Arch vs archlabs what is the difference why i installed this distribution

I already tried debian,arch both i know how they give performance archlabs is inspired by bunsunlab…
If i compair debian and archlabs i dont see any performance difference.
And how this distribution can more faster then arch?
If i hurt anyone sorry for that. I am just curious :slight_smile:.
I feel Debian is much more faster then this archlabs.

Have you tried any actual benchmarks? There shouldn’t be much difference between the two. Debian links /bin/sh to dash whereas Arch links it to bash, which is slower, but that shouldn’t make much difference at all. You could try the dashbinsh AUR package that relinks /bin/sh to dash.

Yah… point maybe i feel slow because just new installation and my pc was over heated.

But what is the purpose of this distro archlabs and what is the speciality of bunsunlab.?

I use both, in a dual boot on my T460s Thinkpad with an i5 chip (the better one) that has 12 gigs of RAM and an nvme SSD. Boot times are inconsequential, I don’t even notice them, they are that quick. AL - Archlabs - I use without many of my own tweaks, they keep the configurations minimal, and they have a variety of configuration scripts (like al-tintzen, to change the tint bar) that make simple changes, well, simple.

BL - Bunsenlabs - well, I use this in a variety of ways, mostly “cross pollinating” it with other Debian based distros such as Sparky, MX, and AntiX, or use it in it’s native state, and either using Testing or Sid (or both) with it. It’s very easy and simple to do, and BL’s Lithium desktop is IMO stellar. I like to use either Arch or Debian mostly, they are very robust and in a way compliment each other, and both AL and BL have roots in what I think was the best distro ever - Crunchbang - which was a very minimal Debian based distro that used Openbox for the desktop.

A Linux distro is a distro… . is a distro. They all do pretty much the same thing, whether you’re in Gentoo or Ubuntu. The difference to me are the people that are behind them. Both AL and BL have wonderful, knowledgeable, innovative, and helpful people behind them, who are constantly improving upon them. Even moreso - and this is very important to someone like myself - they are accessible. One doesn’t get tossed to the “read the Wiki” wolves when you have a question, and although both are geared to the more intermediate to advanced users (I lie in the intermediate category), the simplicity of either as well as they being minimal IMO make it easier for someone who really want to get into Linux, because you don’t have to “deconstruct” a “ready made” bloated distro such as ArcoLinux, a distro that bakes a lot of configs and features in it, but also ships with 4 wallpaper applications in their main ISO, one that has nine keybindings alone.

Are both AL and BL “specialty” or “niche” distros? I don’t believe so, I mean if one uses Debian or Arch in it’s “vanilla” state, and just add a window manager or a desktop environment, then that would make Arch or Debian niche distros (AL has the option to add whatever and how many DE’s and WM’s during installation, and BL just uses their Lithium desktop, but I usually build i3 and bspwm after installation anyway, even Awesome and whatever else I chose, and I don’t use DE’s on either). As far as performance, well the fastest way between two points is a straight line, so a more minimal distro is bound to get you where you need faster, just open your favorite text editor, do a tweak, and you’re there. Because as a musician which I am, the hardware is just the hardware, the performance comes from me, all I do is tune up my axe to where I want it to sound. That’s the way it works with my OS’s, and both AL and BL already are tuned to where I like it, I might tune it and set it closer to where I want it - like my axe - but not by much, as I don’t have nine keybindings to edit after I uninstalled a wallpaper app I never use, like in ArcoLinux.

I use both because again, the people behind both distros, I like their ethos when it comes to both Arch and Debian, as well as having the #! roots. But the best way to compare or check out any distro is to run them, either on VM or on a drive partition. I have an old laptop that is set up for triple boot, and I test distro’s on that because I like to test on metal to get a better feel of them. But my go to Arch distro is AL, my go to Debian always has BL on it, or straight BL, and I couldn’t be any more satisfied. And believe me, I have tried almost all of them (except anything Ubuntu, I can’t stand anything Ubuntu).

3 Likes

BunsenLabs is intended to provide an openbox desktop environment based on Debian (or at least it was when I was on the development team a while ago, maybe it’s changed since then). I think ArchLabs aims to provide a quick and convenient installation method for an Arch-based graphical desktop but I’m sure Dobbie or Nate can explain more about that.

Some Debian based distros, like BL, MX and Devuan are very good. The official Debian is somewhat a little strange. I still feel puzzled why Debian installs Thai language pack by default. Each time, after a new installation, it takes me so much time to delete all those craps installed automatically. Also, pacman is much faster than apt.

2 Likes

Abount BunsenLabs

About ArchLabs

ArchLabs has progressed to focus more on the installer and let the user customize their own desktop.

1 Like

In my experience Q4OS is fastest light weight Debian base distro. I will recommend download without kde … I use this distro on my old laptop.

Thx for that , forgot about clean locales after reinstall a little while ago @chroot

Side talk :unamused:

Thanks for information

1 Like

Arch is like the Red Carpet and ArchLabs is like the King walking down the Red Carpet.
But on a side note, don’t believe anything I type. :wink:

2 Likes

Yeah… imagination :thinking:

Yeah I have done “straight” Debian, and distros like MX and Sparky have their own repos because straight Debian still lacks a lot of packages you would find like say Arch. I just wind up compiling from source, but it’s a real PITA because of all the build dependencies, as the Debian repos are a few versions behind. But Debian is like old reliable, well stable is, and IMO Debian is best when you have distros like MX, AntiX, BL, Sparky etc (haven’t done Devuan yet, tried it once but it wasn’t a non free ISO, and I just went to a non free ISO elsewhere lol). I just have been using Debian for ages, back then I just used GNOME2, bleeding edge wasn’t even on the radar, I was just happy stuff like ndiswrapper or whatever worked lulz.