My wife wanted to buy a new Lenovo laptop yesterday and I told her there was no way we're getting a Lenovo. The hardware, features and price were a good deal and I know I could get it without Windows installed (most computers here come with no OS)but not with those ethics. We got a Fujitsu instead. I traded in my Lenovo Android mobile phone a few hours after I first read the article. No sense in taking a chance and I don't want to support that kind of company. Glad I traded in the phone because I got a second hand Samsung Galaxy III and installed CyanogenMod.
I think the sabayon minimal install uses fluxbox, is based on gentoo and sabayon has a iso builder called molecule. All you would need to do is add openbox and what ever else you want. Its huge though.
I used to use this a few years ago ( before Fabio dumped i686, probably causing popularity drop for Sabayon) to skip the bloat in Sabayon . You had to have an ethernet connection because there were no network management packages included. No ethernet = no installation progress. Kind of like Antergos. No ethernet or wifi = no installation. Being able to do connectionless installations is a big plus for ArchBang and how Mr Green can do installs on the bus
what is the downside to have systemd installed? i have it on my system things seem ok. ive read that many are upset with it but is it really that bad?
Many of us prefer choice and control over our whole GNU/Linux systems. Systemd seems to be taking over the whole system (hence the "system" in its name), absorbing integral parts of the system, calling the absorbed packages and functions deprecated when they're not and limiting choices of the user. For Windows and Mac converts to Linux, this is no problem because they're used to this kind of system on their computers and don't care too much or see what the big deal is. For others like me, I'm used to controlling my whole system, being able to choose how my system is built and run. This is why I run Gentoo, Funtoo, Crux and Slackware. Systemd takes away my choices. It is Windowsizing Linux. Some users, especially a lot of the newer users don't care. A bunch of us old time users vehemently reject systemd. If systemd had remained a choice and not a forced option I would not feel the way I do. I just wouldn't choose it. I'm looking forward to testing Daniel Robbin's new OpenRC that is going to surpass systemd as init for performance when it's ready.
Back on topic, Mr G, I run eudev on Crux, Gentoo and Funtoo and have no problems. I built an LFS and had problems with mdev but not with eudev. Maybe something like the Crux installation might be the way to go but with a kernel binary instead of compiling the provided source during the installation process to shorten the installation time. It's too bad it wouldn't be easy to do a minimal systemd less base Arch install and then add a small Openbox plus minimum number of packages as a tarball or snapshot. Or would it? Sorry, just thinking out loud.
Hmmm, that's not good. I have the same problem with Crux 2.7 and iwlwifi-3945 on my old Compaq laptop. When I build the kernel it only allows me to add iwlwifi-3945 as a module and I have to modprobe like you do.
Is it blacklisted? I can't check now to see if it is normally blacklisted because I'm using my laptop with Funtoo installed. Other than that it might just be that you're stuck modprobing unless someone has a script to add it during the boot ( like a cron job but boot based and not time based). Wish it was as simple as adding it to the openbox autostart.
Please post what you did to fix your problem. Posting "It's fixed" doesn't help someone else who may have the same problem and is looking for a solution.
The command you posted removes the MBR of the USB stick and from experience, doesn't always allow the following partition table to be erased by GParted. Increasing the count from 1 to 10 will start zeroing the partition table and allow GParted to rewrite the USB stick without any problems. (hopefully ) Trying the below command replacing the X in sdX with your assigned usb partition location should do the trick.
# dd count=10 bs=512 if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdX
If you want to freshen up your usb stick, just run
# if=/dev/zero of=/dev/sdX
to write zeroes on the whole stick.
Tom Gundersen, as found here at Systemd Continues Getting Bigger, Almost At 550k Lines Of Code No surprise as he works for Ass Hat now which was probably the RH plan along to recruit the top developer at Arch and why Arch moved to systemd without any resistance from the others. Red Hat are no idiots, well some of them, and if they can recruit top developers from all the big distros then it's difficult to stop the cancer from spreading.
