• jwmgregory@lemmy.dbzer0.com
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      7 hours ago

      sometimes you’re working with particular releases or builds that don’t, but like i said i might be the idiot lol.

      i like the concept of arch. i don’t like the way i need to come up with a new solution for how im managing my packages virtually every few days that often requires novel information. shit, half the time you boot up an arch system if you have sufficient # of packages there is 9/10 times a conflict when trying to just update things naively. like i said it’s cool on paper and im sure once you use it as a daily driver for awhile it just becomes routine but it’s more the principle of the user experience and its design philosophy that i think might be poor.

      arch is for techies in the middle of the bell curve imo… people on the left and the right, when it comes to something as simple as managing all my packages and versions, want something that just worksTM - unless i specifically want to fuck with the minutiae.

      • Feyd@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        2
        ·
        4 hours ago

        conflict when trying to just update things naively

        Sounds like AUR problems. IMO using AUR helpers that tie AUR packages to your full system update command is a trap. AUR never professed to be a stable repository (in fact it’s the opposite). AUR has a place, but it should be used sparingly and thoughtfully.