Linux

47941 readers

1099 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
No misinformation
No NSFW content
No hate speech, bigotry, etc

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 5 years ago

MODERATORS

AgreeableLandscape@lemmy.ml

nooter692@lemmy.ml

MarcellusDrum@lemmy.ml

cypherpunks@lemmy.ml

cyclohexane@lemmy.ml

d3Xt3r

When do you consider a system to be bloated? (lemdro.id)

submitted 6 months ago by governorkeagan@lemdro.id to c/linux@lemmy.ml

103 comments fedilink hide all child comments

I often hear folks in the Linux community discussing their preference for Arch (and Linux in general) because they can install only the packages they want or need - no bloat.

I've come across users with a couple of hundred packages installed (likely fresh installs), but I've also seen others with thousands.

Personally, I'm currently at 1.7k packages on my desktop and 1.3k on my laptop (both running EndeavourOS). There might be a few packages I could remove, but I don't feel like my system is bloated.

I guess it's subjective, but when do you consider a system to be bloated?

I'm asking as a relatively new Linux user - been daily driving for about 7/8 months

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] technom@programming.dev 3 points 6 months ago (1 children)

That's hard to recollect off hand. But one thing I find easier with Arch (and Gentoo, which is my daily distro) is to create complex partitioning schemes (e.g encrypted swap and btrfs subvolume mounts) and boot loader configurations.

Another example is a window manager with a somewhat complex display manager setup and a ton of supporting services.

PS: I don't consider Arch to be the silver bullet. For example, I always prefer Debian for servers.

[–] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 2 points 6 months ago (2 children)

I see. Easier in what way? They all have fdisk and the same basic tools? Does Arch have other tools beyond that which are unique to Arch? Is there a difference how you configure a window manager on Arch and Debian?

[–] technom@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago (1 children)

The problem I have is with the installer GUI. They often don't work well when doing complex partitioning or mounting. Theoretically, you could use fdisk/parted on the live CD to do the partitioning. But the mounting section of the GUI (the part that creates the fstab) still struggles to map these new partitions the way we want it. This happens often when using btrfs subvolumes, LVM, dmcrypt or standard/custom ESP mount points (individually or in combination).

None of these are a problem when you are using a regular terminal shell to install the distros. You can just write fstab manually the way you like. This is a classic example of GUIs being convenient, but CLIs being more complete and powerful.

Theoretically, it's possible to achieve CLI installation for other distros too. Debian, for example with debootstrap. However, those procedures aren't as well documented as for Arch and Gentoo, because you're expected to use the GUI installer. CLI installation just feels natural in Arch and Gentoo.

Another issue I have is with boot loader installation. I have 2 Linux distros (for genuine uses) and a BSD installed. I use rEFInd to manage them. GUI installers replace rEFInd with their boot loader. While this can be reverted manually, it's annoying. But Grub has a CLI option to disable this (--no-nvram).

Does Arch have other tools beyond that which are unique to Arch?

Arch and Gentoo has additional small utilities like pacstrap and eselect. They're not big, but are very helpful when you need them.

Is there a difference how you configure a window manager on Arch and Debian?

I always find it easier to configure things on Arch than on Debian. There are two reasons for this. First is that Arch has an extensive wiki written with the assumption that you'll customize things (which is actually helpful even for other distros). Second is that software on distros like Debian are heavily patched for system consistency, while Arch and Gentoo provide mostly vanilla packages. This means that user documentation from the upstream software developer can be used directly on Arch and Gentoo, whereas you need to be aware of the patching in Debian.

One interesting example of the last point is the recent xz backdoor. That backdoor wouldn't have worked if Debian and Fedora didn't patch OpenSSH to talk to systemd. While Arch and Gentoo also reverted these backdoors, their OpenSSH were never patched and didn't have this vulnerability.

[–] pmk@lemmy.sdf.org 1 points 6 months ago (1 children)

Those are good points, thank you for explaining further.

[–] technom@programming.dev 2 points 6 months ago

No problem!