Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

Silent Observer · 2024-09-02 13:35:58

I've been using Linux as my daily driver since 2011 (after one too many encounters with FBI Moneypak malware on Windows XP); I started with Mepis (which later partially merged with Antix and is now known as MX), then switched to Kubuntu in 2014, Ubuntu MATE in 2016, and back to Kubuntu for 22.04. Now I'm getting nags that my flavor support will end in less than nine months -- but I've never had a successful "upgrade" from one LTS version to the next, always winding up with a clean install and spending nearly an entire weekend at it (attempting upgrade, clean installing, and reinstalling many apps from repo and third party sources); it's usually a month or more before I have my desktop back to what I like and find all the small apps I forgot to install during the "upgrade".

I've been considering switching to Debian because I'm really, really tired of being forced into Snap (and using Flatpak as an alternative), but apparently there's still a feeling in that community that a clean install is the best way to upgrade, despite Debian's claims that it upgrades very well. Someone suggested I look at Arch or one of its derivative rolling distros as an alternative to avoid the whole "failed upgrade, new clean install" cycle every two to four years.

I'm experienced (though far from expert) with Linux and have used command line all the way back to DOS 3.3, though I prefer to use GUI tools when available for anything more complex than a single command. I expect to use KDE Plasma 6 as my DTE, and would prefer to install that from the start. I prefer to avoid Snap and Flatpak mainly due to their bloat (Ubuntu forces Snap on users with the result that an OS that used to run for years in a 30 GB partition is now out of space in 50 GB).

Am I barking up the wrong tree in thinking about Arch or one of its derivatives?

Head_on_a_Stick · 2024-09-02 13:43:04

Silent Observer wrote:

II've been considering switching to Debian because I'm really, really tired of being forced into Snap (and using Flatpak as an alternative), but apparently there's still a feeling in that community that a clean install is the best way to upgrade

Not sure which Debian community you are referring to but I used to be very active over at forums.debian.net (I was even a mod for a while, didn't end well) and the Standard Advice during the 8 years or so I was there was that dist-upgrades between stable releases should work reliably as long as the official Upgrade Guide (in the official Installation Guide for each release) was followed carefully.

I have a Debian stable system that's survived two laptops and 4 dist-upgrades. It is still running very well and requires zero maintenance.

ronw · 2024-09-02 14:04:18

Silent Observer wrote:

I expect to use KDE Plasma 6 as my DTE

Then you likely won't be using Debian for a bit. I think even sid is still on Plasma 5: https://wiki.debian.org/KDE

Silent Observer · 2024-09-02 14:28:37

Head_on_a_Stick wrote:

Not sure which Debian community you are referring to but I used to be very active over at forums.debian.net (I was even a mod for a while, didn't end well) and the Standard Advice during the 8 years or so I was there was that dist-upgrades between stable releases should work reliably as long as the official Upgrade Guide (in the official Installation Guide for each release) was followed carefully.
I have a Debian stable system that's survived two laptops and 4 dist-upgrades. It is still running very well and requires zero maintenance.

That's the Debian community I meant, though there is (as has always been the case on Ubuntu/Kubuntu support forums as well) a faction who say "upgrades work fine" as well. As noted, I've never had a successful upgrade on Kubuntu (the switch to MATE was due to a failed upgrade, and I had one going from 20.04 to 22.04 as well).

ronw wrote:

Silent Observer wrote:
I expect to use KDE Plasma 6 as my DTE
Then you likely won't be using Debian for a bit. I think even sid is still on Plasma 5: https://wiki.debian.org/KDE

Okay, KDE 5 is fine, too. In fact, that might let me get back my old favorite Keramik theme (if I can find it again).

Trilby · 2024-09-02 15:01:52

The best metaphor for arch is that of legos. You can build just about whatever you want from it. So it can most certainly meet your stated goals. However, that doesn't necessarily mean it's a good choice. While dist-upgrades would be a thing of the past, I'm not sure that in itself is really good reason to switch to arch as there are a number of other differences and expectations of the user.

