Re: [arch-general] Tool to stop and start services? (Don't Panic)
Thayer Williams wrote:
On 5/22/08, Travis Willard [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On Thu, May 22, 2008 at 11:07 AM, Nigel Henry
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On my Fedora installs there is a GUI for stopping and starting services,
and
also the option of using chkconfig on the CLI. On my Debian installs, I
installed sysv-rc-conf, which runs on the CLI, and allows you to stop and
start services.
Is there anything similar that I could use on my Archlinux install?
Thanks for any help.
I can't recall any such tool offhand, though the discussion certainly
has come up before. What's wrong with /etc/rc.d/service stop and
/etc/rc.d/service start?
I would also have to agree - Arch keeps things so much more organized
with the /etc/rc.d/service {start}{stop} rather than providing any tools
for the user to possibly break.
As for Gui tools, come on, Arch a 'simple, LIGHT weight' Linux
distribution... If Arch had it's own GUI tools eventually it would need
to pick a DE/WM as a default as well and then the bloat would come on.
Arch is one of the few 'useful' Distro's left that has no real bloat to
speak of, let's try to keep it that way.
Re: [arch-general] Anyway to tranlate installer?
gan lu wrote: I hope I can, or I will report a bug for tracking, thanks. Not being able to translate the installer into your language proper does not qualify as a bug. It would be best if you left the bug tracker for tracking serious, *real*, bugs - like systems that freeze for no apparent reason, slow video after a package upgrade etc... ~Just because you cannot do something.. do not think it impossible for another~ ;)
Re: [arch-general] Xorg network problem
Arvid Ephraim Picciani wrote: On Thursday 08 May 2008 05:16:15 Lin, Zihui wrote: Any solution? archlinux isnt ubuntu yet. You have to read the manual and set some things up before using it. Blame me. Do not make sick twisted jokes like that please.
Re: [arch-general] Banshee needs an update
Alec Hussey wrote: Hello, I was glad when you guys (or Jan de Groot, whichever) decided to push the banshee alpha out to extra. However, it is missing many pretty essential features and it now far behind the releases put out by the banshee developers. I think that either we need to keep up or provide two seperate versions of the package until a final release of 1.0 is made. Thanks! Alec Hussey Thanks for writing this - I was going to write something along the same lines. the Banshee in the repos is much too basic.
Re: [arch-general] signoff kernel26-2.6.24.3-6
Geoff wrote: On Tue, 25 Mar 2008 19:21:26 -0500 Aaron Griffin [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: snip Suffice to say: for all the old timers out there, I am on your side. I *am* an old timer, and I will do everything in my power to make arch what it was. I switched to Arch last September, from Slackware, precisely because of what I had learned about Arch as it was. I am not a fanatical purist, or even a computer science person. I am just a reasonably well-informed ordinary user who hates to be babied. I can only say that I *very* much hope that and your allies you win the battle Aaron. Geoff I think all things considered a balance must always be kept between 'power' and 'ease of use' no one wants an OS that is too complicated to keep up, nor as one of you said to feel 'babied' by it either. I have seen a few changes in Arch throughout the years and most of them, for my part, have been moving towards a positive such as the way Pacman includes mirrors and the mirror-list files. However if someone is really peeved about the direction that Arch has begun to take they might always fork the distro at the last version that was suitable to them - comment out some problematic pacman mirrors ;) and take a more 'sourced' approach to the issues they see.