It seems like there are only a few last bastions of sanity left in the Linux world according to this Boycott systemd and someone should get ArchBang OpenRC added to the list
This is interesting https://bbs.archlinux.org/viewtopic.php … 3#p1378903 as mentioned by Mr G here http://bbs.archbang.org/viewtopic.php?pid=26908#p26908
As complexity increases, bug rates go up, as well as the difficulty in diagnosing bugs and the difficulty in fixing them so that the fixes don't break other things. The sheer size and scope of systemd, the haste and laziness in the shitty coding in which it was created and untested, the arrogance of the developers, their inability to accept advice, correction or help, and this "you end users are stupid and we're brilliant so shut up, bend over, and join the collective because we are the Borg and resistance is futile", should have set off alarm bells for the whole Linux community to reject this crap/malware. Instead, kool-aid has been passed around by RedHat, SUSE, et al and drunk by the lemmings waiting for the signal to jump off the cliff into the systemd abyss. Pathetic!!
I believe there will be bigger and worse problems than what just happened with systemd.debug coming for systemd users. This is just my opinion from my experience of 19 years of Linux usage (as of last month).
Addendum edit: Interesting read from LQ Slackware Linus Torvalds vs Kay Sievers
The chickens have come home to roost. Did Kay and Lennart really think they'd be able force Linus into accepting crap code forever? Has Greg KH weighed in with his thoughts. Their attitude (especially Lennart's) of pushing out crap code and blaming the end user for having a broken system and expecting others to file bug reports and submit fixes is lazy, arrogant, irresponsible and diabolical. I stopped using Arch and systemd a year ago. I could see the writing on the wall and what the future held for those distros that switched to systemd. This unfortunately meant I had to leave this project and the great team here.
I really hope Linus tells Kay and Asshat to get lost permanently from submitting code to the kernel and systemd dies a painful death. The sad thing is is that a lot of time has been wasted by so many people on systemd that could have been spent improving OpenRC, Upstart or the old init. How sad for all those forced into using crapware built as a monument to one person's ego.
If you open a terminal and input
$ obmenu-generator -h
you'll get a readout of help for obmenu-generator. You should see something like this which is mine:
[archvortex@ArchVortex ~]$ obmenu-generator -h usage: /usr/bin/obmenu-generator [options] Options: -p : (re)generate a pipe menu -s : (re)generate a static menu -d : (re)generate icons.db (with -i) -r : (re)generate config file -i : use icons in menus -u : update the configuration file -R : reconfigure openbox Others: -h : print this message -S : print the schema file to STDOUT -H : print help message for config files Examples: ** Static menu without icons: /usr/bin/obmenu-generator -s ** Pipe menu with icons: /usr/bin/obmenu-generator -p -i ** Reconfigure openbox: /usr/bin/obmenu-generator -R NOTE: After a pipe menu is generated, '-p' it's not needed anymore. ** Config file: /home/archvortex/.config/obmenu-generator/config.pl ** Schema file: /home/archvortex/.config/obmenu-generator/schema.pl
You can see that you are able to regenerate the icons.db with the -d flag. Change your icon theme in Appearance and then regenerate the menu icons using:
$ obmenu-generator -d
I like colour in my menu icons so I switched from Awoken as well.
We need to define "pure" Arch. The base install is "pure" Arch until the user starts configuring Arch (changing Host Name, mirrors, etc.) and then it is no longer pure Arch. After that, once the user starts configuring the install according to their needs (adding a WM or DE, network, xorg, etc.), it becomes their "version" of Arch, a "child" of Arch. ArchBang is a Crunchified version of Willxtreme's original 21 step Arch + Openbox. The difference between ArchBang and an Arch Dev/TU or long time Arch user's personal version (complete with tweaks and scripts) is that ArchBang is available for the Linux community and theirs is not.
Is ArchBang Arch? The saying goes "Arch is what you make it." If we go by this then yes, ArchBang is Arch. In the sense of DNA of the parent, ArchBang started out as Arch and became a version of Arch. But as many Archers would probably contend, ArchBang is the unwanted ginger haired step child of Arch.
What is sudo? Isn't that training wheels for the Linux CLI?
As for ArchBang/Arch disappearing/getting ignored in the grub menu when using other Linux installed to the MBR, I'm not sure why and I'm too lazy to find out. If you use os-prober with another Linux it may miss ArchBang as well. I found that mounting the ArchBang partition before running update-grub or grub-mkconfig -o /boot/grub/grub.cfg with another Linux will allow the AB partition to be found and added to the grub menu.
Nice one from Michael Larabel from Phoronix
Latest aptosid (yearly release?) is out.
