Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

indosupremacy · 2012-01-30 12:03:51

like archbang, it's based on arch linux , but using xfce as desktop environment. I saw it in distrowatch last night, still new (still 6 days on sourceforge ), even google still doesnt recognize it in first page .

Here is their description

'Bridge Linux is an Arch derivative that includes a GUI and standard applications. It intends to stick with an Arch base and will not fork'

Usually Archvortex love to try it , their home site is in millertechnologies dot net

edit Pablokal: for more informative post header

Last edited by indosupremacy (2012-01-30 12:10:42)

ArchVortex · 2012-01-31 21:00:05

Hahaha!! Betul!! Thanks for posting this! Downloaded it overnight and about to run it now in Virtualbox. Makasih ya!!

ArchVortex · 2012-01-31 21:41:03

They are using the ArchBang installer complete with spelling mistakes on partitioning (installer says partitionning). Chromium, LibreOffice, Thunar, Banshee, Thunderbird, Transmission, Gimp, Shotwell included. Waiting for installation to finish.

Update: How do we know it's our installer?

Hahaha!! They're even using Will's outdated 09-14-2011 mirrorlist. Bridge Linux guys, if you're going to use our installer that's fine but update your mirrorlist and personalize the rc.conf.
Minimal Xfce DE and it runs smooth. Smart move adding the LXDE menu editor. Good luck with the distro!!

indosupremacy · 2012-02-01 01:10:54

So , Archvortex , in your signature , you can say "all your archbang and bridge linux are belong to us "
well it is the beauty of open source , you can get a chunk of this from here, there, and anywhere else , yet it's still running as it should .
So , guys , just like Archvortex say, about bridge linux , it's so close to archbang but with different desktop environment (minimal xfce) and more heavy package like gimp,libre,chromium,banshee , etc (the kind of program that Will will say LTTU ) .The installer method chosen by Will is very flexible , you even can built a new distro from it . Even Archvortex already made some installer like that but forgot to announce it at distrowatch .

Maybe , if i dont have archbang already running perfectly , maybe i would use bridge linux.

Mr Green · 2012-02-01 01:30:03

http://millertechnologies.net/

Will should be proud, he has not only created a great live distro but the means to build your own from it.

ArchVortex · 2012-02-01 01:53:32

@Indosupremacy,

I'm trying to build a heavy ArchBang right now before starting to make a new distro with Arch plus Fluxbox that I've named "Fluxar". Having problems with permissions in the livecd since the recent changes in Arch but thanks to Mr Green's ideas and new info in the archiso wiki, I should have this working today and make a DVD size ArchBang. I'm still looking for my notes from last November when I made an .iso of ArchBang with Chromium, LibreOffice, etc. Aduh!!

Ninja-1 · 2012-02-01 11:00:54

I'm the (yes, the only) developer of Bridge Linux. I very much appreciate the work done with the ArchBang installer and that I'm allowed to continue using it, that is a huge help for me. The mirrorlist and rc.conf issues have been noted, as have the pacman.conf issues with package signatures, I even wrote about bugs and fixes before I saw this (http://millertechnologies.net/index.php … Itemid=468), and it will be corrected in the next release. The rc.conf was just a stupid overlooked thing on my part, wanted to get it out too fast. I very much appreciate input regarding the distro so I can refine it further, thanks for the interest.

pablokal · 2012-02-01 14:25:21

Let thousands of flowers bloom.

Mr Green · 2012-02-01 15:14:20

@Ninja-1 best wishes with Bridge Linux ....

Ninja-1 · 2012-02-01 16:54:37

@Mr Green: Thanks for the support.

@ArchVortex: These issues have been fixed in a new version that I just uploaded. Thanks for testing.

ArchVortex · 2012-02-01 20:35:06

@ Ninja-1

I like the choice of packages with a minimal Xfce desktop. It runs smooth and have had no problems yet. Everything recognized (screen resolution/ sound cards/etc.).

I notice that you are also not using modemmanager, tcl, and usb_modeswitch to add 3G Modem capability to networkmanager. That might be something to add to the next release. The packages are very small and won't add much to your CD size but will allow us modem users to use Bridge Linux OOTB.

You can remove the Bridge Installer desktop icon from the desktop after installation.

Are you planning to use Conky in the future or is that LTTU?

Kudos for a job well done for your first release!! If there's anything we can do to help, let us know. Best of luck!!! I have a question for you but will e-mail you directly.

Ninja-1 · 2012-02-01 21:53:40

I will consider adding modem support.

Adding a line to the install script to delete the desktop icon shouldn't be hard, that can probably be done.

