[arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
bradklee at gmail.com
bradklee at gmail.com
Mon Jul 24 08:27:54 UTC 2017
It could also be useful to compare with:
Considering minimalist focus of arch and use of systemd, maybe a more apt question would be: why does the installation collection include "dhcpcd"?
Do not confuse me for an expert, but I think the main answer is simply a practical one. The command is easy to type and the daemon does what it needs to with reliability.
Also, when defending, you should not introduce logical fallacies. Completing an installation is no proof that you've read the manual.
The Arch wiki is an incredibly thorough work with many, many pages. There's always more to learn. For example, have you got a dual boot working yet?
In my latest computer experiment, I instantiated Debian + Arch. This was no easy task because suggested loopback did not work with the Debian installation ISO. Even in this case, the wiki was good enough to get me most of the way to an independent solution. Thanks again wiki writers!
> On Jul 24, 2017, at 2:54 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general <arch-general at archlinux.org> wrote:
> I've installed ArchLinux on 3 desktops so far, and I've done them
> successfully, so I must have *RTFM* , I was just wondering why is it
> hard to configure wifi. Since I failed to configure wifi with
> wpa_supplicant. I'll try with wifi-menu today, and report progress.
> No need to be so aggressive man.
>> On 07/24/2017 01:48 PM, Robert Wong via arch-general wrote:
>> A general Arch installation is nothing but a minimal set
>> of GNU/Linux system with a package manager, which
>> can be configured into anything. I'm not going any
>> further for you have made yourself clear that you
>> haven't done your research. Offensive as it can be, I'd
>> say *RTFM*.
>> PS: It's apparently navie to say sth like Arch is nothing
>> but a desktop for archlinux.org itself runs on Arch Linux.
>> -------- Original Message --------
>> Subject: Re: [arch-general] Why there is no NetworkManager in ArchISO
>> From: Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general
>> To: arch-general at archlinux.org
>> CC: Junayeed Ahnaf
>> All fine and good but I don't see arch being installed on something
>> other than desktop/laptop. Of course there are niche cases as arch
>> server I do not doubt but how much of arch install base is traditional
>> desktop? I think it's rather high.
>>> On 07/24/2017 01:30 PM, ITwrx.org wrote:
>>>> On 07/24/2017 12:30 AM, Junayeed Ahnaf via arch-general wrote:
>>>> Why is there no NetworkManager in ArchISO?
>>> Arch Linux is not like desktop focused distributions. Therefore, it's
>>> ISO does not come with "everything but the kitchen sink" where you have
>>> a turn-key desktop after running a GUI installer or install script. It
>>> has the base set of software you need to assemble what you need for your
>>> given install target.
>>>> Isn't it widely accepted as
>>>> the go to method of connecting to internet in Linux?
>>> No, not in general like that. Network manager is primarily used for
>>> network management with desktop environments, most commonly Gnome, as
>>> the other respondent noted. Arch Linux is used in many different ways,
>>> not only for the desktop.
>>>> Is there any reason
>>>> for it not to be default?
>>> The defaults for the ISO would generally be the simpler options, and
>>> less likely to be something large with a lot of dependencies. Also,
>>> minimalist ISOs were the norm rather than the exception in years past
>>> and for Reasons. They still are in some cases or with some distros.
>>> Also, there are not always application defaults with Arch Linux like you
>>> might have with a desktop distro. Arch is "DIY/build your own and choose
>>> your own defaults (for the most part)" type of distro.
More information about the arch-general