As the saying goes, "Give a man Ubuntu, and he'll learn Ubuntu. Give a man SUSE, and he'll learn SUSE. But give a man Slackware, and he'll learn Linux." I've been building my own SlackBuilds lately for my own version of SlackBang.with a stable 3.6.8 smp kernel. I've switched my Gentoo box back to Slack after 10 years. I can keep Slack as up to date as Gentoo or Arch with homemade SlackBuilds that take less time to make and compile than Gentoo and I trust my own package builds more than Arch's.
Still running ArchBang with systemd, and ArchBang with OpenRC and mdev.
What do you mean by stuck? Frozen/Hang during the partitioning step and you have to reboot or can you xkill the installation window in lxterminal and try install again? Any big jump in RAM usage during the step that causes the freeze? Not familiar at all with the ThinkPad. What did you have installed before trying ArchBang?
First of all, LXDE is not the default of ArchBang. Openbox is the default and that's why you're having trouble removing it. Openbox is the window manager that we use that also serves as the DE. Something like:
# pacman -Rns openbox
should get rid of Openbox and its dependencies/configuration files but not all of the Openbox related packages in ArchBang are dependent. handy has already listed some.
Personally, I would leave openbox and the few other packages with it in case KDE lives up to its reputation (KrashDE) and requires fixing. At least then you have a functional desktop in case something with KDE goes wrong. The amount of space required for the Openbox packages is minimal and is a good backup.
This good news from the Gentoo Project List
Richard Yao wrote:
It is no secret that many of us are unhappy with the direction that udev
has taken under the leadership of the systemd developers. That includes
Linus Torvalds, who is 'leery of the fact that the udev maintenance
seems to have gone into some "crazy mode" where they have made changes
that were known to be problematic, and are pure and utter stupidity.'
After speaking with several other Gentoo developers that share Linus'
concerns, I have decided to form a team to fork udev. Our plan is to
eliminate the separate /usr requirement from our fork, among other
things. We will announce the project later this week.
I understand that the council is scheduled to vote on a topic related to
udev stabilization. Would it be possible to delay the vote for another
month so that we have time to get organized?
“I feel a strong desire to tell you – and I expect you feel a strong desire to tell me – which of these two errors is the worse. That is the devil getting at us. He always sends errors into the world in pairs – pairs of opposites. And he always encourages us to spend a lot of time thinking which is the worse. You see why, of course? He relies upon your extra dislike of the one error to draw you gradually into the opposite one. But do not let us be fooled. We have to keep our eyes on the goal and go straight through between both errors (p. 186).” Mere Christianity by C.S. Lewis
@dragonauta Precisely!! I deleted both the gtk2 and gtk3 folders in ~/.config and used Openbox Configuration Manager to make sure the widget theme I wanted (QDarkSudio4) was activated then rebooted, regenerating a new settings .ini in the gtk-3.0 folder with QDarkStudio4 as the GTK theme. If you don't like the icon set AwOken (I prefer colour icons) you can change at the same time and the new settings .ini will have both changes.
That's my tint2 config file modified from Archbanger lrcaballero's original post in the Share your Openbox thread.
--------------------------------------------- # TINT2 CONFIG FILE #--------------------------------------------- #--------------------------------------------- # BACKGROUND AND BORDER #--------------------------------------------- #panels rounded = 5 border_width = 1 background_color = #1A1A1A 75 border_color = #ffffff 100 #active task button rounded = 10 border_width = 0 background_color = #ffffff 20 border_color = #ffffff 20 #non active task button rounded = 10 border_width = 0 background_color = #ffffff 0 border_color = #ffffff 0 #--------------------------------------------- # PANEL #--------------------------------------------- panel_monitor = all panel_position = bottom center panel_size = 100% 28 panel_margin = 0 0 panel_padding = 1 2 font_shadow = 0 panel_background_id = 0 #--------------------------------------------- # TASKBAR #--------------------------------------------- taskbar_mode = single_desktop taskbar_padding = 0 0 0 taskbar_background_id = 1 #--------------------------------------------- # TASKS #--------------------------------------------- task_icon = 1 task_text = 1 task_width = 200 task_centered = 1 task_padding = 2 2 task_font = sans 9 task_font_color = #ffffff 70 task_active_font_color = #ffffff 85 task_background_id = 3 task_active_background_id = 2 #--------------------------------------------- # SYSTRAYBAR #--------------------------------------------- systray_padding = 4 2 3 systray_background_id = 1 #--------------------------------------------- # CLOCK #--------------------------------------------- time1_format = %a, %b %d, %r time1_font = sans 10 #time1_font = droid sans 8 #time2_format = %A %d %B #time2_font = sans 6 clock_font_color = #ffffff 76 clock_padding = 4 4 clock_background_id = 1 #--------------------------------------------- # BATTERY #--------------------------------------------- #battery = 0 #battery_low_status = 7 #battery_low_cmd = notify-send "battery low" #bat1_font = sans 8 #bat2_font = sans 6 #battery_font_color = #ffffff 76 #battery_padding = 1 0 #battery_background_id = 0 #--------------------------------------------- # MOUSE ACTION ON TASK #--------------------------------------------- mouse_middle = none mouse_right = none mouse_scroll_up = toggle mouse_scroll_down = iconify
You can change the number of desktops by changing taskbar mode. Look for
# TASKBAR #--------------------------------------------- taskbar_mode = single_desktop taskbar_padding = 0 0 0 taskbar_background_id = 1
and change it to the desired number of desktops
Who remembers when AUFS got taken out of Arch and caused us so many problems (no more Larch)??? Retards!!
