On Tue, Jun 24, 2014 at 6:50 AM, Dimitris Papastamos <s...@2f30.org> wrote: > On Mon, Jun 23, 2014 at 09:44:05AM -0400, Andrew Gwozdziewycz wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 14, 2014 at 3:28 PM, grayfox <gray...@outerhaven.de> wrote: >> > Hey, >> > >> > i used Arch for some years but changed to Gentoo this week. It's not >> > really BSD-equivalent by default but with some time you can do >> > everything you want very easily. Moreover I like the USE-flag concept >> > to compile just the things I really want and need. >> >> Arch is pretty good, has great documentation and is quite lightweight. > > Arch is not lightweight. You can use the Arch documentation/wiki with any > distro if you know how to remap concepts.
I guess it depends on how you define lightweight. If you define lightweight as "the distro only has 6 packages," then a) I think you're being insane, b) more power to you. There's another way to define lightweight (the way I meant it), which is that it doesn't do anything special for you and allows you to build the system you want. Don't want pulseaudio? Fine, don't install it. Don't want GNOME? Don't install it. The number of *available* packages has no impact on that, but it sure is convenient when installation is a 'pacman -S' away. I fail to understand the docs/wiki comment. The docs/wiki are supplementary to the manuals that come with software you can install if you choose to. To further my point: https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Boot_Loaders. Arch doesn't say, "you can only use GRUB." It says, "here's a bunch of Boot Loaders for you to choose from, and a bit of documentation to get you started quickly." Again, choice over prescription. > >> I must complain about the use of systemd, which is, in my opinion, not >> very suckless at all. No other complaints though. > > Systemd is not the only issue. Please enlighten me, if you would be so kind.
