Comments by "Zer0" (@ForeverZer0) on "Brodie Robertson"
channel.
-
115
-
47
-
31
-
Oddly enough, switching between Linux and Mac is relatively easy, as they both adhere more strongly to UNIX principles, file hierarchy, the concept of package managers, etc. I would disagree with your comment about things changing too quickly, that is completely your choice. There are multiple iterations of each major desktop environment, but there is nothing so drastic between them which would make someone not know how to use them from one version to another. For people who like things to stay the same, there is Mate, which is based on Gnome 2, which was released in 2002, and is till going strong as a popular desktop. Windows 7 was released in 2009 and is well past its end-of-life and support cycle.
25
-
20
-
20
-
17
-
15
-
15
-
14
-
14
-
14
-
13
-
12
-
12
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
10
-
9
-
I honestly think that for newcomers, it is more important to explain the difference in desktop environments, and worry less so about the distro it is running on. They will learn the differences and experiment on their own in time, but it is not beneficially to overload them with distro names that are all equally meaningless to them. They are going to base their initial experience based on what the DE is, not the nuances of package management, init systems, X11/Wayland, etc, etc., which are foreign concepts to a Windows user anyways.
While I don't neither a DE nor a Debian(-based) distro, my typical approach is to have them look at screens for GNOME and Plasma, decide which they like better purely based on aethestics, and then choose a popular Debian(-based) distro that supports it. They can experiment and distro-hop all they want later, just get them up and running with something that isn't broken, and they enjoy the appearance of.
9
-
9
-
9
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
8
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
7
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
6
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
5
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
4
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
@rjawiygvozd I think it is hard to call it great, or even good, as the idea behind it is flawed from the start. It's main primary selling point is that it tests for longer and is supposedly more stable, but then it allows users to install from the AUR, which is intended for Arch and its packages that are already out of testing, causing actual instability that far exceeds anything an extra few weeks of a testing phase would accomplish. If we ignore this, you are left with what is essentially a re-branded Arch with a selection of software somebody else likes installed for you, and a GUI to downgrade the kernel, which is of course only going to cause instability. It is unironically far, far more unstable than a basic Arch install could ever be.
I prefer vanilla Arch, but if I were to recommend a distro based on it, it would not be Manjaro, but something like CachyOS or Endeavor that actually do it well.
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
3
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
2
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I spent decades hating Vim and thinking people were crazy for choosing to use such an inferior and un-intuitive editor. Somewhat recently I took a second look at it (specifically Neovim), and spent a few days forcing myself to get familiar with motions, learning how to personalize it, and configuring with LSPs, etc., There is no going back to something like VS Code now. My editor is perfectly configured to something that works optimally for me.
I would recommend that anyone learn Vim motions, even if you dislike Vim itself. They certainty don't seem very intuitive at first, especially with most modern software hacing left-hand-centric common hotkeys that use modifers keys, with right-hand combinations being less common due to mouse use. Spend a couple days forcing yourself to use them while working on a project,, and you won't regret it. I can now move around and edit a document faster than a mouse/touchpad by orders of magnitude, one only needs to learn the muscle-memory of the keys.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@rjawiygvozd I personally don't see the relevance of whether a delay is "random" or "curated", it is a distinction without a difference in the context of introducing instability with AUR packages. The wrong dependency version is still the wrong version, whether it is because some arbitrary time limit has not yet been reached, or because a skill group of fine artisans are honing their craft as software testers and cannot be rushed. Dismissing this as the fault of a user for using "crazy nonsense" packages based on your limited anecdotal experience doesn't make less stable for the countless times it has, and will to continue to happen.
The irony I mentioned is that a practice intended to provide stability over Arch has resulted in it being more unstable than Arch.
You allude to these "manual interventions" and how it saves its users from this common problem, and I would direct you attention to the Arch news site where they are listed. In all of 2024, there was a single manual intervention required, a basic chown command. How many AUR packages do you think broke exclusively for Manjaro users in the same amount of time? Tens? Hundreds? Thousands? If even only for a week or so, I am confident it was an aggravation, the point being that one does not have to concern themselves with using "crazy nonsense" packages, they are free to use mesa-git if they want without fear of their distro breaking it beyond its already inherent instability.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
@boredstudent9468 ...and obviously some part of it was freshly not setup correctly. There is no "default" install, you obviously selected options on how it should install, so not sure what relevance "fresh" is in this context. It didn't install itself in a vacuum without your input.
If it is bricking, it is likely some issue with your partitioning and/or boot-loader setup, Could even be UEFI/BIOS or GPT/MBR mismatches, but you didn't mention what specific update is causing it to happen, so no way to say. You also claimed it was an update, but now indicating it is the installation process, and not an update. If you are using grub, try systemd-boot, it is more straightforward for a single OS system, and is less prone to mis-configuration with less moving parts.
You can also just use the `archinstall` utility in the ISO, it will take care of avoiding many foot-guns.
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
I couldn't care less what people wish to use. I was one of those "don't see the point of the Wayland" people for years, but gave it another chance a while back, and ended up sticking with it, as it "fixed" an issue I was having with a particular game on X11. Having been with it for a while and now on Hyprland, I don't personally have any reason to switch back to X11. It isn't that I dislike X11 or anything, it did me good for many years, but Wayland is simply a better fit for me now. For my use-case, it has finally gotten to a place where it is stable and works well, but for those it doesn't, just use X11.
I don't see the point of people taking such strong opinions in either camp, or trying to turn this into a flame-war. If I don't like a piece of software, I simply don't use it. I don't care how popular it is or "what everyone else is using". I am not an X11 or Wayland developer, I have no personal stake in either, and will never understand people getting in heated arguments over "which is better".
1
-
1
-
@zizlog_sound I was not very clear, I am saying that your point of thousands of distros as "not working together" has an incorrect premise. I personally don't see any use for all the distros either, but there is very little work going into one that can't be shared with all others. With the exception of package managers, nearly everything is universal and can be "shared". It may not be accurate to call it "working together", but it surely isn't "working against each other".
A perfect example is Cosmic Desktop. It is being developed for PopOS, but the entire Linux ecosystem can use it and will benefit from it. This is the same with nearly all software. The differences between distros is remarkably small from a development point-of-view. No one develops "for Ubuntu" or "for Arch", they simply target Linux, and it works for all of them. Again, package management is the only notable exception to this.
I very much agree that the huge number of distros isn't very useful, no argument here, but who am I to tell someone what hobby project they choose to develop?
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1
-
1