The ultimate battle of non corporate distros never ends. Debian or Arch, which one do you use/prefer?
The ultimate battle of non corporate distros never ends
up to date software
For me it's Fedora.
Can someone tell me how important a distro being "cutting edge" is? How much will it actually effect me, man who isn't autistically adjusting his system 24/7?
cutting edge is indeed a meme outside of desktop circlejerks
stability is what you want when you're actually trying to get something to work for more than a week and not have to wake up to angry messages about how something is down
Jow Forums doesn't understand this because they have never ever ever had a real job
If the main non-corporate GNU distros are Arch GNU and Debian GNU, which GNU distros represents corporate GNU distros?
For those who want a non-systemd Arch, try Artix which is based on Arch but uses openrc or runit instead of systemd.
For those who want to try a non-systemd Debian, try Devuan.
I've tried both and I liked Devuan, but I'm totally in love with Artix.
my workstation runs Arch. after the initial setup nothing really broke for me. You're right about servers, those are running Ubuntu LTS.
I personally prefer Arch over Debian but wih systemd, everything outside package management becomes pretty much the same
non corporate distro thread
posting the most corporate one
litteraly a beta test of Red Hat Entreprise for beta cucks
All distros are basically beta testing for some other distro. Also Fedora is a community based distro.
non corporate distros
use a kernel whose main contributors are corporate entities
Really activates your almonds
distro like Ubuntu package the same distro for community and entreprise
Red Hat use the Fedora ecosystem for testing his entreprise product
non-LTS ubuntu is a beta test for LTS ubuntu, which could be arguably a beta test for Debian to an extent. Also RHEL uses barely anything of Fedora, and they maintain their own software.
You act as if redhat throws things into fedora that will explicitly only be used by and for redhat once its been "beta tested", and that's just not true.
Debian stable for a minimalist, just werks distro. If you don't need the newest software or kernels, no point leaving
Arch for packages up to date. Its wiki is pretty good not only for arch but for every distro.
Simply a matter of preference
No one criticized the corporate ones, rhel shill. Don't get so triggered over it.
Arch is so lame bro's. It's more of a funny distro
come on now
If your system is modern some of your hardware might not work properly on old kernels, that said you can install newer kernels on Debian, so it doesn't really matter at all.
which rolling distros get use the latest kernel first?
I'm totally in love with Artix.
but i don't understand it man, you're totally in love with it because it has no systemd? or because you would also be in love with arch if no alternative was present?
I like having Emacs as much up to date as possible. I don't care about anything else
Debian 10 buster.
select username: root
everything ok. woot? finally a distro that lets me be root without meme security
blows up after half an hour installing
if you're like 99% of this board and basically only use your computer for the web browser, then what distro you use is completely irrelevant
Arch is the hardest to get the work done. Some corps still using Debian on their servers.
theyre both sjw distros so i dont like either of those. manjaro is better.
Arch for main machine and debian for everything else.
trusting in literal whos
Why do you think that they don't selling your data? Logically there's a much bigger chance they do something fishy because they need to make a profit somehow.
based reasonable poster
holy shit are you me?
i've shilled so much i forgot which ones are my posts
and i have that same file.named nixwaifu.jpg too
Nah mate, i just come here once in a blue moon. I've used nixos since fedora 13 and last time i saw this neet pic, so i saved. Good luck spreading the love.
In my experience it's easier to find software/support on Arch and although problems from not being up to date enough are rare it's still a huge pain in the ass when it does happen and better to just bypass the problem completely.
That being said having to set up audio and fonts on every reinstall is fucking tedious.
Arch is for retards. Always has been, Always will be.
theyre both great
Ubuntu is debian beta
arch is for retards
a fucking tranny
His point stands
Debian when it updates and arch after 6 months of Debian update lol
I use debian because
-it has installed
-it has 3 versions for different needs
-can be installed preconfigured or not
-its stable and works
debian for server
arch for desktop
yes i was proving his point
as in "hey user example A"
I'm feeling particularly autistic today, so I didn't get that, sorry
its okay, i actually expected that, as soon as i hit that submit button i said "oh shit this isnt the normal way you quote shit on here, normally a quote is an invitation to argument unless you include "based" and "redpilled" keywords"
On Debian it feels like you're sifting through all the old shit that builds up when you install like three packages. So I would say Arch.
Mintfag reporting in.
Please stop shilling
ok, i actually will
it was getting boring anyway