Iāve been daily driving Linux for 17 months now (currently on Linux Mint). I have got very comfortable with basic commands and many just works distros (such as Linux Mint, or Pop!_OS) with apt as the package manager. Iāve tried Debian as a distro to try to challenge myself, but have always ran into issues. On my PC, I could...
Arch is actually not as bad as many say. Itās pretty stable nowadays, I even run Arch on some servers and I never had any issues.
Not even just nowadays. My desktop is running a nearly 10 year old install. Itās so old, it not only predates the installer, it predates the ātraditionalā way and used the old TUI installer. It even predates the sysvinit to systemd switch! The physical computer has been ship of thesisād twice.
Arch is surprisingly reliable. Itās not āstableā as in things change and you have to update some configs or even your own software. But itās been so reliable I never even felt the need to go look elsewhere. It just works.
Even my Arch servers have been considerably more reliable and maintenance-free than the thousands I manage at work with lolbuntu on them. Arch does so little on its own, thereās less to go wrong. Meanwhile the work boxes canāt even update GRUB noninteractively, every now and then we have a grub update that pops a debconf screen and hangs unattended-upgrades until manually fixed and hoses up apt as a whole.
Wanting to improve my Linux skills after 17 months of daily driving Linux
Iāve been daily driving Linux for 17 months now (currently on Linux Mint). I have got very comfortable with basic commands and many just works distros (such as Linux Mint, or Pop!_OS) with apt as the package manager. Iāve tried Debian as a distro to try to challenge myself, but have always ran into issues. On my PC, I could...