4 ms·

> you can search Arch Isn't Arch specifically for users who don't mind things breaking and going deep into internals to fix it?

smcl 9y ago
Correct but that has caused their wiki to be one of the better places to find out how to setup and configure services, hardware, etc even if you have to do a little tweaking to the instructions for your own distribution
jorgemf 9y ago
Incorrect, I break arch less times than Ubuntu and I use it daily while I use Ubuntu casually
- majewsky 9y ago
  Arch's KISS attitude is really helpful for that. Whenever I have to deal with a Debian/Ubuntu system, I'm sort of weary of "apt install"ing any daemons because of the autoconfigure magic that's going on in dpkg. With Arch, installing a package just unpacks the package files and runs a few innocuous post-install hooks, mostly to rebuild indexes (mandb, fontconfig, etc.) and compile DKMS-based kernel modules. But nothing potentially destructive like `systemctl start postfix`. Also, it installs exactly what you want, instead of dozens of tangentially-related "suggested packages". If you `apt install rsyslog`, it pulls in an entire MTA because somewhere deep in rsyslog, there is an option that might send emails, so Debian in its unending wisdom determines that you MUST HAVE an MTA beyond this point. In Arch, `pacman -S rsyslog` installs just rsyslog and a few required shared libraries.
  - eeZah7Ux 9y ago
    There is no "autoconfigure magic". Daemons install standard configuration files and start by default. Autostart can be disabled, that's all.
  - icebraining 9y ago
    Also, it installs exactly what you want, instead of dozens of tangentially-related "suggested packages". So does Debian, if that's what you tell it you want (either on the config file or as a CLI argument). Even without that, while it may suggest a full MTA by default, you can ask it for another solution and it'll suggest a simple mailer (like bsd-mailx). I don't dispute that Arch's defaults guide you to a simpler system, but it's not really hard to start from Debian netinstall and add just what you need, package by package.
    - majewsky 9y ago
      > you can ask it for another solution and it'll suggest a simple mailer Exactly. The correct solution for me is "no mailer at all".
      - icebraining 9y ago
        Right, so tell it not to install the recommended packages, like I said.
  - kccqzy 9y ago
    Suggested packages are off by default. You are talking about recommended packages which can be turned off via --no-install-recommends.
erikbye 9y ago
I think it's well-suited to anyone who despises bloat. To anyone who wants to run a resource-efficient and performant system with just the parts they need. And honestly, most users will never need to dig deep. Most users will only, occasionally, need to follow a few steps on the well-explained Wiki. More of my thoughts on Arch: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246781 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246781
- suby 9y ago
  I tried arch out in 2016. Over a period of two weeks, 3 separate updates broke one thing or another. In my 4 years using mint / ubuntu, an update broke my machine once, and that was when the power went out during an update. Arch apparently works great for a lot of people, but I'd urge caution.
  - erikbye 9y ago
    Did it break in an unrecoverable way, or was it just an inconvenience? Arch is a rolling release that many choose to update daily, or on a fixed schedule, like once a week. That updates sometimes can break a thing or two, out of hundreds of updates, is to be expected. If that sounds scary to you, Arch is certainly not for you. That said, it has rarely happened to me, and any breakage is usually minor and easily fixed. It's not like you have to even figure out how; it's laid out for you on the Wiki, Forum or Arch's homepage. My experience with other distros has been far more troubling, except Slackware. Arch's strengths easily outweigh occasional inconveniences. Not having to deal with anything Ubuntu or Canonical is a great bonus.
    - mcgrath_sh 9y ago
      I originally went Slackware when diving into Linux. Manual dependency resolution was just a step too far. Installing Calibre became a nightmare. I turned to Arch and have been very happy. I simply don’t have the time to properly maintain a Slackware box. I do really like it though.

smcl 9y ago

Correct but that has caused their wiki to be one of the better places to find out how to setup and configure services, hardware, etc even if you have to do a little tweaking to the instructions for your own distribution

jorgemf 9y ago

Incorrect, I break arch less times than Ubuntu and I use it daily while I use Ubuntu casually

majewsky 9y ago
Arch's KISS attitude is really helpful for that. Whenever I have to deal with a Debian/Ubuntu system, I'm sort of weary of "apt install"ing any daemons because of the autoconfigure magic that's going on in dpkg. With Arch, installing a package just unpacks the package files and runs a few innocuous post-install hooks, mostly to rebuild indexes (mandb, fontconfig, etc.) and compile DKMS-based kernel modules. But nothing potentially destructive like `systemctl start postfix`. Also, it installs exactly what you want, instead of dozens of tangentially-related "suggested packages". If you `apt install rsyslog`, it pulls in an entire MTA because somewhere deep in rsyslog, there is an option that might send emails, so Debian in its unending wisdom determines that you MUST HAVE an MTA beyond this point. In Arch, `pacman -S rsyslog` installs just rsyslog and a few required shared libraries.
- eeZah7Ux 9y ago
  There is no "autoconfigure magic". Daemons install standard configuration files and start by default. Autostart can be disabled, that's all.
- icebraining 9y ago
  Also, it installs exactly what you want, instead of dozens of tangentially-related "suggested packages". So does Debian, if that's what you tell it you want (either on the config file or as a CLI argument). Even without that, while it may suggest a full MTA by default, you can ask it for another solution and it'll suggest a simple mailer (like bsd-mailx). I don't dispute that Arch's defaults guide you to a simpler system, but it's not really hard to start from Debian netinstall and add just what you need, package by package.
  - majewsky 9y ago
    > you can ask it for another solution and it'll suggest a simple mailer Exactly. The correct solution for me is "no mailer at all".
    - icebraining 9y ago
      Right, so tell it not to install the recommended packages, like I said.
- kccqzy 9y ago
  Suggested packages are off by default. You are talking about recommended packages which can be turned off via --no-install-recommends.

erikbye 9y ago

I think it's well-suited to anyone who despises bloat. To anyone who wants to run a resource-efficient and performant system with just the parts they need. And honestly, most users will never need to dig deep. Most users will only, occasionally, need to follow a few steps on the well-explained Wiki. More of my thoughts on Arch: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246521 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246781 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=15246781

suby 9y ago
I tried arch out in 2016. Over a period of two weeks, 3 separate updates broke one thing or another. In my 4 years using mint / ubuntu, an update broke my machine once, and that was when the power went out during an update. Arch apparently works great for a lot of people, but I'd urge caution.
- erikbye 9y ago
  Did it break in an unrecoverable way, or was it just an inconvenience? Arch is a rolling release that many choose to update daily, or on a fixed schedule, like once a week. That updates sometimes can break a thing or two, out of hundreds of updates, is to be expected. If that sounds scary to you, Arch is certainly not for you. That said, it has rarely happened to me, and any breakage is usually minor and easily fixed. It's not like you have to even figure out how; it's laid out for you on the Wiki, Forum or Arch's homepage. My experience with other distros has been far more troubling, except Slackware. Arch's strengths easily outweigh occasional inconveniences. Not having to deal with anything Ubuntu or Canonical is a great bonus.
  - mcgrath_sh 9y ago
    I originally went Slackware when diving into Linux. Manual dependency resolution was just a step too far. Installing Calibre became a nightmare. I turned to Arch and have been very happy. I simply don’t have the time to properly maintain a Slackware box. I do really like it though.