I told myself I wasn’t gonna do it anytime soon but I distro hopped from Endeavour OS to Arch with Hyprland in the span of 3 days. Nothing against endeavour. I just tried to customize, broke some stuff and decided to try Hyprland again. I’m quite liking it. It takes awhile to get used to it but it’s fun. I cloned a repo for a customized version of it. I don’t know how long I’ll stick with it but wish me luck!
But I was told by the fanboys that Arch never breaks. Could they have lied to me?
No. And arch never broke on me. But some packages did and lately they were just more of those. Admittedly a few were the -git version. And I just wanted something else
So Arch broke for you.
The OS was perfectly usable, it were just some applications that changed dependency and such. So no I don’t agree that arch broke on me. That doesn’t mean Arch is perfect.
When a package is not working well, the distribution is said to be broken, at least for that package. This is the Debian definition.
The arch definition is “it’s not arch’s fault lmao”
I like the aggression on “fanboying Arch,” while there’s you cherry picking stuff when they’re literally mentioning git packages.
He said “some of them”, meaning not all packages that broke were -git.
I know, but did you ever ask what those packages are? Are they dependencies? Are the packages that broke came from Arch User Repository? Somehow, you immediately ruled out PEBKAC? I don’t know, you’re a Linux user, this stuff is pretty basic no? I don’t get the anti-fanboyism.