• chaogomu@kbin.social
    23·
    1 year ago

    I can honestly say that I ran Slackware as my daily driver for almost two years…

    Never again.

    Now I run easy distros. Much less stress overall.

      • LordTE7R1S@lemmy.sdf.org
        3·
        1 year ago

        I’ve been running slackware as my main os since 94. I was never able to get really used to any other Linux distro and I saw them all. I run it in my home pc, in my work servers, my work notebook. Best distro ever.

        • BeigeAgenda@lemmy.ca
          1·
          1 year ago

          In the late 90s I ditched redhats crappy package system and used slackware until I got better internet than dialup, after that I switched to Debian based. But slackware still has a star in my book!

  • vlad76
    14·
    1 year ago

    I got my merit badge after setting it up once. That’s enough for me.

    • phorq@lemmy.ml
      1·
      1 year ago

      Nah, that sounds like torture. Anybody willing to have that kind of setup shouldn’t be messed with, they’re clearly unstable.

      • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
        2·
        1 year ago

        Yeah, I don’t know why I’d run Arch containers on Ubuntu. I can already get the latest software via Snap and Docker. 🫰

  • riodoro1@lemmy.world
    3·
    1 year ago

    Guys, why are you constantly making fun of arch. It really is a straightforward, stable and user friendly distro. The wiki is amazing and it’s very easy to find help even when you run into problems.

    Oh, I use arch btw.

      • vixven_random@lemmy.world
        2·
        1 year ago

        In my 8 years of using Arch as daily driver, it has broken only couple of times for me, and usually I can find the fixes in the forums. Ubuntu on the other hand has lead to so much pain.

  • 5redie8
    1·
    1 year ago

    Where does Endeavour stand in all of this?

    • denast@lemmy.world
      0·
      1 year ago

      Arch takes a lot of manual configuration to make it work, hence providing some bragging rights about using it. Manjaro is a fork that has your typical GUI user-frienly installer that does everything for you, therefore you “proudly using arch” has no substance as you did zero work.

      • R0cket_M00se@lemmy.world
        0·
        1 year ago

        I wonder why I keep getting the advice to use Arch, then? Everyone on the Linux forum questions me using fedora and says arch makes more sense and is easier.

        • mwqer@programming.dev
          1·
          1 year ago

          Because Manjaro isnt exactly as it seems. Sometimes it’s the worst of both worlds. I wont deny that it is convenient but (Rant alert) : The idea of delay Arch packages for testing seems nice at first, until you take in the fact Manjaro will have to push some of the packages out before that period for e.g: security reasons, while some might take longer. The thing is, upstream Arch repo is designed to work together only on the packages upstream version, and as per Archwiki said, partial upgrade is highly unrecommended, and it is not uncommon to update your manjarobox and everything went smoothly, until you reboot and fallen into a dependency hell. Sometimes it can cause serious security issues. And with that in mind, the AUR also works with the assumption that you are on Arch’s upstream packages, not Manjaro one, and well, dont need to tell you how it can cause problems down the line.

          If you want a good convenient no “nerd” fuss distros, I recommend Pop!OS, Mint, or even Debian. If you really want to use AUR (trust me it’s not as special as most expect, you generally only want to go there when you must) and really don’t wanna use Arch, there’s projects like Antergos, Artix,… that have much more sane approach.

          I acknowledge tho that I 100% believe Manjaro users can get perfectly stable experience, and these things I mentioned had never be inside their scope. It’s just you can get very similar experience with better management even in Arch-derived space, so why not go for those instead?