I'm not sure about Conky, I don't use it any more myself, I don't see much benefit since most of the time I don't see the desktop, mostly because I'm nearly always using Chromium. I usually open a system monitor if I want to see the system usage. ATM it is LTTU, but if there is great demand I can add it.

I'm also considering other desktop editions, starting with KDE. These would most likely be DVD-sized because of the more bulky environments. If Chakra wasn't forking, there wouldn't be much need, but unfortunately it is. I would like to have graphical installers for the heavier environments. Might try porting the Tribe installer for KDE, was working on it before the HDD issue I had, but stuff happens.

Again, thanks for all the support, this community is great!

indosupremacy · 2012-02-01 23:56:56

@Ninja
welcome to our humble community
Just like Will who got a lot of help from Crunchbang and Arch linux community while in the process of building Archbang , I am pretty sure you will got that kind of help too.
Yes, unfortunately chakra is forking Arch , while we, Arch user who want to retain the simplicity of Arch but doesnt want to have difficulty in installing Arch for the first time, a distro like Archbang , CTKArch , bridge linux would be effective enough

Mr Green · 2012-02-02 01:42:39

@Ninja-1 I have only just started building iso's and my todo list is getting longer by the minute. You do not really need Conky and I agree with Chrome over Firefox.

Not sure about KDE, lxde would be about as heavy a desktop as I would go

kazuya · 2012-02-02 17:20:59

The installer is great, but needs to be simpler for total beginners to be able to install. I was hoping the installer was already gui-fied. Not for me, but for other beginners. Great job nonetheless. More options for us.

ArchVortex · 2012-02-02 22:03:56

Bridge Linux and ArchBang are NOT for beginners. If they want GUI's they can go use Ubumtu or Zorin. Users of Arch or any Arch based distro should be able to work without a GUI. I'm getting sick and tired of people talking about GUI's for Arch.

distrohopperarched · 2012-02-03 02:48:37

ArchVortex wrote:

They are using the ArchBang installer complete with spelling mistakes on partitioning (installer says partitionning). Chromium, LibreOffice, Thunar, Banshee, Thunderbird, Transmission, Gimp, Shotwell included.

Having Banshee on bord is just wrong. Mono is bloatware.

Ninja-1 · 2012-02-03 11:45:19

Banshee will probably be replaced by something lighter. Removing Mono might free up a little more room on the iso.

Mr Green · 2012-02-03 12:19:02

Exaile would be on my list.... but lighter is better

kazuya · 2012-02-03 14:28:45

ArchVortex wrote:

Bridge Linux and ArchBang are NOT for beginners. If they want GUI's they can go use Ubumtu or Zorin. Users of Arch or any Arch based distro should be able to work without a GUI. I'm getting sick and tired of people talking about GUI's for Arch.

Hahaha. Do not get me wrong. I have grown to love the cli for package manager and do not see a need for it for me. At the sametime, I respect having such a feature if at all possible for new and beginner users that deserve a chance to experience the beauty and speed of arch. I understand your concern that gui package manager might ruin some of the power functionality of arch per package management and act as a starting point for more default bloat-ware.

I hardly used or appreciated apt-get command in Debian or Ubuntu due to existence and super convenience of synaptic package manager. The gui package manager possession is one of the strong selling point of chakra linux.

Bridge linux is a nice concept, but I am not too excited about the lack of flash, and very few things. It is good for certain users that may want an XFCE environment already there. Openbox is my number one prefered DE.

Mr Green · 2012-02-04 02:11:23

kazuya wrote:

Bridge linux is a nice concept, but I am not too excited about the lack of flash, and very few things. It is good for certain users that may want an XFCE environment already there. Openbox is my number one prefered DE.

You tube works for me. Unless you mean something else?

Ninja-1 · 2012-02-04 13:10:07

There were two other versions before this one, the one before this had a GUI package manager, but I'm not sure about the compatibility of pacman 4 at this time. It seems like people just love Flash and codecs. I have made it very easy to install codecs, Flash, Java, and even GRUB2. Any new person who is willing to learn should be able to get it up and running, even if they just copy and paste commands into the terminal.

On the other hand, it isn't just for new users. People, like me, sometimes don't enjoy doing a vanilla Arch install. Bridge is much faster to get up and running than vanilla Arch.

Mr Green · 2012-02-05 02:24:12

I just feel that Archbang and of course Bridge Linux gives you the tools to hand to get Arch up and running.

Flash and codecs are icing on the cake....

