Arch Linux 2009.8 Vs Ubuntu 9.04

This is a great article to read. In the test I was curious about the gaming aspect but unfortunately they only did 1 game. World of Padman and Arch won by 5 more FPS overall. Here is the article and it's a good read.

http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=arch_200908_benchmarks&num=1

I think on the reading and writing to the HD's its an unfair test due to Ubuntu using the older ext3 file format to the ext4 on Arch. When I did try to setup Arch, I stayed with ext3. All you Arch fans out there, you got a lead over me when it comes to gaming.


Only if I have been able to install arch linux to try.

 

Hmm, I haven't used arch for a while, I might have to look into it.
Thanks for the article.

 

Lawlz... I don't need convincing. I'll switch at some point.

 

The latest arch package for nvidia is version 190.18

 

Well Archer, I could not enjoy the fruits of Arch Linux, I could never get the raid setup correctly. Sooner or later I get it. LoL

 

Yeah, your setup is especially hard. I never had to deal with raid. My first go was with regular old primary partitions.

 

Fake (software) raid or software (hardware) raid? I can setup my linux server in raid1 using fake raid with ease . However, software raid is confusing. I am still deciding which DE should I use or should I go hardcore using a *box system.

 

I think Linux terms is fakeraid, its using the program DMRAID to make it work.

 

Off-Topic: When you try to install fakeraid, where are you stuck on? You definitely need to load dm_mod and your chipset (if required). If you get a kernal panic after setting up a install, you may have to reinstall grub.

Make sure you setup the raid in your bios before trying fakeraid. Good luck!

 

To answer your question, hardware wise, it was setup by entering my intel raid utility at boot up and setup a striped raid 0 Volume. I was following this guide here

"http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/...with_Fake-RAID"

I got lost here
""Add your_chipset_module_driver and dm_mod to MODULES line in mkinitcpio.conf. IMPORTANT: if you have a mirrored (RAID 1) array, you'll need to add dm_mirror as well.
Add dmraid to HOOKS line in mkinitcpio.conf, preferably after sata but before filesystems.
Exit menu and make sure dmraid is one of the hooks.
"

Had no idea what exactly was my chipset, but I did manage to setup the partitions, and set the file systems as ext 3 on my root and home partition. I made the root partition as the boot was was planning on setting grub there. I never got to the gub part, i left off in the configuration part.

 

The entire comparison between the two distros is a waste of time for one simple reason: though they are both Linux distros, they aren't competing for the same users. They are designed for different users in terms of technical competence and expectations from the OS.

Damnit, people are willing to benchmark toasters if it means they can post some crap on the web.

 

Arch Linux FTW. Use it at home, use it on my Asus Eee PC, about to use it on my soon to come Alienware m17x.

 

was rly hard to get archlinux working.. but its much faster compared to ubuntu

 

Hard at first . Once you reinstall 5 times trying to getting everything perfect and on more than 1 hardware, you can do the whole install without the guide . What to do afterward would be up to you.

You guys are lucky at this point, we had to deal with rc.conf, modprobe, blacklisting, and xorg.conf to get everything working way back. Linux and its FOSS are greatly improving.

 

We still use those. Blacklisting is still done with bang lines in rc.conf.

 

That's a pretty bad comparison, I think.

Ubuntu, first or all runs on Gnome. Arch Linux is just the base system. You could be running Xfce, KDE, or only a window manager.

Secondly, the packages in general, are much more bleeding edge in Arch. The nvidia 190.18 driver is still labeled as 'nvidia-beta', as far I know. So this means that the system in arch is newer than the Ubuntu one.

Third, the year and the release month of an Arch linux installer like "2009.8", "2007.8" are just snapshots of the current base system and the kernel. One could install the "2007.8" version and just use pacman -Syu and it'll be as up to date as any other. It's a rolling release, so version numbers mean nothing.

Fourth, obviously, Arch linux and Ubuntu are targeted at 2 very different Linux user groups. One is simple and works right out of the box, one is infinitely configurable and customizable. though the initial install is hard, and setting up the system to your liking can be very tough, once you get it done, you never have to format, re-install and reconfigure. Just an update will do.

Xorg.conf is, for the most part, not really that much required. Basically it's only used add some items that you want specifically to be modified. HAL handles things pretty ok. Except for ntfs support and automounting. That's still a bit tedious to workaround.