Which distro

[ZetaNeta]

Please excuse my half-knowledge. I confess, I never really used Gentoo. I always thought there is only a software repository and a package management with some presets (If you don't like to compile everything manually), but your machine still has to compile everything itself.


However, Once I tried Sabayon (an already properly set up Gentoo derivate) and almost everything was buggy there.


So I hope you're right and there will be a way around those missconfigurations (so that everything works out of the box).

When i tried Sabayon, i tried not to pick out my eyes with a fondue fork, when i saw their software management system.


Sabayon is based on Gentoo, but almost nothing is left from Gentoo in there.


And its really damn buggy. Very much.


Sabayon doesnt even properly support Portage. They burried it inside the system and forgot bout it

I don't think Gentoo will get ANY speed improvement.


The advantage of Gentoo is, that you can optimize the binary for every system, which is quite practical for PCs, where every system looks different.


But there will be only one specific pyra hardware.


Look at the pandora: All emulators are optimized for THIS system just like gentoo would do it. But I don't have to build Drastic on my own, I can just download a binary.


Furthermore ED already mentioned a pyra specific repository for some pyra related packages. Some time-critical libraries could be replaced with optimized ones. But 90% of the libraries are not time-critical and we don't need to build them on our own...


And you really think to compile stuff in "just one night" is user friendly?


An user wants to download and play, not download, compile... and play tomorrow.

Ok. You are talking about hardware optimizations, and assume that Pyra team will have time to recompile the entire Debian repo for Pyra.


Ok, we got one version of hardware (which will be wrong as soon as ED releases different CPU cards).


Yet, there are 2 more optimizations: USE flags, and just pure ricing flags.


Some people would prefer to safe memory, battery and etc by removing unneeded features.


Some people, would prefer to go ricing, and explore "what else they can add to CFLAGS".


1 night, is for my "i forgot how much" years old PDA, and for the entire desktop environment.


On a Pyra, the entire DE, from "clean stage3" would be much less. Maybe 1-2 hour. How much does it take on Debian? Much i guess.


And for a simple emulator, it would be just a matter of few minutes. (Or less)


Also, i stated that because the XFCE(Or whatever ED plans), FireFox and some other software will be already there, beats the need for all what i mentioned above.


You will barely notice the difference in speed. After all, we have a serious experience of compiling software from the source.

My vote goes towards arch. As others have said, I've been using it for a while, and the only time I ever have a problem is when I try and experiment with my tower


Also some other advantages to it (IMO), are:


The way it manages package


It's lightweight and fast


The Archwiki


Easy to work with


If we were to go with arch though, we obviously couldn't have the default be the pure, GUIless, arch. we'd have to customize it, but keeping a "pure" arch distro for those who want it would be nice.


If we can't(won't) go with arch, debian is fine too.

Who let the dogs #archlinux out?


I tried to learn "how", but i failed.


Gentoo is also light. And no one can argue bout the speed. How small can you Arch get?


Ok, ArchWiki wins at the points of "Change color of that exact pixel in KDE".


Arch didnt even let me get past the installation. Me! A experienced Gentoo user!


Doesnt that defeats you so loved "K.I.S.S"? I am not saying to put plain CLI Gentoo there either, i even want it to be distributed with pre-installed emulators for unexperienced users, and i also want (and will anyway install) pure Gentoo there after getting mine. (With LXDE and hookers)

 

[bzar]

As an arch user, all things considered, I think debian is the way to go. The base system should assume as little as possible about the user regarding skill level and be hard to break with incompetence. Still, the system should allow advanced users do what they please. I think debian strikes a nice balance here. We'll want the base system to be stable to lighten the support load as well.

EDIT: ZetaNeta, please provide actual benchmarks showing this miraculous gentoo compile speed when compared to another distro with the same software (kernel and compiler version as most important ones)

 

[N3Cr0]

1 night, is for my "i forgot how much" years old PDA, and for the entire desktop environment. On a Pyra, the entire DE, from "clean stage3" would be much less. Maybe 1-2 hour. How much does it take on Debian? Much i guess.

That's the wrong sight on those things. A real Debian user will never compile his whole DE since everything is precompiled. So a simple apt-get install will manage all: resolve dependencies, download all packages and install them. The download will take the most time.

