Hacker News Reader

Using Arch is a dream compared to things like Ubuntu for me. PPAs and release cycles made upgrades awkward on Ubuntu. I've been a user for 3 years on my work laptop and have had everything be almost completely painless. (One time yay broke something and a python module had to be removed lol)

View on HN

Arch works fine but sometimes I think I might prefer something like Debian Stable + Flatpak because the repos are frozen. Since Arch doesn't support partial upgrades, you have to upgrade the whole system every time a repo list refresh is required, basically. So some days after the last upgrade, some package you want to install is bumped, and a repo refresh list is required, which wouldn't be a problem in Debian. But Arch is rock solid and the AUR for obscure packages is something Debian doesn't have. I might be wrong about this opinion about partial upgrades etc, somebody let me know.

Debian + Flatpak has been my go to for some time now.

That stable base I don’t have to worry about plus up to date apps is living the dream, as far as I’m concerned.

I may need to trailblaze development on a Linux VM at a new job because my rural DSL isn't up to the task of doing everything on my local MacBook like all the other devs. I have a lot of experience with Arch on desktops and laptops. I was leaning towards Ubuntu just due to a vague sense that "more of the important stuff will 'just work' " but do you think Arch might be a better call?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com