Moving from Arch > Debian

After giving Arch a fair shot, I can honestly say it's nowhere near the genuine quality of Debian. Why do you Archers still use that over literally any other distro?

Other urls found in this thread:

wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

There is IQ threshold for using Arch, you clearly are bellow that

What part about 'I gave it a fair shot' do you not understand? You dont need to be super smart to run pacstrap and 'genfstab'.

>There is IQ threshold for using Arch, you clearly are bellow that
>you clearly are bellow that
>bellow that
>bellow

enjoy you broken ass shit apt lmao

What didn't work for you user?

I don't have to justify my choices to you. Just use what you want senpai. I like the rolling release + arch philosophy + AUR.

Or are you expecting to start a flame war of distro shitposting?

>Why do you Archers still use that over literally any other distro?
- Rolling release
- Fast
- The easiest way to rollback when an update fails.

>AUR

>arch user
>calling other distros broken
wow, you seriously lack self awareness or just have no shame

Arch is only free if your time is worthless.

I recently moved in the opposite direction, from debian to arch. I wanted to use up-to-date versions of actively developed packages like sqlite, letsencrypt, etc not to mention things like python and the kernel. What was the problem with Arch for you? I was nervous at first about stability but its now been 6 months with no issues so far.

There should be a blacklist of sorts, filtering out any OP with "literally" in it.

I don't get the idea behind AUR. Why is the software not with the other repos? Or it's own seperate repo to use directly from pacman?

Because Arch users have to be special fucking snowflakes

Because I want my packages to be updated more than once every blue moon. Also, the AUR and Arch Wiki are both cases of autism that had an amazingly good impact.

> 6 months with no stability issues
> server with a 9d uptime
Pick one.

the docs I can give credit to, AUR is utterly dumb

The AUR saves you the trouble of manually compiling most packages not in the official repo because other users have set it up for you.

>muh speshul snowflakes abloobloobloo
or literally anywhere but here

why are they not in the official repos? wouldnt that make life easier for everyone involved?

>arch on a server

>why do archers use arch over any other distro?
Exactly that. Because it isn't any other distro. Can't you see that this is butt diddling on a collective scale, brought about by being in the height of the irony movement and the internet jacking its dick off to people posting stupid shit like "hey guys made my system even more complicated to use today for no reason". Reminds me of the subreddit made just around this one fagtron's game of civilization that he kept playing for 15 years straight or some shit. Losers flock together and make little internet circlejerk clubs and ignore everything else. Arch is the linux form of this.

because arch is shit and has nowhere near the support or userbase as debian

therefore its main repository is tiny as fuck

the aur is unsafe and unmonitored btw
enjoy your rootkits if you dont review every single file

... have you never updated a kernel? it requires a restart. taking my system offline for 3 minutes at night to update it is not an issue, and if it was, I could just not update it until later

Some of them should be official, I agree, but it helps immensely with those little niche packages that wouldn't make it into official repos normally.

>no support
See: the Arch wiki and forums
>unsafe
Werks on my machine :^)

not him, but arch has the option to use the long term support kernel. definitely better with up-to-date security software.

at least it's better then centos :^)

Literally the only reason I use it is that it's rolling release. I would use gentoo if there was an easy way to install precompiled binaries.

lmao fedora high school skid

Because some of us actually want to LEARN abotu Linux, and the only way to do that is using Arch and building your system from teh ground up

nice false flag, idiot.

>- The easiest way to rollback when an update fails.
How do you rollback?
you mean like rollback to a specific date, or just downgrade a package?

>mount partitions
>pacstrap
>genfstab
mom i did it
gentoo is the OS that does it the real way of 'learning how it works from the ground up'

>>Debian
>out of date packages
>no PPAs/AUR
>hyper bloat i.e. installing a package also installs 500 other packages along with it
>if aptitude breaks good luck fixing that bullshit when -f doesn't work
>sjw developers
>>Arch
>pacman just werks every time
>glorious AUR
>vanilla GNU/Linux experience--no distro-specific bloat
>software that isn't a century out of date
>massive wiki that isn't just filled with TODO pages, forums for support

debian is literally only good for servers.

I liked it for up to date and AUR. also enjoy pac and less bloat

but yes. debian is far more stable and extra packages exist for a reason

>I-I-It's not out of date, it's s-stable!!!
Enjoy your CVEs, nerd.

To be fair, apt breaks stuff much more often than any other package manager I tried over the years, and yet I'm still using it.

Guess I just like to suffer desu.

>not using debian testing

Arch's website runs on an Arch server.

I dare you to catch the website ever being down.

yeah probably LTS version without an update ever.could work that way for any distro.

testing's packages are pretty outdated as well, albeit not nearly as much as stable

>gets proven wrong
>"W-well it's probably never updated because I said so! Ha!"
seriously, kill yourself retard.

After giving Debian GNU/Linux a fair shot, I can honestly say it's nowhere near the genuine quality of FreeBSD. Why do you GNU/Linuxers still use that over literally any other BSD?

