable. Very well known to be unstable.

But that s fine if you re using ash linux and using kde you know you re in for so. It s all good it will improve as time goes by but like i said arguably if you re using some applied xfce. As your desktop environment or maybe. Marte.

You won t have as much instabilities as if you re using kde or maybe genome shell. But i would expect some strange behavior from some applications like ktn live. You know here s another example. Often letters.

Versions off mlt. Which katie ann live and other video. Editors depend on is unstable and causes. Undesired behavior.

In your video editor things like that and that s not to say that it can t happen on other distributions. But all i m saying is bleeding edge equals potentially unstable and if it s not unstable now you know it s always rolling rolling rolling bleeding edge. You will encounter packages that are unstable. So if you want a stable system.

All i m saying is arch. Linux is not you know the best option. Another con of arch linux while a you are is a pro. It can also be a con.

Because there are a lot of packages in the aur that is not written well the package bills are written well or aren t maintained or updated and broken. You might turn around and say well i m going to store like 50 packages from aur and i ve never had a problem okay cool. I ve installed many packages from aur before and i ve encountered several that are broken let s not forget that aur is user contributed package builds so you know the quality is questionable. Another con of ashla mix versus gentoo arch.

Only supports officially two architectures 686 and a 664 while gentoo. A fish supports a wide variety of architectures. Another con in my opinion is constant updates. Because it s bleeding edge and you might not think.

It s a con you might think it s a pro. But i m saying in my opinion. It s a con just an overwhelming amount updates. You know week after week.

Just massive amounts of updates. It requires the user to consistently research on the forums to make sure that the latest upgrades you know are stable or if they need to do any manual intervention. Because if you blindly update. Every time without even thinking about it or researching into it there will be times.


When you will break your system. So yes make informed decision whether you want to apply the latest update or not in our clinics. And there s not to say that things can t break in gender either because it can and does sometimes. But the aim in the port is triage into is to make sure that everything is stable and if it s potentially unstable gets masked.

So drop a comment down below. What you think are some cons of our clinics. Don t be biased. All right pros for gen to portage need.

I say more portage is a far more powerful package. Manager and allows you to customize every aspect of your packages. With things. Like use flags.

Another pro is it s my opinion. That. Gen. 2.

Is a more stable system. Than arch linux. Gen. 2.

Is fairly up to date not bleeding edge. But not way behind lock. The latest version of farm debian is fairly well up to date and stable and because the portage tree is quality controlled and potentially unstable packages or untested packages vast the vast majority of what s in the portage tree that you can install without our masking is proven to be stable and because of this it s my opinion that gentle is a more reliable rolling distribution another pro. I ve really briefly touched on it but in my notes.

I said repose and managed with different levels of mass to ensure stability another pro of gen. 2. Is the party a builds if you can t find something in the main port is tree you can grab. He builds and build it in your own stable environment.

So all the libs are come with it will be built in your stable environments. Now as i ve talked about in one of my previous videos instead of adding overlays and bringing in potentially unstable packages and libraries from an overlay you can grab the e build build it in your own environment. And it will only pull in stable packages and libraries from the main port is tree whereas. I believe it s been a few years to use arch properly.

But i believe with a you are its can pull in unstable libraries and packages correct me if i m wrong. Though. But i m pretty sure there you are it will often pulling you know outside dependencies. But that s the same with gentle with overlays.

But you have the ability to build in your stable environment from top of my head. I don t recall a way to grab a package build and make it so it builds against stable libraries. That s currently in the main repositories. You would probably have to manually edit that package build another pro for gen.

2. Is slots. Not slots slots. So with.

Gen. 2. You can store multiple versions of a package accounting for scenario. Where i would want that myself.


But the option is there if you want to multiple versions of the same application you can pull that off whereas an analytics pac. Man and their repository system you can only have one version of an application not multiple. Now the pro is most modern a builds leverage the apache user function. Which allows you to specify your own patches or patches.

You might find on github or whatever and apply it to the source code or software in the importance tree prior to compiling it what i put into these words you can integrate the patch into the regular build processor. Portage rather than having to download a separate source version of your application and managing. It outside of your main software. Repository.

Now. The pro for gen 2. Is multiple versions of any packages available in the main portage tree so with athlean x. You ll install a particular application from the main repository.

You only get one version with arch linux. You get multiple versions and you can pick what version. You want out of a multitude of available versions. So.

That s the pros of gen 2 versus. Arch linux in my opinion. If you have any of your own dropping down below. So cons of gen 2.

Could be spun as a pro or a con. But let s say it s a con far more complex to learn to manage a gen. 2. System.

Versus. An arch linux system for example with gen. 2. You ve got to play with unmasking.

Use flags deep cleans. Rev. Deep rebuilds. You know things like a dispatch comp to update.

Configuration files. Deciding. If you want to merge a config file or zach bits or replace our current configuration files. If you if you stuff that up you can delete the old config file and potentially screw up an application or your system.

So that s a short list. But a much bigger learning curve with gentle another con of gen. 2. Is much harder to install and a lot more time consuming.

Because everything s built from source. Another kind of gen. 2. Is you will encounter the occasional portage conflict that needs a manual intervention.

Because you re dealing with source packages. You will often have to intervening with conflicts and resolvers before the upgrade will progress and build by the other day for example. There s a xorg. Updates and xorg drivers update.


And it was conflicting with ex f 86. Mouse input and another package xf 86. V4 l. Video couldn t have those two packages and those two packages and stall at the same time.

So you have to either like mask. A couple of them or delete them. And then continue with the upgrade and then install them later and hope that they work together or if one replaces. The other if they get rid of those and use the other package to replace it and all this sorts of technical decisions need to make to maintain your system.

Another con is which i ve mentioned briefly is compilation times to install certain packages. Let s say chromium you d be looking at between one and two hours or longer depending on your hardware. So for me it takes about like an hour an hour and ten minutes to upgrade or install something like the chromium web browser or levi office whereas obviously with a binary distrowatch arch just seconds and you ve got it installed. So you ve got to have more patience with gen especially with doing updates.

You know if you re like the other day. I had like about 50 odd updates. I just left that sucker on overnight and then checked on in the morning. But that s the fun of gen.

I love it. So you re saying. All that what are the similarities of gen. 2.

And arch linux. Only ones. I can think of from the top of my head is there obviously both rolling release distributions. But you know art is the bleeding edge rolling distribution and gen.

2. Is a well. I would say a fairly stable role in distribution. That s you know fairly well tested.

Though they re both distributions that give you a minimal base. If now you build up your system. The way you want it s a do it yourself distribution and once for most of you once you you know sink your teeth into a distribution that you build it up from scratch basically and configure. It the way you want and build it up from a very minimal base you probably want to go back to a pre builds distribution.

Where they give you a default default set of applications and configurations. And all that sort of stuff. Now you might want to stick with destroys that s you know you do it yourself so there you go and this is speculation. But it could be said to be a pro or a con that a gentoo doesn t use system d.

What you can chuck sisson t. On there if you want but they officially support open rc mainly. I m not going to get into a system d versus open. Our csv in it you know debate.

I m not too worried either way. But well i ve open a say so like i say if you have any of your own pros or cons of either versus each other drop them down below. If you enjoy the video. Please thumbs up subscribe and all that good stuff and ” .


Thank you for watching all the articles on the topic ArchLinux Vs Gentoo Opinions. All shares of are very good. We hope you are satisfied with the article. For any questions, please leave a comment below. Hopefully you guys support our website even more.


Leave a Comment