Linux - DistributionsThis forum is for Distribution specific questions.
Red Hat, Slackware, Debian, Novell, LFS, Mandriva, Ubuntu, Fedora - the list goes on and on...
Note: An (*) indicates there is no official participation from that distribution here at LQ.
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Archlinux/Manjaro is nice, more or less reliable, and quite okay.
Debian is a long tradition. It works.
However, I observed that numerous broken packages and errors occur in Manjaro/Archlinux. This is at cutting edge, but basically half things seem to work. The package manager is less reliable than apt-get, in sense that it takes long and it can lead to broken package/libs....
Debian well, everyone knows debian mostly.
It works more or less. Even systemd is more or less okay.
Depends what version of Debian you're thinking of. Sid/Unstable is the nearest thing to Arch and that also requires you to be able to deal with broken packages without panicking.
Depends what version of Debian you're thinking of. Sid/Unstable is the nearest thing to Arch and that also requires you to be able to deal with broken packages without panicking.
let's say stable or testing.
SID is basically too early for use. dev only for sure.
At the moment I'm running Debian stable. I enjoy the stability of stable; I don't need the cutting edge of Sid. Arch is a nice distribution to run in a VM and I do. However, Arch can and will break just by applying available updates. I like Debian and Slackware for bare metal installs. Arch and other operating systems are fun to play with in VMs.
It depends on what the user wants. I like Debian based distros but I prefer Arch based distros more. In my multiboot laptops, I only have one Debian based distro installed, Void installed and all the rest are Arch based distros.
I once encountered a package (for Ubuntu) which had a missing dependency. I was installing it on a new blank system and the program wouldn't load. I figured out what the dependency was and, sure enough, it wasn't in the package's prerequisites list. So I submitted a bug report and the problem was very quickly corrected. It was likely just overlooked, because the missing dependency was a fairly common package that most of the time would probably already be there. These things can happen. And it's a testament to their diligence that it usually doesn't.
Last edited by sundialsvcs; 12-03-2023 at 07:54 PM.
I once encountered a package (for Ubuntu) which had a missing dependency. I was installing it on a new blank system and the program wouldn't load. I figured out what the dependency was and, sure enough, it wasn't in the package's prerequisites list. So I submitted a bug report and the problem was very quickly corrected. It was likely just overlooked, because the missing dependency was a fairly common package that most of the time would probably already be there. These things can happen. And it's a testament to their diligence that it usually doesn't.
On Manjaro, these things can happen most of the time. Better to get a base with pacstrap and keep it untouched.
However, I observed that numerous broken packages and errors occur in Manjaro/Archlinux. This is at cutting edge, but basically half things seem to work. The package manager is less reliable than apt-get, in sense that it takes long and it can lead to broken package/libs....
Debian well, everyone knows debian mostly.
It works more or less. Even systemd is more or less okay.
I have had similar experiences to you. At the moment I'm running up to date versions of Arch and Debian 12.4.0 virtually using QEMU/KVM, Virt-manager, on a Void host. Arch uses a little less RAM than Debian on boot-up. They're both responsive using KDE-plasma.
When I ran Arch on bare metal it could break just by updating the system. This rarely happened on Debian. Systemd can hang on occasion, particularly on shutdown. Not a criticism, just an observation.
Distribution: Arch Linux && OpenBSD 7.4 && Pop!_OS && Kali && Qubes-Os
Posts: 824
Rep:
i used/use Arch as a daily driver. one Arch install were destroyed by user error, other than that i have had good luck with Arch, couple times i have had broken packages but nothing that i couldnt fix.
as a gaming Distro i use Pop!_OS, havent logged to Arch in a month or so. but i think updates will go ok. Debian 12 i have installed on VirtualBox, solid thing that one.
i dont understand why Arch has a unstable reputation, if you read wiki and be ready to fix one or two broken packages everything is just fine.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.