Arch vs Debian

What would you recommend? What are the pros and cons?

Other urls found in this thread:

backports.debian.org/
httpredir.debian.org/debian/
lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2015-July/039443.html
wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable
twitter.com/NSFWRedditImage

Of course Gentoo GNU/Linux - ultimate choice for workstation/desktop/server.
As distro Debian much better, it supports POWER 9, ARM64, MIPS etc.
As disto for amd64 Arch should be better.

GENTOO
or debian

Debian + Xfeces master race. I have tried Arch + Xfeces a few times and it just doesn't feel the same. Probably because autism.

I use Debian stretch with LXDE. Arch is unstable trash.

gentoo

>Arch is unstable trash.
Why?

I'd recommend using Ubuntu LTS.

Because it's built and maintained by teenagers and retarded gibbons.

this.

Anything outside the grand 4 (Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, openSUSE) is a steaming pile of rubbish.

I've used Arch since 2010 without any major issues aside from trying to use the ATI/AMD proprietary drivers for a couple of years. On laptops with Intel CPU/GPUs it's been great.

Is Debian up to date with drivers? Are there drivers for new hardware?

no

Testing and Unstable branches should be. Using Stable on a desktop is autism.

Arch is easier due to pacage manager.
Apt is unusable, when you want to install something it ask you to delete half your other package and you have to decline à dozen time before it stops. If per accident you say yes your system IS fucked.

Friendly reminder that Arch bills itself as a MODERN linux distro and it still DOES NOT HAVE a proper installation wizard in 2017.

Pretty much every hardcore hacker uses arch

Boring office stuff like spread sheets: Red Hat, CentOS
Noobs general: Ubuntu
Entry-level coding: Debian
Reale serious coding, top-end server stuff and hardcore hacking: Arch

What? It does.

This literally never happens, what the fuck are you doing with your system? Sure it marks stuff as autoremove all the time, but mate. FAKE NEWS!

> Arch is unstable trash

Kek

>hardcore hackers use Arch
Calm down son. Nearly died laughing.

>Apt is unusable, when you want to install something it ask you to delete half your other package and you have to decline à dozen time before it stops. If per accident you say yes your system IS fucked.

Revenge?

>5 days uptime means it's stable

>little does he know KDE is unstable trash

Try it.

When you want to install something the prompt will read "X to be installed y to be updated z to be deleted"

LMAO, noone uses Arch in serious business. At Google and FB, I have only seen Debian and Ubuntu other than MacOS

I use stable on desktop. This is my only computer and I need it for productivity. If that's the case going with testing or unstable is not recommended.

stable is for people that need to get actual work done. some anons don't get it.

B-but user-kun, how can you be productive with software older than your mother?

>eduardo
>kde
>twice
garbage taste

Debian is fucking retarded shit with needlessly patched packages that introduces nonsense bugs because they think they know better. Compare Arch stable to Debian stretch. Debian stretch is unusable buggy garbage specifically because they fuck with everything.

> I dont know what stable means

But how can I be productive if my GPU doesn't work.

u must be new here

Is it though? Is it really?

backports.debian.org/
has updated drivers for stable systems

Are you six years old?

So they patch their kernels to the state where they have functionality only added a couple years later? And this monstrosity is considered wise or stable?

You have no idea what you're saying.
If you want a rolling release distro with none of the upstream patches, just use debian sid.

Arch

Debian testing is the only desktop distro you'll ever need. Everything is goat shit

My ATI GPU works absolutely fine on stable.


firmware-linux-nonfree
libgl1-mesa-dri
xserver-xorg-video-ati

Those did it from deb httpredir.debian.org/debian/ jessie main contrib non-free

>ati
So it's ancient.

Is there any difference if I just pick Kali Linux with its bundled tools over Debian?

I'd like to try Qubes, but it seems like heaps of work and might not work on my setup.

arch on desktop debian on server

Two completely different distros. You couldn't be bothered to update your system? Debian. You want updated packages? Arch.
>b-but s-s-stability
Go be an idiot somewhere else.

You meant Plasma 5, and yes it's pretty stable since 5.7

What is stable then? Who the fucks needs a desktop up 80 days?

Old habits die hard

>upstream patches
Fuck off kid

Arch. It's more stable than debshit

Debian has no pacman and is bloated af, arch or btfo

Arch minimal installation is larger than an Ubuntu or Debian minimal installation

>Debian
>bloated
Debian has a minimal installer, which you can build your own minimal system just like you can with Arch. The only reason to use arch is because you're a retard who likes getting fucked over. Even Arch devs recommend Debian over Arch.
lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2015-July/039443.html
>It has never been a minimalist distribution. Splitting packages is rare compared to other distributions, and dependencies aren't made optional whenever possible.
>It has also never been a distribution offering much user freedom / choice compared to Gentoo and even Debian.
>Arch is the *opposite* of a user-centric freedom. The opinion of users has no weight here. Only the developers have an opinion, and there aren't voting systems as there are in Debian.
>Arch has *never* been minimalist... a Linux kernel with every module available and every feature enabled at least when there's no non-bloat related cost, feature-packed/complex GNU tools, nearly all optional features enabled across all the packages, etc.
>What hypocrisy? When have you seen the developers state that they care about user freedom, or that the distribution is based on minimalism?
>Community memes don't define the distribution, technical choices by the developers do. It's clearly not based on what you say it is, and *never* has been. It has always used significantly more disk space and a measurable amount of additional memory than Debian and especially Gentoo as a consequence of keeping things simple (again, from a development perspective).
In essence: Arch devs fuck the users over, adopt systemd, etc, all because of sheer convenience. You'd have to be retarded to trust these people to develop your OS. If you want rolling release, there are better, alternative distros. If you want minimalism, you don't want Arch, because Arch is bloated from top down.

