Why does /g/ dislike Arch in its current state?

People are paranoid autists about systemd

>>62201762
>I only want to a distro that gets me up and running on a productive workstation as quickly and painlessly as possible.
what exactly are other distros lacking?

File: 2017-09-01-12:29:52-scrot.png (8KB, 1015x464px) Image search: [Google]

8KB, 1015x464px

>>62201762
breakage has been a dead meme for years.
>>62201861
up to date packages.

>>62201964
it's like you can't read or something

I don't really get why people care SO much about having their system up to date, I do understand when it comes to security issues but for everything else, I doesn't matter that much.

Also:
>systemd
Just go with Void, Slackware, Gentoo, or Devuan.
Now that I'm talking about it, is there any big distro without systemd?

>>62201995
they'd be stupid not to use systemd.

>>62201964
https://www.archlinux.org/packages/core/any/tzdata/
what?

Why not Nix?

>>62201995
>kernel updates introducing CPU support
>drivers updates tweaking performance

Gee I wonder

>>62201995
Arch follows a simple model. Update your shit. No such thing as backports, security updates, special handling of old versions etc

Lol, I used Arch for a few months and nothing ever broke so I got bored and dropped it. If I wanted a stable, boring OS I'd use macOS.

>>62202064
How about you try windows then? I hear it can keep you occupied with problems.

>>62202133
If I'm going to go through the work of fixing and configuring shit, I should at least get a decent OS out of it. Which Windows is not.

File: 1503928478555.jpg (158KB, 1000x669px) Image search: [Google]

158KB, 1000x669px

>>62201762
>and other times let it sit for 2 months before doing a system update, never had an issue
Nah, that's risky. With a rolling release you don't want to make updates so rare. 80% that your system will break.
Do updates often, look after your system (don't install any weird AUR packages) and it will be stable enough. The problem is though, I don't want to do that. I'd like an OS to help me with my compuring needs and get out of my way but Arch is an attention whore that just doesn't let that happen.

>>62201901
>up to date packages.
such as?

>>62203021
that kernel.

>>62202043
Not him but that's exactly why I don't want to use it. I don't want there to be updates (and potential changes, not just security patches) waiting for me every day. Sure I get that that makes things really easy for the distro maintainers (When there's a new upstream version, push it. done.) but it's obnoxious for me. Yeah, I'm able to troubleshoot any issues that come up. I just don't want to have to do that. Rolling-release is a pain.

>>62203173
It also makes it easy for you since you can consult upstream for any issues and probably bugs instead of particular distro community. Rolling is great for personal use but problem for servers.

>>62201762
Using arch 9 years.The only time it broke was when systemd was transitioned in, even then it was minor changes to get it to work.

"Breakage" is only ill user management. Its rolling release configs are going to need to be changed, watch what is being updated and check if you need to change something, this is a non issue.

Arch is perfectly fine

>>62201762
Because systemd is shit.

Arch has neither AppArmor nor SELinux configured, and there is no way in hell I'm doing that myself, thus why I don't use it. Just too insecure unless you sped a lot of time setting up MAC yourself, which I doubt anyone who uses Arch actually does

>>62203506
>wants security
>but only if other people do it for me
Thats not security at all then chappo
You want to do security your self so you customize it to your workflow

>>62201777
Nice trips

>>62203043
It's two versions behind

>>62203518

Its better than the zero security that Arch has, since probably like 5% of Arch users actually bother

>>62201762
I don't like Arch because it's not the professional production tier. It's made for kids to learn essentials of CLI and to have fun. I also don't like Arch because it's a half measure minimalism in comparison to Gentoo.

>>62203552
gentoo is behind right now, and usually is. There are no overlays for amd-staging linux. I need amd-staging for vega. There are plenty of times gentoo is behind archlinux and it's AUR. Gentoo support for packages is lackluster compared to the AUR

>>62201762
Elitist asshole want muh real men install arch as pride geek.

>>62203882
Just git pull amd-staging sources then, instead of gentoo-sources

>>62203955
this, gentoo is the superior distribution

>>62204064
I like gentoo and I used to use it as a kid, but I just don't have time to wait around for things to compile anymore, and it's too easy to misconfigure something to put the system in a broken state (or hell, even getting the system to a usable state in the first place). If I'm not satisfied with Arch sometime in the future and there aren't any other good alternatives I might take another look.

>>62202016
To be fair, I haven't given Nix or GuixSD a try yet and I really should. I think their declarative approach to configuration is really cool, but from what I've read they didn't seem mature enough for a workstation yet (at least for me personally).

>>62201762
>No apt get
>systemd
>Having to deal with the arc "community"
No thanks

>>62202190
Good answer.

I've only ever used Ubuntu. What's different about Arch? Are there different responsibilities in terms of maintaining the system?

>>62204779
>>Having to deal with the arc "community"
>He thinks the Arch community is any more rude or autistic than this place

>>62204820
I use both and like them both quite a bit, but sometimes Ubuntu does some weird shit with their dependencies that makes installing things alot of work and theoretically a security risk. Namely the whole deal with PPA's. You miss out on a lot of cool stuff without resorting to this nonsense.

>>62201762
Linux Mint

>>62201762
Arch has integrated SystemD bloat, if I want SystemD bloat I go with one of the many "just werks" distros.

If I want customization, I choose Gentoo.