“CrunchBang Linux, a lightweight, Ubuntu-based, thumb-drive-friendly operating system… is now available in 64-bit editions for version 9.04.01, which also adds support for the ext4 hard drive format and more wireless networking support. CrunchBang already booted pretty darned fast in our initial tests, but long-time users are reporting noticeable improvements with the newest version. On the look and feel side, there are more themes included, and support for more theming standards in general. Transmission becomes the default BitTorrent client, and a host of usability improvements were tossed in as well.”
Words “Ubuntu” and “fast” shouldn’t be placed in the same line. Ubuntu was and probobly always will be slow because of the system internals – mostly userland, package management and optimization. Fastes init scripts? sure, but an overal system performance is poor.
What would you say is faster? Any mainstream distro or some niche one? All I’ve tried besides Ubuntu was OpenSuse and YAST is so slow it’s not even funny.
Archlinux used to be pretty fast. I haven’t used lately. I have 0.7 installed on an internal server, but haven’t updated since it was setup. I don’t think its a niche distro now, it probably was once long ago, but it seems to be becoming more and more popular. Its also built from mostly pure vanilla sources.
I love Arch, but I’d still consider it a niche distro. While it’s popular, it is mostly popular with those already familiar with Linux and know what they’re doing. It’s one hell of a system when it’s up and running, but getting it to that point requires knowledge of Linux and manual editing of conf files.
Of course, that is the point of Arch, to be as simple internally as possible, and it succeeds very much in doing that. But it’s not end-user oriented.
Now, a LIve system based around Arch and GNOME that could be installed like Ubuntu, plus a few graphical tools, would, I think, end up become a mainstream distro in the end. But Arch as it is now will never be, and they don’t really want it to be either.
This is no hate on Arch, it’s my distro of choice.
On the ooposite side (Arch -> mainstream, Gentoo -> niche), I really love how Gentoo is fast. The advantages of pure source distribution seem to fade over time as binary distro are more and more stable, but I still love it. Some years ago, updating a system with multiple repository sources was a symlink/incompatible ABI nightmare, but now major repository have almost all packages and ensure inter-compatibility. Gentoo never had those problem as packages were compiled to work with existing one, but anyway, that’s off-topic.
You can’t really compare “install then use” distributions like Ubuntu or Mandriva with DIY and “keep it minimal and let user somplete it” distro like Arch or Gentoo. The two former one will always react faster, but until the user decide to “bloat” them with advanced power management feature, HAL, [a-zA-Z]*Kit and other daemon, they will lack the “mainstream polish” that install and use distribution add to the experience.
And you have of course verified that this is true for Crunch.
I personaly think that CRUX and Arch linux do the trick.