Kubuntu or Ubuntu and RAID 1?

[Michael Butash]

On 07/28/2014 08:15 AM, Kevin Fries wrote:
> Ubuntu has made themselves the self appointed champion of the stupid 
> IMHO.
Someone has to adopt the windoze refugees as they flee 20 years of 
perpetual infection.  Friends don't let friends get sucked into apple's 
walled garden.  I dislike the ui and function (and company), I don't 
really get it...

Sad part is, it really was fairly pure before Canonical tried to 
reinvent the wheel with Unity, and moved their platform around it. 
People didn't want a touch-y ui then, windows 8 users hate it forced 
upon them now.  Canonical just made some bad core decisions how to 
advance the os as a distribution, where breaking it off from d-i began 
to destabilize repeatable process for upgrade and sanity control.  No 
upgrade was ever the same or sane after 10.10-ish.
> But...
>
> If you are to the point of wanting your system your way, its time to 
> upgrade your distro to something a little more professional.
I put Arch on my asus laptop, which between the crazy 2880x1800 display 
and nvidia gpu, freaked the heck out of ubuntu to the point even the 
desktop installer was unstable to use.  Why?  Ubuntu team trying to 
composite everything even in the live desktop caused the oss nvidia 
driver to freak.  Having to dissect ubuntu installer to make 
raid/crypto/lvm go for years made Arch a walk in the park, but it was a 
raring pain.

Automating the process would be an issue I think, where things like d-i 
make pretty sane assumptions to launch systems.  This is where redhat, 
cent, anything deb-based with a solid repo, shine for use in enterprise 
and infrastructure.  Not sure Arch will be there until some folks can 
script the install and make it flexible for disk-based recipes and types 
of installs.  Might as well use rh/deb...
>
> But Arch is not for amateurs.  I would never put my mom on Arch for 
> example.  This distro expects that you know what you are doing.  But, 
> if you have the skill, you will completely avoid the decision making 
> of Red Hat/Suse/Canonical/etc.  This distro for the most part keeps 
> things very clean, and expects that YOU will tweak things as you desire.
I got kde installed on Arch as a quick win via the setup howto, but 
everything was a little jacked up, unfinished, and in general missing a 
lot of key packages and setup that I sort of expect from Kubuntu.  I 
then went to install gnome for a base of gtk (most all of the kde was 
broken using anything that required gtk-base, like most everything 
else), and really couldn't figure out how to add a new login option 
easily to switch between (bad lightdm setup?), and it didn't fix 
entirely the kde using gtk apps issue.  This frustrated me immensely, 
ended up back at ubuntu hacking until it sorta worked.

I also wasn't sure how well things like video upgrades ala dkms worked, 
if steam would work on Arch, other mainline things from deb/ubuntu-based 
systems.  Experiences with Arch here are welcome and encouraged.

My last straw of ubuntu was trying to install 14.04 on my rebuilt 
desktop recently.  I ended up spending half a day playing peek a boo 
trying to figure out where the console was spawning on the system 
between the integrated intel and my 6-head card.  Bios would spawn to 
external, console would cling to igfx with a monitor or not, and display 
would eventually work somewhere between both, totally screwing up 
everything else.  ATI drivers refused to behave with the i915 active, 
and I couldn't seem to kill it even with a grub flag.

Then another half a day giving up trying to make my raid, crypto, and 
lvm setup work.  It didn't, and I started burning Mint cd's, ending up 
with Mint Debian Edition with Mate.

The obscenities borne toward ubuntu that day shall never be repeated.
>
> Just my $0.02
> Kevin Fries
>