271–280 of 284 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I used to think I wanted the very latest version of every single application, not matter what. These days, only Chrome, Spotify, Qbittorrent and a couple of others are the newest versions (through PPAs), everything else is just stock and works perfectly fine.
I'm not even talking about end-user applications. You have different needs as a developer. I need libraries and compilation chains to be up to date.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I'm not even talking about end-user applications. You have different needs as a developer. I need libraries and compilation chains to be up to date.
So you add backports or PPAs for those exact libraries.
I fell in love with Arch, after having used Gentoo for years, and Debian before that. The straightforwardness appealed to me, it's a binary distribution with a rolling release cycle and no custom-finagled packages. But after a while, I got tired of manually configuring everything , doing all kinds of weird house-keeping and having to randomly boot from a USB stick to rescue my system from some update with untested co…
I am very similar. Love to thinker sometimes so early this year downloading and installing many of the top and some obscure distro's. Just sort of felt like going doing an a No-Windows 30 days. Antergos (arch made easy) was one of the distro's I tried last and it stayed on my Asus netbook the longest. I was fairy impressed with Antergos as it installed nice and felt pretty quick. But then things got too manual for my…
Wow. Would be really interesting to know what happened there exactly.
In 2016, I installed an Arch VM using an image from 2014. Against all odds, I could update it. I had to download a few packages (pacman and its dependencies) manually, verify the digests against the package cache on another machine, and install them. After that, `pacman -Sy archlinux-keyring && pacman -Su` just worked.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yep, though I've been upgrading that system since Mint 14 (with Cinnamon). Compared to Arch the maintenance cost is orders of magnitude lower. Compared to Ubuntu (2y, at work, upgraded from 16.04 LTS -> 16.10) it feels higher mainly because stuff is less tested and can also break with regular updates (unless they fixed their workflow to remedy that). - For mortal-level usage -> Ubuntu - For mortal-level usage when yo…
>For mortal-level usage I had to choose distro for my gf, so I'd looked for some newbie friendly. I'd installed ubuntu 16.04 in qemu and I found that gnome-software does not work properly: there are a few packages available to install from gui (no scribus, no emacs, no kicad etc). Literally a year passed since lt came out and it has such unacceptable issue for a newbie-friendly distro. Hopefully fedora just works.
A less known thing about LTS releases is that the repos are smaller because of the testing they have to do to make it up to LTS standards.
Main reason I moved from 16.04 to 16.10.
I don't have direct experience with fedora but I heard that it's nice. Will have to try it someday ;).
I fell in love with Arch, after having used Gentoo for years, and Debian before that. The straightforwardness appealed to me, it's a binary distribution with a rolling release cycle and no custom-finagled packages. But after a while, I got tired of manually configuring everything , doing all kinds of weird house-keeping and having to randomly boot from a USB stick to rescue my system from some update with untested co…
This sounds suspiciously to me like "I rewrote my program in new language and it was 20% faster and 200% easier!" in that yes, your new experience may be better, but that's not necessarily attributable to the new language/operating system, but instead that you just got rid of all the old cruft. It's entirely possible (and sounds to me likely, based on your story) that you could have just reinstalled Arch with the sam…
Debian's package format is really simple and well-designed. However, Debian's packaging process is really tedious and had an almost ceremonial feel to it when I tried it (coming from PKGBUILDs).
Shameless plug: If you just want to throw a bunch of files together into a package, you might be interested in my own https://github.com/holocm/holo-build .
Earlier quoted context omitted.
>For mortal-level usage I had to choose distro for my gf, so I'd looked for some newbie friendly. I'd installed ubuntu 16.04 in qemu and I found that gnome-software does not work properly: there are a few packages available to install from gui (no scribus, no emacs, no kicad etc). Literally a year passed since lt came out and it has such unacceptable issue for a newbie-friendly distro. Hopefully fedora just works.
Package availability issues -> there are PPA's for everything. A less known thing about LTS releases is that the repos are smaller because of the testing they have to do to make it up to LTS standards. Main reason I moved from 16.04 to 16.10. I don't have direct experience with fedora but I heard that it's nice. Will have to try it someday ;).
It's not about availability, it's about possibility of installing packages that are in the main repo with the default software manager gui (gnome-software). In ubuntu lts I found no way to install scribus with gnome-software though it is in repository. This is just a bad quality of the distro itself and I wouldn't call suck behavior ``user friendly''
https://askubuntu.com/questions/783748/16-04-ubuntu-software...
I have been using Arch both for my work and private desktop for about ten years now. It is an absolute joy to work with. The biggest drawback is the very occasional breakage after doing a system upgrade. I would estimate such an upgrade breaks the system once or twice every year on average, although everything is much more stable for the last few years. I upgrade my system at least once per week. Overall, highly reco…
Subscribe to the breakages mailing list and this will never happen again. Will get <10 emails a year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Package availability issues -> there are PPA's for everything. A less known thing about LTS releases is that the repos are smaller because of the testing they have to do to make it up to LTS standards. Main reason I moved from 16.04 to 16.10. I don't have direct experience with fedora but I heard that it's nice. Will have to try it someday ;).
>Package availability issues It's not about availability, it's about possibility of installing packages that are in the main repo with the default software manager gui (gnome-software). In ubuntu lts I found no way to install scribus with gnome-software though it is in repository. This is just a bad quality of the distro itself and I wouldn't call suck behavior ``user friendly'' https://askubuntu.com/questions/783748…
In comparison arch: https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/i686/scribus/
Fedora: https://apps.fedoraproject.org/packages/scribus
IIRC you have to enable multiverse repos in Ubuntu manually (doable with the GUI or somewhere in settings).
2017 will be the year of Linux on the desktop :P.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I agree, except for the installation. Manjaro I think would be a great compromise.
Personally, I prefer dealing with Arch's installation process to other distros. Most graphical installers I've used are extraordinarily inflexible with filesystem options, e.g. dual-booting with full-disk encryption or full-disk-encryption with a non-ext4 filesystem.