You're viewing a single thread.
I've used arch on one machine now, am a total noob to it, and I really like it. I see what people are raving about and I see no reason to shit on it. I don't really care if 6 years ago some people were annoying about it
Arch is good, no doubt 👍.
Void is better 😁.
How?
Faster, more stable, no systemd, supports musl and architectures not usually supported by most distros. It's probably the most stable rolling release distro out there.
What is the benefit of no systemd?
It's too popular and it works too well.
Not true, doesn't work well at all. It's bloated and full of bugs.
What are the systemd bugs that are so bad? I kinda get the bloated comment, but I don't really mind when it serves its purpose
Closing handles on services that for god knows what reason, just hang. Also stopping and starting services again doesn't always work as intended.
That's interesting. I've never had any issues with systemd directly mainly with poorly setup default configs I'm a big fan of a centralised place to manage services. Works super well with podman quadlets
But I'm not too invested use whatever works for you I reckon
I'm also a fan of centralized places to handle things (I prefer having just one package manager, not the package manager and flatpak and pip and god knows what else), but there are other init/service managers.
I literally haven't run into a single one in the whole time Arch has been using it.
(I installed Arch shortly before it switched to systemd and have been using it since without pause)
You must be running hardware not older than 4 or 5 years. Try running it on hardware 10+ years old.
The main benefit is that when people get tired of distro flame wars, they can move on to init system flame wars.
With the price of energy being what it is, people need the systemd flame wars to keep them warm!
No, I just don't like systemd. It's bloated and full of bugs. Just because almost every distro out there uses it, doesn't mean it's good.
I'm feeling warmer already, thanks!
OK, I have to admit, i kinda fell for it 😂.
It made me chuckle, so thanks for that!
Boasting, mainly.
I have no horse in this race, I don't have strong feelings about it either way as long as it works. But I can't help but notice that OP skipped replying to me.
OP said “bloated and full of bugs”.
I've been using Arch since shortly before they started using systemd and literally never ran into a systemd bug.
I have no clue at this point what “bloated” means. Maybe if everything works and you don't have to hack up your own solution all the time, that's “bloat”?
Oh great so now i have to unlearn systemd again?
Runit is even easier than doing things in systemd.
It really is that easy. Runit is probably the simplest init/service manager there is out there.
Here is an alternative Piped link(s):
https://piped.video/PRpcqj9QR68
Piped is a privacy-respecting open-source alternative frontend to YouTube.
I'm open-source; check me out at GitHub.
Does it support glibc while it supports musl?
Yes. From their website:
C library diversity
Void Linux supports both the musl and GNU libc implementations, patching incompatible software when necessary and working with upstream developers to improve the correctness and portability of their projects.
"Patching incompatible software"
What does that mean? If glibc is supported why there is a portability issueand requirement of patches?
Presumably so it can work with either libc implementation.
Well if glibc is supported all glibc softwares must work right?? Patching the software to support musl would not be needed if it does support glibc
Even if it's supported, it doesn't mean it needs to be installed in every system. If the user wants to use a Musl-based system, the software working only on glibc needs to be patched. At least that's how I understood these statements.
But the Void Linux team specifically wants to support both glibc and musl
Some patches are there for software that reauires systemd or parts of it.
I have checked the void website and it does NOT support glibc. Here is it:
Wait edit: there is musl variant and glibc variant..
Incompatible software
musl practices very strict and minimal standard compliance. Many commonly used platform-specific extensions are not present. Because of this, it is common for software to need modification to compile and/or function properly. Void developers work to patch such software and hopefully get portability/correctness changes accepted into the upstream projects.
Proprietary software usually supports only glibc systems, though sometimes such applications are available as flatpaks and can be run on a musl system. In particular, the proprietary NVIDIA drivers do not support musl, which should be taken into account when evaluating hardware compatibility.
glibc chroot
Software requiring glibc can be run in a glibc chroot.
They are likely referring to musl. Patches might be needed for some programs to work with musl.
Not just musl, software that depends on systemd (or parts of it) as well.
We also need to patch binaries as well sometimes 😁. It is fun though, cutter and/or iaito are great tools.
Yes, there are basically 2 builds for every architecture. One is glibc, the other is musl. I haven't used the musl builds that much, just toyed with them a few times (mainly because of lack of software), but if you only use open source software that doesn't specifically depend on the GNU toolchain, yes, you can daily drive it, no doubt there. And yes, it is faster than the glibc builds.
Yeah different builds. Not what i expected
Many programs aren't packaged for Void though
Repackaging is easy though with xbps-src.
Tell me more about it. Let's say I have an Arch (AUR) package that I want to repackage for Void, how do I do it?
