General Category => Discussion about Artix => Topic started by: l3u on 16 July 2022, 23:05:41
Title: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: l3u on 16 July 2022, 23:05:41
Hi all :-)
I come from Gentoo, and I must admit that I really love Artix/OpenRC for being quite like Gentoo, but without the compiling stuff ;-) I was really happy to see that there are more people out there that are prudent enough to not use that systemd stuff.
But I wonder about one thing (no hard feelings, and no harm meant!): Why is there even the need for Artix as an Arch fork?
Gentoo (which is all about choices) does use OpenRC by default, but you can use systemd as well if you want. You only have to enable another profile.
So what's the reason Artix had to fork from Arch? Why didn't Arch provide e.g. OpenRC as an alternative init system? Wouldn't it be better for both sides if the Artix devs cared about non-systemd init systems to run on Arch, and the Arch devs cared about systemd and everything else?
I'd never have used Arch because it's systemd-only. I'm really happy that I found Artix, and I love it. I hope that it will stay forever and grow! But what's the reason behid the fork? I'm just curious ;-)
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: capezotte on 17 July 2022, 00:00:21
Besides there being high-ranking Arch maintainers who really think systemd should be the one init to rule them all, providing systemd and non-systemd options on a binary distro is inconvenient as many packages would need to be compiled twice, once for systemd and again for non-systemd. Same reason why Artix joining Obarun (which believes having elogind is just as bad as having systemd itself, and comes with a similar problem) is unlikely.
Gentoo can afford to offer that choice since choosing the configure settings and making the binaries is up to you :P
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: cat herders of linux on 17 July 2022, 01:27:23
I think if i remember correctly you can install arch and use openrc BUT you will get no support for it from arch for the aforementioned reasons above and much like debian, you will still have to install systemd even if you're not using it because so many files have a dependency check for systemd irrespective of its actual use.
Also, welcome again to artix. You must have some mondo skill to convert from gentoo to artix. I had never actually considered doing that. That's truly a gonzo move and i'm impressed. i may have to install gentoo just to try it.
BTW, my favorite reason for abandopning gentoo and choosing artix is that i can 'sudo pacman -Rdd gnome-keyring' because i hate those popups and no one could seem to tell me how to get rid of it on my gentoo install permanently.
But you're right i think, for the effort, gentoo just doesn't give that much back. Artix is a great place to be.
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: cat herders of linux on 17 July 2022, 01:32:54
Besides there being high-ranking Arch maintainers who really think systemd should be the one init to rule them all, providing systemd and non-systemd options on a binary distro is inconvenient as many packages would need to be compiled twice, once for systemd and again for non-systemd. Same reason why Artix joining Obarun (which believes having elogind is just as bad as having systemd itself, and comes with a similar problem) is unlikely.
Gentoo can afford to offer that choice since choosing the configure settings and making the binaries is up to you :P
obarun's scripts gave me a headache trying to develop a gestalt of how it functions. please don't try to explain it to me as i have a fragile constitution. just tried to install xfce from their automated installer and i remembered why i stopped using it. nothing but base installs. removing zenity webkit2gtk and midori does nothing to prevent the install failure of xfce or openbox and i am not even interested in trying plasma. blech! they can have it.
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: x230 on 17 July 2022, 10:23:07
Besides there being high-ranking Arch maintainers who really think systemd should be the one init to rule them all, providing systemd and non-systemd options on a binary distro is inconvenient as many packages would need to be compiled twice, once for systemd and again for non-systemd.
Yeah okay, that explains it. I'm pretty sure they could find a solution to that if they wanted (like creating Gentoo-like profiles, and having a repository containg the packages to be switched between init systems for each; and changing the profile activates the respective repo or whatever). But if they don't want, that won't happen.
After having used Gentoo for 18 years now you don't get that you can't simply relink everything that needs to be relinked after changing something ;-)
But I have to admit that I didn't switch completely to Artix (yet). I still love/hate Gentoo, and I keep it on my desktop, which is a Ryzen 5 3600 with 32 GB RAM. There, you can "afford" Gentoo, but you still have to really want it.
Other thing for my notebook, the pc of my wife and my parents: I simply had enough of telling them "You won't be able to use your computer for the next two days, because I'll run an update with contains the QtWebEngine".
Until now, I installed it on my notebook, and I'm really impressed. Everything "just works". Very easy, very quick. Artix/OpenRC almost feels like Gentoo, but without the compiling stuff. I think this is a very beneficial tradeoff between control over the system and simplicity. And the little bit of handwork you have to do to install it is also almost what you have to do to get Gentoo up and running – but easier.
