![]() ![]() It’s convenience that makes Arch lose points here. dev/dvd nodes (when applicable) and Alsa sound restoration, gstreamer’s plugin registration, right permissions for /proc/acpi/event (for laptop users) etc, all happen automatically, while with Arch you need to go tweak those yourself. ![]() Slackware comes with better defaults though. Adding/removing daemons especially, is really easy, much easier than in Slackware, (the Slack book has… forgotten to mention those). Having a single central point where you can edit daemons, modules, networking, hostname etc, it’s just convenient and easy to remember. While the installation of Arch by editing rc.conf might baffle some, the same rc.conf makes the system configuration of Arch a breeze, after you finally get it installed. However, I will give Slackware a slight preference here because of all the networking/package installation that’s done by the installer, while Arch requires the user to use a text editor to edit the /etc/rc.conf to its liking, as this requires some extra knowledge. Mind you though, “best” doesn’t always mean “easy”.īoth distros feature text-based installation that are quite equivalent in terms of features and ease of use. This is an article outlining the differences between –what I believe– are the two best Linux distros around today. To paraphrase one of the best “Star Trek: The Next Generation” episodes, “ Best of Both Worlds“, both Arch Linux and Slackware represent the best of all the OS worlds: the power of traditional Unix, the elegance of BSD and the ease of mind of Mac OS X. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. Archives
December 2022
Categories |