Is it true that arch break itself very often?I often read that updating it may result in broxen x or some other shit...

Is it true that arch break itself very often?I often read that updating it may result in broxen x or some other shit. I want to switch from debian, mainly because I want bleeding edge software but I care about stability.

Other urls found in this thread:

wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Polkit
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Worst I ever got was videos stuttering in full screen after I updated

Arch isn't about bleeding edge software. It's about ricing. It's about nitpicking at details.

Bleeding edge software is by nature unstable. If you want the very bleeding edge you compile from source using the developer source code usptream.

Many distros have a way to trade off bleeding edge for stability. If you want something a little more tested than developer source in Fedora you can get something from updates-testing which is compiled from the latest release. Then it gets pushed to updates after a testing process which is more stable but you're still getting new releases from upstream a week or two after they come out. It depends on the particular package maintainer and the amount of people interested in testing when it hits updates-testing.

I think Debian does something similar with different versions and repos. You can always compile it yourself.

It won't break unless you break it.

Only thing I have 'break' in the 6 months running it is my MEGASync client when updating it's dependencies. Easy fix by reinstalling the client. Still rather annoying though.

And how do I break it?

It's a bit of an exaggeration to say it "breaks." Certain programs might behave strangely if the upstream devs fuck up. I'll give you two recent examples. Recently after netcdf updated, mpv was no longer able to play because it was look for a library that didn't exist. This was because of some dumb bug in netcdf. The best solution was to simply downgrade the package which is very easy to do on Arch, you don't even need to download older packages because they're saved in archived format in a directory. Some people used a hacky solution and symlink the library. It was patched within a day. Another instance was with lightdm, there was some bug that prevented the user from inputting their password in the password field. This bug was very annoying but was also patched within a day. Did the entire system break? Nah, it was still very much usuable. It's rare you'll run an update and find yourself unable to boot to log on or use core utilities.

Filthy lie.

Install unstable shit from aur or edit a config file wrong. Doing a pacman update is perfectly safe now

I have been using Arch on my desktop since January. I update every day. I have yet to have an update break the system, and have had nothing but stability. You will not have an unstable system if you follow the official installation guide and not some sketchy tutorial site.

Closest thing I had to "breaking X" was when the update upraded the kernel and the screen went black for a few seconds. I almost hard-reset it, but it came back a few seconds later, having updated everything with no errors.

>not using the superior mac os

It won't break unless you are trying to break it (or did a typo in configs)

Arch isn't bleeding edge
For bleeding edge go gentoo

Been working for me, steady as hell for almost a year now.

I irregularly run pacman -Syu and it never broke.

not really unless you enable the testing repo
been using it for 4 years, and have had no more issues than i did using debian/ubuntu

I once had PCIe passthrough break on an update on my desktop, but that was easy to fix. I have a home server with Arch + Linux lts and it's been completely stable.

The whole 'pacman broke Xorg meme' either was never true, was only true a long time ago, or is only true if you configure your system like a retard.

I never had any brakage on Arch and I used it for a couple of years

No

I updated yesterday and now gnome only displays a black screen with x cursor. So yeah, i guess.

Seems like shit.

>The whole 'pacman broke Xorg meme' either was never true, was only true a long time ago, or is only true if you configure your system like a retard.
Possibly around the time catalyst was on the official repos?

JEST DO IT OP

if there is no new thread about it on the forum this would mean something went wrong with only your toaster

One of the funniest questions because it brings out the worst/best in arch apologists

>Well, if you had spent hours reading mailing lists which only exist because other people did it first and it broke, which means it still does, you would know to not update!

>It only takes 15 minutes to reinstall if you spend weeks doing it over and over again and know it by heart

>Just don't update anyway

We call this type of person a "faggot". Meanwhile every other single distro since 2004 does not have this problem. this is why arch is a meme distro. didn't just wake up one day and get that name.

So it wasn't even my fault lightdm broke? Dammit, I searched 2 hours for the mistake I made...

>>Well, if you had spent hours reading mailing lists which only exist because other people did it first and it broke, which means it still does, you would know to not update!

Read the wiki.

>>It only takes 15 minutes to reinstall if you spend weeks doing it over and over again and know it by heart

Version control your etc, confs and init.

>>Just don't update anyway

Not a problem anymore.

Been using the same Arch install for 3 1/2 years. Had a HDD failure on after 2 years. Installed base, installed my other shit, pulled my confs, and was back up and running in less than 20 minutes even without a local backup.

