4 ms·
> Or what Arch has become. What has Arch become? I've been using it for 10 years and the only thing I can think of that has changed is the init system.
by meribold 5y ago
> Or what Arch has become.
What has Arch become? I've been using it for 10 years and the only thing I can think of that has changed is the init system.
- trabant00 5y agoI was about to ask the same thing. I think I have more than 10 years and haven't noticed any significant change in Arch, it requires no additional work.
- KingMachiavelli 5y agoIt is still very good for some things like as a desktop OS, has very good Steam/Proton ecosystem, etc. Using Arch as a server can be a headache. Just today I updated a Arch VM running postresql. Postgresql needs to previous version present to do the upgrade. I had actually skipped a version (11 to 13) so Arch no longer had version 11 in the repos and old packages had broken dependencies. I ended up just installing the Nix package manager on the system. I started a shell with Postgres 11 & 12 both present to do one upgrade. Then I used another shell with 12 & 13 to do the final upgrade. It took like 10 minutes vs the hour I had spent trying to rollback packages on Arch.
- jorams 5y agoThis is definitely something Nix is very good at, but it's not a problem with Arch. Staying up to date with upstream is basically the point of the distro, so if you're going to postpone an update for a year you should be using something else.
- pxc 5y agoWhy do Arch users always do this? > We told you Arch would be bad at this does not refute (or even contradict) > Arch is bad at this The cost of Arch's KISS philosophy is a system that is uniquely brittle among Linux distros in a number of ways, and Arch users are totally unwilling to admit this except in the form of blaming users for having bad experiences.