Would you advise Arch for Java development ?

[Jan Goyvaerts]

I'm curious about Arch Linux - said to be fast, stable and doing rolling updates. The initial setup is a bit long. But it seems pretty fast indeed. However, I've got the impression the fine-print on the wiki reads: "updates are at your own risk". :-)

What I'm looking for:

• Fast - so I can squeeze every cycle.
• Runs the regular Sun/Oracle JVMs.
• Runs the regular JEE development software.
• Runs in NVidia Twinview for two screens.
• Should never be upgraded to major versions like Ubuntu's & al. Only an endless stream of updates.
• It's my machine at work - so I want it to work with it. Not fight it after each update.

Is Arch all that ? Any other distro's satisfying the criteria ?

[ags]

If you have the time, why not.

I'm a lazy person, I'm sticking with Ubuntu 11.04 so far, does the job, 2 and 3 screen configuration (dual geforce cards).

JVMs work, jee works, nothing really to complain about. No major updates, no fights here as well.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group.
To post to this group, send email to java...@googlegroups.com.
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to javaposse+...@googlegroups.com.
For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/javaposse?hl=en.

--

ags

[Jan Goyvaerts]

Well yes... sticking with a release is an option too. The problem is that I have to try once in a while something new. Which usually does not exist yet for the older releases. Or you can not install recent software because it has a dependency with a new version of a library. 

Oh yeah: I have to run VMWare player once in while too.

[Kevin Wright]

Don't be conned by the speed argument, you'll only be gaining 2-3% at best.

What arch, gentoo, etc. really get you is configurability, but you WILL be paying for that by spending more time in actually doing the configuration and maintaining it.  It's a trade-off, if you want to be able to optimise your boot sequence to <5 seconds then it can happen, but you'll still be using the same NVidia driver and the same JVM binary.  If you want things to be less stressful, you're probably better sticking with Ubuntu.

[Jan Goyvaerts]

Would the regular Debian on Testing be an option ?

[clay]

Just curious, why not use the latest Ubuntu? Is there a problem with the newer releases?

I'm currently using Ubuntu 12.04 (I plan to just stay synced on the current final release) for my development workstation and I love it. My only gripe is switching between different external monitors on my laptop requires command line commands rather than working automatically.

Compared to Windows, it's much better suited for JVM development. The shells are dramatically better (although I never fully explored alt-shell options on Windows). You have proper soft links (I just learned that NTFS has them, and I'm not sure how well they work). It's more responsive, the software repo is nicer, the GUI is cleaner/simpler, and all my main apps are fully cross platform Win/Mac/Linux.

[Jan Goyvaerts]

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:39 PM, clay <clayt...@gmail.com> wrote:

Just curious, why not use the latest Ubuntu? Is there a problem with the newer releases?

No - not at all. I'm running Ubuntu at home. 12.04 was the very first release that survived an update btw. And I even happen to like Unity. Finally something different, good looks and incredible finishing touch ! (sorry guys :-)

But for work I want something lightweight (XFCE) and functional to coax the maximum out of it. Preferably with rolling updates to be sure I'm not murdering the machine after a major release upgrade. Currently I'm using Mint Debian. But the support for Nvidia Twinview is a bit shaky. It crashes as soon as I'm trying to go to character mode. I've already lost data doing a reckless CTRL-ALT-F1 in dual screen mode. :-)

And probably it can be repaired with some hacking. But that's exactly what I want to avoid: hacking on my work machine. 

I'm currently using Ubuntu 12.04 (I plan to just stay synced on the current final release) for my development workstation and I love it. My only gripe is switching between different external monitors on my laptop requires command line commands rather than working automatically.

With NVidia you've got the excellent nvidia-settings. Yes, it's closed-source, but the alternatives are no way near as fast and stable. (sorry again :-)

 

Compared to Windows, it's much better suited for JVM development. The shells are dramatically better (although I never fully explored alt-shell options on Windows). You have proper soft links (I just learned that NTFS has them, and I'm not sure how well they work). It's more responsive, the software repo is nicer, the GUI is cleaner/simpler, and all my main apps are fully cross platform Win/Mac/Linux.

That's right ! 

 

On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 9:06:41 AM UTC-5, Andrzej Grzesik wrote:

If you have the time, why not.

I'm a lazy person, I'm sticking with Ubuntu 11.04 so far, does the job, 2 and 3 screen configuration (dual geforce cards).

JVMs work, jee works, nothing really to complain about. No major updates, no fights here as well.

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/QlYuSOyYVYYJ.

