CachyOS is the most stable distro I've ever used. It's been like 20 months or so, and I've had exactly a single issue, which resolved itself in like 3 days (kde bug that got fixed quickly and wasn't a big deal either). I have zero problems with only having outdated software in the repo, which is something I can't say about any other distro I've tried. It's the ONLY one where that's the case (obviously would apply to base arch as well).

I have no idea what kind of problems people keep having that leads them to calling it "unstable". I certainly haven't experienced this at all.

I let my partners PC go for 6 months without an update on cachy. It updated in one shot with no issues.

The general type being the type that pushes back against your bullshit? Yeah I bet you really don’t like that, huh?

So to summarise, they don't like cachyos because if something goes wrong, you have to roll it back Vs bazzite where if something goes wrong you roll it back. Great, that clears it up.

I wish I could double upvote this. I've been using vanilla arch for years and found that Cathy's edge is more in the eye of the beholder. I've yet to find a measurable difference and on my hw there is almost 0 improvement with using cachy over vanilla arch.

Bazzite is a bloated mess. They put everything in a 7GB iso, lots of things consisting of 1 line of packages to install.

The immutable part has never held any water for me,as I guess if people are afraid of their OSes, maybe that OS is just not for them. No shame in using Windows or MacOS.

Doesn't help that the one time I tried to install bazzite and used LACT,causing a crash, resulted in my Bazzite install somehow removing all installed programs - I might have just been unlucky with a specific version,but that was the first impression I got from it and it was a nasty one.

Edit: words

Edit2: I'm not gatekeeping anything. I just think that people should make up their own minds and stop spreading useless information.

What was the non-determinism in compilers? Honest question. Like, where does it comes from?

If you had a bug in a compiler, and a code that caused it, would it, for the same input and architecture only show some of the time? Does it included randomness in how it handles output?

Being bug-ridden is not the same as non-determinstic, if you can reproduce the bug everywhere and thus fix it, so I'm honestly curious where would the non-determinism of compilers come from.

So many words just to say "I use Arch, actually." ;)

I'm getting tired of arguing about how Arch has a false reputation of needing more "maintenance", as if you have to update every day or every week or some shit.

Just don't update if you don't want to! Update as often as Debian does, if you so choose! That is the beauty of Arch. You decide.

Sometimes I'll go every day of the work week. Sometimes it'll go a month, or more.

It's been months since I updated my server because Jellyfin had some breaking changes that I haven't been ready to deal with. But it's fine! It's still working! 😆

I wish people would stop perpetrating the lie that Arch somehow requires more "maintenance" than other distros.

My "maintenance" consists of running doas pacman -Syu, typing my password, pressing enter. Oh no, so much maintenance...

Just stop.

And don't get me started on "reliability". 🤡 Ubuntu broke way more often than Arch has, in number of times, and I've been running Arch for probably twice as long as I did Ubuntu. (Like over a decade versus maybe ~5 years.)

I've found Cachy to be very snappy and responsive, but Bazzite offers a better user experience out of the box.

so in short - CachyOS requires you to put in expertise and effort to get a little extra, whereas bazzite is letting the experts at universal blue handle the bulk. is that right?

nyoo :(

I’m used to the sheer convenience of the AUR.

Famous last words. But if you really know how to use the AUR you can create your own PKGBUILDs for whatever it is you want.

What do you want? Your OP sounds like you want to combine different package management systems.

yeah, these things are all trivial to compile.

i suggest not dealing with things like MPR for this; just set --prefix=/opt or something similar when compiling the program, and install everything to /opt.

in slackware this is very easy to deal with, as the package manager is extremely basic and basically just unpacks tarballs and logs its file list somewhere. 'packages' are just tarballs so you just compile anything with a prefix to a temporary dir, tarball that dir and install it with the 'package manager' to keep track of things. this is simple enough so you can do similarly on debian without switching distros or using slackware's scripts

Great, another busy month of patching ahead

I'm as in the cult as they get, so I'm pretty bias, but you could try nix package manager

installable on any distro, and claims to have a larger package library than the AUR.

My reason for hating Ubuntu is snaps

Baby steps

You do that inherently when you are writing the code. Every line you write has already had that focus, because you had to come up with it.

That you should also not trust every line of the compiled assembly after you wrote the code, and check it lime by line, is an extremely stupid argument.

Of course, you should get someone else, with a fresh/unbiased opinion to review your code too, but just the act of figuring out every line you write is in some sense a rewiev, that there is at least a plan or reason why it was written.

AI just randomly generates code without thought or reason, and you have to check everything. Unlike assembly generated from code.

If this was a change just for the sake of change, you would totally have a point!

Then you already know the perils of adding sketchy software sources like AUR.

Microsoft can walk west until their hats float.

I guess I don't really count skimming as reading haha

When looking for readability, maintainability, etc what I mainly look for are design patterns. If you're using the same boilerplate and layout I'm going to start skipping over sections

I also mainly work on high performance embedded systems that are difficult/nearly impossible to unit test and I dont always have line coverage metrics. A lot more verification by inspection in my corner of the world

I guess other thing Ubuntu One provides is kernal hot patching which I do not care about.