===================================================================
DATE : 2021.10.13
TIME : 21:40
AUTHOR :
[email protected]
TITLE : SID TO ARCH
===================================================================
I've been using debian linux since 1995; when I say using,
I mean at least one machine in my house has been running debian
constantly during that entire time, be it a server install running
stable, a laptop or desktop computer for the wife or one of my
daughters running stable, or maybe testing, and always my personal
daily driver laptop running sid. So when I changed my two personal
daily driver laptops (not any of my servers or other family
member's computers) from debian sid to arch linux this past July,
it could be asked, why arch and why now?
I know and love debian. It works, I know all the ins and outs,
and it has never once broken, failed to update, or let me down
in any memorable way; these are the reasons debian is the only
distro I would ever install on a server. Debian is not just
for servers; debian is everything anybody needs, meaning if you
need stable they have you covered, if you need more recent, less
"stale" programs, they have that covered as well, and if you need
the latest and greatest, then they have that too! If you want
a minimal install, or a full fledged out of the box, everything
included, just works distro, you have those options too. And no
matter what you need, they have security covered too. Installing
packages from the appropriate official repo, no matter stable,
testing, or sid, you can rest easy knowing that security has been
handled appropriately.
Debian sid is often called a rolling release, and it's accurate
to do so; outside of the freeze before a stable release, debian
sid is constantly being updated. Other than that, if one sticks to
the official repos, and doesn't mix repos, just about everything
you could possibly need is there, and can be safely downloaded and
installed with almost zero unexpected gotchas to be had.
So why even try something new? Was there an itch that debian
sid wasn't scratching for me? The short and only answer to
the question is that for my personal daily driver computers
running sid, I have been for years maintaining a list (paper
and electronic) of packages that were installed from source and
outside of the standard sid repos. The itch that arch seemed to
scratch that debian sid does not, is a solution for installing
packages outside of the standard repos using the package
manager. Debian doesn't do this as easily, and more times than
not, it's easier to just build and install from source. With arch
however, using the aur, and the pkgbuild system, everything on my
lists of things installed outside the package manager on debain
sid, could be installed using the package manager and the aur.
Is it perfect? Is it safer? No to both questions. The aur doesn't
feel as safe or secure as debian for sure; but it is just a safe
as installing from source on sid, if you take the time to read
the source --which is something you should be doing every time you
install anything from source. The main advantage with arch and the
aur is that you can install from source using the package manager.
So, for me it's a win: if something is not in the official arch
repos, and it's in the aur (which everything on my lists were)
I can install it with the package manager, which with arch is a
superior user experience.
Just from a more nebulous aspect though, having things installed
more close to source (less patches than with debian binaries) my
system seems a little more lean--it's a feel thing but it seems
a little more lean and a little more snappy. One of the things I
really enjoy about a debian sid install is the minimal netinstall,
arch does this in spades, as you only install what you need and
you only enable or start the services you need as well. With arch
I feel more in control of every detail of my system.
Overall I am very happy replacing debian sid with arch, and I
don't regret anything about it. YMMV
-dsyates
(o\_!_/o)