And you start with nothing but a bootable system that ends up in a console. Nothing more. You only get what you want to and are not spammed with tons of software you not even know what it does. I really love it :-D
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: phoenix_king_rus on 17 July 2022, 12:28:26
Yeah okay, that explains it. I'm pretty sure they could find a solution to that if they wanted (like creating Gentoo-like profiles, and having a repository containg the packages to be switched between init systems for each; and changing the profile activates the respective repo or whatever). But if they don't want, that won't happen.
You know, that was a thing before Artix: there were Arch-openrc repo and Manjaro-openrc (the latter was considered as "official" IIRC). Eventually these projects merged to become Artix.
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: Lancia on 17 July 2022, 18:06:15
Yeah okay, that explains it. I'm pretty sure they could find a solution to that if they wanted (like creating Gentoo-like profiles, and having a repository containg the packages to be switched between init systems for each; and changing the profile activates the respective repo or whatever). But if they don't want, that won't happen.
After having used Gentoo for 18 years now you don't get that you can't simply relink everything that needs to be relinked after changing something ;-)
But I have to admit that I didn't switch completely to Artix (yet). I still love/hate Gentoo, and I keep it on my desktop, which is a Ryzen 5 3600 with 32 GB RAM. There, you can "afford" Gentoo, but you still have to really want it.
Other thing for my notebook, the pc of my wife and my parents: I simply had enough of telling them "You won't be able to use your computer for the next two days, because I'll run an update with contains the QtWebEngine".
Until now, I installed it on my notebook, and I'm really impressed. Everything "just works". Very easy, very quick. Artix/OpenRC almost feels like Gentoo, but without the compiling stuff. I think this is a very beneficial tradeoff between control over the system and simplicity. And the little bit of handwork you have to do to install it is also almost what you have to do to get Gentoo up and running – but easier.
And you start with nothing but a bootable system that ends up in a console. Nothing more. You only get what you want to and are not spammed with tons of software you not even know what it does. I really love it :-D
>>I'm pretty sure they could find a solution to that if they wanted (like creating Gentoo-like profiles, and having a repository containg the packages to be switched between init systems for each; and changing the profile activates the respective repo or whatever). But if they don't want, that won't happen.
Even if they want, and they can, is it worth the effort?
Gentoo profiles and ebuilds were with the distribution from the start, how do you bring something like that to an Arch based distro?
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: Hitman on 17 July 2022, 18:17:27
Afaik Parabola (which is another Arch fork, go figure) has a systemd and nonsystemd binary repo, but that distro is so weird that i don't think this can be applicable here, they push for something that is not common sense nor reliable (except for in an ideal world of course).
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: cat herders of linux on 17 July 2022, 18:26:54
>>I'm pretty sure they could find a solution to that if they wanted (like creating Gentoo-like profiles, and having a repository containg the packages to be switched between init systems for each; and changing the profile activates the respective repo or whatever). But if they don't want, that won't happen.
Even if they want, and they can, is it worth the effort?
Gentoo profiles and ebuilds were with the distribution from the start, how do you bring something like that to an Arch based distro?
I hope they never do that. I prefer artix over all the other choices as far as i can tell... unless someone wishes to revive pcbsd?
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: cat herders of linux on 17 July 2022, 18:30:44
Afaik Parabola (which is another Arch fork, go figure) has a systemd and nonsystemd binary repo, but that distro is so weird that i don't think this can be applicable here, they push for something that is not common sense nor reliable (except for in an ideal world of course).
all the linux arch gamers would be frustrated with parabola... they offer only free software. i'm thinking they'd never get steam running well and if they did it would be a great effort?
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: l3u on 18 July 2022, 10:33:44
As of now, I think Artix is good like it is. I hope it stays ;-)
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: l3u on 18 July 2022, 10:42:21
Gentoo profiles and ebuilds were with the distribution from the start, how do you bring something like that to an Arch based distro?
Well, of course, one would have to change the distro a bit. But I don't think this would be too hard: Have a shared repo with everything that doesn't depend on the init system, and one all init-system-specific packages, one per init system.
Surely, on Gentoo, this is way easier. But Artix at least shows that it's no problem to support multiple init systems.
After all, let the Arch guys do what they want and keep rocking on Artix ;-)
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: lq on 18 July 2022, 13:42:58
Artix is an Arch project, the GNOME3 lackeys and systemd assholes just don't want to realise it yet.
