4 ms·

Having used BSD many years ago on desktop, I completely disagree. What are you using your computer for using BSD? I really don't spend 99% of my time just compi

Having used BSD many years ago on desktop, I completely disagree. What are you using your computer for using BSD? I really don't spend 99% of my time just compiling lol The chaos thing is something I hear from BSD users quite a lot. I'm still not sure what it is means, maybe that's some sort of personal issue..? I suppose you don't like forking and variation, which is understandable coming from a user of an OS with a fantastically small userbase that somehow still manages to be proportionally more fragmented than any other community I can think of, but the "chaos" of Linux is grossly overstated. Most everything that is relevant today runs Debian, unless you're a poweruser running Arch or even Gentoo, but even then, who's out there being a distro purist? I'm willing to bet that most people running Arch or Gentoo are still using quite a bit of 'Debian resources'/assets. Sure, there's RedHat too and all the others that fill some corporate niche, but there really isn't this whole divide within the Linux community like people sometimes imply. I think a lot of people are stuck in a mindset that hasn't been relevant for somewhere between 10 and 20 years.

nsajko 4y ago
> I'm willing to bet that most people running Arch or Gentoo are still using quite a bit of 'Debian resources'/assets. More like the reverse, the Arch Wiki is the best so everyone uses it. Although for some topics it makes sense to take a look at Debian or Gentoo wikis, too. Not sure what other kind of 'Debian resources'/assets you had in mind.
- therealunreal 4y ago
  I use Arch almost exclusively on the desktop but I gave up on running it on servers that I don't want to actively maintain (think of small, non-critical web servers). Ubuntu works fine there.
- ooneeks 4y ago
  Whilst I don't at all doubt your testimonies, I am still sitting here wondering what programs everyone here is using, if not programs usually tailored for Debian. I feel like I've seen more software that runs natively on Debian (Ubuntu, really) and made specifically for dpkg. But I suppose a lot of applications also come with "snap" these days, but I avoid "software stores" like the plague. I personally have had very little contact with Arch, but I realise that is me that is strange, I personally dislike Arch very much and can recognise that, that might be the reason I don't see it around as much; a negative confirmation bias of sorts, if you will. 99% of the time when I have an issue and I just google it, I'll end up on the Ubuntu forum, that's no lie. But I do seem to remember using the Arch wiki years ago. I'll admit, I'm probably just a diehard fan of Debian.
  - nsajko 4y ago
    You do know about package managers and software packages, right? Debian has its own packagers, and so does Arch, there's nothing in common between Debian and Arch packaging (except for certain elements of the philosophy, etc). What do you mean by "programs usually tailored for Debian", in general Linux programs for sure won't be tailored for Debian, except for Debian-internal developer tools perhaps.
hnlmorg 4y ago
I can’t speak for everyone, but one of the reasons I use Arch is precisely because Debian doesn’t have as many resources/assets as Arch. AUR may not be perfect but there is very little software out there that someone hasn’t already packaged in it and it’s a great deal more convenient to use than faffing with custom repos. The Arch Wiki is second to none too. I’ve even occasionally found myself using it when debugging other Linuxes. I definitely wouldn’t use Arch on a server though. I mean, I have done, multiple times in fact, but they’ve always been personal systems. I much prefer FreeBSD for servers. Professionally it has usually been Debian, CentOS, or, much more recently, Ubuntu Server (but I really don’t like Ubuntu Server. Or Desktop for that matter). Disclaimer: this is all my own opinion and I’m not trying to pass any of it off as fact.
- ooneeks 4y ago
  Interesting. I suppose I also just use very mainstream software as well. I find that basically everything I need is either made for dpkg or exists within Ubuntu repositories (they've got literally everything there, haven't they!). I agree in your overall assessment though, I can concede to the fact that I might be underselling the value of Arch within the broader Linux community. I've often seen Arch as the detrimental opposite however, which is quite ironic. Personally I just find Debian distros superior to most others (except Linux Mint.I hate Mint, more than anything). I do quite fancy Ubuntu as dekstop, but you truly are right that it is at the very least, not a very good server distro. It might be the worst, imo, Debian server distro. My go-to choice for a Debian alternative is Fedora, however, so our different experiences might also be a testament to a fundamentally different view on Linux and how you do your computing.

nsajko 4y ago

> I'm willing to bet that most people running Arch or Gentoo are still using quite a bit of 'Debian resources'/assets. More like the reverse, the Arch Wiki is the best so everyone uses it. Although for some topics it makes sense to take a look at Debian or Gentoo wikis, too. Not sure what other kind of 'Debian resources'/assets you had in mind.

therealunreal 4y ago
I use Arch almost exclusively on the desktop but I gave up on running it on servers that I don't want to actively maintain (think of small, non-critical web servers). Ubuntu works fine there.
ooneeks 4y ago
Whilst I don't at all doubt your testimonies, I am still sitting here wondering what programs everyone here is using, if not programs usually tailored for Debian. I feel like I've seen more software that runs natively on Debian (Ubuntu, really) and made specifically for dpkg. But I suppose a lot of applications also come with "snap" these days, but I avoid "software stores" like the plague. I personally have had very little contact with Arch, but I realise that is me that is strange, I personally dislike Arch very much and can recognise that, that might be the reason I don't see it around as much; a negative confirmation bias of sorts, if you will. 99% of the time when I have an issue and I just google it, I'll end up on the Ubuntu forum, that's no lie. But I do seem to remember using the Arch wiki years ago. I'll admit, I'm probably just a diehard fan of Debian.
- nsajko 4y ago
  You do know about package managers and software packages, right? Debian has its own packagers, and so does Arch, there's nothing in common between Debian and Arch packaging (except for certain elements of the philosophy, etc). What do you mean by "programs usually tailored for Debian", in general Linux programs for sure won't be tailored for Debian, except for Debian-internal developer tools perhaps.

hnlmorg 4y ago

I can’t speak for everyone, but one of the reasons I use Arch is precisely because Debian doesn’t have as many resources/assets as Arch. AUR may not be perfect but there is very little software out there that someone hasn’t already packaged in it and it’s a great deal more convenient to use than faffing with custom repos. The Arch Wiki is second to none too. I’ve even occasionally found myself using it when debugging other Linuxes. I definitely wouldn’t use Arch on a server though. I mean, I have done, multiple times in fact, but they’ve always been personal systems. I much prefer FreeBSD for servers. Professionally it has usually been Debian, CentOS, or, much more recently, Ubuntu Server (but I really don’t like Ubuntu Server. Or Desktop for that matter). Disclaimer: this is all my own opinion and I’m not trying to pass any of it off as fact.

ooneeks 4y ago
Interesting. I suppose I also just use very mainstream software as well. I find that basically everything I need is either made for dpkg or exists within Ubuntu repositories (they've got literally everything there, haven't they!). I agree in your overall assessment though, I can concede to the fact that I might be underselling the value of Arch within the broader Linux community. I've often seen Arch as the detrimental opposite however, which is quite ironic. Personally I just find Debian distros superior to most others (except Linux Mint.I hate Mint, more than anything). I do quite fancy Ubuntu as dekstop, but you truly are right that it is at the very least, not a very good server distro. It might be the worst, imo, Debian server distro. My go-to choice for a Debian alternative is Fedora, however, so our different experiences might also be a testament to a fundamentally different view on Linux and how you do your computing.