I often hear folks in the Linux community discussing their preference for Arch (and Linux in general) because they can install only the packages they want or need - no bloat.

I’ve come across users with a couple of hundred packages installed (likely fresh installs), but I’ve also seen others with thousands.

Personally, I’m currently at 1.7k packages on my desktop and 1.3k on my laptop (both running EndeavourOS). There might be a few packages I could remove, but I don’t feel like my system is bloated.

I guess it’s subjective, but when do you consider a system to be bloated?

I’m asking as a relatively new Linux user - been daily driving for about 7/8 months

  • 柊 つかさ@lemmy.world
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    4
    ·
    7 months ago

    Bloat is relative to the user. If I have a piece of software installed that I don’t use, it is bloat. If a program has features that I don’t use (especially if they get in the way) they are bloat. Random config and cached files from programs long gone are bloat. It is not really about saving CPU/RAM/disk resources. It’s like keeping my room clean. I also consider any UI element that is not strictly necessary bloat, because it gets in the way, takes up screen space and doesn’t look clean. I have 485 packages on my 3+ year old Artix system right now (and some things I compile). Sometimes it can be higher if I use some extra software. But more than 700 hundred packages will start to feel uneasy. An example of bloat: I used startx to start my X server (like almost everyone else). Then I replaced it with a small shell script (sx). It worked exactly the same for me, I couldn’t notice the difference. That means that everything startx provides over sx is bloat in my case: completely useless. You can see it as a form of minimalism.