this post was submitted on 27 Jul 2023
99 points (95.4% liked)

Linux

48133 readers
1273 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml
nooter692@lemmy.ml
MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml
cypherpunks@lemmy.ml
cyclohexane@lemmy.ml
d3Xt3r@lemmy.nz
99
whats so good about arch compared to linux mint? (lemmy.ml)
submitted 1 year ago by jackpot@lemmy.ml to c/linux@lemmy.ml
94 comments fedilink hide all child comments
 

new to this linux stuff sorry

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] Spectacle8011@lemmy.comfysnug.space 27 points 1 year ago (4 children)

For me, it's:

  • All software is shipped with as few changes as possible from upstream, so I'm getting the software as intended. If there's an issue, it's likely due to the software, not my distribution's unicorn configuration.
  • Pacman. This includes PKGBUILDs, syntax, and speed.
  • Good support. For all that this distribution isn't "the standard", you find install instructions in places you wouldn't expect, and more difficult things tend to work on Arch more easily than on other distributions.
  • Easy to set new things up. Because Arch doesn't ship with much configuration, there's no existing configuration you need to investigate in order to wrangle it to work with something new. This is also a downside, but we'll get to that...
  • Inertia. I installed it a few years ago, and I kind of want to move to openSUSE or Fedora, but I'm too comfortable here.

Downsides:

  • You need to configure everything. That includes the security stuff like AppArmor and SELinux you don't understand.
  • Occasional breakages. Arch doesn't break that often, but it's annoying when it does. Usually visiting bbs.archlinux.org is enough to set you on the right path.
  • Some software is packaged more slowly than other rolling distributions. Notably, GNOME is usually packaged a few months after openSUSE and Fedora ship it.
  • Constant updates! And HUGE updates, at that! Not great for computers you don't use often. If you do, make sure to pacman -Sy archlinux-keyring before you install new updates.
[–] mrmanager@lemmy.today 10 points 1 year ago (1 children)

You don't have to do the keyring thing manually anymore, pacman takes care of it. :)

[–] Spectacle8011@lemmy.comfysnug.space 5 points 1 year ago

Oh, cool! Since when? I always thought that was something the user shouldn't need to remember and that Pacman should automatically prioritize it.

This is exactly why I love making these kinds of comments. Someone always comes along to teach me something new!

[–] Anticorp@lemmy.ml 6 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Not great for computers you don't use often. If you do, make sure to pacman -Sy archlinux-keyring before you install new updates.

Pro tip there!

[–] Spectacle8011@lemmy.comfysnug.space 2 points 1 year ago

Thankfully, it appears this is no longer necessary in most cases since 2022: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Pacman/Package_signing#Upgrade_system_regularly

Though, it's still worthwhile doing it for computers you don't power on for most of the year, as the service likely hasn't had a chance to run.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 3 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago) (1 children)

Notably, GNOME is usually packaged a few months after openSUSE and Fedora ship it.

In this case, it's actually a plus IMO. Giving Gnome extension devs a month or so to ensure that any compatibility issues are fixed is ideal.

[–] Spectacle8011@lemmy.comfysnug.space 1 points 1 year ago (4 children)

I use GNOME without any extensions, so there's no benefit for me 🙃

I mean, technically I use AppIndicators, but I tend to just turn off system trays for all software I can. Steam is probably the only exception.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 2 points 1 year ago

Gnome without extensions?? I could never.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

Gnome without extensions?? I could never.

[–] Spectacle8011@lemmy.comfysnug.space 1 points 1 year ago (1 children)

I don't see any need for them! I like the defaults. I only change the keyboard shortcuts, and I usually don't even autostart anything. I tend to still install GNOME Tweaks so I can turn on Focus on Hover, move the Close button to the left side of the window, but I don't need an extension for any of that. I don't know what I would even use an extension for!

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 1 points 1 year ago

I use about ten different extensions that all add useful functionality, but the absolute deal breakers are 1) indicators for apps that require a system tray, 2) GSConnect to transfer stuff between my computer and my phone, and 3) clipboard history. I can't survive without those.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Gnome without extensions?? I could never.

[–] aleph@lemm.ee 0 points 1 year ago

Gnome without extensions?? I could never.

[–] wviana@lemmy.eco.br 1 points 1 year ago

Inertia. I installed it a few years ago, and I kind of want to move to openSUSE or Fedora, but I'm too comfortable here.

Everytime I see something about nixos

You need to configure everything. That includes the security stuff like AppArmor and SELinux you don't understand.

Are those really important thing I should have configured? The only safety thing I have is LUKS encription.