Hello, thanks to everybody. I think he will use Gentoo (then I can help a little bit too).
Greetings! Fabian On Tue, 2004-01-13 at 20:16, Bryn Reeves wrote: > On 18:09 Tue 13 Jan , Fabian Braennstroem wrote: > > Hello, > > > > does anybody tried arch-linux before and can tell me now, why gentoo is > > better. I need some good arguments for a friend, who doesn't know which > > distribution (arch/gentoo) he should use. > > Is it just the speed which is very important? > > > > Greetings! > > Fabian > > > > > > -- > > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list > > > > Just looking at the front page of http://www.archlinux.org tells me that > arch-linux is optimised for i686. This is a big difference from gentoo, for > one thing I assume it is x86 only. Gentoo will optimize packages however > you ask it too, based on your /etc/make.conf settings - it can do this > because it builds everything (if you use a stage1 tarball) on the local > machine as you install it. > > Gentoo has portage as a package manager, arch-linux has pacman, again the > homepage tells me: > > "Pacman package manager, which couples a simple binary package format with > an easy-to-use build system" > > So there you are. arch-linux has a (primarily) binary package manager, gentoo > (primarily) source-based. > > I don't think it is a question of which is 'better' in absolute terms, it > all depends what you want to do with it, and what your personal tastes and > goals for a distro dictate. > > Your best option is probably to read the About section of their website and > see how well it fits your needs. > > Cheers > > Bryn > > > > -- > [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list -- [EMAIL PROTECTED] mailing list
