• voracitude@lemmy.world
    637·
    6 months ago

    I have no horse in the Linux distro race, I’m just downvoting this inferior version of the meme format because fuck that guy.

  • lemmyreader@lemmy.mlEnglish
    463·
    6 months ago

    Bold :-) openSUSE is based on zypper and rpm. Arch Linux uses its own package system.

    p.s. Please replace that Change my mind guy with a Calvin and Hobbes one.

  • Raccoonn@lemmy.ml
    27·
    6 months ago

    OpenSUSE was actually released long before Arch even existed. I’m an Arch user, btw, but I consider both operating systems to be excellent choices. Everyone has their own preferences. Let people enjoy what they like and embrace their individuality. We don’t all have to be alike…

    • lemmyreader@lemmy.mlEnglish
      15·
      6 months ago

      OpenSUSE was actually released long before Arch even existed.

      You’re basically right but just some historic facts added :

      Judd Vinet started the Arch Linux project in March 2002. OpenSUSE : Its development was opened up to the community in 2005, which marked the creation of openSUSE. Before that it was called SUSE Linux, first released in 1994.

  • Peasley@lemmy.world
    211·
    6 months ago

    Somebody has never used opensuse. Zypper is an amazing package manager, one of the best on any distro.

    It can handle flatpacks, native packages, and packages from the opensuse build system, keeping everything updated and organized.

    Pacman is very basic by comparison, and a lot slower too in my experience.

      • Peasley@lemmy.world
        52·
        6 months ago

        I guess I’m smart enough to install opensuse, but dumb enough that I somehow got slow pacman.

        I kid you not, on my hardware zypper is the fastest between ubuntu apt, fedora dnf, and arch pacman. dnf was the second-fastest on my hardware, with apt and pacman being pretty sluggish

        I’ve also used portage which was even slower, but probably not a fair comparison considering how much more complex it is.

          • Zangoose@lemmy.one
            13·
            6 months ago

            In the grand scheme of things the difference between C, C++, and Python isn’t meaningful when operating over a network (edit: for a single-user system). It’s very likely that the difference for thread OP is just caused by weaker connections to specific repos.

            We’re talking about a package manager, not a game, network server, etc. On a basic level the package manager only needs to download files from a network and install them (OS syscalls for reading/writing files, these are exposed C functions or assembly routines), or delegate to a specific package’s build setup (which will also likely be written in a compiled language)

          • sorrybookbroke@sh.itjust.worksEnglish
            10·
            6 months ago

            Trust me my friend, a person can make a c program that’s much, much slower than one in python. That’s a meaningless point.

            Sure, c allows for more control and thus the possibility for a quicker program but that’s just it, a possibility.

            Zipper, though written in c++, can only download one thing at a time. This is why it’s so slow

  • Björn Tantau@swg-empire.de
    151·
    6 months ago

    Serious question: What makes Arch’s package manager so “great”? I always just found it confusing to use. The flags don’t make any sense to me. It feels like you have to add a varying number of s or y to get it to do what you want. I never found it to be any faster or slower than any of the others (apart from portage of course) out there. And apart from the flags it doesn’t seem to give me any more or less trouble than the others.

    • WFH@lemm.eeEnglish
      12·
      6 months ago

      pacman -Snstall -yefresh -yefresh -unly-upgrades

    • exu@feditown.comEnglish
      5·
      6 months ago

      As a user it’s definitely harder to get into than apt or dnf. However, as a packager, it’s very easy to package new applications for pacman. That’s also why the AUR offers this many packages often not found in other distros.

    • Encamped@lemmy.ml
      4·
      6 months ago

      It’s fast. That’s why it’s great. I’ve considered switching to opensuse a lot, but the speed of pacman compared to how slow zypper is always drags me back to arch

      • Peasley@lemmy.world
        2·
        6 months ago

        Wow I must be doing something wrong, zypper has always been faster for me than pacman, both on my newer desktop and my older laptop

        • Encamped@lemmy.ml
          1·
          6 months ago

          I’ve heard countless times it’s one of the slowest package managers and the last time I tried opensuse it confirmed that, though that was a year ago, so I guess improvements have been made

    • VeganCheesecake@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      2·
      6 months ago

      I use tumbleweed on my desktop, but run arch on a secondary machine. From experience, pacman is much faster than zypper, even on a slower machine.

  • UnfortunateShort@lemmy.world
    12·
    6 months ago

    OpenSUSE exists as a testbed for SLE, I don’t think there’s anything confusing about that. It’s also much easier to get to a sensible setup for new users. If it weren’t for the AUR and the Arch Wiki, I would probably still be using it.

  • Shareni@programming.dev
    114·
    6 months ago

    Arch has no reason to exist as almost all of it’s benefits are replicated with nix without having your system fail to boot because you dared to update it.

      • Shareni@programming.dev
        2·
        6 months ago

        I decided to dump arch when I was working in a foreign country for a month, had bad internet, and had to weigh whether -Syu or -S would be more likely to break my system. Shit’s way too stressful.

