My experience is that maintaining any computer operating system is painful--it's just a different type of pain depending on which OS.Second that. I've always been a Debian guy - on all the platforms - but the only way to stay sane is to just not upgrade. The periodic disruptions are too painful.The conservative rolling updates avoid periodic disruptions that Debian major releases cause.
I'd like to switch to a rolling update distro. Sounds like the best of all worlds.
Is "void" like that? Is it arch without the pain that arch implies? (IMHO, arch is just too weird - too raw even for me...)
I think too much changes between each major Debian release to make upgrading easy while the constant churn of Arch is too rapid. For me the rate at which Void Linux rolls along seems like a good compromise.
Having said this, there is definitely an advantage to Ubuntu. The popularity leads to lots of howto blogs and on x86 is one of the few types of Linux for which AMD makes binary packages for ROCm. Unfortunately, after a few tries I've not been able to understand systemd well enough to maintain a computer that relies on it.
Though perhaps not completely reliable
My initial attraction for Void Linux was that it was the most popular distribution on DistroWatch not complicit with a particular set of world domination plans. The fact that it also runs on the Raspberry Pi was an added bonus.Yes, systemd was developed by Lennart Poettering and is maintained by Red Hat, along with contributions from many other developers. It has become the standard init system for most Linux distributions.
It's difficult to know whether it's too weird, but the documentation for Void is not as comprehensive as Arch Linux and that can be frustrating. From a learning point of view, the documentation for Arch also seems better about explaining why and what each configuration option does.
Even so, I'd suggest giving Void a try.
Statistics: Posted by ejolson — Sun Oct 20, 2024 6:03 am