Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5
Results 41 to 45 of 45
You can check out CRUX here: http://crux.nu/cgi-bin/trac.cgi It's not nearly as well known as some distros, but it's very stable, and fast once you get it setup and running. Oh, ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #41
    oz
    oz is offline
    forum.guy
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    arch linux
    Posts
    18,733

    You can check out CRUX here: http://crux.nu/cgi-bin/trac.cgi

    It's not nearly as well known as some distros, but it's very stable, and fast once you get it setup and running. Oh, and Arch was based on it...

  2. #42
    Linux User oosterhouse's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2006
    Location
    Grand Rapids, MI
    Posts
    318
    Quote Originally Posted by ozar
    You can check out CRUX here: http://crux.nu/cgi-bin/trac.cgi

    It's not nearly as well known as some distros, but it's very stable, and fast once you get it setup and running. Oh, and Arch was based on it...
    Faster than Arch you think? How about Gentoo?

  3. #43
    oz
    oz is offline
    forum.guy
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    arch linux
    Posts
    18,733
    CRUX feels slightly faster than Arch to me, but it takes a very long time to fully install, and the ready-to-go packages for it aren't quite as plentiful. Speedwise, Arch feels about the same as Gentoo to me, but it too takes a really long time to install.

    Don't forget the tip I gave you a while back about making images of your Linux partitions. Doing so will allow you to try out lots of different distros, then get back to your default distro (Arch, or whatever) in about 5 to 10 minutes with a simple restore.

  4. #44
    Linux Guru bryansmith's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2004
    Location
    /Ontario/Canada
    Posts
    2,619
    What a great idea ozar. I never thought of that.

    I was thinking of trying Gentoo once...way to much work for me.

    ozar: I have heard that it is based on Crux and LFS. I don't really know which is the true inspiration though.

    Arch is great when you take into account the AUR. Once you start building the AUR packages, you can find packages for just about anything. I was a while ago a package maintainer in the AUR but orphaned my package because it was too time consuming.

    Anyway, I kind of went off topic but Arch is one of the few distros that I really really enjoy. Pacman is the best package manager (the only one that I know of that will remove a package and all of its dependencies that aren't still needed on the system).

    Bryan
    Looking for a distro? Look here.
    "There can be no doubt that all our knowledge begins with experience." - Immanuel Kant (Critique of Pure Reason)
    Queen's University - Arts and Science 2008 (Sociology)
    Registered Linux User #386147.

  5. #45
    oz
    oz is offline
    forum.guy
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    arch linux
    Posts
    18,733
    LFS plays into the overall picture, too. Here's the quote right out of the arch wiki:

    Arch vs Crux

    Arch Linux is descended from Crux. Judd once summarized the differences:

    "I used Crux before starting Arch. Arch started out as Crux, pretty much. Then I wrote pacman and makepkg to replace my bash pseudo packaging scripts (I built Arch as an LFS system to begin). So the two are completely separate distros, but technically, they're almost the same. We have dependency support (officially) for example, although Crux has a community that provides other features. CLC's prt-get will do rudimentary dependency logic. Crux gets to ignore lots of problems we have too, since it's a very minimalistic package set, basically what Per uses and nothing else."
    http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/..._Other_Distros

Page 5 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •