CrunchBang to ArchBang



I've used CrunchBang for over a year and I've been really curious about this. Especially since trying Arch Linux with features like Pacman.

Now I've got my hands on a distro that is inspired by CrunchBang but has Arch "under the hood" instead of Debian.

I did have some funky things going on with the install with Grub vs. Syslinux as I mentioned in the other thread. Also, Pacman required some extra steps to get going by setting up "Keys".

Another surprise was my Broadcom4312 worked at first, but then setting up the Keys and updating with Pacman -Syyu broke my wireless. I used some firmware tools from the Packages and AUR so I'm glad to say my Netbook is running great. (Not asking for help, just sharing my experience for other potential ArchBang noobs).

The final result is really nice. Unlike #! over Debian, I have newer bleeding edge packages. The trade off may be potential instability if I run an Update, but I'll carefully review ArchBang forums before doing that. I might also look into updating individual programs instead of everything.

I also think there is a performance increase over Crunchbang. The bootspeed is a little faster and I think it can also load Web Browsers or LibreOffice a little faster.

Pacman is nice and combined with more options in AUR it gives users a lot to work with.


Darren Hale

"I might also look into updating individual programs instead of everything. "

Very wise some programs don't need updating and if they work and don't need updating then stick with them.


Unfortunately, it looks like CrunchBang has come to the end of the road. The developer/creator wrote this message yesterday. :(

I downloaded the iso and will play around/use it with it in a VM. Truly sad as they seem to have a wonderful community.


Manjaro has an Openbox variant. That might be interesting...

Very sad to see #! die. But I doubt the community will allow it. ;)

Mitt Green

Systemd is guilty again?

Reading from Devuan mailing list:
Crunchbang claimed to be... clean and simple but when Debian went systemd, Crunchbang followed eagerly... alienating their user base.
I can't help but think that the adoption of systemd for Jessie and
beyond played some role here. At least that is my take-away and may be
completely at odds with the real reason(s).
I am a crunchbanger, and my sense is that the community was fine with systemd, that it intended to roll right on in to Jessie without asking any questions. The thinking was "Crunchbang is based on Debian, and so it will follow Debian's lead."
(adoption of systemd played some role here)
I'm sure it did. Nobody who appreciates clean and simple could *like*
systemd, so the maintainer probably figured a Debian descendent that
kept taking its packages from Debian had no chance to ever get rid of
systemd. And of course, the transition to systemd alienated a big part
of Crunchbang's users. Heck, I never even tried it, because it was


It'll be a shame to see Crunchbang go; I have a lot of time for Crunchbang. It was always one of my go-to distros. I've been using Kubuntu on my new laptop recently - now I finally have a machine with enough oomph to run a full-fat desktop. But I have been thinking of switching back to Crunchbang, seeing as I rarely use the Plasma desktop any more. Most of the time I end up using dwm, heh heh!

Very sad to see Phil/Corenomial ending the project, but I understand and respect his decision. Hopefully some of the community will be able to get together to continue the project under a different name; Otherwise when I decide to make the switch from Kubuntu, I guess I'll have to use Debians minimal net-install image and manually configure and install all of the additional bits to get a crunchbang-like system up and running using the debian testing repos.

Or perhaps I should just bite the bullet and go back to Arch with Openbox/dwm. Or maybe even Archbang, seeing as it is basically Crunchbang on Arch!

Controversially, I quite like the idea of Archbang. Sure it's not exactly the 'Arch way', with it's user friendly installer and pre-configured desktop. But I have manually installed and configured Arch several times in the past. I've already been through the requisite rites of passage. So it's not like I don't know what I'm doing. Plus I like being lazy! :) Don't judge me! XD


The devuan mailing list is well known to be swarming with ill informed anti-systemd ranters. The devuan "fork" itself if examined objectively, has not actually produced anything credible to date. There is a lot of chat, so far as I can tell and not much more.

It's also still possible to run testing or unstable without systemd, so I'm still unsure as to what their objectives are except to purge every last vestige "just in case". That in itself makes me all the more skeptical. Then you have to question a project overseen by a group calling themselves the "veteran unix admins", most of whom remain anonymous.

On topic, I agree with the lead developer's decision to end crunchbang. There was a time and a place for it and that has passed.


I have only used ArchBang, but knowing that the idea came from CrunchBang is enough to acknowledge such distro was glorious.

Nice to know #!++ will push the legacy forward.

I loved the meaning behind this logo by the way
$100 Digital Ocean Credit
Get a free VM to test out Linux!

Members online