Smil3y, you're more than welcome to stay here and don't have to leave. This subforum is to share your project and help ArchBang/Arch users keep a systemd free Arch system.
How difficult would it be to install a stage 3 tarball on your LiveCD? I'm thinking what if we made a weekly systemd-free stage 3 ArchBang tarball that could be installed on the LSD LiveCD installation (a la Gentoo) and provide a weekly updated ArchBang. I don't think it'll take much time to make the tarball.
I don't know about spyware but have a look at who created systemd and is actually in control of it. RedHat. I don't want to spread FUD but RedHat is the big money making distro in Linux and hypothetically, if they decided that systemd was no longer going to work with any other distro but RedHat, then there would be a lot of screwed distros and Linux users who would have to either pay to use systemd or go elsewhere (Slackware, Gentoo or heaven forbid, Windows or Mac).
I think my biggest question is, is it going to to be possible to create a maintainable systemd free ArchBang iso based on Arch? Is ArchBang going the way of Chakra or has it already started moving in that direction? As the ArchBang project leader, I really don't feel comfortable ethically, polluting ArchBang user's systems with a full systemd .iso. It actually disgusts me. If someone wants to change their system to run on systemd then that's their perogative and choice. We are all about choice. I really don't want to be pushing systemd on anyone because I disagree with systemd and its implementation on so many levels.
Thanks for the link. I've done something similar but with only Openbox and Fluxbox desktops loaded and not all the KDE and XFCE packages. Inspired by our friend, Barnaby. http://all-things-linux.blogspot.co.uk/ … kbang.html
If you run Slackware Current mirrors then you will have the latest Slackware packages or use AlienBob's package versions.
# slackpkg update # slackpkg install-new # slackpkg upgrade-all
will update the repo mirror you chose (just like Arch you must choose a repo mirror but in Slack's case only one mirror), show you new versions of some packages and upgrade upgradeable packages installed. Pretty simple. And yes you must manually install packages that weren't included with the install.
# installpkg foo
How difficult is that? Maybe a bit time consuming.
I run ArchBang, Gentoo, Debian and Slackware on my 2 Asus 1215P netbooks (64 bit processor run as a 32 bit due to maximum 2GB RAM capacity) and CPU frequency scaling is my best friend. Adjusting frequency limitations and using the right frequency driver and governor will make a huge difference to heat output and stop possible kernel panics. Packages like cpupower, cpufrequtils and cpufreqd are your best friend when using netbooks.
@marxav, I'm originally a Vancouver boy but have lived most of my adult life in Asia (Japan, Hong Kong, Macau, Singapore and Indonesia).
@handy, I'm so sorry I didn't see your posts on my "subscribe to this topic" or when logging in to Forums. You can see package dependencies at https://packages.sabayon.org/ or by using Rigo https://wiki.sabayon.org/index.php?title=Rigo
I've been testing Debian Unstable for awhile now and only find the main difference between it and aptosid is that aptosid has a more up to date kernel and you don't need to change run levels to install packages like aptosid. When I ran aptosid it was just as bleeding edge as Arch and more stable.
I've been using Slackware since 1995 and will probably die using Slack (unless Pat and Eric have something tragic happen to them and systemd gets implemented). Running current repos keeps things as up to date as required and my current kernel is 3.2.29 smp.
I've been using Gentoo since 2002. Took what I learned from Slackware and installed Gentoo before there was a handbook. Flag usage, masking/unmasking, compiling, ebuilds.
