You're viewing a single thread.
So your GF is in favor of uncontrollable security issues and massive user scrambling to fix whatever your update fucked up on a daily basis?
There's a reason updates are batched, this is so fuckdamn shortsighted.
There’s a reason updates are batched
Yes. And I like to be the one doing that on my system.
And I like updates that are actually tested on silicon before they're rolled out. Rolling distros don't do that. In that environment, YOU are the tester.
And You must be a fucking unemployed savant to be able to check every line of code being pushed to you daily.
You must be a fucking unemployed savant to be able to check every line of code being pushed to you daily.
I get this feeling from a lot of the posters here.
Actually, I use Arch cause I'm too lazy for other distros (I've tried all the main ones).
The simplicity makes it much easier to automate the entire process.
I run myupdate.shscript before I install new packages, or when a news entry pops up in my terminal about a change requiring manual intervention.
So about once a month I type inupdate.sh, monitor the messages for 5 minutes and reboot.Literally the only issue I had so far was a software from 2021 that didn't compile on the first try cause it expected an older version of Java.
Other than that, it's the least buggy distro I know.So, your personal computer then? Just one instance?
Do you think that holds up when you are supporting a legacy environment of 200+ VMs and iron with code written by the cheapest consultants for 20+ years?
Because that is a very different experience.
No shit that's a different experience, who in this thread is suggesting running fucking Arch on their server farm? Lmao
I'm almost positive that even archlinux.org is hosted on Red Hat servers.
No, I use it on my personal computer as well as my server and that of my org, with a nextcloud, website and forum.
Do you think that holds up when you are supporting a legacy environment of 200+ VMs and iron with code written by the cheapest consultants for 20+ years?
No. I never claimed rolling release is right for every system.
::From the shadows, a ragged, scruffy, burnt out looking enterprise IT employee slowly emerges into the room. His button-up grid patterned shirt has a few buttons hanging on for dear life. His face lit only by flickering server lights and a crumpled cigarette smolder lazily hanging from his dry, crusty lips. His employee badge sways to and fro with each bedraggled rise and fall of his gaunt shoulders.::
"Oh, you like your rolling releases and your AURs and your 'cutting edge' software huh?"
::He takes another drag before blowing a stench into your face that can only be described as vaporized despair. He then drops the cigarette into his coffee with a hiss, swirls it a few times, and takes a long swig.::
"Do you think that holds up when you are supporting a legacy environment of 200+ VMs and iron with code written by the cheapest consultants for 20+ years?"
::His eyes narrow. The open source software enthusiasts who were moments ago happily discussing their personal computing experiences are stunned, unsure what to say.::
"...Because that is a very different experience."
::He turns and melds back into the server room from which he emerged, mumbling something that sounds like 'absolute fools' and 'don't even know about ESXI...'
Do yourself a favour and try opensuse tumbleweed. You won't regret it.
Also even on arch things doesn't break unless the user installs a whole lot of stuff from the AUR. Since there are flatpaks around most people can get their day to day apps working without relying on community repos.
In that environment, YOU are the tester.
So you feel comfortable doing that in a prod environment where you support 200+ linux boxes?
I mean IDGAF what you do on your local PC but a business environment is no place for rolling updates with the exception of the most egregious zero days, and STILL there needs to be on-silicon testing.
In a business environment with 200+ linux boxes, it doesn't matter which Linux distro you like best. Cause you're going to have to run a system with enterprise-level support and wide adoption to cover your ass and find employees who are familiar with it.
So that leaves Red Hat, Suse or Ubuntu as your only options.Yes, we mostly use Red Hat and I am the enterprise-level support for it.
When was this talk ever about a production environment??? Of course i wouldn't run fucking arch on a server or similar. But the benefits bof arch on my PC outweigh the disadvantages
NixOS ftw
That's not my experience with Arch at all, it kinda just works nowadays
I've never run Arch itself but have been super happy with Manjaro. They do the testing and batch up the updates for you. 6 months in on several different machines with no issues at all, honestly better than any Debian based desktop I've run.
Almost anything I've ever wanted has been in either the main repo or AUR, no more hassle with stale versions of this or that when I want to run some hot new software of the week. Everything just works.
However as mentioned elsewhere it's all Debian all the time for my servers, where stability is the name of the game.
My experience with Manjaro was okayish for a lot of things, but if I wanted to try some new software, it was a coin toss to see if it would compile or not, and I don't have the expertise to track down why something didn't compile. I got fed up with it recently when something I wanted to install...didn't compile. I went to the effort of backing up my computer, missed a few minor folders, and migrated to Mint.
Few years ago I installed arch and started furiously pacman -Syu'ing just to see how long it would take before some botched update would send me scrambling for a fix. Still waiting for it to happen. Any day now.