4 ms·

Great news :) We switched to Gitlab at Arch Linux recently as well: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/ https://gitlab.archlinux.org/ (well, we're still migrating pro

Great news :) We switched to Gitlab at Arch Linux recently as well: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/ https://gitlab.archlinux.org/ (well, we're still migrating projects and users, it's a long process)

smitty1e 6y ago
Arch and Xfce are a peanut-butter-and-chocolate combination of rock solid performance, flexibility, and minimal fuss.
- varbhat 6y ago
  .
  - rxhernandez 6y ago
    This past year, on my Thinkpad P50, I've switched between Ubuntu, Fedora, and Arch; Arch has by far been the least buggy. With Ubuntu, things would go haywire when docking/undocking. With Fedora, putting it to sleep was always a risk because after putting it to sleep I would sometimes I would open up my laptop to a black screen that I couldn't recover from. I was fine with that and just wouldn't put my laptop to sleep but eventually I started using Zoom and Fedora would crash within an hour and a half of using it. This pushed me over the edge to wipe my laptop and install Arch; I'm really glad I did. I still have an issue where the system is not detecting when my laptop lid closing but at least it's not crashing every day or two.
    - carlhjerpe 6y ago
      This fragmentation between what works on what dists makes me sad. Philosophically I've always admired BSD for the consistency, considering how there's just 3-ish of them, realistically I'm a Manjaro user as I don't have enough Linux-fu to set Arch up.
      - Talanes 6y ago
        Honestly you don't need any particular skills to install Arch. Just time and access to the instructions. It's a neat way to spend an afternoon once, but I just switched to Manjaro too on future installations,
        carlhjerpe 6y ago
        I'm one of those that when I fiddle with something I really wanna know what I'm doing too,so my arch installation would probably take weeks (and I'd learn a lot). Soon-ish™
        licebmi__at__ 6y ago
        If you already know the basics, you won't find too much surprising stuff. That's actually the reason I like Arch, whenever I wanted to customize something, I would find the steps in other distros more esoteric and made with a lot of assumptions, in that regard Arch seems simpler to me. If you want to investigate what you're executing in your system, as opposed to find what fedora does under the hood during install, you might find Arch install is nice an simple.
        ta17711771 6y ago
        I loved Arch until I figured out their security patch intervals are like a week behind upstream..
        Foxboron 6y ago
        That is sadly what you get with an non-commercial all-volunteer distribution. We only have so much time on our hands and Security Team members are productive members of the community holding several roles. More contributors are always needed and welcome.
        ta17711771 6y ago
        In my other comment, s/Arch/Manjaro, sorry.
    - zozbot234 6y ago
      Plain vanilla Debian is a lot more solid than Ubuntu as long as the hardware is well-supported. With very new hardware you end up having to stay on the testing or unstable release channel for a while, which is quite a bit messier since, e.g. some security updates may be delayed. Still more predictable than Arch or Manjaro though.
    - hvis 6y ago
      Could it simply be due to the difference in kernel versions? E.g. you have some new-ish hardware where the most recent kernel (packaged in Arch) includes fixes.
LukeShu 6y ago
Well, I guess that gives more ammunition to the people in Parabola asking to switch to GitLab.
oehtXRwMkIs 6y ago
Does this mean no more Flyspray? I really hope so.
- scrollaway 6y ago
  Yes, flyspray is atrocious. But it's also one of our more complex migrations, so it'll take some time to complete the work on it.

Great news :) We switched to Gitlab at Arch Linux recently as well: https://gitlab.archlinux.org/ https://gitlab.archlinux.org/ (well, we're still migrating projects and users, it's a long process)

smitty1e 6y ago

Arch and Xfce are a peanut-butter-and-chocolate combination of rock solid performance, flexibility, and minimal fuss.

varbhat 6y ago
.
- rxhernandez 6y ago
  This past year, on my Thinkpad P50, I've switched between Ubuntu, Fedora, and Arch; Arch has by far been the least buggy. With Ubuntu, things would go haywire when docking/undocking. With Fedora, putting it to sleep was always a risk because after putting it to sleep I would sometimes I would open up my laptop to a black screen that I couldn't recover from. I was fine with that and just wouldn't put my laptop to sleep but eventually I started using Zoom and Fedora would crash within an hour and a half of using it. This pushed me over the edge to wipe my laptop and install Arch; I'm really glad I did. I still have an issue where the system is not detecting when my laptop lid closing but at least it's not crashing every day or two.
  - carlhjerpe 6y ago
    This fragmentation between what works on what dists makes me sad. Philosophically I've always admired BSD for the consistency, considering how there's just 3-ish of them, realistically I'm a Manjaro user as I don't have enough Linux-fu to set Arch up.
    - Talanes 6y ago
      Honestly you don't need any particular skills to install Arch. Just time and access to the instructions. It's a neat way to spend an afternoon once, but I just switched to Manjaro too on future installations,
      - carlhjerpe 6y ago
        I'm one of those that when I fiddle with something I really wanna know what I'm doing too,so my arch installation would probably take weeks (and I'd learn a lot). Soon-ish™
        licebmi__at__ 6y ago
        If you already know the basics, you won't find too much surprising stuff. That's actually the reason I like Arch, whenever I wanted to customize something, I would find the steps in other distros more esoteric and made with a lot of assumptions, in that regard Arch seems simpler to me. If you want to investigate what you're executing in your system, as opposed to find what fedora does under the hood during install, you might find Arch install is nice an simple.
      - ta17711771 6y ago
        I loved Arch until I figured out their security patch intervals are like a week behind upstream..
        Foxboron 6y ago
        That is sadly what you get with an non-commercial all-volunteer distribution. We only have so much time on our hands and Security Team members are productive members of the community holding several roles. More contributors are always needed and welcome.
      - ta17711771 6y ago
        In my other comment, s/Arch/Manjaro, sorry.
  - zozbot234 6y ago
    Plain vanilla Debian is a lot more solid than Ubuntu as long as the hardware is well-supported. With very new hardware you end up having to stay on the testing or unstable release channel for a while, which is quite a bit messier since, e.g. some security updates may be delayed. Still more predictable than Arch or Manjaro though.
  - hvis 6y ago
    Could it simply be due to the difference in kernel versions? E.g. you have some new-ish hardware where the most recent kernel (packaged in Arch) includes fixes.

LukeShu 6y ago

Well, I guess that gives more ammunition to the people in Parabola asking to switch to GitLab.

oehtXRwMkIs 6y ago

Does this mean no more Flyspray? I really hope so.

scrollaway 6y ago
Yes, flyspray is atrocious. But it's also one of our more complex migrations, so it'll take some time to complete the work on it.