New ArchLinux 2009.02 ISO release

ArchLinux have released their latest ISO; 2009.02.

For those interested, there are i686-32 bit and x86-64 bit versions available, as an ISO image aswell as an USB image. Download here.

Features ( linky);
2009.02 comes with the following features:
- Kernel 2.6.28
- Ext4 support. Installation can be done on a ext4 root partition.
- Rescue and maintenance capabilities for Ext4 root partitions
- Fallback ISOs with the ISOLINUX bootloader, for those that have trouble booting Grub-based images
- Several bugfixes in the installer
- Brought the included documentation up-to-date
- Inclusion of AIF (Arch Linux Installation Framework), the next generation installer, currently under development.

Cheers.

 

Awesome. I've been waiting for this. The lack of ext4 support in the last disk became a pain when I foolishly installed Vista without setting up a rescue partition beforehand. Thank God for pvmove...

 

Looks like it's time for me to download.

p.s. I think we should have an "ISO War" sometime to see who has the most linux ISO's. I swear I might win.

 

A better contest would be to see how many times you (re)install a *nix OS every month!

 

haha, yeah

 

I would win, you fool.

30+, at the least.

 

I've fallen behind. I was installing a new OS once or twice a week, but then I just got lazy.

 

Used the new installer a few times already, and I like it. However, the only bummer is the fact that there i no FTP image yet.

I'm a victim of always reinstalling - its just so much easier than trying to clean up.

 

FTP install iso has been available since release if thats what you mean.

 

It must have been the mirror (cs.vt.edu). They have had the core install up since Feb 11, and added the FTP two days ago.

 

Hmm, must have been the previous 2008 release, 2009.02 was just released two days ago.

 

I have successfully installed Arch 2008 just before this release and started to tweak it for my needs. However there is no luck with 2009.2 so far: I cannot make xorg to work.

 

If you already had 2008 installed why did you reinstall with 2009?

 

You seem to be under the false impression that Arch has versions. It does not. Only the installer has versions. Read about the rolling release model here.

 

Yes, I knew it in theory. I did few things wrong with 2008 and was not sure how to revert it, so I wanted to start from the beginning anyway and 2009 came just in time. Hope to return back to it.
I am not that experienced Linux user, nor I am intended to be at the cost of my main job which has a little to do with coding.

In spite of the good reputation and my first impression about Arch documentation, in reality it appeared to be both incomplete and contradictory for the one who does Arch for the first time, even if he/she has some experience with Debian based distros like me.

Based on my installation of Arch 2008 with LXDE, it was not so fast as the rumors say. I actually could not see anything very particular about it and its speed but the installation pain and the time invested to it.
For comparison, the latest Debian Lenny was installed without any problem and there are also may possibilities to make it light.

 

In fact, after having spent 2 evenings trying to make Xorg in Arch to work on my hardware (which has no problem with most linux distros I have tried before), I suspect that there is something wrong with the "Arch way".

It is just impossible that one has to spend so many efforts on a basic hardware recognition issue while the tiny linux distributions
like Puppy, DSL, and even Slitaz (after some minor postinstallation tweaks) are able to do it without any pain in the *ss. And all these distros are 3-6 times smaller that the basic Archlinux CD.


I also cannot understand how/where Arch evolves, if xorg installs with small pain in its 2008 editions, and it is so difficult to install in its 2009 edition.

Even without Xorg, desktop environment, and many daemons, the Arch installation which boots just to a console does not seem to boot faster than a typical linux distro. Well, with the default kernel. However, if an ad hoc kernel is the thing which allows to speak about super fast Arch, then one can, in principle, compile custom kernel also in other distros.

I think Mythbusters should take care about linux distros legends.

 

I'm sorry to hear that, ivar. Arch was never a popular distro, and I don't expect that it will ever be. A few of us just find it very charming. I can honestly say that I've never experienced the problems you've just described. I chose Arch because I found it less of a headache than any other system I've tried, including Vista. But all that is beside the point. "To each his own" is the method of linux.

 

This charm of Arch still keeps me trying and hoping.