>cuck license
>no support
>insecure
>literally more hobbyist and hipster than gentoo or arch

What a fucking dumbass

debian went to shit since switching to systemd

systemd works fine for me. No problems here

I wonder how many backdoors are in Arch's shitty repos.

>I can honestly say it's nowhere near the genuine quality of FreeBSD
Wow, so specific. Call me convinced. I'm gonna switch to FreeBSD, where I get less support and less options to choose from in every way.

LOL

Not hating on BSD. But is there any actual legit reason to use it besides being edgy or a pedophile?

I mean why

As an end user, I don't have any clue what all this systemd vs wayland shit is about, and I don't give a shit.

What effect does systemd/wayland have on me? Why do people make such a shitstorm out of this?

Debian testing/unstable is rolling

>shit licensing
>no drivers
>barely any active development
even TempleOS is better than that retard shit

wiki.debian.org/systemd#Installing_without_systemd

it breaks only if you install third party repositories, never got a problem with the main repos on ubuntu's stable releases.
pacman requires to --force or make changes to upgrade properly sometimes, usually documented in the news but still annoying and not guaranteed to work everytime
I prefer pacman as package manager (better syntax/faster) but ubuntu/debian are just more polished overall and if I want to install a custom/minimal OS gentoo is a lot better (and more fun too)

you're all wrong you goddamn cock gobblers

fedora is the best, just works as they say

all you kids making your computers all colorful and pretty. get your fucking buttplug out and be a MAN, juh-juh-juh-JR!

because some retards just can't comprehend that systemd is the logical next step in making the GNU/Linux experience less fragmented and more streamlined.

you're all batshit, arch is ok just because you construct it from the ground up and ubuntu is just shit all around

BSD has no GPU passthrough, does it?

I actually have a job and use my computer for real work so I use Debian.

BMI 39 detected

>you're all batshit
look, some anons are on the arch side of things
other than that, I agree

>inb4 tripfag

>systemd is the logical next step
That was really vague/general and didn't really answer my question. You basically said "systemd is better, durr"

Lemme re-ask:
What effect does systemd/wayland have on me as an end user? AND Why do people make such a shitstorm out of this? You're just adding to the seemingly random shitstorm factor.

if you're the average end user, there's not really anything to care about.

if you have a severe case of autism there's a bunch of technical differences that nobody should care about but do anyways

Thanks mang

no problem bro

Fedora is the most unstable and unusable steaming pile of shit I have ever used in my decades using Linux. Never again. Fuck off

arch linux was created and maintained by hobbyists from Sup Forums, that is why it has had numerous high profile gaping security holes. the average of the arch community is about 17.

debian was created and maintained by professionals in the software industry with actual jobs, people who pay more in income tax than the average arch developer makes in five or six years.

arch linux did not start using signed packages until last month

arch developers are more interested in making minor performance enhancements in ricing packages than releasing security updates in a timely manner or doing rudimentary stability testing.

arch developers spent more time tweaking the logo in photoshop than planning the release schedule

arch was created by users in an irc channel for reselling obsolete cs go wallhacks and gift cards purchased by russian carders

The only thing that comes close to godly AUR is FreeBSD ports

10/10 bait guaranteed replies

...

I'm actually serious. Sure, ports lack packages but it's comfy as fuck

>there's no packages so i better say something vague and meaningless like "it's comfy" to seem like it's actually good

I installed Arch today because I wanted a bloat free distro. The installation was painless, and I haven't had any driver issues.

you're dumb.

just dumb.

a fucking asshat, if you would.

it's installing programs you mongoloid.

>No programs
Not true.
How many big softwares did you compile all by yourself, newbabby?

Why u people dont use a friedly dietro like ubuntu?

here is my question, in 2016, what is considered bloat? Who the hell even worries about package size anymore? You still installing from floppys or something?

>using a package manager
>not being bleeding edge by compiling from source

Oh you mean doing that thing that takes forever to do with barely any benefits from doing it? Twice. I've used both arch and freebsd and they are both flaming pieces of garbage.

I found no reason for it.

Maybe you were not competent enough for both Arch and FreeBSD. Nothing wrong with it though

>restarting a server
>ever
jesus fuck....

>pic related it's my Ubuntu/Unity desktop right now
>tfw a bloated Unity desktop OS has more uptime has better uptime than Headless Arch

>ProTip: my last restart was to go into my Windows Partition

Arch fag
D E T E C T E D
E
T
E
C
T
E
D

sure, i'm not competent enough to wait for a program to compile that would take literally 2 minutes to download and install using a package system.

So i have to actually sit here and do work on my computer instead of waiting 30 minutes for firefox to compile so i can jerk off.

Firefox has a binary and so does mainstream packages

Sometimes the version from the package manager is outdated, and you need the very latest version.

>... have you never updated a kernel? it requires a restart
wtf are you talking about ? no it doesn't
typical arch user, knows nothing but thinks he's an expert

Have you considered setting up a PCI passthrough? Then you would not need to restart to go to your windows partition.

Debian on the streets.

Ubuntu in the sheets.