Is Gentoo the best OS?

Generally asking
Is this the best OS out there?
memes aside
>I feel pissed off with all the other Linux distro's and it's standards
>it uses based OpenRC
>source based
>I install programs from source all the time
>Can literally be anything you want it to be
>since it's compiled for your system it is optimized for your system making it much faster than any other distro
>the logo is cool
Is this the true final answer?
Should I do it?
Should I Install Gentoo?

Other urls found in this thread:

bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=582084
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

>since it's compiled for your system it is optimized for your system making it much faster than any other distro

5 milliseconds isn't much faster

Still faster

In large proportions it is.

bump

>the logo is cool
The logo looks like the lemon-eating retard kid pacman* had after he fucked his sister.

Honestly that's why I can't take gentoo seriously. How the fuck can anyone think the logo is cool?

*the video game character not the package manager your fucking autists

i would not say these are better but if you want to learn about resolving package conflicts and deficiencies use slackware and you could take it a step further with LFS. both operating systems are basically gentoo but with even less hand holding

Two main benefits of Gentoo - 1) it has quite a lot of packages (main repository + Zugaina overlay search, 100K+, more than AUR has), 2) it's the rolling release distro that does 'rolling' part right, since you can do partial updates of your system without major problems because of 'preserved libs' and slotting mechanisms.

It's also sponsored by some big companies, like HP and nVidia.

I like it, but only because I use kde. I can't image how horrified gnome/cinnamon/whatevergtk users get when gtkwebkit pops up in emerge. Fuck that noise.
Also, gentoo is kde's testbed and has ebuilds for releases 2-4 days before they even get released officially.

The enormous package selection and superb rolling release handling (as said) are the main reasons I use Gentoo
Otherwise, though fun, it's a chore and the logo looks like shit

If you find yourself doing partial upgrades often or want particular versions of software like wine or need unstable libraries for development then Gentoo is your baby

Arch Linux is.

not gentoo

I really love the Gentoo logo, it feels so 2004

a binary distro that doesn't provide an installer and has a userbase full of underage kids and the creators literally are weeaboos

Gentoo is fucking glorious.
USE flags make it really easy to customize the programs you install to exclude/include the features you want.

I'm spending all day tommorow installing it so I can finally have a no problems system that I can keep on my pc without having to distro hop or reinstall the system every week or so

make sure you read the entire portage section to get make the best out of your system

also do not go the genkernel route

overly complicated. Operating systems should be as easy to install/use as possible.

I use gentoo since ten years and I still don't know how to use genkernel. That shit sounds so fucking complicated I just go into the default config and add some shit I want.

I inherited a shitty old laptop with 2GB ram and an old AMD processor, started dicking around with gentoo because mint wouldn't run smoothly. It's a great distro, fast, clean, neat, all the config files are simple, to the point and in the right place, emerge is great, the wiki is awesome but fuck, it's one hell of a time sink.

As this user points out, big complicated things make it a nightmare, cinnamon was horrific when trying to config, i3 on the other hand is ideal for gentoo.

>I'm spending all day tomorrow installing it..
>all day
>1 day
I'm so sorry user.

lonix is simply shit thats why it only has a minuscule autistic userbase fespite being free

Its
SHIT
H
I
T

What even fucking is it? Like configing the whole kernel by hand? I tried that bullshit and it's too much and would take 2 hours

nobody cares kid

I have no clue, nowadays I think some people just use it to generate an initramfs. Just make config and enabling my soundcard at the first install is fast enough for me.

No, its macOS

macOS is really nice too
Gentoo and macOS are different types of OS's it's hard to compare the two

That webkit-gtk pain is real, it took me more than 15h on 4710hq the first time I installed gnome.
But surprisingly it wasn't there in the dantrell's gnome 3.22 overlay. I compiled it a few days ago and gnome web wasn't there and full emerge took less than 5 hours.

genkernel --menuconfig all
Is it really that hard ?

Yeah, I get similar feelings when icu gets a new fucking revision shortly after the other. Popular offenders include clang/llvm, libreoffice, firefox/chromium. Damn, some software really isn't that good with -j6.

Sure. Why not.

/thread discarded

Yes, but then I have to look into every single option that I would need. I rather have the kernel team decide for me a good default and add my special snowflake hardware myself.

Configuring your kernel manually is far from difficult, it just takes a bit of googling.
vanilla-sources + self configured kernel is nirvana.

GNU/Linux*

genkerel a kernel used in the live cd it primary use if for compatibility but because of that it has a lot of bloat and significantly increase kernel compile time. it is also an alternative to configuring your kernel by hand but i think if you are install gentoo you might as well learn how to configure a kernel. that shit goes a long way and can be used on any distro

you would have a better time if you configured you kernel by hand. the kernel team adds extra things into their kernel for compatibility and kernel configuration is not too hard once you understand the basics of it

if you are a kernel noob watch these

...

