• miss_brainfart@lemmy.ml
      8·
      1 year ago

      I compiled Firefox from source on my laptop for shits and giggles one time. Poor i3-5005U took a good 24 hours to do it

  • treadfulEnglish
    231·
    1 year ago

    I’m flagging that AUR package and you can’t stop me.

  • kalkulat@lemmy.world
    243·
    1 year ago

    Ubuntu’s updates keep up with Debian’s snail-like stable version. In over 10 years using Ubuntu-based distros, I’ve seen very few app updates … even between major updates.

    Debian’s unstable may have more updates, I’d guess. (I might actually try Debian 12 soon.)

    And there’s always the PPA route. I’m usually busy using current app versions, and so don’t often understand that ‘bleeding-edge’ approach (esp. with all the memory and cores we’ve got.)

    Gotta admit that Arch is what keeps the Arch Wiki a super resource!

    • Fal@yiffit.netEnglish
      242·
      1 year ago

      I run arch and have VERY few problems. I have way more problems on my work ubuntu computer because I’m forced to add PPAs to get even remotely modern things like git versions that support this https://git-scm.com/docs/git-config/#Documentation/git-config.txt-pushdefault

      I think it’s totally inappropriate to be using a non-rolling release OS as a desktop. You’re way more likely to run into issues when you massively update your system every 6 months - 3 years, rather than keeping things up to date constantly. It’s not like anyone tests the upgrade process on a desktop. They just do it one day. Whereas it makes sense on a server to be more cautious about updates, where there’s presumably staging environments, etc.

      • kalkulat@lemmy.world
        52·
        1 year ago

        Oh yeah, I don’t doubt Arch is solid, just different strokes for different folks. I got a bunch of stable apps I use all day every day to get stuff done, including some coding and keep up. Solid OS for my needs, no racing stripes, does what I need -every- day. I invest my limited OS time in maintenance/backups.

        I recently began moving to Mint 21 from 3 NO-TROUBLES years in 19.3. Install from ISO in 20 minutes, copy my apps & configs over, done. Just as with 19.3. No doubt about smooth sailing. Point releases every few months, done in 5 min. Support 4 more years.

        • Fal@yiffit.netEnglish
          5·
          1 year ago

          I just don’t understand what problems you think you’re saving yourself from. If the latest version of a package has a bug or just doesn’t work for some reason, just install an older one. It takes 2 minutes, and you get to use software from this decade with modern features.

          • kalkulat@lemmy.world
            32·
            1 year ago

            I didn’t mention any problems I don’t have. I just don’t waste time on updates I don’t need. I already have the older one, and it works just fine. (Now and then I hear of a new version that’s better, and switch to it.)

            Besides, we both know that sometimes updating Linux software does create problems … which is proven by the existence of Arch Wiki … and Debian stable … or force us to relearn some ‘improved’ features (prime example: KDE’s ‘Kate’ editor.) And don’t get me started on Gnome.

            Anyway … so long as you’re enjoying yourself with Arch, good for you.

  • Avid Amoeba@lemmy.ca
    13·
    1 year ago

    Ubuntu beta testers wait for 6 months. The rest of us wait for 2 years.

    Beta testers, thank you for your service!

      • rumschlumpel@feddit.deDeutsch
        3·
        1 year ago

        Yep, don’t have the headspace right now to deal with any issues that pop up, and TBH Canonical’s flavor of corporate-ness kind of takes the excitement out of getting updates, too.