-15
I'd like to get away from "arch bad for new users"
(lemmy.world)
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
this post was submitted on 11 Feb 2024
-15 points (41.0% liked)
Linux
48228 readers
575 users here now
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Rules
- Posts must be relevant to operating systems running the Linux kernel. GNU/Linux or otherwise.
- No misinformation
- No NSFW content
- No hate speech, bigotry, etc
Related Communities
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
I'm in general agreement on that. If the person is coming from a somewhat technical background, or is simply curious about learning the ins and outs of their system, then Arch is as good a choice as any imho.
In some cases, Arch is a better choice if you need more up to date software (although 3rd party packagers like Flatpak appear to solve many of these issues on scheduled release distros as well).
There sadly is a lot of gate keeping in the Linux community which leads to a lot of blanket statements that pervaid discussions, especially when it comes to how best to grow the Linux community. And "don't recommend Arch or Arch bases distros to noobs" is one of them.
Should you recommend Arch to a new Linux user? The answer is never a direct "yes" or "no", but rather, as always, "it depends."