I have had some similar experiences myself. Linux is impressive in that you can break it in an absolutely retarded way and then fix it back up as easily as you broke it, usually after a short period of quickly scanning the Arch Wiki in a panic.
Windows is almost the opposite in that you can fuck it up in an absolutely retarded way, but it would take a genius to fix it, so you just say "fuck it I'll reinstall."
My life on Arch Linux is as follow:
> breaks system, manages to delete the root folder.
It's so over
> somehow manages to cp -a the whole root folder from a btrfs backup
We're so fucking back
Repeat this for eternity. That's the linux life.
zfs rollback pool/dataset/root@date-time
I will, thank you father!
I use Arch on my home computer. It's a binary rolling release for sure, with all the pros and cons that entails, but it has never broken for me by fault of the package manager. It gets called "unstable" more than it needs to be in my opinion. My Arch breakages are pretty much always caused by me being a mongoloid retard.
I've run arch on my servers for years, and it's only broken once through my own fault - I decided to run zpool upgrade on the root (yes, I use zfs on root B) ) and grub did not support new zpool features. Whoops! Nothing to do with arch, though.
If you want something to mainly run a NAS RAID with other stuff on the side forget about DIY stuff and just get a Synology.
There was nothing I could do except remake the pool with incompatible features disabled and reinstall the OS.
Pretty much. KDE is enormously flexible. The notifications system lets you set any type of action when pretty much any type of system event happens.
Same. My main problem with arch is that I use it on my work computer and I hate restarting my work environment.
pacman -Syu.
Me too, but it seems to just be part of the nature of library linking in modern operating systems. Linux just has to be MEAN and not let you hot-reload any part of the system at any time.
