this post was submitted on 31 Jan 2025
19 points (85.2% liked)
Linux Gaming
16076 readers
6 users here now
Gaming on the GNU/Linux operating system.
Recommended news sources:
Related chat:
Related Communities:
Please be nice to other members. Anyone not being nice will be banned. Keep it fun, respectful and just be awesome to each other.
founded 4 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
@SynopsisTantilize
Just install @archlinux and be happy for many years ๐.
Man. If I had the time to maintain arch I would
YMMV... but in my experience that whole "time to maintain arch"-idea is overstated.
I defintiely spend less time on issues like "oh, there's a bug. let's role that update back and try again in 6-24 hours when it's fixed" or "defaults changed in a new version, let's take a quick look at the changes" on arch than on annoying bugs persisting for years in fixed distros. And that's before calculating the whole "distro upgrade every otehr year"-stuff. Which likes to kill a whole weekend at least and barely ever works (followed by the same "oh, defaults changed" but now on dozens of components at the same time).
And because of that second point in particular even if archlinux wouldn't be my choice I could never go back to a non-rolling release.
I've been using Linux since the nineties and I've been through the rolling distros and agree with you that usually it's not a big hassle, just keep an eye on the process and .pacsave/.pacnew (or .rpm-ditto) - but I just don't bother at all anymore, I only game and code some Rust and I prefer a LTS distro that keeps the kernel up to date, for me that's the best of both worlds.
I'd also say that running a major upgrade on my stable distros (both on servers and laptop) takes less than an hour, not a weekend and I never have issues with it. Issues when upgrading either rolling (every update) or LTS releases usually comes from the admin having made incompat/bad changes to the system on their own.