Is there a very barebones/modular distro with great community with very long/slow update cycles?
by linuxuser371038 from LinuxQuestions.org on (#6ND1X)
I originally jumped into using linux around 8 years ago and chose arch for the main reason I had read that it was a very light, modular distro.
I love it for that reason and the great and super knowledgeable community but what really bugs me is the super fast update cycle and the forced full upgrades.
I have tried to avoid upgrading, sometimes leaving it for maybe a year or more, but usually sooner rather than later you want to install a new package and it won't work because of conflicts/dependency issues because 'partial updates are not supported'. This is usually the reason that forces me to do a full upgrade.
On the other hand if updating more regularly you still end up with a broken system to a greater or lesser degree often due to bleeding edge new packages and compatibility issues with others that have not implemented the new changes.
I am very much of the "if it ain't broke don't fix it camp" so arch is the worst distro for my preferences in that sense. On the other hand it suits me for being very modular and lack of bloat unlike ones like ubuntu.
I have not looked into others much over the years so really don't know if there would be better alternatives for my use case which would give the modularity but with glacial updates.
I know debian is more like that in regards to the release cycle but is it as stripped down as arch if you want it to be? I know at one point I was considering it for the same reasons but at the time I was doing a lot of coding which required a few cutting edge packages. At that time arch made more sense after consideration because 99% of things are already in the pacman and what isn't there will be an aur for it. Debian on the other hand I found myself having to scour obscure repos or even build from source.
So the newness factor of arch was in my favor at that stage but now I no longer have those requirements as that work is long completed so maybe debian would be a better fit for me now.
I have used it a bit on remote servers when arch was not an option to install out the box and found it pretty good in that regard.
Any others that might suit better?
It must also have a strong community to help with issues which arch has been great for even if they are often grumpy and do not suffer fools gladly :). I imagine the average archer to be like real life versions of Gilfoyle.
I love it for that reason and the great and super knowledgeable community but what really bugs me is the super fast update cycle and the forced full upgrades.
I have tried to avoid upgrading, sometimes leaving it for maybe a year or more, but usually sooner rather than later you want to install a new package and it won't work because of conflicts/dependency issues because 'partial updates are not supported'. This is usually the reason that forces me to do a full upgrade.
On the other hand if updating more regularly you still end up with a broken system to a greater or lesser degree often due to bleeding edge new packages and compatibility issues with others that have not implemented the new changes.
I am very much of the "if it ain't broke don't fix it camp" so arch is the worst distro for my preferences in that sense. On the other hand it suits me for being very modular and lack of bloat unlike ones like ubuntu.
I have not looked into others much over the years so really don't know if there would be better alternatives for my use case which would give the modularity but with glacial updates.
I know debian is more like that in regards to the release cycle but is it as stripped down as arch if you want it to be? I know at one point I was considering it for the same reasons but at the time I was doing a lot of coding which required a few cutting edge packages. At that time arch made more sense after consideration because 99% of things are already in the pacman and what isn't there will be an aur for it. Debian on the other hand I found myself having to scour obscure repos or even build from source.
So the newness factor of arch was in my favor at that stage but now I no longer have those requirements as that work is long completed so maybe debian would be a better fit for me now.
I have used it a bit on remote servers when arch was not an option to install out the box and found it pretty good in that regard.
Any others that might suit better?
It must also have a strong community to help with issues which arch has been great for even if they are often grumpy and do not suffer fools gladly :). I imagine the average archer to be like real life versions of Gilfoyle.