Talk:Arch compared to other distributions

From ArchWiki
Revision as of 17:57, 1 July 2011 by James Eder (Talk | contribs) (Is 'distro' a formal word?)

Jump to: navigation, search



"Arch does not 'split' their packages into \"-dev\" and \"-common\" as Debian does, therefore, Arch repositories will seem much smaller." I'm having a hard time understanding this bit. Looking at the debian repos, I see some packages have a "-dev" suffix and some have a "-common" suffix, but rarely are the two suffixes both present with the same prefix. --Johniv 03:58, 3 March 2010 (EST)

"Arch supports i686 and x86_64 while Gentoo officially supports x86, {...}, amd64, {...}, and itanium architectures." x86_64 is the same thing as amd64, is it not?

Yes, though Arch typically uses 'x86_64' and Gentoo typically uses 'amd64' to describe the architecture. I'm not sure if it's more right to leave the article the way it is or to change it to use the Arch/Intel naming convention.TheCycoONE 14:31, 4 June 2010 (EDT)

Is 'distro' a formal word?

What about fiddle around with the guts of the system? Yeah, nitpicking here ;P -- Karol 19:10, 17 June 2011 (EDT)

We have,,, and then so I think it is at least common enough in usage amongst most English speaking regions of the world.
I don't know if it presents a translation barrier, but I suspect not so much. It doesn't not hurt to be safe, however (like with contractions).
As for the actual question: Is it too informal for us? I suppose we could get into the semantics of what "formal" is but I think it would be more straightforward to consider the reason for using formal language: to increase readability and promote technical accuracy from contributers. I don't really think it is that much of a readability issue and I don't know that using 'distro' degrades the aura of technical accuracy much when you consider the long history of informality in the free software world with respect to project names. To a large extent, I think we have grown to just accept names as just something that is. James Eder 13:57, 1 July 2011 (EDT)

Fedora refuses to include MP3 and other media support

I never used Fedora, but does it include e.g ogg or flac support? If it does, then it should be changed to Fedora refuses to include MP3 and other non-free media support. -- Karol 19:10, 17 June 2011 (EDT)

Fixed. -- Karol 07:34, 19 June 2011 (EDT)