I kinda wonder about many decisions the distro maintainers make.
Like, gcc6 is still hard-masked despite working OK for all the packages I use (maybe I'm lucky, though), stable packages can literally be years older than unstable (what is even the criteria?), yet some of the more obscure unstable ebuilds in the main tree I use occasionally break and take ages to update, and for that matter many overlay ebuilds are old shit that doesn't even compile right, and yet they often hold useful programs, and the whole eclasses thing makes writing ebuilds yourself kinda hard for me, since there's a lot of deprecated stuff in there, and there's often no way to know what a particular eclass does except by reading through its interface. Also, at times it's appalling how much does the syntax vary between different EAPIs, which makes it hard to update them. Portage itself is fairly slow with its dependencies resolution too, though I think that's because of the structure of the tree that requires it to read from disk for dependency resolution. Also, I wonder if the way the portage tree is set up is really the best way, I know a big part of it is probably borrowed from BSDs, but still.
Then again, I like slotting, preserved libs, compiling things myself and not worrying about what version of the lib I have, how easy it is to patch packages, how easy it is to configure everything for yourself, and the fact you can write ebuilds for yourself at all, and just use them with occasional updates.
Also, I don't actually have much experience with other distros, so maybe I'm overlooking their faults because of that too.

bugs.gentoo.org/show_bug.cgi?id=582084
There you can see all the bugs leading to build failures of packages.

So, they're trying to check every package in the tree for if it builds.
Well, I guess it is a reason.

Not just maintainers. Someone reported pkgconfig not building with it and that's a pretty big fucking deal for gentoo methinks since almost all ebuilds depend on it.

Well, I remember 9999 not building for me, but once I downgraded to unstable, it started to build fine.
Alright, I guess that decision is understandable then.

I used gentoo it was fast and without systemd by default.. But compilation started to anoy me very much... i migrated to freebsd i still compile software but just when i something different or to add new feature... everything else i install from pkg(binary packages).. and btw all packages on freebsd are compiler with -O2 and -pipe by default.. so performance is same i have tested it myself

Yeah, it would be easier if gcc wasn't such a complete mess when replacing the version and such. Would be nice if we could specify working gcc versions and portage would just switch to that on the fly for the affected ebuild. Not easily possible with the way gcc works sadly.

good for you

That would be nice. For the time being slotting is the best thing available, though.

>-pipe
>Use pipes rather than temporary files for communication between the various stages of compilation. This fails to work on some systems where the assembler is unable to read from a pipe; but the GNU assembler has no trouble.
Defenestrate thyself

it doesn't really matter, the kernel can be easly modified with --menuconfig in genkernel and main genkernel config is basic stuff you mostly need.
Your initramfs is usually the bloat, you could turn that down by making it yourself.

Gentoo can be a very good distro. The installation is not so bad, but the tweaking/fixing will go on for weeks. You should know a bit about linux before trying gentoo.

1. systemd is better than openrc
2. compiling shit from source generally isn't going to produce a faster system

That said, the flexibility of portage is the real reason people use Gentoo, not meme performance anti systemd shit.

genkernel initramfs is super light already

OpenRC draws many people to Gentoo while Portage keeps them

Gentoo was the best in the early 2000s. Yum hadn't been created yet, Debian was still very young, and all other distros has no package manager worth a shit. It was great because of portage. Now good package managers are standard.

Arch is a good choice for a desktop os if you want a Gentoo like experience, but really it still sucks having to configure absolutely everything. Good luck getting your fonts sorted out in X for example.

It used to be a major draw because it was the best init.

Everything uses systemd now though so not so much any longer.

Gentoo can use SystemD though

Are you an autist? Exactly because everything uses systemd, Gentoo draws dissenters

>your

Gentoo has the best systemd support of any distribution. People that switch to Gentoo to avoid systemd are morons and their opinion doesn't matter. All veteren Gentoo users have switched to systemd at this point.

>since it's compiled for your system it is optimized for your system making it much faster than any other distro
people are still spouting this in fucking 2017?

holy fucking shit.

systemd is shit dude

it is true though

I'm not going to fall for your bait

Its true though, OpenRC support is already slipping, service files are standard.

This.
Get with the times grandbeards, shell style init is fucking dead.

does debian stable use it

Sadly, it does.

Poettering, why don't you fuck off from Sup Forums and go back developing the next shitware for redhat?
Systemd is not an init system, it is replacing many things that have nothing to do with init system.
Binary logs alone are so fucking retarded, no sane person would even remotely think it is a good idea, but we got Poettering...

Boohoo go use your shitty runit and openrc frankenstein init.

>Grandbeard can't handle modern software
The 90s called, they want their computer back. Please send it asap!

if systemd did not over step what it does would you use it?

t. 16 y/o faggot that started using Linux 2 weeks ago during christmas school break.

If it was just an init system with no insane binary logs maybe I would use it.
I don't like having to relearn how to do stuff that was already working fine because for some reason some faggot decided to rewrite them in his own retarded way.
Systemd forces people to relearn how to do things a different way without a good reason to do so (if it is not broke, don't fix it).
journalctl, service files with their own syntax and so on are a pain in the ass no one asked for because we already had working solutions.

