May be a mean sounding question, but I’m genuinely wondering why people would choose Arch/Endevour/whatever (NOT on steam hardware) over another all-in-one distro related to Fedora or Ubuntu. Is it shown that there are significant performance benefits to installing daemons and utilities à la carte? Is there something else I’m missing? Is it because arch users are enthusiasts that enjoy trying to optimize their system?

  • HaraldvonBlauzahn@feddit.org
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    10 hours ago

    It works well for me.

    Actually, I am a long-term Debian user (for 15 years) and use it in parallel with Arch, since about ten years, and I had less trouble with Arch: When upgrading from Debian 10 to 12, GNOME broke for me so that I could not log in any more. I spent a day or so to search for the cause - it is related to the user configuration but I could not figure out what it was and I had to time-box the effort, and switched to StumpWM (a tiling window manager, which I had been using before). I had no such problem with Arch, and on top of that I could just install GNOME’s PaperWM extension just to give it a try.

    You could argue that my failure to upgrade was GNOME’s fault, not Debians, and in a way this is true. Especially, GNOME should not hide configuration in inscrutinable unreadable files, and of course it should parse for errors coming from backwards-compatible breaking changes.

    But the thing is, for software making many small changes is very often much easier than a few big changes. For example because it is far easier to narrow down the source of a problem. So, it is likely that GNOME on Arch had the same problem between minor upgrades, and fixed it without much fuss.

    But you also need to see that Arch is primarily a Desktop/end user system, while Debian is, for example, also a server system. Debian is designed for a far larger range of applications and purposes, and having many small breaking upgrades would likely not work well for these.

    • LeFantome@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      2 hours ago

      I agree with you on the “stability” of frequent small changes vs infrequent huge ones (release upgrades on distros like Debian, Ubuntu, or Fedora).

      However, I have had multiple Arch installs where I have not used the system for multiple years (eg. old laptops, dormant VMs). Other than having to know how to update the keyring to get current GPG keys, Arch has always upgraded flawlessly for me. I have had upgrades that downloaded close to 3 GB all at once with a single pacman command (or maybe yay) that “just worked”.