Took what I learned from Slackware and Gentoo and have been running Arch for 6 years now.
Anybody got any tips on which is the best distro for building/packaging?
Slackware in my opinion.
Running cutting/bleeding distros requires time, research, experimentation, and application of learned knowledge to fix problems. If a user isn't going to put the time in to learn and apply then they should use Zorin or Mint or just go back to Windows. If you've been running Linux for only 3 months, my suggestion would be to run a more stable distro and set aside a 10 GB partition if you have the space to learn experiment, break stuff and fix it, and learn Linux inside out.
As you said you will try Calculate this week. It's a closer to real Gentoo overlay than Sabayon is and you can download binaries as well instead of compiling to save time. Something like
# emerge -bv firefox
will allow you to download the binary with the -b flag and see the installation verbosely with the -v flag. It actually may provide you with a stable enough cutting edge distro that you seem to be looking for. Boot up time will be similar to Sabayon and requires parallel loading, changing rc service run levels and prelinking to improve boot time.
On reading it I gained some more respect for at least one of the Arch devs.
Agreed!! Tom seems to be the only one of the Devs that cares about the big picture and all the users. From the time he announced that Arch would move in the direction of systemd, he has tried to give support non-systemd users as well and apparently will offer his time and help to someone to setup and maintain a sysvinit user-driven and maintained project and use AUR if so desired to store the packages.
More from the thread:
On Thu, Sep 27, 2012 at 10:22 PM, Eric Bélanger <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote: > I'm a bit confused by this post. I guess I should clarify my aim: As there are vocal proponents of sysvinit who feel strongly about staying with that, I'd rather help them get started in the right direction rather than cause lots of unnecessary confusion and fragmentation (as I alluded to at the end of my email I have seen some misguided attempts at doing this which I think would be detrimental to everyone). Where this work happens (if it happens), is not really anything I gave much thought. If it is the consensus that we should quickly drop initscripts and sysvinit from our repos and ask people to work on it elsewhere that's completely fine with me. > My understanding was that we were > switching to systemd as the default init system because maintaining > two init systems was too much work and problems. My take is that it would be too much trouble to make all packages (polkit, networkmanager, gnome, ...) support both running under initscripts and systemd. Moreover, it is not really possible to improve initscripts to the point where it is competitive to systemd. So making systemd the default makes sense. However, maintaining the initscripts package as it currently is is not really a big problem from a technical point of view. Nor is maintaining non-systemd versions of the relevant packages in a separate repo. > -remove initscripts from the repos > -no more developement in git and on arch-project ML I don't see the benefit of doing that quickly, but if that's what you guys want, it is fine with me. I would be in favor of initscripts dying a natural death. > -we can start removing rc.d scripts from packages as we update them That would be fine (and someone could gather them from svn and put them in a package in some third-party repo (as I suggested)). > By letting initscripts become a user project, > we will be able to use our resource on other aspects of the distro. I'm not suggesting that anyone but me should put any efforts at all towards supporting non-systemd systems. My point was exactly to get a user-driven project started (if anyone steps up). > Also maintaining initscripts in repo also means maintaining the rc.d > scripts. I don't think that follows. In the same way that systemd has been in community/extra/core for a long time without service files around, the same could be the case for initscripts. > As most of us dev/TU are using (or will use) systemd, these > will be harder to maintain and fix. I agree, rc scripts should be dropped as soon as they become a burden (which could be decided on a package-by-package basis). > I don't know what you think about this but that's how I see things. Sorry if I created any confusion. Hope it is clear now.
One full systemd partition on grub-bios I ran would hang for what seemed forever until it finally autologged to desktop in at the 1 minute 50 second mark. No verbose as to what was happening and where the hell are my readable log files? Oh yeah, "undocumented binary format." AssHat strikes again.
Tom Gundersen email@example.com
8:48 PM (2 hours ago)
to Public, General, Arch
As the move to systemd is under way, and we will soon have packages in
our repos that require your system to be booted with systemd, I
thought this would be a good time to summarize the state of
sysvinit/initscripts in Arch and their future.
Abstract: I think the current state is relatively good (but I'm
clearly very biased) and it should not be hard to maintain a
non-systemd boot on Arch even in the long-run. However, someone has to
do the work.
NOTE: Please let's keep any replies on-topic. This is NOT about
whether or not sysvinit or systemd is good or bad.
