Arch-Based EndeavourOS "Apollo" Released

[andyprough]

Maybe that's the case with crappy distro like popos. I NEVER had to manually fix something on well maintained distro like fedora.

Good thing to know that there are zero bug reports on broken packages in the entire history of Fedora.

[arun54321]

Just use Fedora or Fedora KDE spin.

[computerquip]

I used EndeavorOS, it's actually really nice. Doesn't have overlapping repositories with Arch Linux (seriously, why does Manjaro do this?), a mostly standard installer, some sane defaults and neat themes. Basically just gets you up and running then gets out of the way.

[curfew]

It happens so rarely that you can go a year or two sometimes before having to do it. And as long as you're capable of reading you usually get a notice while upgrading. I've had worse experiences on Windows coincidentally

Rather I am dealing with weekly problems in system upgrades because my lib32 packages are out-of-sync with the corresponding, "native" system libraries. These lib32 packages are required to e.g. use Steam or Wine.

Sure, this is more about repository management (in upstream), maybe, but then you at the very least have to maintain your own repositories and take precious care about pushing packages.

[curfew]

That's one of the reasons why I was a bit surprised that Valve went with Arch for the Deck. Perhaps they just aren't expecting anyone to really manage packages (or use snaps or flatpaks or whatever) but it was an odd choice when if user-friendliness was to be considered.

Valve isn't relying on the upstream to provide packages or manage repositories, so they are able to work around most of the issues that make me not recommend Arch for anyone who doesn't specifically demand using Arch Linux.

Valve is probably going with Arch because if they can make their software work on Arch Linux, it will probably work on every other distro as well, hehe. Arch is the one most prone to suffering of breakage as the packages are being upgraded rapidly and arbitrarily.

[xhustler]

...
Personally, in 22 years or so of Linux I've had the worst times updating Ubuntu and Debian. Do a dist update and get asked if I want mpv or mplayer, pulseaudio or alsa, Oracle or Open Java, preferred shell, and things like that. The average user doesn't know that stuff and probably doesn't care; would rather have upstream just pick the appropriate ones and not nag them. What sucks is if you pick the wrong choices you could end up in Apt Dependency Hell. ...

Agreed. On the other hand, those in the "I hate MacOS" camp would cry that you are limiting my freedom!

[Slithery]

Rather I am dealing with weekly problems in system upgrades because my lib32 packages are out-of-sync with the corresponding, "native" system libraries. These lib32 packages are required to e.g. use Steam or Wine.

Which repositories are you using? The only time I've ever seen this issue it's been because only some of the testing repos have been enabled which isn't a supported configuration.

[Volta]

Agreed. On the other hand, those in the "I hate MacOS" camp would cry that you are limiting my freedom!

You said it like there were no dozens of problems in this broken POS. Oh, and forget about upgrades for older macos.

[skeevy420]

Agreed. On the other hand, those in the "I hate MacOS" camp would cry that you are limiting my freedom!

Honestly, it's the same either way. The difference is getting a giant dump of changes versus getting the changes gradually over time.

I like the latter since I prefer doing my research in small snippets because, for me and how I think, it's easy to miss manual interventions for the manual interventions* when I'm doing a dist upgrade and get hit with a lot of new things and changes. Learning all that at once and finding secondary manual interventions can just be daunting; especially if you don't keep up with Linux on a site like Phoronix -- I remember reinstalling Arch one day and afterwards going where TF is /etc/init.d? Where TF do my init scritps go? WTF is a unit?

*like on Arch when getting a .pacnew and doing /etc melds or having to run some command manually; getting 20 or so of those during an LTS dist upgrade can be daunting (any LTS distro)

I can see why someone would prefer the other way. Everything works as-is until one scheduled day in the future when you sit down and figure it all out. It sucks when you update Arch, reboot, and systemd 240 FUBARs your system so hard that you can't write a contract so you have to boot a Manjaro live ISO from your phone because all your stuff is on ZFS and you need quick access to KDE and a dkms package.

[schmidtbag]

Arch is the one most prone to suffering of breakage as the packages are being upgraded rapidly and arbitrarily.

Despite being more prone to such things, Arch has so far been of the most stable and reliable distros I've ever used. Other than when I first tried learning it, I don't think I have ever had to reinstall it due to breakages. I lost count of how many times I had to reinstall distros like Debian or Fedora because of a borked upgrade, or a config that unknowingly changed. Granted, Arch makes it just a little bit easier to chroot, since the boot ISO comes with the option to do it.