My vote goes towards arch. As others have said, I've been using it for a while, and the only time I ever have a problem is when I try and experiment with my tower

 
The Problem is that Arch is known for changing basic elements deep inside the system from time to time. That can cause inconsistencies after updating.

I can't say it's out of question, but to keep this system rock stable we would run into the same problem as with Pandora's °Angström: We would need our own repository which needs to be maintained by someone because we cannot rely on the official source.

 

[ZetaNeta]

As an arch user, all things considered, I think debian is the way to go. The base system should assume as little as possible about the user regarding skill level and be hard to break with incompetence. Still, the system should allow advanced users do what they please. I think debian strikes a nice balance here. We'll want the base system to be stable to lighten the support load as well.


EDIT: ZetaNeta, please provide actual benchmarks showing this miraculous gentoo compile speed when compared to another distro with the same software (kernel and compiler version as most important ones)

Cant see why Gentoo cant go there. I find it quite friendly.


If you will to set up the testing enviroment. I got another server to setup right now.

 

[Caine]

I would not like the default OS to be one where you need to compile stuff to install it.

My fear is that the majority of potential customers will (rightfully) argue that that is poor usability.

I think that Debian makes the most sense here. It is the root of the majority of the distros these days.

There are some major benefits in not being the odd-man-out.

 

[ZetaNeta]

1 night, is for my "i forgot how much" years old PDA, and for the entire desktop environment. On a Pyra, the entire DE, from "clean stage3" would be much less. Maybe 1-2 hour. How much does it take on Debian? Much i guess.

That's the wrong sight on those things. A real Debian user will never compile his whole DE since everything is precompiled. So a simple apt-get install will manage all: resolve dependencies, download all packages and install them. The download will take the most time.

My vote goes towards arch. As others have said, I've been using it for a while, and the only time I ever have a problem is when I try and experiment with my tower

 
The Problem is that Arch is known for changing basic elements deep inside the system from time to time. That can cause inconsistencies after updating.

I can't say it's out of question, but to keep this system rock stable we would run into the same problem as with Pandora's °Angström: We would need our own repository which needs to be maintained by someone because we cannot rely on the official source.

How much a download will take?


And again, the installation is not a serious matter for unexperienced users, as most software will come preinstalled. Adding a bunch of emulators is a matter of few minutes.


Ok, i get it now. You are all about stability? Well, it seems like only Debian/Funtoo can suit you in it.


There is a difference between "Acceptable stability" and "Lock down all the updates", and a difference between a Embedded system, or a "zero-maintenance-required" server, and a personal workstation, or any other interactive device.

 

[ZetaNeta]

I would not like the default OS to be one where you need to compile stuff to install it.


My fear is that the majority of potential customers will (rightfully) argue that that is poor usability.


I think that Debian makes the most sense here. It is the root of the majority of the distros these days.


There are some major benefits in not being the odd-man-out.

I agree that Debian maybe better by default.


But i am really against any situation where a "different" distro would require serious and same time pointless porting efforts (afaik what happened with Slackware on Pandora)

 

[Linux-SWAT]

Can you elaborate ?

 

[TrashyMG]

But i am really against any situation where a "different" distro would require serious and same time pointless porting efforts (afaik what happened with Slackware on Pandora)

Any distro would require a bit of effort to get working on a custom handheld like the Pandora or Pyra.. Linux-Swat did all the effort on Slackware, On the user end Slackware just requires extracting the image on an SD card.

 

[ZetaNeta]

But i am really against any situation where a "different" distro would require serious and same time pointless porting efforts (afaik what happened with Slackware on Pandora)

Any distro would require a bit of effort to get working on a custom handheld like the Pandora or Pyra.. Linux-Swat did all the effort on Slackware, On the user end Slackware just requires extracting the image on an SD card.

Yeah, but why?


If its a set of userspace tools to manage some Pyra-specific devices, why not to release as a universal tarball?


If its a custom kernel, why not to release it as a patch set?


If its config customizations (like new udev rules), why not to release them too?


All i do on AW, is just installing the right U-BOOT, and the distro needs zero porting effort, except being a ARM distro.

 

[TrashyMG]

Yeah, but why? If its a set of userspace tools to manage some Pyra-specific devices, why not to release as a universal tarball? If its a custom kernel, why not to release it as a patch set? If its config customizations (like new udev rules), why not to release them too?

