What is your opinion about Arch?
@urusan They have a great wiki, I wish it focused on a distro that didn't make so many things unnecessarily hard (jesus christ that package manager, I think I might find the official *Windows* package manager less objectionable?!) but maybe it's everything being such an uphill slog through a minefield in a thunderstorm that helped create such a wiki? Certainly the previous (and still very good) holder of that crown, Gentoo, proves it's at least correlative if not causative!
Follow
@keithzg
Gentoo's bugtracker is still a great place to look for patches in case building something is broken, especially on the more obscure architectures like PowerPC, but the distro itself went downhill long ago. I've been a Gentoo user for over a decade, but I won't advise it even to my sworn enemy today. I'm using Void now. Never had an opportunity to check out Arch.
@urusan
Gentoo historical, Arch "reliable"
In more recent years Arch has very much taken that place for me, it's clearly where a lot of the tinkerers are and collectively keeping their notes, and I've even used stuff that's Arch-based myself when there's nothing Debian-based that makes sense at the time (ex. on my Pinebook Pro). But I have to keep an article on my *personal* wiki just to explain to myself how to actually sanely do package management on Arch, ironically one of the things the Arch wiki can't really be trusted with :P
To grumble for a moment, it's especially annoying to me that the Arch wiki goes at length to insist people MUST upgrade their systems regularly and I'm a fool living in a fantasy land if I expect it to be even possible to keep using a system if I don't constantly keep up to date — which, uhh, goes at real cross-purposes with me using Arch-based installs for weirdo devices I don't use consistently, like my Pinebook Pro whose matte screen I find most useful actually for outdoors laptop work during the summer months . . .