Arch Linux is the best!

>adopt systemd
Kek

How many times a day do you sudo pacman -Syu?? Me? At least 30

debian is owned by tlas and using their position as a dominant distro to force adoption of compromised packages on the rest of the "linux community". .

Stable means the system doesn't change. Debian stable is locked to old packages (of course backport option exists). Testing is the basis for the next stable Debian release, i.e. packages in testing for becoming the next stable. Just because it's testing doesn't mean it's jittery and about to implode, but you do need common sense. Sid is a walk on the wild side, i.e. you shoot heroin and have sex with trannies in unknown abandoned houses at night.

Anyway, sometimes it seems like pipples haven't even read as much as
wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable

In any case you should use openSUSE, either the stable (Leap) or the rolling release (Tumbleweed), whichever steez you prefer.

What about Gentoo and Slack?

>lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2015-July/039443.html

I like Arch more after reading this.

Debian unstable on the desktop is not so bad
I've been using it for around 8 years without major problems

Devuan

>Arch
Updated /\ NonPatchedByDebianCodeMOnkeys -> Secured
>Debian
Obsolete /\ PatchedByDebianCodeMonkeys -> Unsecured

try both and form your own opinion

Debian is pretty comfy, but I've been burned too many times by apt throwing me into 7 circles of dependency hell somewhere along the line for no apparent reason. Pacman just werks, plus the aur is really nice to find install scripts for most everything

It doesn't matter what you "like", what matters is the validity of a Linux distro, and Arch loses to Debian. Also, I have to question what makes you view devs taking shortcuts and constantly veering towards convenience instead of actually being competent favorably. It's not a favorable trait, and it directly translates to Arch.

this desu. theres many distros out there so that each person can find one they like. use a vm and test it out, dont be a sheep

Yeah, playing "installing SO" every month must be really fun.
Don't you have anything else to do?

This.

Pacaur is great

Well

According to my filesystem I installed Arch on 31-Jan-2017. It has been working very well so far. I am planning on trying out some version of Debian when/if Arch breaks badly though.

Don't go to arch unless you are much sure that's what you want. Otherwise, it will be a bad experience and a huge waste of time.

neither

what do you recommend?

...

I personally have strong preference towards Arch, mostly out of more experience with it and poor experience with Debian.
The Stable branch does not work on my GPU because the kernel is too old. Tried to install unstable. No issues so far, works all right. Try to replace the built in Gnoke Desktop. Oh boy here we go. Apt tries to remove half of my packages again... After going to dependency hell and getting a stable XFCE system up, I foolishly using Apt-get auto-remove without looking at the packages it got rid of. Next thing you know I can't boot up. This is where my Debian experience ended...
To be fair, I fucked up Arch and Manajro installs just as much, but at least there I actually felt it was my fault. Pacman is a superb package manager, and I feel generally comfortable using it to build the system as I wish without having to deal with stupid meta packages and apt deciding to remove half of my stuff.

this, the modifications arch does to it's packages are minimal and useful

take chromium's for example, always want to use arguments but dont want to make an alias? Their package has support for a file that loads arguments.

Pinche lalo, deja de ver ese pinche video feo. Twice is basura.

Cállate ricardo regresate a hispita

Eduardo you should really check out Pristin and mpv :3

I actually wanted to use debian bc I've been using debian-like distros in the past 10 years. The problem was the installer broke every time so I decidec to try arch. And so far so good. It works wonderfully.. Also you can choose what pkgs to install. In a regular unoobtoo distro you've got prob. ~2k pkg while all-working arch with the things you really need is no more then 900 pkgs.. it's a big difference right there

SMPlayer uses mpv as backend and Yeah I know Pristin too, Nayoung is very sexy.

>girl on the left is wearing a Dr Pepper shirt

Do they actually have Dr Pepper in gookland?

I tried to install Debian twice over the years and both times the installer got hung and locked my computer up. I haven't tried installing it again since.

>5d
>stable
Buena bait.

should I not install debian then? This package thing sounds annoying

apt is shit, fedora's dnf is way far better.

6 days now.

>the grand 4 is what I say it is

Damn that's retarded

>arch
good if you want to people to stare in awe of your epeen (though your epeen still wont be nearly as big as gentoo fags)

>debian
good if you actually want to use your computer for anything more than constant ricing tweaks. though i guess you can do that too.

gentoo has a niche, slackware is irrelevant

I used both, but I am extremely biased towards Debian, so I can't tell.

I installed Arch on an old laptop with only a CLI and that time I was a noob, so it wasn't pleasant. Nowadays, I probably wouldn't have that much trouble.

Both differ in details.

>Devuan
This. Its still Debian, but its special snowflake enough to get mentions in screenfetch threads.

>desktop
What is a server?

>I've been burned too many times by apt throwing me into 7 circles of dependency
That's what happens when you add shitloads of repositories that are not official and you don't even need.

nobody, even Arch users, have ever recommended Arch for servers. We are talking about desktop use in this thread.

i like debian for arm/x86 and ubuntu for x64 machines

Arch:
- Works well
- Stable
- Has lots of updates

Debian
- None of those things

There's literally zero reasons to choose anything over Debian stable. go for it OP

I've never used Debian in my life, the post

Why do people not prefer debian on x64?