Though I would say try it out. You'll know pretty quickly whether or not arch is a good fit for you if you follow the proper installation guide on our wiki.

Silent Observer · 2024-09-02 15:30:12

Trilby wrote:

You'll know pretty quickly whether or not arch is a good fit for you if you follow the proper installation guide on our wiki.

Right, but that assumes I've got a spare machine to put it on, or a good sized chunk of free space for dual boot or VM. I have my desktop daily driver, and a laptop (Core i5, 16 GB RAM, Intel graphics, dual boot with Win10 and Kubuntu 22.04, not much extra space). Oh, and a "spare box" that still has a Pentium II 300 and 768 MB RAM, I forget what video, and an old, old platter drive (haven't powered it up in at least ten years, so the caps may have gone bad). Kept that one mainly to have a spare case or maybe eventually build a second machine again.

cryptearth · 2024-09-02 17:47:43

you seem to know your way around linux - best option: just give arch a try

Silent Observer wrote:

though I prefer to use GUI tools when available for anything more complex than a single command.
[...]
I prefer to avoid Snap and Flatpak

well, as bare metal arch is it has its own shot at this: the AUR - pretty much the playground for anything targeted for arch but not in official repos
as for configuration: for a lot of stuff one can find graphical tools for many things in the aur because in the past someone else already had this idea
but many guides I read often uses bare commands or editing configs via an editor

the archwiki will be your friend - and to avoid the first trap: read the install guide carefully - or you likely end up restarting from scratch at least once

cloverskull · 2024-09-02 18:42:40

I've done the Kubuntu thing recently on a work computer and found my way back to Arch. I also prefer the rolling release style. I'd say that I think *buntu/Debian handle long periods of time between upgrades a bit better than Arch (just my experience) but if you keep your Arch setup relatively up-to-date you should be good.

Some ways I mitigate any upgrade stress with Arch is that I use btrfs with snapshots and also I have a package installed which requires me to read any Arch news items before it'll allow me to do any sort of upgrade - I can't remember the name of this package off the top of my head but if I remember it I'll follow up.

Silent Observer · 2024-09-02 19:38:34

cryptearth wrote:

many guides I read often uses bare commands or editing configs via an editor

the archwiki will be your friend - and to avoid the first trap: read the install guide carefully - or you likely end up restarting from scratch at least once

That's the case with Debian, Ubuntu flavors, and most other Debian based distros too, mainly because the command in shell will be the same for any OS with the same architecture. I have no problem with copy/paste commands as long as I understand what they're doing before I paste...

Yeah, having an installer that can easily go very wrong isn't a beautiful feature, IMO -- but that pretty much applies to anything other than Debian, *buntu, and their derivatives. Arch is a little further off that "suitable for the naive user" path, as I understand it.

cloverskull wrote:

Some ways I mitigate any upgrade stress with Arch is that I use btrfs with snapshots and also I have a package installed which requires me to read any Arch news items before it'll allow me to do any sort of upgrade - I can't remember the name of this package off the top of my head but if I remember it I'll follow up.

I know nothing about btrfs, other than that it's new enough Debian upstream didn't even have good support for it until 2022. I've been using ext3/ext4 on anything I formatted new for Linux since 2011, and been very happy with it (for instance, how well it recovers from power drops while working). I don't really understand what journalling does, but I've found this file system much more resilient than either FAT* or NTFS (which between them I used for twenty-plus years -- and never had a clue how NTFS worked, either).

Arch Linux

#1 2024-09-02 13:35:58

Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#2 2024-09-02 13:43:04

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#3 2024-09-02 14:04:18

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#4 2024-09-02 14:28:37

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#5 2024-09-02 15:01:52

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#6 2024-09-02 15:30:12

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#7 2024-09-02 17:47:43

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#8 2024-09-02 18:42:40

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

#9 2024-09-02 19:38:34

Re: Considering transition from Kubuntu to Arch

Board footer