Arch is different…

  • Miaou@jlai.lu
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    24
    arrow-down
    6
    ·
    1 day ago

    It’s difficult to take people shitting on arch in here seriously. I’ll take 1h per year fixing whatever broke over a whole weekend upgrading Debian.

    Oh and god forbid you need to compile yourself a package and maybe a few of its dependencies from scratch because that 6 years old bug didn’t make it through the freeze last release.

        • raspberriesareyummy@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          9 hours ago

          Yes? Same thing… aptitude upgrade, aptitude dist-upgrade, edit /etc/apt/sources.lst to point to the new major version (s/bookworm/trixie), aptitude upgrade, aptitude dist-upgrade Done. Typically takes 1 hourish at most.

    • vandsjov@feddit.dk
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      8
      ·
      1 day ago

      Debian can take a week to upgrade? Apparently I’m yolo’ing it and just the upgrade. However I have just done one major update, so u might just be lucky

      • anewfox@lemmy.zip
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        1 day ago

        i have often found myself needing to manually update packages on distros like fedora or debian because i need a newer version that hasn’t landed in dnf/apt yet. arch doesn’t have that problem. ymmv, obviously, it’s not going to be an issue for everyone.

        • vandsjov@feddit.dk
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          1
          ·
          15 hours ago

          I probably don’t mess around my system too much and don’t install too many things outside Debian repositories to make issues with the upgrades.

    • glibg10b@lemmy.zip
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      21 hours ago

      Debian isn’t the only alternative to Arch. There are rolling-release distros where being a guinea pig is opt-in, not forced. Like Gentoo, where brave users test packages before they reach the wider audience

    • jama211@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      3
      arrow-down
      9
      ·
      16 hours ago

      As someone who gave up on linux years ago, this sounds like one person driving a broken old alfa romeo shitting on someone else driving a broken old fiat. Whilst I watch on from a modern EV.

      Hah, here come the downvotes.

    • insomniac_lemon@lemmy.cafe
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      19 hours ago

      It’s absolutely true. And that my outdated Arch system is likely still more fresh than Debian.

      That said yeah I would like something that can update itself whenever without breaking*, certainly if it expects me to update frequently. And manual interventions (ideally used for things that actually have a choice/fix, not just what ends up being a pasted command or two) should be a warn-step/update-blocker (depending on situation).

      Though what the image is probably about (2025-12-20, nVidia 10-series turned legacy, legacy driver put onto AUR) is a bad situation in its own right particularly later when the AUR issues started happening. And it is really an update-or-don’t (or get an AMD card somehow) issue.

      Other distros likely do solve the issue of updating, though from what I can see aren’t as good with packaging (dependency handling, lacking optional dependencies) and package availability. Which can be worked around somewhat too, but still needs more trial/input.

      Annoyances are also multiplied for me by having non-fiber internet (also shared).

      * TBC I also mean the act of updating itself (outdated keys etc), not just the outcome