Can we please, PLEASE for gods sake just all agree that arch is not and will never be a good beginner distro no matter how many times you fork it?
-
Fair, that's defs breakage that would trip up a novice computer user.
I've been around enough to know that everyone ignores "have backups". Although I think pacman can do rollbacks because it keeps a cache by default? I've never had to and I use snapshots so /shrug.
Still a novice computer user would probably not feel comfortable reading manual pages, and even an expert would be annoyed if this happened.
I tried to run linux on a mac once (work supplied) and it was very annoying compared to a think pad. I can't remember specifically why, maybe the touchpad had low level drag scrolling I couldn't overrule or something like that. How do you find it?
-
Nah that's gentoo
-
Debian doesn't support PPAs. That's an Ubuntu feature. Even if you somehow managed to enable a PPA on Debian, the packages will be for Ubuntu and are likely not install or work correctly.
-
people who unironically recommend anything arch-based (haha yes steamos is based on arch, yes you're very very clever, i'm sure you can even figure out why it's an obvious exception if you think about it for a minute) are just detached from reality and simply want to be part of a group.
The only time arch is suitable for beginners is installing it in a VM to learn linux via brute force, after you've gotten used to going through that process you'll have a very solid base of knowledge for using a more suitable distro.
-
Oh no someone's doing piracy! I don't know about their addons but DaVinci and Houdini have Linux versions. Seems like a valid complaint to me. Piracy is no worse than paying for proprietary software.
-
Is there anyone here remember Gentoo and the merge/split
/usr
period?Gentoo developers are kind and super helpful that they put out any important notice after you pull upgrades to your system. Run
eselect news read
to know what the breaking change is going to be, and carefully perform the required actions one by one. It's a great distro made by great fellas.I don't mind there is breaking change at all. I do mind that you don't tell me about it.
-
Yeah, Gentoo puts serious emphasis on that, I have to give them a credit. I liked it.
But yeah, I'd rather not have breaking changes in the first place.
-
I'm not completely up to speed with the core principles of Arch, but I think it revolves around KISS (Keep It Simple, Stupid!).
Meaning that Arch doesn't hold your hand with nice GUIs. Instead, it tries to make the command line interface as easy to understand and use as possible.
So if you run into a problem, you're more likely to understand how to fix it, or at least what the root cause is. Which is not a given when you're used to distros with more abstraction like Ubuntu.
Then again, this design concept is not for everyone. -
Counter-counter point: people don’t get a Mac or windows laptop to learn about osx or windows. They generally want to run software or at least browser to do what they need to do.
-
Again, stable doesn't mean what you think it means. An unstable system is not one that breaks, but one that doesn't keep a stable base. For example, Debian will not update a major version of almost anything, since that could potentially break dependencies, so it is stable even if it released patches as fast as Arch. On the other hand Arch is unstable, even if upgrading your system never broke anything because it can at any point change the version of any library you have installed.
-
yes, yes, and it works without tearing in xorg
no problem. multitouch is not xorgs nor wayland's responsibility. -
They have linux versions?
-
I said its easy to pirate on other os not that they arent available on linux?
-
Thats not a strange issue, shits expensive, ppl pirate, lemmydbzer0 is here for a reason
-
Forsure, if i do run into issues I'll switch to Bazzite. I always have windows to return to if I need to, still using it for some programs and im keeeping most files that cant be just be reinstalled when I need it on an external ssd.
-
I don't think arch does much to make commandline easier to use it understand - instead I'd say it aims to teach you how to use it, because it might be easier than you realize, but importantly it tries to tell you why. Instead of just giving you the command to run, the wiki explains various details of software, and the manual installation process tells you which components you need without forcing a specific choice. As a result, hopefully after using arch you'll know how your system works, how to tweak it, and how to fix issues - not necessarily by knowing how to fix each individual issue, but by understanding what parts of your system are responsible and where to look.
-
That’s still exactly what I meant? Sure, arch may never break even though it’s unstable but it being unstable heightens the risk of it (or some program) breaking due to changing library versions breaking dependencies.
Dependency issues happen much more rarely on stable systems. That’s why it’s called stable. And I very much prefer a system that isn’t likely to create dependency issues and thus break something when I update anything.
-
The package manager way of delivering distro management, updates and upgrades is an archaic and dumb idea. Doomed to fail since inception and the reason Linux never broke the 1% of users in forever. It's a bad model.
Atomic and immutable distribution of an OS is the preferred and successful model for the average user who wants a PC to be a tool and not a hobby on itself. I don't think the traditional package manager will ever go away. But there are alternatives now.
-
Arch doesn't require you to "read through all changelogs". It only requires that you check the news. News posts are rare, their text is short, and not all news posts are about you needing to do something to upgrade the system. Additionally, pacman wrappers like
paru
check the news automatically and print them to the terminal before upgrading the system. So it's not like you have to even remember it and open a browser to do it.Arch is entirely about “move fast and break stuff”.
No, it's not. None of the things that make Arch hard for newbies have to do anything with the bleeding edge aspect of Arch. Arch does not assume your use case and will leave it up to you to do stuff like edit the default configuration and enable a service. In case of errors or potential breakage you get an error or a warning and you deal with it as you see fit. These design choices have nothing to do with "moving fast". It's all about simplicity and a diy approach to setting up a system.
-
I would, however, recommend Arch if you're a Linux novice looking to learn about Linux in a more accelerated pace.