>>10868091A) It does.
B) People have to use install scripts on several servers, Arch is not really meant for your personal workstation. You can use Manjaro etc. as others have said.
>>10868635>.until it doesn't, then you'll struggle to untangle a snarl of dependencies and bloat.Coming back to Windows after only a few years of Linux I've had the same experience. It is difficult to get to system to do what you want to.
>Arch feels good when you first set it up because it can be so lightweight and simple, but unfortunately the "rolling release" paradigm is not compatible with actually getting work done. This is just nonsense. I've used Arch for over 6 years as a PhD candidate and later at work. In all that time I've only had issues with failing hard drives. As for "getting work done" it is the perfect system. The convenience of pacman is unlike any other package manager available. Especially when you need to do any kind of development. You have X random problem where you need to merge several pdf files and remove all actives? Well my friend just copy-paste these 2 command lines from stackexchange. Done. No need for the 30 minute process of finding non-malicious .exe's to do one stupid task.
>Imagine having a paper submission due in mere days and your machine won't even boot because you were forced into a full system upgradeIn the first place this can happen in Windows, even disregarding the BSOD days from XP and Win7 there are issues with Windows 10's new update system that could cause the same thing. The safest bet is a LTS linux distro of course, but even then one careless sudo could break your system.
The solution is to use only trusted user space software, ie. minimize sudo usage.
>arch is cool I guess if your "job" is keeping your own pc running. so yeah, never again.Seriously, what the fuck did you install? I autorun most updates with a hidden console every time I boot into my beautiful KDE environment. There is zero maintenance required with Arch.
