Why Are Arch Linux Users So TOXIC?

BearPear@lemmy.world to Linux@lemmy.ml – -27 points –
Why Are Arch Linux Users So TOXIC?
youtube.com

I also want to see how many downvotes i am going to get

55

You are viewing a single comment

Arch is the past, the future wars of toxicity will be fought over NixOS.

@elouboub @BearPear I mean having a declarative system ist kind of nice, but with a Fedora Silverblue like system you have most of the advantages of Nix as well.

Don't you have to restart the system every time you install stuff because the base system is read-only?

Doesn't allow you to mix old and bleeding edge software in the immutable layer, it's everything or nothing

How can you replace GNOME with Hyprland? Is it easy? And what if I want packages that can only be compiled from source on Fedora? Say I want to use the Starship prompt and I decide on using bspwm with bsp-layout. These are already packaged on nixpkgs, so I just add them to my config, do a rebuild switch, (and possibly an update) and I just log into BSPWM, without the need to restart for any of that. Simple. And if I have a complex configuration, I can just save the files and do vc via git and gitlab, and it's happy days. Also, automatic generation creation and the abilify to roll back if something breaks. And because the config is written in a declarative language, it means you will be told of any errors when you rebuild, but in case any others appear, you can still roll back.

Now all the Silverblue and Kinoite users will start talking about UBlue, and fair enough, you do get a lot of the advantages of NixOS with UBlue, but you don't get all reproducible packages, and you don't get the breadth of packages that you would get with NixOS. And it's a third-party non-native program. While the developer seems trustworthy, it still just creates more work.