>it's bad because it's different
end yourself

>insane binary logs
systemd supports using any system logger.
You are a dumbass repeating shit you heard from other dumbasses.

Absolutely. Personally it's the only stable linux distro I've ever used. Debian is only stable in the sense that bugs never get fixed, modern ubuntu is as unstable as it gets (even the installer crashes if you choose anything but the default settings), centos has no packages on top of being antiquated.

Optimization doesn't mean much except if you're not on amd64 hardware most of the time, but the times it does matter the difference is significant in my experience, especially with ricey flags. Most of the boost usually comes from use flags, though.

My favorite parts are:
- if it compiles, it works.
In other distros, you can successfully install a package and then it will fail to run (e.g. missing libraries or plain broken build). Since gentoo is source-based, this doesn't apply. Chances are that if it successfully compiles, it will work.
- Use flags. It's what enables me to use openrc even with software that would usually depend on systemd, and is dependent on systemd in other distros. Here it's just a use flag away. Same applies for backend libraries for various parts of the system like databases and blas.
- package availability. Only arch has more packages (note that other distros may claim more packages, but that's because they split docs, debug, source and release builds in different packages, and further create alternative builds for everything when a significant, supported alternative config option is available).

The lack of systemd is just the cherry on the cake. It's really unfortunate that Sup Forums decided gentoo was a meme because it's unironically the best distro (and even OS!) out there.

>chore
I never got that complaint. Just emerge -av world every month. Done. Where's the chore beside the initial setup?

It is bad because it is an init system and so much more where it should just be an init system.
It is bad because it is forced down people throat (a shitload of software requires it as dependecy).
It is bad because binary logs are retarded.

Let's add some more n thousands lines of code to support offloading logging to any other system logger.
That surely is a great idea.
Have you ever heard of sane default and not overcomplicating things without a very good reason?

I wouldn't because poettering has never been able to produce usable software in his life.

>not overcomplicating things
systemd-nspawn -D

vs

cp /etc/resolv.conf /mnt/etc/resolv.conf
mount -t proc proc /mnt/gentoo/proc
mount --rbind /sys /mnt/sys
mount --make-rslave /mnt/sys
mount --rbind /dev /mnt/dev
mount --make-rslave /mnt/dev

Also pic related is an example of a shell based init service and a systemd service.

Your lines of code argument just shows how fucking retarded you are, its an impractical meme argument.

you seriously can't be this stupid?
both of the examples you gave are examples AGAINST the points you were trying to make, not FOR them

Only in your imagination bro.

> It's easier if we hide the complicated parts in hard t debug, compiled binaries.
> What could possibly go wrong?

Sup.

what exactly does systemd-nspawn -D do? and could i do it manually

Sets up your chroot with everything including networking and manages it as a slice.

It does some other pretty cool shit there is an ephemereal option so that any changes aren't written that uses a BTRFS snapshot so you can do shit like fire up a chroot of / and test a system update.

interesting i might try it

Wait, actually why does the OpenRC version not use alsactl and instead fuck around with config files and proc?
I mean, it technically could, and last I checked both /etc/init.d/alsasound and /usr/sbin/alsactl are installed by the same package, so you probably can depend on alsactl to exist. And unless it's extremely unstable, you would think it's better to call a separate binary created specifically for a goal of managing alsa states instead of duplicating its functionality in bash.
Why didn't the author of this init file use alsactl? Am I missing something here?
This doesn't have any connection with systemd or OpenRC, though, both can call binaries just fine. It seems to be just an issue of maintainer being a retard, or I don't get something.

Please, if I were going for cheap tactics, I'd have pointed out that
> mount -t proc proc /mnt/gentoo/proc
doesn't match the other mount points.
Or that the --make-rslave lines are only there for systemd in the first place,
implying you only included them to make the commands look clunky and scary.

Those aren't cheap tactics though, they aren't even arguments against my point.

They don't even remotely do the same thing. The systemd one breaks on most hardware during a sleep/resume cycle, for example.

no user, the best OS is Windows 10

delet this

>nu/g/ literally can't stop replying to triptards
wew lad

Um, they don't? I mean, from what I see, both seem to be managing volume states for alsa.
Also, if it does, isn't it the fault of the binary? So, it's the program that is shit then. Or is it something with you not being able to depend on /usr to exist, or something?

Dude all rc scripts are hacky bullshit like that.

This openrc script is fucking 231 lines to start xdm.

That's because you have no point to start with.

This one seems normal, since it mostly deals with compatibility for different display managers and handling errors for weird configurations, whereas systemd just loads the default one whatever happens.
ALSA, on the other hand, was weird, unless the utility doesn't work anywhere but the default configuration or is buggy.
Systemd is shit, but that initscript was inexcusable.

Yeah but you can literally pick any of these large openrc scripts and compare it to the systemd service with the same result.

>weeb
>saying thus on Sup Forums
why do you even use Sup Forums

those 5 milliseconds add up mate