      • Shareni@programming.dev
        61·
        6 months ago

        Run pacman -Syu, reboot, and it fails to boot. Had it happen many times with arch and derivatives on multiple devices. It’s far more likely to happen if you don’t update for like a month.

          • Shareni@programming.dev
            2·
            6 months ago

            A dumb one using Arch on a backup media device. At least that one dodged the bad grub release.

            I’ve had it also happen on the main device that was updated multiple times a week.

        • AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml
          2·
          6 months ago

          First off, run Syyu, the old arch gods demand it

          Also have a copy of pacman-static somewhere so that you can fix your shit in case of a partial upgrade (and trust me, it can go horribly wrong)

          And thirdly, Arch is meant as a power user distro – despite this abhorrent popularity it has gained, the fact of the matter remains that you need to know the system inside and out, if you make your arch system unable to boot… Don’t use arch

          This is not my attempt at elitism. Arch was never meant to be a hassle free distro and it sure as shit is not one.

          There are many maintenance-free distros you can use instead. Can I offer you a Debian in these trying times?

          • Shareni@programming.dev
            2·
            6 months ago

            Also have a copy of pacman-static somewhere so that you can fix your shit in case of a partial upgrade (and trust me, it can go horribly wrong)

            Oh I know, I quickly learned to never update it without having live media nearby to arch-chroot with.

            if you make your arch system unable to boot… Don’t use arch

            The only thing I did to make it unbootable is to update it. Going by that logic nobody should use it.

            This is not my attempt at elitism. Arch was never meant to be a hassle free distro and it sure as shit is not one.

            I definitely agree, that’s why I’m commenting against dumbasses suggesting it to beginners. Especially when they glorify AUR.

            Can I offer you a Debian in these trying times?

            No need, I already landed on MX + nix after 2+ years of arch. Nix unstable gives me all of the benefits of arch (except for the DE) and then plenty more on top. Different downsides, but far less stressful. I’m

            • AMDIsOurLord@lemmy.ml
              2·
              6 months ago

              You need to keep the update log and go through the whole thing and see if something needs reconfiguring. Sounds shitty? Yeah, that’s why I stopped using Arch and Gentoo despite being a veteran

              Nowadays I just install Debian or some derivative and call it a damn day. Unless you need some exotic setup (and those are more suited to Gentoo or Slackware anyway)

              • Shareni@programming.dev
                1·
                6 months ago

                Oh I had a far simpler method: update and it fails to boot? Rollback and try updating again in a week. It usually works then, but I had to wait a bit more a couple of times.

                The only exception was that bad GRUB release. I think that’s the only update fail that absolutely required arch-chroot.

  • cetvrti_magi@lemmy.world
    73·
    6 months ago

    Arch based distros are pretty stable in my experience. I actually had much more problems on distros like Debian and PopOs than Arch.

      • cetvrti_magi@lemmy.world
        3·
        6 months ago

        Problems I had were because of software not being on the latest version, not updates. Things just work on Arch for me. Only thing that ever broke was Xorg because of Nvidia drivers but that’s pretty easy fix.

        • Nisaea@lemmy.sdf.org
          2·
          6 months ago

          You’ve been lucky. I’ve been daily driving EndeavourOS for a few months now and I really love it but it did spontaneously break spectacularly twice already due to updates.

        • Shareni@programming.dev
          2·
          6 months ago

          Problems I had were because of software not being on the latest version

          I really need to get someone to make a jingle for this: just use flatpak/appimage/distrobox/nix…

          Things just work on Arch for me.

          And how long have you been using that install? I ran arch and derivatives for 2+ years on multiple devices and can’t count how many times they failed to boot due to an update.

          MX + nix unstable give me the same bleeding edge packages without risking my system exploding randomly, while also giving me a bunch of other benefits.

  • Staraven1@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    3·
    6 months ago

    Arch stable ? I mean, from experience, I’ve had one break in stability so bad it made me hop : the lack of gentoo-like config protect. To be fair, I was on Artix but the breakage was versions of Pipewire deleting not just my changed config files but config files it couldn’t run without ! Or to be fair, also, actual Arch but on my phone, plasma 5 package conflicts (that came as is from the installation image) prevent the whole system from updating 🙃 … Never had any of those 2 problems on OpenSUSE or, to be fair, non-Arch-based distros

    • Staraven1@lemmy.blahaj.zone
      1·
      6 months ago

      Nevermind : just got my boot borked on OpenSUSE (which is dumb as the rest of the system is fine but I can’t easily just reinstall just the boot) THANKS, TPMs Edit : “what do you think is stable then ?” idk, fcking Gentoo ? “And what if I don’t wanna compile blah blah” use linux lite, may not be rolling and pretty nooby but it is stable and the only one I feel comfortable handing to my mom (amongst the ones I’ve tried) without that much bloat

  • owatnext@lemmy.world
    85·
    6 months ago

    Sorry. I didn’t even read it. I just down voted when I saw that terrible human being.