04-12-2012, 12:18 PM
Originally Posted by vansmith
How so? Package repositories don't have everything and I'm not going to wait for someone to add it. For instance, I'm not going to stop using Opera because most repositories don't have it. On top of that, various distro's have "static repositories" that only receive bug fixes during the current release cycle.
This is where Arch is nice - the PKGBUILD system is excellent and having a rolling release means you're always up to date.
True, distro repositories don't have everything. Or in some cases the latest and greatest of package XYX. But is it necessary to have the latest and greatest? Come folks, XP has been around for 10 years and will probably be with us another 5.
Linux folks, at least a lot of them, feel the burning desire to constantly upgrade . Some don't. I got out of that cycle a long time ago. I'm one of those that feel v1.0 works just as well as v2.0. And if my repo does not have v2.0, oh well. So be it. At the very least, if I use a non-repo package it's designed for my package manager - an RPM package or debian package. But tarballs? No thanks. I can do without them. Even Slackware, one of the geekest distro that ever was, recommend
using tarballs designed specifically for their particular distro. Also there are unofficial but approved
third party repos one can use to install other programs.
So, if you can't get a package from your distro repo, stick to a package designed for your Linux OS package manager. You'll have a lot less hassles. Belive me. I've been there.
Concerning 'rolling' distros like Arch and others, I've been on the bleeding edge. It's not fun. Well, it was back then. Of course I was younger and had more hair. But I spent more time fixing things than using my OS. That's another thing I've left behind. I want my OS to work. Don't want to spend my time fixing, tweaking or repairing it.
(Linux user since '97 and still using it)