Who said it wouldn't.. I just mentioned it will be a bit of work to initially get the work done. Just don't expect to drop in any ARM Distro and expect everything to work..

 

[Linux-SWAT]

I can confirm it's indeed a bit more complicated than that.

But i have to say i targeted the best possible quality so the amount of work was proportional.

You may say the same thing about the Open Pandora: grab a pcb, solder components on it, put a screen, et voilà the super device.

Unfortunately, that's not how projects goes.

 

[Ziz]

You may say the same thing about the Open Pandora: grab a pcb, solder components on it, put a screen, et voilà the super device.

Unfortunately, that's not how projects goes.

Sounds like Craig thought about the pandora project. *hide and run*

 

[ZetaNeta]

Yeah, but why? If its a set of userspace tools to manage some Pyra-specific devices, why not to release as a universal tarball? If its a custom kernel, why not to release it as a patch set? If its config customizations (like new udev rules), why not to release them too?

Who said it wouldn't.. I just mentioned it will be a bit of work to initially get the work done. Just don't expect to drop in any ARM Distro and expect everything to work..

Well, i expect to drop in any ARM distro, configure uboot, install tools, maybe change a kernel, "and here i go".


Thats the amount of work which i find suitable.


As long as the amount of work required can be done by software management (except for u-boot maybe), i find it ok.

I can confirm it's indeed a bit more complicated than that.

But i have to say i targeted the best possible quality so the amount of work was proportional.

You may say the same thing about the Open Pandora: grab a pcb, solder components on it, put a screen, et voilà the super device.

Unfortunately, that's not how projects goes.

Can you explain?

 

[slaeshjag]

Distros usually don't have any installers on ARM. That tends to complicate the process.

 

[Linux-SWAT]

I can confirm it's indeed a bit more complicated than that.

But i have to say i targeted the best possible quality so the amount of work was proportional.

You may say the same thing about the Open Pandora: grab a pcb, solder components on it, put a screen, et voilà the super device.

Unfortunately, that's not how projects goes.

Can you explain?

Well, try to port a distro to Pandora.

You can also check my build system on the wiki.

 

[ZetaNeta]

Distros usually don't have any installers on ARM. That tends to complicate the process.

"I, as a official Gentoo user, officially declare that i dont give a sh*t."


Right now, i am comparing it to other ARMs.

I can confirm it's indeed a bit more complicated than that.

But i have to say i targeted the best possible quality so the amount of work was proportional.

You may say the same thing about the Open Pandora: grab a pcb, solder components on it, put a screen, et voilà the super device.

Unfortunately, that's not how projects goes.

Can you explain?

Well, try to port a distro to Pandora.

You can also check my build system on the wiki.

I dont have a pandora.


Gonna give it a look.

 

[TDT]

I gotta admit, porting things is incredibly difficult...and even porting over a somewhat 'simple' program is causing a lot of headaches for me at the moment.  I also agree with others regarding Arch.  I *love* arch linux, but yes, they do  have times of breaking random stuff.

 

[asdfffdsa]

I use Arch on my desktop PC and I like it, but I don't really want it on a portable PC.  If you don't stay up to date with the bleeding edge, you will undoubtedly have many problems with Arch.  Stuff breaks all of the time and a lot of the maintenance is left to the user (and this seems to be getting worse over the years).  I also dislike the fact that its package management system doesn't support partial updates (you want to reliably update something?  Have to update everything.  No clue if Debian is the same)

 

[Granitehead]

I use Arch on my desktop PC and I like it, but I don't really want it on a portable PC.  If you don't stay up to date with the bleeding edge, you will undoubtedly have many problems with Arch.  Stuff breaks all of the time and a lot of the maintenance is left to the user (and this seems to be getting worse over the years).  I also dislike the fact that its package management system doesn't support partial updates (you want to reliably update something?  Have to update everything.  No clue if Debian is the same)

Usually you update everything at once in Debian. I don't doubt there is a way to update only a package and it's dependencies (and the dependencies' dependencies, etc.), but that means it will probably update most of the system anyway in quite a lot of cases. Don't know how you could do that in any other way unless you started having multiple versions of the same dependency and I don't know why one would want this.