Results 11 to 13 of 13
Haha, Dapper Dan. I just noticed you change your tag to Trusted Redneck. Very nice. How fitting you use a distro whose name is commonly referred to as the Southern ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
- 11-25-2007 #11
Haha, Dapper Dan. I just noticed you change your tag to Trusted Redneck. Very nice. How fitting you use a distro whose name is commonly referred to as the Southern Cross.
- 11-25-2007 #12
- 11-26-2007 #13Originally Posted by MikeTbob
This thread is specifically asking about Crux (which lead to a mention of Arch), so here's my 5 cents on the topic: Keep in mind that I read about both, but I've tried neither. If I were actually going to run a GNU/Linux desktop, it'd probably be either Crux or Arch.
Why? They're both minimalist without 10,000 layers of abstraction and without beginner-focused gui tools. They seem to value a healthy compromise between stability & latest apps available in the apps they provide. From what I've read I envision both as 'no fluff, no hand holding, get your work done'.
The Arch Linux Wiki has a bit on how Arch compares to Crux. They seem to have a lot in common, with one fundamental difference: Arch is primarily package based; Crux is primarily source based.
Unless that latter point is a deal maker or breaker for you, I'd say both are deserving of a trial run (keeping in mind that each may require a learning curve above and beyond the average *buntu Linux distro).
Sounds like a fun project. I suspect that in both cases, once things are set up properly you'll have a mostly unbreakable box for your kid to play with.