[Fabrizio Giudici]

On Tue, 11 Sep 2012 21:11:32 +0200, Jan Goyvaerts <java.a...@gmail.com>
wrote:

> On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 6:39 PM, clay <clayt...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just curious, why not use the latest Ubuntu? Is there a problem with the
>> newer releases?
>
>
> No - not at all. I'm running Ubuntu at home. 12.04 was the very first
> release that survived an update btw. And I even happen to like Unity.
> Finally something different, good looks and incredible finishing touch !
> (sorry guys :-)
>
> But for work I want something lightweight (XFCE) and functional to coax
> the
> maximum out of it. Preferably with rolling updates to be sure I'm not
> murdering the machine after a major release upgrade. Currently I'm using
> Mint Debian. But the support for Nvidia Twinview is a bit shaky. It
> crashes
> as soon as I'm trying to go to character mode. I've already lost data
> doing
> a reckless CTRL-ALT-F1 in dual screen mode. :-)

I have a completely different experience: I've been using Ubuntu at home
(since about one year I've moved back using Mac OS X as the primary o.s.
in my laptop, but I have Ubuntu running on other computers and another
laptop) and I didn't experience any particular problem (with one exception
*) at each major update. I'm even using Ubuntu Server on three servers in
production, and no problems even there (caveat: I have virtual machines
for them and I first try a full upgrade on the VM).

So, given that there's this high variance in the experience with Ubuntu,
how can you be sure that the same will happen with another distro? And
note that relying on others' experience could be useless for the same
reason.

--
Fabrizio Giudici - Java Architect, Project Manager
Tidalwave s.a.s. - "We make Java work. Everywhere."
fabrizio...@tidalwave.it
http://tidalwave.it - http://fabriziogiudici.it

[Dale Wijnand]

On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 4:18:42 PM UTC+2, KWright wrote:

What arch, gentoo, etc. really get you is configurability, but you WILL be paying for that by spending more time in actually doing the configuration and maintaining it.

As Jan stated, yes, the initial configuration is a lot longer than normal installations. But maintaining it? Last time I used Arch I only had to remind myself to check for updates, and occasionally merge updates on a modified etc config file (which is normally pretty fast).

Note: I'm talking about Arch, I've never run Gentoo.

How has your experience with Arch been different to mine?

Dale

[Jan Goyvaerts]

Aha ! Finally an actual Arch user ! :-)

No clue. I've just did the installation with the wiki next to me. And I don't mind that. Because it's a one-off thing. But from there I'd rather not fight the OS only for the sake of having Arch. It's to get a stable, lightweight and fast OS. That will never be broken by any release.

 

Dale

--
You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group.

To view this discussion on the web visit https://groups.google.com/d/msg/javaposse/-/hCZIWvImxYEJ.

[Dale Wijnand]

On 12 September 2012 09:47, Jan Goyvaerts <java.a...@gmail.com> wrote:

Aha ! Finally an actual Arch user ! :-)

On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 9:42 AM, Dale Wijnand <dale.w...@gmail.com> wrote:

On Tuesday, September 11, 2012 4:18:42 PM UTC+2, KWright wrote:

What arch, gentoo, etc. really get you is configurability, but you WILL be paying for that by spending more time in actually doing the configuration and maintaining it.

As Jan stated, yes, the initial configuration is a lot longer than normal installations. But maintaining it? Last time I used Arch I only had to remind myself to check for updates, and occasionally merge updates on a modified etc config file (which is normally pretty fast).

Note: I'm talking about Arch, I've never run Gentoo.

How has your experience with Arch been different to mine?

No clue. I've just did the installation with the wiki next to me. And I don't mind that. Because it's a one-off thing. But from there I'd rather not fight the OS only for the sake of having Arch. It's to get a stable, lightweight and fast OS. That will never be broken by any release.

 

Dale

I think that you always kind-of fight the OS, no matter what OS it is, and one solution is to reformat and reinstall, which might be an easy or a difficult solution.

The point of Arch for me is that it tries to keep updated with most of its components and integrates them (solving any issues) quickly, and releasing them when they are ready, instead of waiting and trying to synchronise everything for a 6 or 12-month release schedule.

Personally I'd go with an always updated, stable system, in which I have to dedicate a bit of time to update and handle any issues, then to have something like Ubuntu where I'm basically better off re-installing every 6 months because I don't trust it to upgrade properly.

However, if Kevin's experience is different, I'd be interested in hearing them.

Dale

[Blazej Bucko]

I've been using Arch for several years now and, except for few complete meltdowns of X's (yes evdev, I'm looking at you), everything just works. I'm doing 'pacman -Syu' once a week, staying away from the testing branch and rebooting only after kernel upgrades... And reinstall is always easy: install packages, mount /home and copy this, this and this file to /etc.

I tried Ubuntu few times and IMHO it sucks. It's eye-candy and you can find solution for every problem with Ubuntu in "the internets" but it sucks everywhere else. Errors all the time, services starting/stopping/crashing in the background for reasons unknown, important packages from strange repositories (Java for example). Ehh.. I just don't like Ubuntu for Desktop. My friends, on the other hand (mostly Java devs like me), are using Ubuntu and are completely fine with it. Hell, they are happy with it's simplicity, wizards and drivers for the printers :)

Regards,

    Blazej Bucko

--

You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "Java Posse" group.

[ags]

On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 5:39 PM, clay <clayt...@gmail.com> wrote:

Just curious, why not use the latest Ubuntu? Is there a problem with the newer releases?

11.10 was a very rough thing, both update and a clean install, so I stick with 11.04.

And am therefore a bit reluctant to switch, since 11.04 does the job, but I will eventually, as I want to be on an LTS.

Cheers