Talk:Arch Linux

Computing Start‑class

	This article is within the scope of WikiProject Computing, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of computers, computing, and information technology on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.ComputingWikipedia:WikiProject ComputingTemplate:WikiProject ComputingComputing
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Linux Start‑class

	Linux portal This article is within the scope of WikiProject Linux, a collaborative effort to improve the coverage of Linux on Wikipedia. If you would like to participate, please visit the project page, where you can join the discussion and see a list of open tasks.LinuxWikipedia:WikiProject LinuxTemplate:WikiProject LinuxLinux
Start	This article has been rated as Start-class on Wikipedia's content assessment scale.
???	This article has not yet received a rating on the project's importance scale.

Arch GUI

Anyone have a good screenshot of their Arch desktop?

Its default is no GUI. At least the version I downloaded. --Vellocet Malchickawick

There is no GUI by default but many of the users use at least one of the major window managers. I know of very few users who rely solely on the CLI (though there are a few).

http://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php?t=9665&highlight=window+manager

If we were to showcase one it would probally have to be XFCE.

Here is one of my desktop... Desktop Screenshot

I use only CLI for my server. After all, no reason to slow it down with a GUI if your only purpose for your machine is to be a server. My desktop machine however runs fluxbox and i'm about to try out xgl+compiz. If I make a snazzy screenshot, I'll upload it. --Anthony5429 13:53, 10 August 2006 (UTC)[reply]

A screenshot of my Arch desktop would be the same as just a screenshot of KDE. --134.58.253.130 23:34, 2 December 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Oh no, that's a silly screenshot, it shows only the moon 'n a bit of kde nothing else (package system in the shell would be nice etc.)... —Preceding unsigned comment added by 88.70.23.84 (talk) 23:54, 7 April 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I'm going to go ahead and remove the screenshot that's on the page right now, it has very little to do with Arch Linux. --78.70.152.241 (talk) 15:38, 25 August 2008 (UTC)[reply]

Agreed and done. I've added one of Archie in the Live section just so the article isn't totally picture devoid. But aparat from that I think a screenshot would just be misleading people into thinking that there is a 'default look', in other words be more disinformatie than informative. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chochem (talk • contribs) 14:42, 17 September 2008 (UTC)[reply]

The added screenshots seem irrelevant at best and misleading at worst. I'm removing the one from the info box as it is misleading and the version on as it simply seems to have been inserted at random.

1) There is NO default look or desktop for Arch. People seeing these sceenshots will assume that there is one. Therefore: misleading. If you want pictures go get a grab of the framebuffer when you've started up the install media because that's the common denominator for all Arch installs.

2) This is not the place to show off your desktop. Go to the forum - there are hundreads of thread for exactly that purpose. chochem (talk) 10:05, 5 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Somebody please remove that ugly screenshot. Not just because of the quality, it's misleading.--06:58, 19 October 2009 (UTC)

Pacman (Arch Linux)

Is there really any reason this couldn't be part of this article and redirected? This article isn't too long and it would only mean adding a paragraph anyway. IMO it would be better here anyway. NicM 11:08, 28 January 2006 (UTC).[reply]

I think that it might be better to leave it as a seperate page. some other linux distros (frugalware) use pacman. -Arthur

I also think it's better as a separate page. There is now a pacman 3 development effort which restructures pacman as a library with a defined API. It's clear that pacman is being developed as a packaging tool independent of Arch GNU/Linux.--Kbk 16:12, 5 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Pacman is part of Arch Linux, but being developed as a seperate tool that other distributions can use. The consensus here is that it should remain a seperate article, so I will remove the notice. -- Michael

Userbox

~~For anyone interested, I have made an Arch Linux userbox here. --Anthony5429 18:51, 25 June 2007 (UTC)~~[reply]

Please use the userbox below instead. It is nicer as it includes the Arch logo. --Anthony5429 (talk) 02:48, 3 May 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Here is another userbox template for Arch Linux with logo Template:User Arch Linux --KDesk (talk) 03:41, 17 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This user contributes with Arch Linux.

Repositories

The section describing repositories needs a rewrite. There has been a reshuffle. I don't know enough yet to write it.

I have modified the repositories section, according to the http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Official_Repositories Claudiu (talk) 11:09, 18 December 2007 (UTC)[reply]

According to the latest pacman.conf, there is now a [community-testing] now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by 24.117.239.16 (talk) 19:28, 31 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Logo Change

Official artwork and logo - [1]

Recent revert

This edit needlessly reignites the GNU/Linux naming controversy on this article. It should be reverted; "distribution" is clear enough on its own given the context. Chris Cunningham (not at work) - talk 18:47, 2 March 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Get rid of the "release" box.

I think it would be a good idea to remove the release box or at least rename it to "CD Image Build History" or something, because it is misleading. Valcumine (talk) 21:46, 14 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

I agree with you, maybe call it Rolling Release CD Image History? 58.107.166.49 (talk) 03:20, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]