Language Selection

English French German Italian Portuguese Spanish

Comparing CTK Arch Live and ArchBang

Filed under
Linux

Today I’ll be comparing two Arch Linux-based Openbox Distributions: ArchBang and CTKArchLive.

A few years ago, CrunchBang (“#!”) Linux became very popular as a lightweight Ubuntu-based distribution that made the Openbox window manager more palatable and appealing. Since then, it’s only gotten better and more popular, along the way ditching the Ubuntu base for Debian and gaining an Xfce version on the way. Because it was the first very popular Openbox distribution, it has inspired the creation of other distributions that use Openbox on top of various other base distributions. For example, Madbox, which I have recently reviewed, is based on Ubuntu to fill the gap from #!’s move to Debian.

The two I’m testing today, CTKArchLive and ArchBang, are, as you can probably guess by their names, based on Arch Linux. Aside from Chakra GNU/Linux, a KDE-using distribution that’s sort of based on Arch that I’ve tested before for FreeTechie.com, I’ve never really used Arch before. Neither of these distributions claim to cater to relative newbies like Chakra does, so I may have to play the whole manual configuration thing by ear, as I’ve never done that before in depth. I will say, however, that I have tried the live session of a previous ArchBang release before briefly in a live session. Continue reading to see how each one turns out. I tested both of these by using the MultiSystem multiboot USB creation script on the two ISO files and trying each via a live USB system. As I just want to focus on the live sessions, I did not install either of these.

rest here




More in Tux Machines

Black Hat 2014: Open Source Could Solve Medical Device Security

On the topic of source code liability, Greer suggests that eventually software developers, including medical device development companies, will be responsible for the trouble their software causes (or fails to prevent). I think it’s fair to say that it is impossible to guarantee a totally secure system. You cannot prove a negative statement after all. Given enough time, most systems can be breached. So where does this potential liability end? What if my company has sloppy coding standards, no code reviews, or I use a third-party software library that has a vulnerability? Should hacking be considered foreseeable misuse? Read more

Does government finally grok open source?

Yes, the government -- one U.S. federal government employee told me that government IT tends to be "stove-piped," with people "even working within the same building" not having much of a clue what their peers are doing, which is not exactly the open source way. That's changing. One way to see this shift is in government policies. For the U.S. federal government, there is now a "default to open," a dramatic reversal on long-standing practices of spending heavily with a core of proprietary technology vendors. Read more

The OS LinuX Desktop

Reader Oliver wanted to make his Linux Mint desktop look as much like a Mac as possible so others would find it easy to use. Given some of our previous Linux featured desktops, we know it wasn't tough, but the end-result still looks great. Here's how it's all set up. Read more

A Linux Desktop Designed for You

Desktop environments for Linux are not released ready-made. Behind each is a set of assumptions about what a desktop should be, and how users should interact with them. Increasingly, too, each environment has a history -- some of which are many years old. As you shop around for a desktop, these assumptions are worth taking note of. Often, they can reveal tendencies that you might not discover without several days of probing and working with the desktop. Read more