stolen from linux memes at Deltachat

  • SamsonSeinfelder@feddit.de
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    119
    arrow-down
    3
    ·
    1 year ago

    Isn’t archwiki one of the most comprehended wikis for Linux distros out there? If anything, the arch-wiki (to me) has often too many answers for the same problem than the other way around.

    • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      56
      arrow-down
      2
      ·
      1 year ago

      The Arch wiki is great, but Arch is a terrible platform for newbies, unless they go into Linux with the intent to do a deep dive into the structure behind a Linux OS.

      • Christian@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        14
        ·
        1 year ago

        I switched like ten years ago because I wanted to learn the details, but in all honesty I still feel like I barely understand anything. Not sure how normal this is, maybe I’m unusually dumb, but I feel like what I’ve really learned is how to troubleshoot and solve issues by reading documentation and tinkering, rather than understanding what I’m actually doing. I’ve had a stable system for years but I kind of feel like if a typical arch forum poster looked my system configuration for five minutes they’d be like wtf are you doing.

        • stevar@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          6
          ·
          1 year ago

          If you know where to look and where to tinker, then I think you have at least some understanding of what you’re doing.

        • Skull giver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          4
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          Knowing you don’t know everything is what makes you smart. Arch helps keep people smart by forcing them to be on edge all the time by feeding everyone the most recent, often not very well-tested versions of software. All the shiny new tech, with some of the sharp edges that still need to be sanded down.

          Every time you learn how to configure a tool or daemon or subsystem, a new, shinier tool comes out, or there’s a major update, or you discover an approach that works better for you. The Linux landscape is constantly shifting. You can bite down and stick with what you know (CentOS and derivatives are great for that!) or you can stay along for the ride.

          Weird shitty configs is the Arch Linux life. The flexibility is what allows you to configure your system in whatever way works for you, and until it inevitably all explodes with some future update, it’s probably best not to touch anything and break your config because there’s a “better” way. Unless you like that stuff, of course.

      • sederx@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        18
        arrow-down
        22
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        Is actually great since it forces you to learn which saves you much more time in the long run.

        But most people can’t see past their nose.

        Edit

        Can’t believe somebody got offended by this…

    • TwinTusks@outpost.zeuslink.net
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      10
      ·
      1 year ago

      It is most comprehended, but for newbie it is too comprehensive. Its overwhelming, I tried to troubleshoot why I boot to black screen even the installation said its successful and there’s no error. I saw solutions that want me edit grub, edit xorg … and some other file that I never understand.

      I understand the wiki is very good and very important, its just not newbie friendly.

    • Hugging Stars@programming.dev
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      8
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      edit-2
      1 year ago

      That’s the issue. Arch and it’s wiki are labyrinths for beginners.

      For anyone not interested in tinkering all-day long they’re better off using fedora, debian or suse.