218
Arch Linux AUR Malware Campaign Hits Multiple User-Contributed Packages (linuxiac.com)
submitted 4 months ago by to c/linux@programming.dev
68 comments fedilink hide all child comments
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
[–] 5 points 4 months ago (5 children)

What makes this a fair argument? Debian not having an AUR analogue? It's a shit response from someone who couldn't even be bothered to look up any information on what the AUR is or how it's supposed to be used. And what exactly is wrong with using debian on a "main pc"? If people want ancient packages with backported security patches they can knock themselves out. It doesn't fit my requirements, but there's nothing wrong with it either.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
    •
  • [–] 1 point 4 months ago* (4 children)

    Its rather subjective but it wouldn’t be the first time updating arch has broken my system and its fair that some people don’t want to deal with that and much prefer some more mature.

    And i have no qualms with people who do use debian for a main system but i do assume everyone who do are retired folk with a long career in computing behind them and aren’t in the market to change to another.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
    •
  • [–] 5 points 4 months ago

    The AUR is not the standard arch package repository and arch as a distro shouldn't be judged by it's merits or dangers. Yes, obviously a rolling release distro is not the best fit for most people, but that's beside the point. Debian is completely fine for people who are looking to replace their windows machine with something stable and don't need ton of exotic software or especially recent packages.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 0 points 4 months ago* (1 child)

    Who is having breaking update issues anymore in 2026? I've been running vanilla Arch for 10 years and the only times that has happened (there have been a handful I guess) the archwiki says "hey there's a breaking change run these 2 commands" and it's fixed. As a beginner on Linux I actually switched to Arch because every Ubuntu issue I googled was 6 to 10 lines to fix while arch was 1 to 3 lines. The only problem is that the OS expects that you be able to read, which is sometimes tough.

    I can't imagine being on a system that is multiple major releases behind on basic things like nvim and python. I guess if you're content not to use anything remotely current it makes sense.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
    •
  • [–] -1 points 4 months ago

    Being behind a few releases isn't that bad, honestly. At least you're certain it's going to be well tested and the majority of problems have been ironed out. And there'll be documentation already on how to fix things or work around certain missing features if that ever occurs. It's much less of a hassle.

  • permalink
  • fedilink
  • source
  • parent