The syntax is a bit different, but everything else, more or less the same. In fact, if you just wanna repackage a deb or an rpm, it's even easier than in Arch, xbps-src can handle deb and rpm automatically, it detects dependencies and does repackaging on it's own. You basically just have to feed it the deb/rpm file in a one liner, that's it.
I should probably give an example. Here is the template file (they're called templates in Void) for Viber. You basically just feed it the deb, do a
vcopy(copy operation specific to xbps-src) and that's it, everything else regarding the repackaging is done automatically by xbps-src.Thanks for the explanation. How does xbps-src handle dependencies? I.e. does it somehow detect the dependencies in the original package and find corresponding Void Linux packages? What about dependency versions? What happens if a dependency is not available in the Void repos?
How does xbps-src handle dependencies?
Regarding feeding it rpm/deb packages, it reads the dependencies from the deb/rpm package and uses the equvalent names in shlibs (shared libraries). That's basically a list of libs that some applications expect to find, so xbps-src just makes a symbolic link to the equvalent lib with the name that the app expects to find. Look at the example I gave above with libtiff.
Regarding everything else built from source, there are 3 types of dependencies, since the packages are built in a chroot: hostdepends - dependcies that are requires by the chroot system, makedepends - dependencies that are required to build the package, depends - dependencies that are required to run the package. The ones that are required just to run the thing are the just depends, the other 2 are required for building only.
What happens if a dependency is not available in the Void repos?
You find the equivalent lib in Void (the xtools package is a great help for a lot of things, including repackaging), add it to shlibs and that's it. If it's proprietery or Void doesn't have it (higly unlikely if it's open source... I have yest to run in a case like that), you have to put in the template as a distfile (if proprietery and only binary versions are available), or you have to compile from source (also done automatically by xbps-src once it detect there are distfiles for the lib and is not present in the repos).
Building from source is also easy in most cases (when no patches need to be applied). xbps-src has build styles (gnu-make, meson, etc.), so you just define that in the buildstyle parameter and it does everything automatically, including adding missing build dependencies.
xbps-src goes through a lot of trouble to make packaging and building as automatic as possible.
Gonna give it a try one day
Interesting. I will have to try it some time. I just know on my raspberry pi 5, out of the few OSes I could get to run on it, Arch was the fastest and smoothest running, and gets updates all the time. All this, even though rpi5 is not even officially supported yet!
Void runs even faster, I've tried (on an older RPi, but still).
How is it faster? You mean every program runs faster or what?
No, just bootup and general responsivness of the system. Software is still compiled by the ssme compilers used in other distros. Everything is not magically faster.
Though on the musl build, yeah, it is faster. Trouble is, you can't run glibc software on it. Through chroot, yeah, but natively, no.
- The package manager is extremely fast
- The lack of systemd reduces startup time
- The musl libc marginally speeds up programs
It's a bit tounge in cheek, nobody actually got mad at the arch namedropping. More like "I'm a platinum level player in LoL". Lol.
I always got the impression that it was more of an "Oh god one of THESE insufferable people". I'm just saying from my experience -- they have a point. Arch is pretty nice.
Lel
Damn you're calling me out. It's emerald now.
What's so good about it?
The existence of ArchWiki and the Arch User Respository (AUR). And rolling releases, if that’s your thing.
Basically just the fact that it's very lightweight, I was able to install it on an rpi5 (not officially supported), install only what I needed, and was able to resolve all the issues I had for my niche use-case.
There is a quite noticeable difference in how snappy it feels versus the official rpi OS. Arch runs way zippier on it. Those devices are a little limited hardware-wise so it makes a big difference in what it feels like to use that system.
I also like knowing that the updates flowing in so quickly, I get the latest fixes and new features before I would on any of the other distros I've used. I have always been a little scared of rolling releases but over the last couple months I haven't seen any breakages yet so fingers crossed! A lot of people have tried to tell me rolling release can be solid, but I was skeptical.
snappy it feels versus the official rpi OS
I blame the desktop manager. Once I ditched the default von on the pi, and replaced it with standard gnome, the pi became almost as snappy as my regular notebook.
in general: standard debian should be exactly as light-weight as arch.
Oh I misread what you wrote in the first paragraph. Yeah I actually did try that route too, installing Gnome on PI OS lite. I used this guide: https://forums.raspberrypi.com/viewtopic.php?t=276512
It actually was pretty slow for me for some reason. I had some weird crashes and things too, so I abandoned that.
for me it was on a pi5. maybe the amd64 was what made it work for me? idk.
Good to know. Yeah, I actually did try to install debian iirc but I didn't have any luck.
It fits me