4 ms·
The thing is not that it's a new deficiency or something, it's just that Arch user conveniently ignore this when praising their distribution over e.g. Debian.
by dozzie 8y ago
The thing is not that it's a new deficiency or something, it's just that Arch user conveniently ignore this when praising their distribution over e.g. Debian.
- dvfjsdhgfv 8y agoFortunately admins are not unreasonable and don't base their decisions on praises but on actual merits, so most servers run Debian rather than Arch (which is an interesting distro for other usage cases).
- farresito 8y agoWho would want to use a rolling release distribution for a (production) server? Sounds like a pretty terrible choice, to be quite honest.
- cmiles74 8y agoMaybe you could make the case for some cutting edge development or test box, but then again, I'd rather be testing on something that's as close to identical to the production environment as possible. I used Arch on my laptop (primarily used for development) for several years. It mostly worked great and I always had access to the newest whatever with a minimum of hassle. I don't have many complaints, but occasionally after an update something critical would stop working. I'm on Solus now and, so far, it's been pretty great. :-)
- Foxboron 8y agoAll of the Arch Linux infrastructure is run on Arch. Works pretty well.
- JackCh 8y agoThere is an expectation that projects dogfood their own software, but I really can't think of a rational reason for a production server not affiliated with the Arch project to be running Arch. Rolling release is great for technically competent users to install on their workstations, but why would you ever want a rolling release on a production server?
- Foxboron 8y agoYou wouldn't. The only reason why we run it is because we know it. I wouldn't have used Arch on any production things personally.
- semi-extrinsic 8y agoWell, one thing which I know of several projects doing, is having an Arch server as one of the continuous testing servers. This way you can test against bleeding edge gcc/glibc/whatnot and catch bugs or breaking API changes long before they appear in major distros.
- walrus01 8y agoNobody that values their job or sleeping well at night. It's basically one level of nuts above and beyond running Debian Sid on all your production servers.
- hultner 8y agoI ran SID in a embedded customer box testing unreleased software, I did run it in KVM from a stable release since I wouldn’t have physical access if something went wrong, glad I did.
- mateuszf 8y agoAUR repository isn't supported by the core tools and packages. To use it one has to install external scripts. So it's by no means part of the system.
- mar77i 8y agoUrm, you need git, you need build tools... and pacman. That's it. But oh yeah, because I do these things by hand and check whether the source urls point to the place I'd actually like to install (and other code doesn't download external sources, eg. in the PKGBUILD or external scripts like *.install files), I'm suddenly an exception. I just noticed that the blue used on the Archlinux logo is actually quite consistent with Rick's hair color. https://i.imgur.com/kkE25w2.jpg https://i.imgur.com/kkE25w2.jpg Fits me. I don't give a damn.
- Foxboron 8y agoI'll assure you Rick has a blue-grayish color while the Arch logo is Navy Blue.
- dozzie 8y agoWhich, as I said, very conveniently is glossed over by Arch users.
- JackCh 8y agoThat's a problem with Arch users, not with Arch. It's unfortunately common that fanboys undermine the reputation of reasonable software.