Of course you can install what you need, if you are prepared to open a terminal

monacelli · 2012-02-05 07:01:53

Nice. I'm digging your choices of XFCE, Chromium, and LightDM. If I were to nitpick I would say ditch the LibreOffice install but getting rid of it after an install is no big deal. It's cool seeing an XFCE based distro based on Arch/Archbang. Keep up the good work, Ninja-1!

once · 2012-02-08 05:39:11

@Ninja-1
can we have a smaller size kde version?

Last edited by once (2012-02-08 05:42:55)

Ninja-1 · 2012-02-09 00:25:02

My plan was to allow KDE and other heavier desktops to have a larger iso. What would you cut to make it 300 MB smaller?

once · 2012-02-09 02:20:57

@Ninja-1
after installed xfce4 version then -Syu got 'startx' error, so replace cairo-ubuntu to cairo solved that problem, does it normal?

Ninja-1 · 2012-02-09 16:59:13

This was mentioned on my site, if you have issues that's a good place to look: http://millertechnologies.net/bridge-li … ade-notice

once · 2012-02-18 21:46:33

@Ninja-1
can we have gnome-iso md5sum? cant start in livecd when login.

pablokal · 2012-02-19 06:16:33

Please, address Bridge Linux questions at its own forum: http://millertechnologies.net/forum

ArchVortex · 2012-05-27 23:33:21

Congrats Dalton on your latest release!!

axel668 · 2012-05-28 01:55:07

while I'll probably stick with Archbang, personally, it's cool to have more desktop alternatives ... especially if you just want to try something out in a VM or on a LiveCD (I'll probably check out the latest Gnome some time soon). and copying from the best is the way to go in OpenSource, so ... good work

Ninja-1 · 2012-05-29 12:55:25

Thanks, ArchVortex!

kazuya · 2012-06-05 07:33:30

I drop my hats off to ninja for the development of Bridge Linux. XFCE is now fully my desktop environment of choice. I do like the fact that Bridge comes at less than 700MB, but is full featured with xfce4.
Big kudos for an awesome job. And reading my past comments, they reeked of a lack of appreciation for the work and effort. Keep it up.
On my archbang install, I primarily run in the XFCE4 DE. I hardly use openbox as much, even though that is nice as well. Kde and razor-qt still feels bloated for me. LXDE seems a little incomplete, but nice as well. Gnome 3 is snappier and faster now, but still suffers some performance degradtion when truly taxing my system.

XFCE is the perfect balance for customizability, speed, functionality, and ease of use. - my personal opinion.

Ninja-1 · 2012-06-09 22:30:55

kazuya wrote:

XFCE is the perfect balance for customizability, speed, functionality, and ease of use.

Agreed. Xfce is addictive, lol. Thanks!

axel668 · 2012-06-12 04:38:50

Tried Bridge XFCE, too, totally disappointing - didn't boot into X after installing and didn't recognize my wireless.
If they copy the installation stuff from Archbang, couldn't they at least copy it right ?!??

So I reinstalled Archbang and installed XFCE manually, it's really not rocket science (and probably MUCH faster than to figure out the Bridge- issues):

'sudo pacman -S xfce4' (press enter to install all)
replace the last line in .xinitrc with 'exec startxfce4'

Here you go, next time your Archbang will boot into XFCE 4.10
(which is an excellent desktop environment, very fast, very stable and polished ... try XFWM composition, looks great and hardly needs any resources at all)

Installing other desktops (Gnome, Mate, KDE) won't be any harder, so resist the Bridge- 'Pepsi challenge' and stay with the original !!

Last edited by axel668 (2012-06-12 04:44:11)

Ninja-1 · 2012-06-12 12:25:02

@axel668

Tried Bridge XFCE, too, totally disappointing - didn't boot into X after installing...

Looks like you didn't bother to read the forums. http://millertechnologies.net/forum/ind … opic=113.0

...and didn't recognize my wireless.

What kind of wireless is it? The only ones I've heard of issues with are Broadcom chips, and that happens on nearly every distro.

If they copy the installation stuff from Archbang, couldn't they at least copy it right ?!??

You do understand that it isn't just a copy at this point, yes? Sure a few things were copied in the beginning, but it's different now.

If I hated every distro I had issues with, there wouldn't be any distros left for me to pick from. I do understand that as an existing AB user you were probably a bit biased already. That said, use what works for you and what you like.

pablokal · 2012-06-12 13:46:53

I think it is important to be supportive to projects and devs.
And not to be chauvinistic.
Shit is happening always and everywhere and almost everybody tries to help and to solve things together.
Even if things don't work out for you, try to respect the efforts and results of the people working hard to get something done.

