I’ve been using debian-based distros for around 2-3 years (Mint, then MX Linux). I also run a simple homeserver using headless debian. I still consider myself a newbie, though ok using terminal. (One challenge is I keep forgetting commands).
I use MX Linux as a daily driver and it works fine. Though, the pain of doing major reinstalls every couple of years puts me off in the long run. I’ve always been attracted to rolling releases but scared off that they will break too often. I don’t mind putting some effort in, but rather have a system that is reliable and consistently works.
So my question is, will it require a lot more effort to use EndeavourOS as a daily driver (compared to something like MX Linux)? Would I end up worrying about it breaking more often? Or is that caused by say using software from AUR? I’m a total noob when it comes to Arch.
I’m thinking I first install endearvouros as a vm and play around with it. But if there’s any advice about making the transition to endearvour, that would be much appreciated.
I run both EndeavourOS and MX(19 ATM) along with a couple of others. So far the problem score (all minor) is MX 3 (2 fixed) and EnOS 2 (both fixed quickly). I have been completely amazed how rare problems are on Arch and EndeavourOS, and how simple to fix they have turned out to be. There are a LOT more updates, but they are generally much quicker to install and can be done when you feel like it.
The only MX trouble (not self-caused, or created by package naming differences) that remains is that I have to shutdown to get out of it - a reboot just restarts MX without going to the system startup… a thing I have seen before and never have figured out!
I doubt you would have much trouble, even given that the documentation style on Arch-based systems can be ‘denser’ with information. Enjoy either way - and a VM won’t hurt to try first.
It’s hard to say whether your system will break, or how often. It depends on a lot of factors.
For me EOS has been nearly as stable as Mint, but maybe I’m just lucky. My advice is to take regular snapshots of your system, so if something does go wrong it will be easier to resolve.
My first Arch install is over 5 1/2 years old; never had a problem beyond an occasional KDE bug here and there. Certainly nothing that ever had my system in an unbootable or unusable state.
I have 5 other Arch installations, ranging from 4 years old to just under 2 years old. Same thing, no problems.
More effort? Yes. A lot more? Probably not. Things almost always break because people break them trying to configure things. If I wanted something that just worked. Run the LTS kernel on the Cinnamon desktop on Ext4. . . enjoy!
Badly designed software (including distros) are problematic, well designed ones are not.
EOS is well built and stable.
MX, Debian & Devuan are well built & stable.
Arch is designed to be a rolling release… debian/devuan ‘stable’ are designed to be bullet-proof/ conservative.
I personally like arch & debian/devuan based distros. Right now I use more debian/devuan based than arch-based. But (and it’s a big but…) I primarily run debian/devuan testing (not stable) and I use dwm or i3wm (wms).
To succeed with either distro environment, most people will find it necessary to be comfortable (willing) to adhere to ‘regular’ maintenance norms. Both distro eco-spheres are well documented and supported. (Note: I’m not so good at doing things mainstream, I build lots of tools to do things my way.)
In the end, if you are willing to learn, are technically engaged, and are open to innovation both arch & debian/devuan linux platforms can suit you well.
If, on the other-hand, you are in anyway fearful of risk, innovation… a stable fixed release version of Debian is most likely a better choice.
Hello to everyone and a happy new year!
I´m new to this forum but not new to EndeavourOS. I used to linux for nearly 20 years and I use EOS with cinnamon since the very, very early days after antergos was stopped.
My opinion is, besides Garuda, EndeavourOS is the most useful Linux distribution you can have! Even you go into serious treble, reinstallation is not a big deal, if your home directory is on a separate partition.
The forum members are very friendly and helpful and you can learn a lot just reading the forum.
I agree with manyroads. Moreover, for those who have the time and resources, having multiple systems, multiple distributions, or preferably both, you can learn a lot and experiment a lot.
I’ve been fortunate to have sufficient hardware resources to do this, and even during a few times where I did not have a lot of money, I did some freelance writing and was actually provided systems from which I could test and compare hardware and software. Often a discarded piece of hardware is sufficient to handle the task; even broken hardware is useful, because replacing one or two parts is surprisingly inexpensive if you have an electronics parts store nearby or available. So if you’re short of equipment, scavenger hunts, discarded hardware, etc. are available - I had a friend ~20 years ago who lived in an area where people would put 3-5 year old computers on the curb with their trash! Some didn’t work as is, but were easy to fix, sometimes with parts from other discarded systems. So it’s worth looking for units that can be used for testing and learning.