SourceMage vs. Gentoo
#1
Posted 19 November 2006 - 03:17 AM
What does it do better than Gentoo? Is it worth switching?
#2
Posted 19 November 2006 - 07:08 AM
#3
Posted 19 November 2006 - 07:51 PM
Before going any further, take the time to read this:
http://wiki.sourcema.../FaqDiff_Gentoo
Which is an exhaustive comparison of Sourcemage and Gentoo.
Okay, sourcemage has less packages in its package manager, but that's fine. everything you need is still there. Also, I think sourcemage is more lightweight than Gentoo. Gentoo installs too much optional stuff by default. Ah, this makes me think, here's a major difference with the package manager:
when you install (emerge) on gentoo, you have to set flags before doing so. On sourcemage, the package manager (sorcery) asks you for what to enable/disable instead. I think that's better than checking what flags are available for your package then setting the flags and blah blah blah waste of time.
Installation: Way faster on Sourcemage. Gentoo will simply give you a terminal and a handbook. Sourcemage will give you an assisted installation, by this I mean that you will go through a list of things to do, still giving you maximum flexibility through installation (you can get a terminal at any time). I didn't even bothered to look at the documentation to install sourcemage. it was plain easy.
Well, in all, I've been using Gentoo for a while, but I switched to Sourcemage. I think you should go for sourcemage, and people who say Gentoo rocks are people who never tried sourcemage. that's all.
#4
Posted 19 November 2006 - 10:21 PM
#5
Posted 22 November 2006 - 10:57 PM
but one thing about Gentoo is that their developers can't make their minds up sometimes if you ever read their mailing list you will understand.
Edited by kitche, 22 November 2006 - 10:58 PM.
#6
Posted 22 November 2006 - 11:05 PM
I've never used SourceMage, tho!
#7
Posted 22 November 2006 - 11:56 PM
#8
Posted 24 November 2006 - 04:54 PM
#9
Posted 24 November 2006 - 06:44 PM
bitMonkey but are you using multilib setup 32bit libs with 64 bit libs? or you just running a pure x86_64 system
It's about 95% x86_64. I have Firefox, OOo, and wine in 32 bit. Come to think of it, I'm not sure why I have OOo 32. Portage, here I come.
#10
Posted 24 November 2006 - 07:03 PM
bitMonkey but are you using multilib setup 32bit libs with 64 bit libs? or you just running a pure x86_64 system
It's about 95% x86_64. I have Firefox, OOo, and wine in 32 bit. Come to think of it, I'm not sure why I have OOo 32. Portage, here I come.
You have OOo 32 because it has problem with x86_64 builds. At least it had like 6 months ago, I read, that's why there is a binary package for that one..
#11
Posted 24 November 2006 - 08:32 PM
EDIT: Amazingly, it does seem to work in x86_64. That's awesome. I can't believe how long it took to compile -- it literally just finished 1.5 minutes ago.
EDIT: And that's on an AMD Athlon 64 4000+!
Edited by bitMonkey, 25 November 2006 - 12:27 AM.
#12
Posted 26 November 2006 - 07:01 PM
hmm... well, it's was only in ~amd64, so I guess it's worth a shot. If it doesn't work, I guess openoffice-bin is pretty quick to "compile" again
EDIT: Amazingly, it does seem to work in x86_64. That's awesome. I can't believe how long it took to compile -- it literally just finished 1.5 minutes ago.
EDIT: And that's on an AMD Athlon 64 4000+!
OOo is quite a big program... that's where the weakness of source distros come in. I have an AMD Athlon64 3400+.
#13
Posted 16 December 2006 - 11:14 PM
#14
Posted 19 December 2006 - 02:06 PM
Portage also lets you install packages though, its a flag for emerge IIRC.yea Source Mage at least gives you an option to install the binary
BinRev is hosted by the great people at Lunarpages!












