3 ms·
Anecdote: I use Manjaro on my home server and on a laptop and it's rock-solid. Not sure why people look down on Arch, I only had good experiences and I'm very f
by pdimitar 5y ago
Anecdote: I use Manjaro on my home server and on a laptop and it's rock-solid. Not sure why people look down on Arch, I only had good experiences and I'm very far from a seasoned sysadmin.
- unixhero 5y agoI don't look down on Arch at all. I came from the yesteryears of using Slackware Linux. It was a lot of work. I learnt a lot of course. But I won't do that again. Arch is much much more modern and elegant, but still requires some handholding. The Arch Wiki is a pearl. I tried Manjaro and was mightily impressed, it was a breeze. I might go back to that on a multi boot machine. Cheers.
- dTal 5y agoPeople look down on Arch because the stability story is catastrophic, and Arch users deny that because they have low standards: Parent was surprised that "Somehow the upgrade didn't completely hose everything" after only 2 years of no updates. It "just" took them "an hour of babysitting it" through cyclic dependency headaches. Child comments proudly proclaim "only seen a handful of actual breakages" (since 2016) and "on the of easiest distros to fix when things go wrong". Compare to my dad's laptop, which has been running Debian for about a decade and often goes multi-year stretches without updates, and has never broken. Not once. That's the kind of performance I expect from an OS.
- iamevn 5y agofwiw I've gotten a debian install to the point where I'd rather wipe and reinstall than fix thanks to a combination of pinning, bad pip hygeine (why oh why is global install default), and not being sure where to go to learn how to untangle the mess I'd created. Sure I was a lot less experienced but there's something to be said for arch giving me enough tools and information that I actually feel like I can fix whatever comes up.