If I'm being honest, Void is so much better than Arch, wow!


well, Arch still lives on the reputation of what it ones where.
Back then when I started useing Arch, It was heavely inspired by Crux (which where the dist I then switched from). there was a /etc/rc.config which contained roughfly all you needed to edit. It was lightning fast, and truly minimalistik.
what i liked back then was that i didn’t need to configure the kernel by myself and that pacman offered alredy complied stuff that, then, was supriseingly stable at the same time as you got acces to the latest stuff…

not supriseingly, the stability was the first thing that started to show some cracks in the boat hull., there was seldom anything serious, but then they started to mess around with the file hirarky, /bin -> /usr/bin, glibc. they removed the installation script because of maintanse, somewhere in the middle thay splitted up the rc.config file, forced “sudo” apon us, and then finally systemd…

the archwiki is like the giza pyramides, just a gloryius leftover, from a civilisation that ones where. the people that still live there aint fully the same eather…


Can’t speak for everyone, but I’m pretty sure a significant number would, like me, say “systemd” to your first “don’t know” and “rolling release” to the second. Of course “better” is a relative term and for me, that’s been pretty much the only thing that was better. I’ll probably give Artix a try with my next box.

(X) #23

The AUR is awesome ! thousands of packages , not only hundreds ( as void ) ! !

(Kevin Moses) #24

The thing is, I’ve learned that the power of the .Deb package is real.
The problem with the aur is that most of the packages are out of date, or will become out of date at some point.
With a .deb file you are guaranteed to pretty much stay in date.
I’m not necessarily a Debian fan, but the deb file is just too powerful to ignore.
Especially when you get packages that are really difficult to try to recreate.


That wasn’t my experience. In fact, I switched from Debian because some key packages were many versions behind upstream. To be sure, AUR does require maintainers. At one point, I maintained most of the 3rd party OCaml libraries. Users flag out-of-date versions and usually updating the AUR package was merely a matter of changing the version number. If there was a maintainer, it was rare for anything to be more than a few days out of date. Anyway, my experience was quite the opposite.

(Erin) #26

The package gap is not as big as suggested.


I’ve been using Void for 1 week and I think is pretty easy to use, minimalistic environment and a incredibly nice distro name (hehe). I don’t know too much about Arch, so I won’t write about that.

(William Rueger) #28

Erin is probably correct if restricting to the official repos. However, the AUR has 50000 (yes, fifty thousand!) packages.

(oliver) #29

I’m not sure that’s entirely a positive :slight_smile: There are currently 21 different versions of ‘st’ to choose from some of which are at least a couple of years out of date.

(Travis Sturzl) #31

Also loving Void. I’ve been using it for about a week now. Company switched my laptop, and I needed to install linux. My thoughts were immediately to install Arch, but I stumbled upon Void and I heard about it in the past. I used to use runit on a openBSD box I used to hack around on, and I really enjoyed it. Mostly what sold me on void was runit. It helped that it’s a rolling release distro, it’s pretty minimal, and the xbps package manager seemed really solid(and so far has proven to be).


the one thing I was never comfortable with when using Arch was a modest number of packages and anything really useful it was in some user contributed repo where seemingly any old bit mining random Joe or Joanne could contribute packages…


Void is NOT arch!
I believe this topic should be closed.
Sorry, arch fans but,…AUR?? What’s that?
AUR = a place where anyone can upload whatever.

Once again, sorry! I couldn’t resist.


I agree. Why there is a discussion about arch and aur over void xbps?

(Erin) #35