On Wed, 19 Jan 2011 21:57:46 -0500 Gary Whatmore <n...@spam.sp> wrote:
> This is something the Gentoo and Arch fanboys don't get. First of all I spent >5yrs with Gentoo before jumping to Arch and those are really two different beasts. With Arch I practically have zero-admin time after I did my 1st install. > They don't have any idea how little time a typical Ubuntu user > spends maintaining the system and installing updates. Moreover, I spent enough time servicing Ubuntu for new Linux users (refugees from Windows) and upgrading (*)Ubuntu from e.g. 8.10 to 10.10 was never easy and smooth, while with Arch there is no such thing as 'no packages for my version'. > Another option is to turn on all automatic updates. Everything > happens in the background. It might ask for a sudo password once in a > week. What if automatic update breaks something which happens? With Arch and without automatic update I can always wait few days to be sure that new stuff (e.g. kernel) do not bring some undesired regressions. > I personally use CentOS for anything stable. I *Was* a huge Gentoo > fanboy, but the compilation simply takes too much time, and something > is constantly broken if you enable ~x86 packages. /me nods having experience with ~amd64 > I've also tried Arch. All the cool kids use it, BUT it doesn't automatically > handle > any configuration files in /etc and even worse, You can see what new config files are there (*.pacnew) and simple merge with e.g. meld/ediff is something what I'd always prefer than having my conf files automatically overwritten. ;) > if you enable the "unstable" community repositories, the packages > won't stay there long in the repository - a few days! The > replacement policy is nuts. One of the packages was already removed > from the server before pacman (the package manager) started > downloading it! Arch is a pure community based distro for hardcore > enthusiastics. It's fundamentally incompatible with stability. You gott what you asked for. :-) What you say does not make sense: You speak about Ubuntu's stability and comparing it with using 'unstable' packages in Arch which means you're comparing apples with oranges... Unstable packages (now 'testing') are for devs & geeks, but normal users can have very decent system by using core/extra/community packages only without much hassle. Sincerely, Gour (satisfied with Arch, just offering friendly advice and not caring much what OS people are using as long as it's Linux) -- Gour | Hlapicina, Croatia | GPG key: CDBF17CA ----------------------------------------------------------------
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature