Arch vs Debian

File: wayland-screenshot.jpg (97KB, 750x421px) Image search: [Google]

97KB, 750x421px

>>60409946
Of course Gentoo GNU/Linux - ultimate choice for workstation/desktop/server.
As distro Debian much better, it supports POWER 9, ARM64, MIPS etc.
As disto for amd64 Arch should be better.

GENTOO
or debian

Debian + Xfeces master race. I have tried Arch + Xfeces a few times and it just doesn't feel the same. Probably because autism.

I use Debian stretch with LXDE. Arch is unstable trash.

gentoo

>>60410058
>Arch is unstable trash.
Why?

>>60409946
I'd recommend using Ubuntu LTS.

>>60410078
Because it's built and maintained by teenagers and retarded gibbons.

>>60410101
this.

Anything outside the grand 4 (Ubuntu, Debian, Fedora, openSUSE) is a steaming pile of rubbish.

I've used Arch since 2010 without any major issues aside from trying to use the ATI/AMD proprietary drivers for a couple of years. On laptops with Intel CPU/GPUs it's been great.

Is Debian up to date with drivers? Are there drivers for new hardware?

File: 1493779651140.png (83KB, 500x379px) Image search: [Google]

83KB, 500x379px

>>60410134
>>60410101
no

>>60410227
Testing and Unstable branches should be. Using Stable on a desktop is autism.

Arch is easier due to pacage manager.
Apt is unusable, when you want to install something it ask you to delete half your other package and you have to decline à dozen time before it stops. If per accident you say yes your system IS fucked.

Friendly reminder that Arch bills itself as a MODERN linux distro and it still DOES NOT HAVE a proper installation wizard in 2017.

Pretty much every hardcore hacker uses arch

Boring office stuff like spread sheets: Red Hat, CentOS
Noobs general: Ubuntu
Entry-level coding: Debian
Reale serious coding, top-end server stuff and hardcore hacking: Arch

>>60410362
What? It does.

File: 1486962549366.jpg (119KB, 588x588px) Image search: [Google]

119KB, 588x588px

>>60410331
This literally never happens, what the fuck are you doing with your system? Sure it marks stuff as autoremove all the time, but mate. FAKE NEWS!

File: Screenshot_20170515_123453.png (603KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

603KB, 1366x768px

>>60410058
> Arch is unstable trash

Kek

>>60410412
>hardcore hackers use Arch
Calm down son. Nearly died laughing.

File: 1493040437831.gif (3MB, 697x458px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 697x458px

>>60410331
>Apt is unusable, when you want to install something it ask you to delete half your other package and you have to decline à dozen time before it stops. If per accident you say yes your system IS fucked.

>>60410362
Revenge?

File: 1494452722128.jpg (33KB, 600x565px) Image search: [Google]

33KB, 600x565px

>>60410446
>5 days uptime means it's stable

>>60410446
>little does he know KDE is unstable trash

>>60410454
Try it.

When you want to install something the prompt will read "X to be installed y to be updated z to be deleted"

>>60410412
LMAO, noone uses Arch in serious business. At Google and FB, I have only seen Debian and Ubuntu other than MacOS

>>60410279

I use stable on desktop. This is my only computer and I need it for productivity. If that's the case going with testing or unstable is not recommended.

>>60410520
stable is for people that need to get actual work done. some anons don't get it.

>>60410520
B-but anon-kun, how can you be productive with software older than your mother?

>>60410446
>eduardo
>kde
>twice
garbage taste

Debian is fucking retarded shit with needlessly patched packages that introduces nonsense bugs because they think they know better. Compare Arch stable to Debian stretch. Debian stretch is unusable buggy garbage specifically because they fuck with everything.

>>60410446
>>60410454
> I dont know what stable means

>>60410520
But how can I be productive if my GPU doesn't work.

>>60410516
u must be new here

File: 1494710666873.jpg (25KB, 641x530px) Image search: [Google]

25KB, 641x530px

>>60410582
Is it though? Is it really?

>>60410605
https://backports.debian.org/
has updated drivers for stable systems

>>60410582

Are you six years old?

>>60410629
So they patch their kernels to the state where they have functionality only added a couple years later? And this monstrosity is considered wise or stable?

>>60410582
You have no idea what you're saying.
If you want a rolling release distro with none of the upstream patches, just use debian sid.

>>60409946
Arch

>>60409946
Debian testing is the only desktop distro you'll ever need. Everything is goat shit

>>60410605

My ATI GPU works absolutely fine on stable.


firmware-linux-nonfree
libgl1-mesa-dri
xserver-xorg-video-ati

Those did it from deb http://httpredir.debian.org/debian/ jessie main contrib non-free

>>60410696
>ati
So it's ancient.

Is there any difference if I just pick Kali Linux with its bundled tools over Debian?

I'd like to try Qubes, but it seems like heaps of work and might not work on my setup.

>>60409946
arch on desktop debian on server

Two completely different distros. You couldn't be bothered to update your system? Debian. You want updated packages? Arch.
>b-but s-s-stability
Go be an idiot somewhere else.

>>60410474
You meant Plasma 5, and yes it's pretty stable since 5.7

>>60410469
>>60410604
What is stable then? Who the fucks needs a desktop up 80 days?

>>60410569
Old habits die hard

>>60410676
>upstream patches
Fuck off kid

>>60409946
Arch. It's more stable than debshit

Debian has no pacman and is bloated af, arch or btfo

>>60411518
Arch minimal installation is larger than an Ubuntu or Debian minimal installation

File: 1471007438949.jpg (62KB, 690x460px) Image search: [Google]

62KB, 690x460px

>>60411518
>Debian
>bloated
Debian has a minimal installer, which you can build your own minimal system just like you can with Arch. The only reason to use arch is because you're a retard who likes getting fucked over. Even Arch devs recommend Debian over Arch.
https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2015-July/039443.html
>It has never been a minimalist distribution. Splitting packages is rare compared to other distributions, and dependencies aren't made optional whenever possible.
>It has also never been a distribution offering much user freedom / choice compared to Gentoo and even Debian.
>Arch is the *opposite* of a user-centric freedom. The opinion of users has no weight here. Only the developers have an opinion, and there aren't voting systems as there are in Debian.
>Arch has *never* been minimalist... a Linux kernel with every module available and every feature enabled at least when there's no non-bloat related cost, feature-packed/complex GNU tools, nearly all optional features enabled across all the packages, etc.
>What hypocrisy? When have you seen the developers state that they care about user freedom, or that the distribution is based on minimalism?
>Community memes don't define the distribution, technical choices by the developers do. It's clearly not based on what you say it is, and *never* has been. It has always used significantly more disk space and a measurable amount of additional memory than Debian and especially Gentoo as a consequence of keeping things simple (again, from a development perspective).
In essence: Arch devs fuck the users over, adopt systemd, etc, all because of sheer convenience. You'd have to be retarded to trust these people to develop your OS. If you want rolling release, there are better, alternative distros. If you want minimalism, you don't want Arch, because Arch is bloated from top down.

Arch Linux is the best!

>>60411774
>adopt systemd
Kek

How many times a day do you

sudo pacman -Syu

?? Me? At least 30

debian is owned by tlas and using their position as a dominant distro to force adoption of compromised packages on the rest of the "linux community". .

Stable means the system doesn't change. Debian stable is locked to old packages (of course backport option exists). Testing is the basis for the next stable Debian release, i.e. packages in testing for becoming the next stable. Just because it's testing doesn't mean it's jittery and about to implode, but you do need common sense. Sid is a walk on the wild side, i.e. you shoot heroin and have sex with trannies in unknown abandoned houses at night.

Anyway, sometimes it seems like pipples haven't even read as much as
https://wiki.debian.org/DebianUnstable

In any case you should use openSUSE, either the stable (Leap) or the rolling release (Tumbleweed), whichever steez you prefer.

>>60410134
What about Gentoo and Slack?

>>60411774
>https://lists.archlinux.org/pipermail/arch-general/2015-July/039443.html

I like Arch more after reading this.

>>60411977
Debian unstable on the desktop is not so bad
I've been using it for around 8 years without major problems

>>60409946
Devuan

>Arch
Updated /\ NonPatchedByDebianCodeMOnkeys -> Secured
>Debian
Obsolete /\ PatchedByDebianCodeMonkeys -> Unsecured

>>60409946
try both and form your own opinion

File: 1430783204734.gif (2MB, 335x237px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 335x237px

Debian is pretty comfy, but I've been burned too many times by apt throwing me into 7 circles of dependency hell somewhere along the line for no apparent reason. Pacman just werks, plus the aur is really nice to find install scripts for most everything

>>60412004
It doesn't matter what you "like", what matters is the validity of a Linux distro, and Arch loses to Debian. Also, I have to question what makes you view devs taking shortcuts and constantly veering towards convenience instead of actually being competent favorably. It's not a favorable trait, and it directly translates to Arch.

>>60412081
this desu. theres many distros out there so that each person can find one they like. use a vm and test it out, dont be a sheep

>>60411091
Yeah, playing "installing SO" every month must be really fun.
Don't you have anything else to do?

>>60412127
This.

Pacaur is great

File: 1492638341063.jpg (50KB, 616x960px) Image search: [Google]

50KB, 616x960px

>>60412152
Well

According to my filesystem I installed Arch on 31-Jan-2017. It has been working very well so far. I am planning on trying out some version of Debian when/if Arch breaks badly though.

>>60409946
Don't go to arch unless you are much sure that's what you want. Otherwise, it will be a bad experience and a huge waste of time.

neither

>>60413919
what do you recommend?

File: wallhaven-210652.jpg (460KB, 1920x1080px) Image search: [Google]

460KB, 1920x1080px

>>60409946

>>60409946
I personally have strong preference towards Arch, mostly out of more experience with it and poor experience with Debian.
The Stable branch does not work on my GPU because the kernel is too old. Tried to install unstable. No issues so far, works all right. Try to replace the built in Gnoke Desktop. Oh boy here we go. Apt tries to remove half of my packages again... After going to dependency hell and getting a stable XFCE system up, I foolishly using Apt-get auto-remove without looking at the packages it got rid of. Next thing you know I can't boot up. This is where my Debian experience ended...
To be fair, I fucked up Arch and Manajro installs just as much, but at least there I actually felt it was my fault. Pacman is a superb package manager, and I feel generally comfortable using it to build the system as I wish without having to deal with stupid meta packages and apt deciding to remove half of my stuff.

>>60410582
this, the modifications arch does to it's packages are minimal and useful

take chromium's for example, always want to use arguments but dont want to make an alias? Their package has support for a file that loads arguments.

>>60410446
Pinche lalo, deja de ver ese pinche video feo. Twice is basura.

>>60415572
Cállate ricardo regresate a hispita

File: our-girls.jpg (549KB, 1800x1200px) Image search: [Google]

549KB, 1800x1200px

>>60410446
Eduardo you should really check out Pristin and mpv :3

>>60409946
I actually wanted to use debian bc I've been using debian-like distros in the past 10 years. The problem was the installer broke every time so I decidec to try arch. And so far so good. It works wonderfully.. Also you can choose what pkgs to install. In a regular unoobtoo distro you've got prob. ~2k pkg while all-working arch with the things you really need is no more then 900 pkgs.. it's a big difference right there

>>60416745
SMPlayer uses mpv as backend and Yeah I know Pristin too, Nayoung is very sexy.

>>60416745
>girl on the left is wearing a Dr Pepper shirt

Do they actually have Dr Pepper in gookland?

>>60416755
I tried to install Debian twice over the years and both times the installer got hung and locked my computer up. I haven't tried installing it again since.

>>60410446
>5d
>stable
Buena bait.

should I not install debian then? This package thing sounds annoying

>>60418345
apt is shit, fedora's dnf is way far better.

File: Screenshot_20170515_194003.png (379KB, 1366x768px) Image search: [Google]

379KB, 1366x768px

>>60418088
>>60410469
6 days now.

File: SLUTTY_ELF.png (3MB, 3840x2160px) Image search: [Google]

3MB, 3840x2160px

>>60410134
>the grand 4 is what I say it is

Damn that's retarded

>>60409946

>arch
good if you want to people to stare in awe of your epeen (though your epeen still wont be nearly as big as gentoo fags)

>debian
good if you actually want to use your computer for anything more than constant ricing tweaks. though i guess you can do that too.