Arch is GNU/Linux From Scratch with training wheels. If you don't understand the ecosystem, you can't understand Arch.

perfectly fine if I don't understand arch, I don't want to ever since I got a programming job. ubuntu runs all my laptops and debian runs all my servers and I had to learn far less than my years of inherited windows skills. once you are in any sort of situation where your time is at all valuable, timesink distros very very quickly go right out the door. Linux is about being a server to run business apps. If you spend any time at all looking at the system itself or configuring it, you've completely failed. digitalocean dropped arch for a reason.

by the way, the same people who use the "ecosystem" argument are macfags.

>um I just switched from android and there's no file manager in ios? or one on the app store?
>you just don't *understand* the iOS *ecosystem*

It's save op. I was running Ubuntu a long time and wanted to get into ricing because I had a break between graduating school and starting to work. I dumped Ubuntu and windows 10 (the developer preview I think) and installed arch.
My first try was just following youtube videos because I didn't know how to do shit and because I've been a lazy fuck who didn't like to read a wiki for days (seriously, if you want arch and you don't want shit to break the first time search for antoun savires, I think he made a gentoo video series too)

Anyways, I'm running arch for about a year now and it never failed me. I reinstalled one time, but it was 100% my fault for fucking shit up by using commands I only knew half. Home and media partitions were still fine, so no problem at all. I got pretty comfy with it and have a pretty neat openbox setup running, currently experimenting with compton and xmonad. My laptop is running arch too, but I installed cinnamon so people in the school I go to won't give me the looks (I'm not a total neckbeard despite my setup)

It's all personal preference, but I love the distribution unironically and I'd recommend it to anyone who's interested in knowing what's going on and how it can be modified to fit your needs.

Probably you noticed that I wrote I "didn't" like reading wiki pages for days, because I'm really pleased to say that my interests in things have grown quite a bit and I'm genuinely interested into learning it all, reading probably the most user friendly Linux wiki out there like other people would read the newspaper

t. Arch user

Nope, blame the lightdm devs for fucking that up.

I've been running Arch on my main desktop since 2006 or 2007.

I was in uni and my linux enthousiastic friend installed it for me (so technically speaking I never installed Arch and I wouldn't know how to).
I did math not CS)

It never broke and I still use it as my main machine now. But that might be because I only updated my kernel and gnome once a year.

I'm so used to it that I never bothered looking for another OS.

does anyone else here have invisible/no text in wine with freetype >2.6?
if it turns out not to be an arch thing i'll repost in sqt

i've been working around it by just holding back lib32-freetype (most of my wine prefixes are 32bit), but freetype's up to 2.7 now and it's still doing it

am i missing something? i've looked around several times, but i don't have anything specific enough to find relevant information

pic related, i've tried each new freetype version as they come out, and wine's been through several versions as well

If you want to experience a nightmare, take up Architect for a ride. Supposedly the user friendly installer but never seems to install Arch properly and always fucks up somehow.

If by some miracle you do get it, getting arch to properly access the aur repos to a nearby server is a project. If still you make it, try adding a new user to the wheel and suddenly, you have no control over the system even if you added yourself as admin.

Compared to this turd, Ubuntu Unity is flawless and never fucks up unless you really want it to. Also Compiz is the best compositor with no screen tearing and flawless 10-bit video playback. All drivers including my printer worked OOB without any fingering of terminal.

>knowing what's going on
I like arch, but claiming to know what's going on in a computer because you're using it is like opening a car hood, putting a label on everything (engine, fuel tank, cooling water...) and then claiming to know how cars work. No. Arch doesn't teach you anything about how stuff _actually_ works. Yeah, polkit does something with permissions or so. But you won't know any more than that, and even in the rare cases where you can find out what a thing does (the intro bit in wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Polkit is a bit better than my description), stuff if still vague as fuck.
You learn how to use and configure things, but that has virtually nothing to do with how they work.

Gnome 3 switched to Wayland by default. It stopped loading my Xresources files for the terminal font and colors. It was a very sad day.

I had weird GNOME bugs back on Debian ffs. I was literally just using GDM because it looked nice, so I ended up setting up xinit instead and getting rid of it.

I've used architect on a dozen machines without issues.

AUR works too, although not sure what specifically you mean by 'access the aur repos to a nearby server'.

>try adding a new user to the wheel
why? isn't this for root privileges or something? just use sudo, if so

>All drivers including my printer worked OOB without any fingering of terminal.
hardware is handled by the kernel so distros shouldn't matter (Aside from some distros coming with newer kernels)

What kind of config should I care of?