Coming from someone who's clearly never used Arch... It is anything but stable, that's kinda the whole point.
I get that but he's lost so many pixels is it really him?
If you can recognize its him then yeah its him.
I have no horse in the Linux distro race, I'm just downvoting this inferior version of the meme format because fuck that guy.
You can down vote on lemmy?
lemmy.one has disabled downvotes, it's up to admins of each instance if they allow viewing and making downvotes.
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.
Maybe they used him because it's a shit opinion?
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....
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.
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.
Wait something can be slower than Zypper? Does it have a bunch of
sleep(1)scattered around?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.
Steven Crowder is dumb enough to think that.
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.
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.
Dunno. Anecdotal, a few years ago pacman appeared to be much faster than apt-get for me. Currently I don't see that very much difference but then again I haven't paid much attention to it.
- Pacman can do parallel downloads (which I haven't tried) : https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/pacman#Enabling_parallel_downloads
there's nala as an upgrade to apt, but pacman iirc has a few more features still
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.
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.
Have you ever even used opensuse?
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.
The gamble is the fun part tho
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.
Asshole meme template + really biased take. You really wanted to be downvoted aren't you ?
Arch based distros are pretty stable in my experience. I actually had much more problems on distros like Debian and PopOs than Arch.
doesn't opensuse have guis for every single thing you could possibly do?
Sorry. I didn't even read it. I just down voted when I saw that terrible human being.
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
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
Always gonna downvote fascist memes.
arch? don't you mean shart?
Fedora 40 + dnf5. QED.
