EndeavourOS. Arch, but easy to install. I’m thrilled with it, although I suspect I’d be even happier if I’d have tried one of the convenience installers for the base. Endeavor is has prettier defaults, so less fussing with basic stuff.
Otherwise, I’m thrilled. I have Artix on my laptop, and while I like not having systemd on it, some things are a bit more kludgey, and I spend more time on maintenance and working to fill gaps. Like, there are not dinit entries for every service, and I have to write them myself; which is absurdly easy, but still. Maybe in a couple years Artix will be less of a chore; in the meantime I’m preferring EndesvorOS.
I do not like the frequency of reboots necessitated by kernel upgrades. I know that I could mask it, but IME that eventually causes problems with packages than make .ko kernel modules; it’s just more things to fail, and it makes me really wish Linus would have just based Linux on MINIX.
Anyway, I have 4 computers I deal with which are Debian based, and I never love Arch more than when I have to do something on Debian. Two are Mint, which are infected with flatpack, and I really hate those.
I do not like the frequency of reboots necessitated by kernel upgrades. I know that I could mask it, but IME that eventually causes problems with packages than make .ko kernel modules; it’s just more things to fail, and it makes me really wish Linus would have just based Linux on MINIX.
Here’s a tip that you might not be aware of: Arch has an LTS kernel. It may seem counter intuitive to run Arch and not have the latest, bleeding edge kernel, but the upside is that you get a stabler, less breakage-prone system.
I didn’t know about the LTS kernel. How does that interact with module packages, like the fscking Broadcom support packages, or bcachesfs (before it for mainlined)? That’s where I’ve historically run into issues with pinning the kernel.
I will absolutely look into this, though. If it prevents the “you need to reboot or else” messages after every Syu, I’m in. On Arch, when you get a message like that, it’s best heeded.
Another pro tip: You don’t need to update Arch every day.
I update about once a month. Just make sure you read the news and deal with your .pacnew files.
I’ve gone months between updates. On servers, that’s a little more risky because it CVEs, which can also apply to the kernel, but LTS is probably safe enough there: if there’s a kernel CVE, LTS will be updated.
I’ve had trouble with pinning the kernel before, though. Last time I did it, I went several months and forgotten I’d done it, and my system got itself wedged because some package was expecting a newer kernel; it took me a while to figure out.
LTS might be a better option, since that will be caught be dependency management. Pinning can cause version dependency mismatch issues.
EndeavourOS. Arch, but easy to install. I’m thrilled with it, although I suspect I’d be even happier if I’d have tried one of the convenience installers for the base. Endeavor is has prettier defaults, so less fussing with basic stuff.
Otherwise, I’m thrilled. I have Artix on my laptop, and while I like not having systemd on it, some things are a bit more kludgey, and I spend more time on maintenance and working to fill gaps. Like, there are not dinit entries for every service, and I have to write them myself; which is absurdly easy, but still. Maybe in a couple years Artix will be less of a chore; in the meantime I’m preferring EndesvorOS.
I do not like the frequency of reboots necessitated by kernel upgrades. I know that I could mask it, but IME that eventually causes problems with packages than make .ko kernel modules; it’s just more things to fail, and it makes me really wish Linus would have just based Linux on MINIX.
Anyway, I have 4 computers I deal with which are Debian based, and I never love Arch more than when I have to do something on Debian. Two are Mint, which are infected with flatpack, and I really hate those.
Here’s a tip that you might not be aware of: Arch has an LTS kernel. It may seem counter intuitive to run Arch and not have the latest, bleeding edge kernel, but the upside is that you get a stabler, less breakage-prone system.
I didn’t know about the LTS kernel. How does that interact with module packages, like the fscking Broadcom support packages, or bcachesfs (before it for mainlined)? That’s where I’ve historically run into issues with pinning the kernel.
I will absolutely look into this, though. If it prevents the “you need to reboot or else” messages after every Syu, I’m in. On Arch, when you get a message like that, it’s best heeded.
Another pro tip: You don’t need to update Arch every day.
I update about once a month. Just make sure you read the news and deal with your .pacnew files.
I’ve gone months between updates. On servers, that’s a little more risky because it CVEs, which can also apply to the kernel, but LTS is probably safe enough there: if there’s a kernel CVE, LTS will be updated.
I’ve had trouble with pinning the kernel before, though. Last time I did it, I went several months and forgotten I’d done it, and my system got itself wedged because some package was expecting a newer kernel; it took me a while to figure out.
LTS might be a better option, since that will be caught be dependency management. Pinning can cause version dependency mismatch issues.