Hint: :q!
Sister communities:
Community rules (click to expand)
1. Follow the site-wide rules
sudo in Windows.Please report posts and comments that break these rules!
Important: never execute code or follow advice that you don't understand or can't verify, especially here. The word of the day is credibility. This is a meme community -- even the most helpful comments might just be shitposts that can damage your system. Be aware, be smart, don't fork-bomb your computer.
The "Arch breaks all the time" people have obviously never used Arch.
I've run Arch as a daily driver for the last 4 and a half years and haven't had any issues. I've tried Pop_OS twice in that time and had install-breaking issues within a week in both cases.
Only time I've ever broken my ~10 year arch box is when I don't read the news feed
where is the news feed? I just had my arch laptop wiped out and it'd be nice to avoid it next time
If you use 'yay' or 'paru' you can set them to tell you any new news every time you launch them...
I used arch for 1.5 years and it did break a lot. Though I did use nvidia, so it was to be expected.
Switched to Nixos yesterday because it was kind of anxiety-inducing knowing my main computer was sitting on a time bomb that only got worse as time went on, as I toyed with the system more and more
Absolutely loved arch though, and I hope I’ll love nix as well
Literally switched off nix today because of a few mandatory (for me) packages were broken and I already regret it. Nix is such an awesome is and its impossible to break. Unlike Debian that fucked itself because rfkill wasint installed and that borked my networking on my PC. Couldn't start my nic or anything and stayed up til 2 am trying to fix til I said fuck it and re-installed. Switching back to nix tomorrow!
YMMV
I run Manjaro with KDE on X11.... I use a lot of mouse gestures, so I can't sit with Wayland.
I found the SYSTEM is extremely stable for ME. It is important to say this every time...
I find KDE is often less stable... I had at least 2 issues I couldn't explain/understand and just fixed with restoring contents of .config from snapshots.
This is one area where Manjaro 'held back' and did actually save us from a lot of the bleeding edge (5.26 was a rough ride)... but that's not an 'Arch' issue, that's a 'KDE' issue.
But the USER likes to tip the boat until it does a barrel roll, or sinks entirely... and this is mostly what divides the happy users. Sometimes it's just basic hardware, sometimes it's the USER habits/modus operandi.
So we have Snapshots, and we have rsync backups to a mounted drive.... Then it matters not - a quick restart fixes most issues, and a reinstall takes only 6 minutes with no data lost -> in backups.
That's stable enough for me.
BTW, I use AUR quite a lot - and it never actually caused me an issue, other than some stuff needing rebuilds.
Same Arch has been my daily driver for 10 plus years.
the subtle difference is that distros like Pop try hard to aim at home computer normie users or new to Linux, Arch doesn't. 99% of Arch fault cases are also user's fault.
Can confirm, I am a dumbass often.
ROFLMAO
I'm a bigger idiot than you 😛
Funny but my arch doesn't break at all. I think users probably break it because they are learning, and that's not really the fault of arch. :)
I've been using Arch for years and not once has an update "broke" my system. If it does break someone's system it's likely because they messed with their libs without knowing what they were doing
Stupid libs ruining everything
WELL ACKTCHUALLY...
But jokes aside: How do you people break your Arch system so often? I'm on Arch since 2012 or so and it never really broke for me. Also, anyone who can read will be able to fix the ~1 time a year required manual intervention.
Arch is DIY, so you're supposed to know how to fix it.
I used Arch for many years. The biggest problem I had was if I didn’t update packages for awhile, it would often seem like my next update would lock up in dependency hell. Doing it often I never had that issue, so if you’re pretty rigorous with it I’d guess it’s probably better.
What the heck are you guys doing? I've been using Arch for over 5 years on many different computers and an update has never broken my system. I was even impressed that I was able to update my desktop with NVIDIA graphics after 6 months of it being unplugged.
Are you sure you installed the system correctly at all?
If you keep your Arch Linux system updated it shouldn’t break. I have been using Arch as my daily driver for close to a year now, and have been updating it at least weekly. The times that it did break for me (which is only 1-2 times), it didn’t break because of an update, but because of my stupidness.
This hits close to home.
well, you don't complain when your hammer does a shit job at driving a screw. (well, maybe you do, but thats on you)
One is consumer focused,
the other is bleeding edge.
After two weeks on arch, nvidia driver updates have broken shit twice already.
But that's the arch way and I chose the arch way.
In 5 years on arch I have never had an nvidia driver update break anything.
I always thought it might be hardware related. So far i have always bought AMD cards and had no issues.
I’ll take rolling updates over twice a year major release upgrades any day. My experience with Centos and Ubuntu was that anytime I needed to upgrade the OS, I had to spend a few hours fixing random stuff. Never had a problem with Arch that I couldn’t fix.
I have yet to experience a breaking change in about 5 years with arch as my daily driver. The only "critical" thing that broke was the ms-teams flatpak app right before a meeting :D The reason was probably the shitty app itself and not arch though.
I love Arch, been using it for a few years now. So far the only update that really caused me some trouble was that whole Grub bootloader thing that happened a while ago.
You obviously didn't read the release notes for all your installed software before running "pacman -Syyu"
IDK, I've maybe had 2 system breaking incidents like this in 7+ years.
soooo pop for stability on a desktop system??
for the most part, yes. Pop offers a pretty good overall user experience too! Honestly it has the only appstore that has enough apps for me to not have to use the terminal
FINALLY, LINUX MEMES IS HERE
It's the trade off of having a mostly bleeding edge operating system. It's part of the reason why I wouldn't recommend Arch to beginners. While pretty rare, some update will eventually break part of your OS or cause other (often minor) issues and you should be knowledgeable enough/willing to look up the offending package and roll it back. It's up to the user to decide whether Arch's pros (massive software availability through official repos and the AUR, DIY approach, up-to-date packages) outweigh its cons.
As @[email protected] said (I can't tell if jokingly or not - lol), it is somewhat expected that an Arch user checks the Latest News section on archlinux.org before updating their system. Though I might add, I usually don't bother.
Ubuntu-based is based, change my mind.
I love Ubuntu. It's by far the most popular distro and that comes with the very helpful perk of it being easier to find support. More users means more people who can answer your questions. It means more people who might fix some issue that annoys you. And all the while, it is a solid and easy to use distro.
How does pop compare to mint?
Imma be real.. Arch has been the most consistent system I've used to date.
I've been using linux off and on since like 2008. I jumped around from ubuntu, fedora, opensus, popOS, centOS, etc.. I've had manjaro and now arch as my daily driver for probably 4 or more years now and Arch updates have only ever broke one thing, one time, and it was more of a audio pipewire issue than it was really archs fault.
arch updates do not deserve this slander, its been very reliable for me, more than probably any system i've ever used.
"ubuntu user snaps your finger off"
I've got a machine running Pop! for over 2 years and can honestly say the only issues I've had were caused entirely by ME.
Arch issues are also caused by the user. The user decided to update the dependencies.
Nice meme.
From what I know about these distros (Debian, sometimes Fedora user here), Pop is targeted for "normal" home users, while Arch has traditionally been for hackers. From that point of view, it makes sense that breaking the former would be seen as less acceptable for the wider community.
I would say pop is for new users, arch is for users that know what they want and willing to put in the time, i wouldnt say its "for hackers".
picking an arch based distros thats already built for you though is the easy way to go if you want a linux system for gaming. I tried using pop for a while. it was ok but ultimately a rolling release system was better.
Idgi, I've been using arch based distros for a few years and I've yet to break my system.