Hello everyone, lately I got really into Linux. I installed it in every machine I have, but I still had to try Arch. From what people were saying online I thought that it was going to be a hard and impossible task. So I bought a Thinkpad for a hundred euros (x260 if you’re wondering) and I followed a guide on how to install Arch. I thought I was going to be using the terminal all the time, and had to type everything. No black screen of death, no prompt saying “Are you awake?” Matrix style, the pc didn’t breack, reality didn’t bend and just following simply the guide I had Arch running in fifhteen-twenty minutes no problem. Only the Network Manager wasn’t on were I rebooted after installation but it took five minutes to search online how to fix it. Everything works: bluetooth, internet, apps and so on. I could leave it as it is and I could just use it as any other pc. So all I’m saying is that I’m having a great time with Linux distros, the pain to learn how install repository and other things is really worth it. Every time I learn something more about my computer puts me more in control. So thank you Linux and its community.
Welcome :) The myth that “Arch isn’t user-friendly” will probably never die — and neither will “Arch is unstable.” I’m honestly relieved you didn’t dare push the door to join us 😏
If you ever switch machines, you can check how Arch is supported on tons of laptops here.
The reason people say that Arch is unstable is that you are expected to read the news on the website before every update or else your system is liable to be broken – and sometimes it will break in spite of that. Oh, and the expectation is that you’ll be updating multiple times per week, and if you don’t, you will soon be in a situation where to install any package you must update your entire system.
Most other distros place no such expectations on the user.
I would also add that it heavily depends on the setup a user is running. I had been running Arch with XFCE and dwm for years on a machine with a Nvidia card and I can count the number of issues I had which were not induced by my wrong-doing with three fingers. When I switched to Plasma Wayland on my new machine I faced more issues in one and a half years than with my old setup. Also, none of these issues were mentioned on the news section but were due to Plasma updates. There are just too many moving parts under heavy development with such a big DE and Wayland is also not quite 100% there yet, so for some people it can seem like Arch is rather unstable although it still is a heavy generalisation.
To be fair, you don’t need to update your system to install a package, all you need to do is run the update command just to sync up the database, then cancel out when prompted.
I’ve gone multiple weeks/months without updating and everything was fine.
I’ve been using Arch for over 15 years, and honestly, I never check the news before updating. Once in a while, I’ll get an error — maybe once a year — and the fix is always just running a quick command I find on the Arch site or the package page. Takes seconds, no drama.
I’ve only managed to break my system twice, and both times were 100% my fault. Even then, recovery was easy: just chroot in and run one command.
As for updates, doing them regularly (daily, weekly, or monthly) is recommended. No need to go crazy with updates. Too frequent updates are actually discouraged. Arch is a rolling release, so your packages and dependencies get updated together — meaning things don’t randomly break. Skipping updates won’t nuke your system either, and if something ever goes sideways, you can just downgrade and be back up in no time.
This has been my exact experience as well. I run updates whenever I log into the machine. Sometimes daily other times monthly depending on the computer, and very rarely have I run into errors.
One time I did not update an arch system for something like 6 months… You can’t immagine the troubles I needed to go through to get it into a working state.
Interesting. I once didn’t update the arch system on my laptop for several years, while it was sitting in a drawer. Had to manually update the keychain but besides that the update just worked
it’s funny because once you start using other distros you quickly realize how easy Arch actually is. I find Arch more straight forward and easier to use that Ubuntu. Ubuntu makes me want to rip what remaining hair I have out.
My impression was always that the biggest issue is needing to pay attention to, and sometimes intervene in updates, is that not a thing with arch anymore?
The difference is rolling vs stable release.
Debian 13 is out, and it will stay exactly the same Debian 13 that it was when it released, even 5 years from now. The only changes are bugfixes, security patches, etc. No new features. This means you can basically do unattended
sudo apt update && sudo apt upgradewith no problems. By the time Debian 14 comes out, there will have been a ton of changes to upstream software, Updating from 13 to 14 might be a one-click fix, or it might take effort fixing configs and ensuring the new software works.Arch Linux is rolling release, it does not have version numbers, and does not hold back a major package update just “because it changes things”. This means basically every update might change things, and that can require intervention. If the Arch Linux team is aware of required intervention, it will be put on the Arch News. This is often just one or two commands. The possibility of intervention being required means unattended upgrades are a no-go on Arch, but that’s pretty much it.
If you don’t update your system for say, a year, everything that’s changed in that time will change all at once. This is often still a few commands to fix, but could be more depending on what updated exactly. Updating regularly is reccomended, because it’s easier to tell what exactly changed between updates, and thus easier to track down where a problem originates from.
For general users, updates changing things is pretty much never an issue, which is why typical end users always use the word “stable” to convey it’s more colloquial meaning of “not going to break on me”, rather than the technical definition sys admins use it to describe.
If arch didn’t have breaking changes I don’t think users would ever really mind it being rolling release, which is how you get the term “stable rolling release” for rolling distros that hold updates for long enough to generally prevent breakage, like void or tumbleweed
To the original commenter’s point, as a more design and ux person I think being able to do unattended upgrades and not get any errors or stuff you have to fix is kinda important. Which is why I find it a tad irksome when technical folks act like everyone and their grandma should run arch cause it’s never given them issues. It is awesome that it sounds like it’s improved so much though!
Maybe I’ll try arch some time and see if I’ve progressed enough to not find managing my system a bit more bothersome
As an Arch user, man I hate when people are like that. Arch certainly has a specific target audience. If you (the individual) are comfortable with a distro, and it works well for you, it’s a good option. If Arch isn’t that, then it’s not a good option for you. Some people don’t understand that even the “once a year single command” maintenance is too technical for most.
Having run Arch only the last few years, I don’t know how much it’s improved compared to say 10 years ago. I do know on most of my systems I don’t spend that much time updating or maintaining my Arch installations, usually just a
yay, select which AUR packages not to update (the ones I have can have issues updating sometimes), wait for 15-ish minutes (depends how much I have to compile from AUR), and that’s it. From server to desktop, some weekly, others once every couple months. Although I would say it’s more than average, as I have a custom repository with some nightly compiled packages, which has its own issues.I 100% agree with this comment. Also, if that “once-a-year single command” bit was about my comment, I’d have appreciated the shout-out 😄
If not, all good — I was literally talking about copy-pasting a line from the Arch or package page. It’s nothing technical; it’s basically similar as running a
pacmancommand.Arch has certainly a specific target audience. That’s true for every distros. The magic of GNU/Linux — you get to pick exactly how much chaos you want in your life. From super-polished plug-and-play distros to full DIY mode, there’s something for everyone. Nobody should ever be forced to use a distro. Again, it’s a personal choice and the one that will make you enjoy using your system. Arch is meant for people who have time and desire to build their system and write a bunch of config files. In that sense, yeah, it’s a technical distro, and that certainly not make its users anything special. I’m still and will forever be a Linux noob compared to a lots of people.
It does still happen occasionally that updates need some intervention, it is still policy that you should check the blog in case, but it’s only happened once in the last two years for me.
How often are you supposed to check the blog?
Edit: probably every time you’re about to do an update, sorry I’m sleepy lol
Yeah, exactly, when you want to do a full upgrade it’s technically best practice to check if there’s anything which requires intervention. But I never bother honestly, and the one time there was an issue it was resolved by just uninstalling one package for another.