Ark Linux 2005.1 Released with KDE 3.4

Following the trend of distributions scheduling themselves around KDE releases, Ark Linux has released their first stable version, Ark Linux 2005.1. The goal of Ark Linux is to build the easiest to use GNU/Linux distribution while keeping it technically sane.

Ark Linux 2005.1 is built around the latest desktop technologies, including KDE 3.4, 1.1.4 (a preview of 2.0 is also available on the Ark Extra Software CD), glibc 2.3.4, X.Org 6.8.2 and Linux 2.6.11.

The base install CD of Ark Linux contains everything the average desktop user will need - other tools such as compilers and development programmes,
additional games and support for additional languages are available on the
extra CD images "Ark Development Suite", "Ark Extra Software", "Ark Server
Software" and "Ark Extra Languages", and of course in our large online
package repository, easily accessed through the Kynaptic GUI. Experienced
users can use the "apt-get" tool to install software from the repository on
the command line.

Ark Linux 2005.1 can be downloaded from using ftp,
http, BitTorrent or EDonkey.


by cm (not verified)

Please stop trolling. There are still lots of people who are quite happily running a server based on Debian stable, and doing development for that platform.

by ac (not verified)

You're the one who's off-topic for the thread, so don't accuse me of trolling.

If OP wants to run latest version of Xine what is he going to do exactly? So please stop trolling with your unstable debian for this and stable debian for that excuse when people want BOTH AT THE SAME TIME.

by Soren (not verified)

I run several Debian computers and have NEVER had a problem with the testing distribution. I am very often MORE up to date than those running Mandrake, Suse, or Red Hat. If I want the very newest version of Xine and don't want to wait the couple of months it usually takes (for a package like Xine) to move into testing I get it from unstable. Otherwise I do simple one command upgrades periodically.

Back to the original purpose of the post, Re: Why should I choose ArkLinux. I was interested in something that is VERY easy to use so that I can set it up on other people's computers. I do a lot of repair work, and very often would like to say, "The easiest way to fix your problem with [spyware, adware, crashes, etc.] would be to install [an easy to use version of Linux.] Frequently I work with old grandma's and such people that really don't work well with change. I remember one house where I changed the order of the icons on the desktop to put them into logical groups and the person told me to put them back because she couldn't find her programs. So I need something VERY easy to use. I'm not sure if ArkLinux is it yet, but I'm interested.

by maestro (not verified)

Not only don't you know anything about debian, but you don't know what trolling consists of (while practicing it nonetheless).

by superstoned (not verified)

I've been using mandrake for years, and debian, too. I know them both very well, and its no FUD. damn, I'm even moderator on a mandrakeclub forum... Mandrake isn't as bad as SuSE in this regard (I'm trying suse 9.2, but there seem to be different packages for suse 9.1; suse9.1 with KDE 3.3; and now there have to be packages for suse with kde 3.4!!! what a waste of time to build all these packages! the mess for suse 9.2 isn't that big, yet, but it'll be...).

a lot rpm's work just fine, altough you often have to search for quite some time. but there are quite some hard-to-find packages, esp if you want them up-to-date. and also you often have to overwrite files and force nodependencies, which is as bad as it sounds - stability problems will emerge, sooner or later. mandrake and suse require a fresh install, now and then, if you really fiddle a lot with them (if you don't, nothing wrong, but I guess a developer sometimes wants to try new packages, and installs stuff that isn't on his installation cd's - and that spells trouble).

Debian's advantage is that amost everything you want is simply in its official package pool, so it won't break anything. unstable is generaly more stable than a fiddled-with mandrake install (eg after some upgrades, lets say from 9.0 to 10.1, mandrake becomes hard to mantain) and testing is as a rock, for me. for a home system, I don't care too much about security, just apt-get upgrade now and then.

The best choice is imho (k)ubuntu, for it is as up-to-date as mandrake, and you can use all these debian packages. if you use a official version, its stable, and you can run bleeding-edge if you want.