Mr Green · 2012-06-12 13:51:37

This is probably not the place to discuss Bridge related issues.

ArchBang is a happy forum I will keep it that way!

axel668 · 2012-06-13 02:15:11

LOL guys ... just wanted to share my own Bridge experience (which is what this thread is about ?)
Admittedly some parts of my post DO sound a bit harsh, so I apologize, I didn't mean to hurt anyone's feelings.

I don't hate any distribution, even less if it's Arch- based, and I appreciate the effort that went into it,
even if not everything works in the 1st release.

So let's all be friends and have a happy forum again ?

Last edited by axel668 (2012-06-13 02:31:17)

Mr Green · 2012-06-13 07:23:10

@axel668 Arch based distros are cool, but ArchBang is one of the best,,,,,

Ninja-1 · 2012-06-13 08:44:58

@axel668

No problems.

kazuya · 2012-08-13 16:25:41

Bridge Linux for me does something that neither Archbang and Archlinux has done. After install of Bridge Linux, it automagically detects and list all other OSes in my boot options. This is very impressive. Bridge Linux XFCE is simply awesome. I take back all negative complaints I ever made about Bridge.
The post script is awesome as well. A great deal of effort was put here similar to what was done to produce Archbang. It is not perfect, but is very close to super great for me. This sounds corny, but this distro, archbang, and Zorin are now my favorite fun distros to work in.

Mr Green · 2012-08-13 23:37:46

Going to test bridge light,....

luvfree · 2012-08-23 10:08:58

After reading this thread I gotta say YOU PEOPLE are COOL!!! It's great to find such an easy going community as this one seems to be. I'm new to archbang but not linux (11 years old now) and in my search for a new distro (after being slowly weaned away from what linux should be by ubuntu) I landed here. I tried Arch first but during configuration my ADD got... the... shoobie doobie dooo... la la la laaaa la... OH WAIT... where was I?
Oh yeah! Archbang was just what I needed to get me over the ADD ant hill and using arch. Kudos on that point guys. Installation was quick and painless but failed to find my other operating systems. Updating had some glibc hangups which weren't too attention intensive to iron out and up and running great. Openbox is fast and lean but I soon found out doesn't run compiz. OH NO! I installed my fave DE from ubuntu (XFCE) so I could install compiz and did so quite easily. Another kudos for the BANG! Both are running VERY well on my 10 year old box and I am sold on Arch or a fork thereof.
GOODBYE UBUNTU!!!
I came across this thread and see that Bridge Linux is just the BRIDGE I've been looking for! It'seady to burn and I'm eager to try it. I'll keep the BANG for sure as I am VERY impressed by it. Instead of triple booting variants of ubuntu I now begin the voyage of multibooting variants of the Arch.
THANKS GUYS AND KEEP UP THE GREAT WORK!

Arch Linux

Announcement

#1 2012-01-30 12:03:51

Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#2 2012-01-31 21:00:05

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#3 2012-01-31 21:41:03

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#4 2012-02-01 01:10:54

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#5 2012-02-01 01:30:03

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#6 2012-02-01 01:53:32

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#7 2012-02-01 11:00:54

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#8 2012-02-01 14:25:21

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#9 2012-02-01 15:14:20

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#10 2012-02-01 16:54:37

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#11 2012-02-01 20:35:06

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#12 2012-02-01 21:53:40

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#13 2012-02-01 23:56:56

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#14 2012-02-02 01:42:39

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#15 2012-02-02 17:20:59

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#16 2012-02-02 22:03:56

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#17 2012-02-03 02:48:37

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#18 2012-02-03 11:45:19

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#19 2012-02-03 12:19:02

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#20 2012-02-03 14:28:45

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#21 2012-02-04 02:11:23

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#22 2012-02-04 13:10:07

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#23 2012-02-05 02:24:12

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#24 2012-02-05 07:01:53

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#25 2012-02-08 05:39:11

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#26 2012-02-09 00:25:02

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#27 2012-02-09 02:20:57

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#28 2012-02-09 16:59:13

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#29 2012-02-18 21:46:33

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#30 2012-02-19 06:16:33

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#31 2012-05-27 23:33:21

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#32 2012-05-28 01:55:07

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#33 2012-05-29 12:55:25

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#34 2012-06-05 07:33:30

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#35 2012-06-09 22:30:55

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#36 2012-06-12 04:38:50

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#37 2012-06-12 12:25:02

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#38 2012-06-12 13:46:53

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?

#39 2012-06-12 13:51:37

Re: Bridge Linux: Arch+XFCE atm.. Any one ever tried it?