>>60411999
gentoo has a niche, slackware is irrelevant

>>60409946
I used both, but I am extremely biased towards Debian, so I can't tell.

I installed Arch on an old laptop with only a CLI and that time I was a noob, so it wasn't pleasant. Nowadays, I probably wouldn't have that much trouble.

Both differ in details.

>>60412015
>Devuan
This. Its still Debian, but its special snowflake enough to get mentions in screenfetch threads.

>>60411350
>desktop
What is a server?

>>60412127
>I've been burned too many times by apt throwing me into 7 circles of dependency
That's what happens when you add shitloads of repositories that are not official and you don't even need.

>>60418688
nobody, even Arch users, have ever recommended Arch for servers. We are talking about desktop use in this thread.

>>60418788
i like debian for arm/x86 and ubuntu for x64 machines

Arch:
- Works well
- Stable
- Has lots of updates

Debian
- None of those things

>>60409946
There's literally zero reasons to choose anything over Debian stable. go for it OP

>>60418848
I've never used Debian in my life, the post

>>60418846
Why do people not prefer debian on x64?

>>60418894
More like, Debian has always fucked up on me, the post.

Is bunsenlabs better than debian?

I absolutely hate debian. Ive had less trouble using Arch and other "cutting edge" distros than debian.
Maybe Ubuntu and Fedoa just tainted how I feel a Linux distribution should work.

Anyway. This debate is meaningless. No one uses debian stable as a daily and only 14 year old haxors use Arch.

Use fedora.

>>60419210
>No one uses debian stable as a daily

Yes they do. Debian stable + backports is comfy as fuck.

Also I've had less problems with Debian Sid than Arch.

>>60418964
This.
Everytime I fall for the debian meme I feel like everything takes an extra step.

Holyshit, you collosal faggots don't need make a shit, old rebranded version of Firefox and make it take 6 gorrilion steps to install actual Firefox. I'd rather have no browser at all.

>>60410362
That's why you use Antergos, it's Arch without the autistic installion process

File: 1494800099479.gif (2MB, 498x372px) Image search: [Google]

2MB, 498x372px

>>60419210
>mfw using fedora as a desktop
I use Debian stable as a daily. Never had any problems with it and apt is super comfy. redpill me on Debian stable please.

File: 1491357975233.jpg (111KB, 382x675px) Image search: [Google]

111KB, 382x675px

>>60418451
DELET

>>60419491
Debian stable users are the unironic GNU/Linux posters.
CIA niggers grow more powerful everytime Debian is installed.

>>60419210
>No one uses debian stable as a daily
>impying
>servers on university are on Debian
>connects to network
>apt upgrade
>1 Gbps download
>system updated in about 2 minutes
yfw

>>60419612
>1gpbs
>no server is giving you your entire pipe.
>tfw you are throttled to 10mpbs

>>60419333
>fdisk
>mkfs
>grub-installer
>pacstrap
>chroot
>fstab
>pacman -Syu
>reboot

So you're autistic

>>60410446
BUILD WALL

>>60412226
Yes, it is. In fact, why stop at every month? I reinstall daily. Just yesterday I broke X.org even though I use wayland. I don't even have X.org installed and it still broke and it took down the power in the whole city with it! Arch is such a piece of shit! How can anyone put up with it?!
I repeat: go be an idiot somewhere else.

Definitely Arch. I've tried both multiple times, and every time Debian is worse. Outdated packages even on Testing, packages can be a pain to install, Java 8 took me a while and a lot of searching to get working, etc. Arch just werkz and has the wiki for everything you're too dumb to figure out. Never had it crash/break on me in years.
I've grown to hate working with Debian.

>>60410446
Fucking press Ctrl+C, Eduardo. Your bloated UI is giving me the autisms.