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: Hitman on 18 July 2022, 14:51:03
all the linux arch gamers would be frustrated with parabola... they offer only free software. i'm thinking they'd never get steam running well and if they did it would be a great effort?
Last time i screwed around Parabola i still had problems with propr. software even after removing your-freedom and booting another kernel, they must be doing something else library wise. Probably Steam with included libraries might start up, i need to check, but with my t400 only having opengl1.1 it might complain :) my ryzen machine won't boot parabola due to amdgpu. But yeah their repos and linux-libre kernel are good for some stuff but the distro is completely weird.
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: cat herders of linux on 18 July 2022, 16:49:48
Last time i screwed around Parabola i still had problems with propr. software even after removing your-freedom and booting another kernel, they must be doing something else library wise. Probably Steam with included libraries might start up, i need to check, but with my t400 only having opengl1.1 it might complain :) my ryzen machine won't boot parabola due to amdgpu. But yeah their repos and linux-libre kernel are good for some stuff but the distro is completely weird.
not all blobs are the enemy after all
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: lotuskip on 18 July 2022, 18:02:18
Yeah okay, that explains it. I'm pretty sure they could find a solution to that if they wanted (like creating Gentoo-like profiles, and having a repository containg the packages to be switched between init systems for each; and changing the profile activates the respective repo or whatever). But if they don't want, that won't happen.
Just consider that Arch start just now to offer installations-scripts and this.... only because people like Ermanno Ferrari (EF-linux on youtube, a fan of Arch) start to offer those scripts on his github account.
The reason is very simple, former CLI-installation was too much trouble for all if the user want to use btrfs, so! They were obliged to offer (in last three monthly installations) better and better scripts.
Surely, the quality of an OS increase when more people work on it, but, as usual, ideologies don't have a positive effect. OSs all, even free, was "involved" in something very similar to, if not absolutely ideological, "emotional spiral".
Moreover, some people are so constraint in ideological things, that first ignore the problems, than camouflage them and finally, only when the user deserting... make some changes.
The biggest and oldest problem we have (p.e.) is/are the data-carrier (HDD, SSD, NVMe, etc.) with their partitioning and formatting. In this case, none piece of software, for all graphical, is able to partition and format properly 4K-drives (PBS/LBS). Only one CLI-app is able to do it, and this is `sgdisk` for partitioning. For formatting such "drives"... you have to grab the most obscure tricks, today in 2022.
About ZFS... we don't talk about it, but only one: The new "Free-Nas/True-NAS" is Debian-based (with "SystemD" of course) ;D
We here (with/by Artix) are glad to test and use a relatively new OS, the success in the ranking prove many things. The most important evidence is that SystemD was not (diplomatically said) necessary.
Conclusion: In a software-world not caring about basic and primitively problems (like proper handling of data-carrier) is Artix taking care about the most dangerous... refuse the use of SystemD.
The ideology of Arch with their inactivity obliged the arisen of Manjaro, Arco-Linux and many others arch-based OS that basically was not necessary.
Basically, if we want to remain honest... Arch is not an OS for server because cannot handle ZFS (Kernel newer than ZFS-packages) and until three months ago was only a desktop-OS for "experts". RIP (requiescat in pacem) Arch!
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: ####### on 20 July 2022, 15:54:10
Arch started developing a simplified GUI installer over a decade ago but most users weren't interested in it so it was abandoned: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=260360 (https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=260360)
Title: Re: Why is Artix not an Arch project, but a fork?
Post by: lq on 21 July 2022, 10:46:36
Arch started developing a simplified GUI installer over a decade ago but most users weren't interested in it so it was abandoned: https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=260360 (https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?id=260360)
Since the past cannot be changed by anyone, let's say diplomatically, it's all good.
With the so-called forks, of course, there is a lot of work on the wiki that needs to be adapted, see also Arco and Majaro for example.
The thing with the "Init system" does a lot of work and "SystemD" is in too many packages, it even has its own "bootloader".
I don't think that all the people who wrote the installation scripts or made other Arch-based OS with Calamares installation was boring.
Well, it seems that it is not so easy to remove "SystemD"...
Moreover, and especially now that Arch has an installation script... you should ask Arch why and whether Arch can be installed without "SystemD".
But, we already know this answer... a link on the wiki where it says that you can install any init system.
In general, it is easier for a Gentoo "user" to adapt Artix to their own needs than to remove "SystemD" from Arch.