This has been repeated a lot, but I think it makes sense to say it
again: We are quickly running out of people who do early testing of
initscripts. I.e., who follow arch-projects, review patches and test
initscripts-git. At some point we will probably also struggle with a
lack of developers/TU's testing initscripts in [testing], so if you
feel passionately about a non-systemd boot on Arch, please join
arch-projects and help with testing.
Initscripts are currently fully supported and actively developed. Work
has been going on for a long time to make initscripts and systemd
share the same configuration file format wherever that makes sense,
and this work is mostly completed (at least on the initscripts side).
Moreover, code is shared between systemd and initscripts wherever
possible (there might still be more opportunities for this, but the
work is mostly completed). Together, these two developments should
make it relatively easy to maintain initscripts for Arch in the
long-run, even with a small user/developer base.
I intend to maintain initscripts in the official repos as long as this
makes sense. However, for this to be viable, I think we would need at
least one capable and active initscripts developer who is interested
in helping out and who uses sysvinit/initscripts as their main init
system. In the long-run it would make sense for such a person to take
over maintainership of initscripts. Anyone interested, please join
arch-projects and post reviews, suggestions and patches :-)
Packages requiring systemd
In the (near) future, we expect some packages to no longer support
non-systemd boot. In particular I'm thinking of polkit, networkmanager
and some gnome packages (I don't know which as I don't use gnome
myself). There will probably be more in the future. We might also drop
ConsoleKit from the repos at some point in the future.
No need to panic though. The number of packages that will actually be
need to be rebuilt to support non-systemd boot are actually very
limited (certainly less than ten). An alternative repository just
providing the relevant packages could very easily be maintained by one
committed person (possibly even the same person that will help out
with initscripts). I would be happy to help with getting this started
if anyone is interested.
A point to keep in mind is that the people who don't want to switch to
systemd, might not be using ConsoleKit, polkit, etc anyway, so maybe
this problem is not actually a real one.
Currently we have a few hundred rc scripts in our repos (the scripts
under /etc/rc.d/) shipped with our various packages. This will
probably not change in the near future, but if for whatever reason
some packagers decide to drop some rc scripts from their packages (and
rely purely on the systemd unit files), then it would be very simple
to pull the relevant scripts from our repos and ship them in a
rc-scripts package in the above suggested repository.
As I have tried to outline above, the amount of work required for a
non-systemd boot is really small, and I'd be happy to help anyone who
decides to take it on. However, I have seen some suggestions of ways
of avoiding systemd that entails splitting the systemd package up,
rebuilding tens of packages just to avoid a systemd-libs dependency or
re-duplicate all the code shared between initscripts and systemd.
This, in my humble opinion, is not worth the effort and is not
something I'd be interested in getting involved with.
Please direct any technical discussions to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Interesting how Allan says "Arch Bang has plans to save all the systemd haters! And they have made an installer so their ability to handle actual packaging of something this complex is not to be questioned!" See http://allanmcrae.com/2012/09/replacing … rch-linux/
I don't recall that we were going to save systemd haters but rather that we were going to offer a choice to ArchBang/Arch users. Arch Devs can say whatever they want about me or ArchBang. Non-conformists who don't follow the other lemmings (lennings) will always be ostracised and I don't really care. I'm not going to get into a war of words or fire sarcastic volleys back and forth. It's not going to accomplish anything positive for anybody. We will continue along our merry way trying to offer ArchBang/Arch users a choice, whether it's systemd, sysvinit, OpenRC with mdev, Upstart, or whatever floats your boat. In my opinion, I believe time will tell and a few years from now when systemd has had time to work its "magic'", we'll see that many a major distro realise that they made a mistake by taking the systemd path. Hopefully, ArchBang will still be around providing users with a choice.
Allan removed the new systemd 191-1 out of [testing] for i686 because it crashes during boot up (as I found out on my testing partition with systemd) You may ask why I'm running Arch with systemd. Well, I believe you can't complain or criticize something without using it. I have a regular and a testing partition with systemd (rolling back to the last version solves the systemd crashing problem). Also, someone will have to support AB users with systemd (LennArch). Yes, I'm taking one for the team
Any opinions are not wanted at Arch Forums. "Just the facts, Ma'am." It seems to be the consensus of Arch Mods that if you want to express your opinion then start a blog.
I was rudely-sarcastic about RedHat
I'm rudely sarcastic and highly opinionated most of the time and probably should be banned on all Forums everywhere