Slashdot Mirror

← Back to Stories (view on slashdot.org)

Interview with Arch Linux Core Team

Posted by timothy on from the golden dept.

Provataki writes "OSNews posted a juicy interview with the Arch Linux core team discussing everything about their promising distro, including their original package manager 'pacman,' their competition, their plans and more."

3 of 10 comments (clear)

  1. Good distro by dimss · · Score: 4, Interesting

    I've tried Arch last year. Mostly good distro but their i18n support was very poor. First, I have to rebuild ncurses with utf-8 support (Looks like this one is fixed by judd). Second, glibc comes with reduced locale set. I had to build ru_RU.KOI8-R myself. Debian, for example, provides nice frontend for doing this. Slackware comes with huge number of locales by default.

  2. Great distro... by deggy · · Score: 4, Insightful

    I've been using arch for about 18 months now and it's a great distro - I like to keep bleeding edge and it allows me to use all the latest libs with ease.
    I aggree that it's not for beginners, and still takes considerable user effort at times but it's got a sensible conf file layout and syntax and provides complete control over the OS, it much harder to FUBAR that a Mandrake or a Redhat.

    D.

  3. Naming is Hard! by Makarakalax · · Score: 2, Informative
    Why does every FOSS package name tells us nothing about what it does?


    Pacman stands for Package Manager.

    But to defend less well named products, it is very difficult to name things, and extremely difficult to name things well. Also frankly it is far more important to pick a name that is memorable and easy to pronounce. It doesn't take long to figure out what something does (man pacman, pacman --help, google for pacman etc.), but if you can't remember it next time you need to use it, then the name is useless.

    Sure it's still a good idea to have a small reference to what the application does in the name, but it isn't that important. Google does ok. Not having a reference to what you do in your name means you get more word of mouth. People have to ask "What does that do?", and straight away they are interested.

    Generic names don't really make good names in the overcrowded world of software. People don't realise that you are talking about an Application when you refer to Mac OSX's "Mail". Word does OK because it is so commonly known. But Excel is an excellent name for an application, Access too. You get a small feel for what the application does but the name is fairly unique and memorable.

    And finally, your name (sfcat) tells me nothing about you, why didn't you pick a name that would instantly help me know what kind of person you are? My name is obviously better, it tells you that I am a bit weird.