406
Everything was almost perfect. Until...
(lemmy.nz)
Arch is different...
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 21 Aug 2026
406 points (93.4% liked)
memes
22478 readers
5235 users here now
Community rules
1. Be civil
No trolling, bigotry or other insulting / annoying behaviour
2. No politics
This is non-politics community. For political memes please go to !politicalmemes@lemmy.world
3. No recent reposts
Check for reposts when posting a meme, you can only repost after 1 month
4. No bots
No bots without the express approval of the mods or the admins
5. No Spam/Ads/AI Slop
No advertisements or spam. This is an instance rule and the only way to live. We also consider AI slop to be spam in this community and is subject to removal.
A collection of some classic Lemmy memes for your enjoyment
Sister communities
- !tenforward@lemmy.world : Star Trek memes, chat and shitposts
- !lemmyshitpost@lemmy.world : Lemmy Shitposts, anything and everything goes.
- !linuxmemes@lemmy.world : Linux themed memes
- !comicstrips@lemmy.world : for those who love comic stories.
founded 3 years ago
MODERATORS
Why would anyone want to use a distro that can break at any update unexpectedly or have to read articles first to see if it's safe is beyond me.
It's too much of a hassle.
yeah windows do be like that
I've yet to have one of my windows systems brick itself. Several of my Linux systems have.
Same, at-least everything past Windows Vista era of operating systems. I guess Microsoft has the resources to test and deploy to most types of hardware configurations so the chances of getting a borked update is rarer compared to other OS's like Arch and Mint which have a smaller user base but more diverse hardware configurations.
I haven't had a Windows install completely brick itself, but I have seen Windows go into a try to update->update fails->rollback->updates are available->tries to update again... etc. infinite loop.
It's been a while since I've had a Linux system brick that wasn't me doing something stupid, though I've gotten a lot better at handling the occasional minor hiccup.
It's a problem regardless of what OS it happens to. I've personally/professionally found it much more frequent that an update breaks something on linux vs. windows, but it's also much easier to fix those issues & they're rarely the kind of critical failure you get with a M$ OS.
(and if you truly crave stability, Debian is always happy to welcome you back into it's big soft embrace)
Any distro can break at any update. If you've ever done a major upgrade on any fixed-release distro, you have very likely experienced some sort of issue.
And the solution is very simple (and the same for all distros): Enable Snapshots, roll back if important stuff breaks.
Not atomic distros, at least not nearly the same risk. Every update is like a fresh install.
And that fresh install can also just fuck up. Have you never had a clean install go screwy? I know I sure the fuck have a few times over the years.
I've had bazzite kill it self twice so far on an update.
Well if a fresh install fucks up, then that means the distro itself has an issue. It's very different from how updates fail on traditional systems, which are failures of the update system and not the distro itself.
In other words, any distro can be broken, or simply incompatible with your hardware. But atomic distros get rid of an entire class of failures, where the package manager's update system bugs out and breaks the OS.
I'm very curious how this happened since I've never heard of an atomic distros borking on update. I've heard of atomic distros failing to install because of hardware incompatibility, but usually after it installs successfully, it's smooth sailing after that.
That's literally every distro ever. Fuck even debian can break on an update. Things happen.
Man even me mint broke once because of an update and i had to format the PC
No.
I don't have to go read articles about the latest update to see if it's going to break and have to sift through documentation for a fix or a workaround and troubleshoot on nearly every update on Debian. Or Redhat, OpenSUSE, etc.
I wish arch didn't have that reputation because I seldom have issues with it
Its like that subway meme where it goes "my brother in Christ you made the sandwich"
If arch breaks it's 99% of the time user error, and that's ok. But to say it's the distros fault is incorrect imo.
I mean, they earned it...
Flashbacks to when I bought a Winblows Surface Pro 3 tablet that broke on every single update they released for the first year i owned the damned thing
Yeah, idk bro, it's weird to me too.
Some crazy people do this for fun.
I mean, I get the appeal. But I'm to old for this shit now. I have a life I need to take care of.
It just doesnt though. I've used it for almost a decade at this point and it just doesnt.
It's can be fun to plumb the limits of computing and Arch's gimmick is living entirely on the bleeding edge of computing - it's where all the exciting issues are being actively identified and worked on. However, if you're not into tinkering, I agree - Arch is 'C tier' for average users - specifically because of the dangers of playing in deep waters. As an enthusiast myself, I have Arch on my daily driver, but only because I have a NAS, home server, backup strategy, and other Linux machines running Debian, Fedora, and SteamOS at the ready in case I hit one of Arch's infamous 'Bad Days'.