Im thinking about using gentoo linux, im currently on arch what

>>60290158
install gentoo

>>60290323
lulz but what are the benefits

>>60290940
install gentoo

Barely any. First you'd use emerge bullshit so if you like wasting energy you'd like it, and it doesnt use systemd and can use musl so it's ok

>>60290940
your beard grows long

>>60290158
>pros
- Every package can be compiled specifically for your CPU's micro-arch and characteristics, so you'll get better performance
- No reliance on systemd (I don't mind systemd, but the fact that it's so intertwined in many distros is problematic)
- Incredibly large package repository with thousands of versions of each package, so if a newer version breaks something you need, you don't have to hunt around for an old package or wait a possibly indefinite time for the bug to be fixed.

>cons
- every package needs compiling, even on a decent desktop, this can take ~1-2 days.
- installation is very complicated compared to other distros and can easily result in a non-working system for new users, even after days of compilation.
- the forums are 99.98% pure distilled cancer.

>>60290158

Portage vs pacman (Build from source, vs binary) is probably the biggest difference. Portage gives a lot more control over the software that you install via USE flags.

At least in my personal opinion, I have had less issues updating Gentoo than Arch. With Arch there have been several times where the update breaks shit. Your milage may vary

>>60290994

>every package needs compiling, even on a decent desktop, this can take ~1-2 days.

What package are you compiling that it takes you 1-2 days? Unless you're compiling on a shitty CPU, or haven't correctly set your MAKEOPTS, even the larger packages shouldn't take longer than several hours.

>>60290994
systemd is compromised

>>60291033
he probably means it takes ~1-2 days for all basic packages u need for the running system to compile

>>60291033
Should have been more specific, I mean emerge --newuse --deep @world can take 1-2 days even on a reasonable desktop.
distcc speeds that up, but that's even less user friendly.

>>60291049
Linux is compromised, systemd is the least of your worries.

>>60290994
Thanks and sorry for asking but what is systemd

File: Archlinux-icon-crystal-64.svg.png (137KB, 2000x2000px) Image search: [Google]

137KB, 2000x2000px

>>60291033
>several hours
>several hours
>several hours
pic related, the best OS that ever was, is and ever will be
long may he reign

I use gentoo just because I installed it ages ago and I'm too lazy to switch. I wouldn't bother installing it at this point because the long compilation times are annoying. That said, I really like the minimalism and control you have over everything, plus it was pretty fun to experiment with for a while. You can definitely live with the compilation times since it happens in the background, and most updates are pretty small anyway. The biggest packages, like libreoffice and firefox, often have binary version.

>>60291169
That was true a decade ago. These days it's more like half a day at most.

>>60292117
It's GNU/SystemD.
Now we just need a init system.

>>60290158
>>60290158
Main advantage is you get a powerful tool to configure and deploy packages from source code.

So you can do things you only can reasonably do when working with source code. Change it's compile-time configuration, apply patches to enable, disable or fix things, compile for very uncommon architectures or runtime stacks (that nevertheless can be made work somehow), and so on.

>>60290994
> Every package can be compiled specifically for your CPU's micro-arch and characteristics, so you'll get better performance
Usually basically irrelevant. It's not what the vast majority of Gentoo users use Gentoo for.

> No reliance on systemd
There is OpenRC, but "no" reliance on systemd isn't quite true. There are packages that rely on it or a component of it, even if OpenRC is used as init.

> Incredibly large package repository with thousands of versions of each package, so if a newer version breaks something you need, you don't have to hunt around for an old package or wait a possibly indefinite time for the bug to be fixed.
Arguably also the case on other distros.

>>60292194
> the long compilation times are annoying
This is very strongly dependent on hardware.

Compilers usually can utilize CPU very well if you feed them their data off a SSD or RAM.

There are only a few handful of software packages extensive / complex enough to have compile times that might count as actually "long" on a modern machine. And these specific packages usually have binaries as alternative even within the main portage tree, because Gentoo is rather pragmatic overall.

Is compiling just a waste of time? I heard that compiling specific to your architecture only gives you a performance boost of less than 1%.

>>60291169
Some fairly typical /pcbg/ setup with a SSD should take like 2 hours to compile to a fairly extensive desktop setup (plus any time you spend writing commands and reading docs).

You also don't need the gaymen GPU that usually accounts for like 1/3 the cost of /pcbg/ builds, so we're really not talking about anything very fancy, money-wise.

>>60291010
>With Arch there have been several times where the update breaks shit
Why people lie about this shit?
Why do you lie on anonymous imageboard shitsite?
I hope you get cancer and die

>>60292415
Nobody compiles for speed boost. There are only a handful of packages that even support cpu extensions with USE flags. The only programs benefiting from them are emulators. Also, gentoo has a slow version of firefox because pgo builds are hard masked (broken without patches). I don't know how many other distributions build with pgo. I guess only suse and ubuntu do since their firefox versions start under 2 seconds and opensuse patches firefox heavily.

I have it because I use it as it's meant to be used, as a meta distribution that I employ over all my office computers and terminals with heavily patched software to support my branding and to fix other annoyances like pgo in firefox.

>>60292415
> Is compiling just a waste of time?
No. It's what has to be done to get from source code to binaries.

> I heard that compiling specific to your architecture only gives you a performance boost of less than 1%.
Just forget about trying to establish a general case with a percentage, there are too many factors involved.

But in the vast majority of cases people are not (re-compiling) source code for performance reasons. It's more to be able to work with software and sauce code directly, eh. As you'd kinda expect.

>>60292415
Also, gentoo does not have dependency hell because of

FEATURES="preserve-libs"

. It auto detects if a binary/library depends on a specific library version and does not delete it when the library gets updated. It does remind you to recompile the program that depends on it to use the newer version and deletes it afterwards, though.

>>60292600
> There are only a handful of packages that even support cpu extensions with USE flags.
Compiler choice and compiler flags may affect any package.

If a particular package doesn't have, say, a SSE4.2 USE-flag, that doesn't mean that the compiler is sure to not generate SSE4.2 code.

It's just that for some packages, this can be turned on/off at the Gentoo ebuild and/or package ./configure level, and that is modeled as USE-flag.

>>60291010
> With Arch there have been several times where the update breaks shit.

Total nonsense, any time userspace is broken there is a detailed guide explaining why and how to navigate it on the front page. The guide literally will be three or four lines long.

People keep repeating this mantra that Arch breaks on updates because morons couldn't navigate the in it changeover to systemd.