File: freedom-trademark.png (73KB, 300x300px) Image search: [Google]

73KB, 300x300px

>>60419318
iceweasel doesn't exist anymore

File: The_best_lightweight_and_userfriendly_distro_for_daily_use.png (69KB, 512x512px) Image search: [Google]

69KB, 512x512px

>>60419658
More like a lazy fuck who just wants it to werk but still wants to be an Archfag

You are officially out of excuse to not install Arch
https://arch-anywhere.org/

Arch is what's known as as a hobby distro, made and used by those view their computer not as a means to an end but an end itself, because they don't have much real need for a computer but still want to feel productive/accomplished without putting in the effort to learn a real skill or do anything.

>>60419729
"Unstable" isn't actually unstable. It's fine for anywhere Arch would even be an option. One time gpg broke on me, but it got fixed automatically with a later dist-upgrade.

File: yjaitk4lpjvy.jpg (24KB, 750x327px) Image search: [Google]

24KB, 750x327px

>>60420251
close to home, dude

>>60419814
It did the last time I used d*bian.

>>60410134
>Fedora
>no RHEL

>>60410511
You were doing it wrong anon. That doesn't happen

>>60409946
Honestly, Debian. I use Arch on my laptop for fucking around, but there is SO MUCH SHIT that doesn't work properly and requires around 1-2 hours of research and workarounds.

I mean, I like it, but it's pretty unsuable if you expect to do actual general work. Very specific work would be fine, however.

>>60419765
The whole KDE is well coded

>>60409946
Arch if you want bleeding edge software, Debian is fine otherwise.

>>60410331
this

arch is superior, also debian logo is a pube

>>60420311
Learn to use org-mode and change that.

How often should one sudo pacman -Syu

>>60411774
i was with you until 'community memes dont define [a thing]'

fucking kek where are you right now. also i have been transitioning from arch to debian via netinstall, good shit

>>60423037
You could do it once a year and pretend you are using Debian

>>60424198
LOL

>>60410134
>The grand 4
Fucking kek

>>60409946
Can Arch even lay claim to being a lightweight distro if it uses systemzog just like Debian does?

Like what's even the point of using Arch in 2017 vs. a BSD or Void Linux or something? FreeBSD is what Arch *was* at the turn of the decade, with the same init system. I suggest just using that.

>>60424227
Arch never claimed to be lightweight,
only some Arch users do, even though they themselves are not lightweight either.

>>60424284
When I used it back in 2007 it was absolutely billed as a lightweight and KISS distro. They even had a whole smug wiki entry dedicated to shitting on all the distros for being too over-engineered.

I think Linux in general is trash compared to BSD these days, but there are definitely better alternatives to Arch now. I just haven't bothered using any of them.

>>60424425
Ubuntu is lighter than Arch, for instance.

>>60409946

Both distros are NSA/systemd'd. Move on and install Devuan or any other distro that doesn't suck RH cawk.

Reasons not to use Arch:
>lazy developers
They don't try to compile or configure their packages so the end user can install and enjoy them, they compile them with as much shit as possible and then don't configure or test anything. They think it's okay to leave those tasks to the end users and their packages sometimes have asinine dependencies.
>upstream
Again, this means no testing goes into their packages, any update (and believe me, you will be updating at least once a day with Arch) can break your system or introduce new bugs/regressions. Wonderful.
>Pacman loves to fuck up config files
>official repositories are shit. AUR is botnet
Not really, but AUR packages are not reviewed. Which means anyone could upload malware-ridden packages and nobody would notice.
>stupid CLI install
The Arch team refuses to add a GUI installer, or to make scripts to automate certain parts of installation to offer "more flexibility" during install. This, of course, is bullshit because a. No one with more than 2 neurons would use Arch in a server because it's too unstable and 90 % desktop users are going to use the default guide; and b. Other distros like Debian, Ubuntu and OpenSUSE provide a CLI installer as well as a GUI installer.
>the Arch community is full of 1337 hax0rs
The Arch community despises the Manjaro community because, get this, they offer a GUI installer, test packages before rolling them out (which means updates are slower) and offers sane defaults. The Arch community also decided to delete the beginner's guide in their wiki because it was too simple and allowed regular people to go through their bullshit install ritual.
>Arch community is full of autists
It's no wonder why all desktop/Screenfetch threads always end up full of autists using i3 with a lolicon wallpaper: Arch is full of autists.