Fuck-up Assessment Form

For a second I thought that the first field was:

IRL nickname: I don't use IRL

110

Nobody should use IRL, it sucks and is way too humid.

25
- Floridean detected
  
  12

h--how did you manage that

65

What's wrong with btrfs?

44

This is a rather old form and in its early days btrfs was not very stable.

73
People don't know how CoW FSes work 🤷.

20
My only gripe with btrfs is that I've had systems come down from a single drive failure in raid quite "often" when compared to other FS.

ZFS is a ram hog but I always could do a live resilvering without downtime.

10
- btrfs's RAID features are not production-ready, and at this point I doubt they ever will be. See:
  
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Btrfs#Implemented_but_not_recommended_for_production_use
  
  https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Btrfs
  
  https://www.phoronix.com/news/Btrfs-Warning-RAID5-RAID6
  
  ZFS is definitely more robust.
  
  1
I don’t think I’d call it anything wrong, but the subvolumes definitely do make it different for installation purposes so that following ext4 instructions for bootloader configs or kernel arguments could put you on the wrong path

5
Nothing these days

5
performance

opening programs was noticeably slower for me

benchmarks confirm this, and I think this is an aspect not discussed often enough

0
- I benchmarked it and it blew XFS out of the water
  
  1

Fucking Allan, always fucking shit up.

29

I liked using Arch, but i got tired of Allan breaking into my house and bricking my computers all the time, so i ended up switching

6
All we wanted was some detail.

5
😬

5

That’s funny and sadly accurate 🤣

25

Please return completed form to /dev/null in order for your fuck-up to be assessed by a professional.

Lol

20

lol
My rootfs has been btrfs up to 2 days ago, when I switched back to TKFS (The King File System, AKA ext4) because I realized I have no use for the features of BTRFS.

17

What is the problem with using BTRFS for rootfs?

5
- I think that this form is actually old, from when BTRFS was quite unstable. That point on the list made me chuckle.
  
  9
- It tends to break when you force power off the machine in my experience, where ext4 is super resilient to that kind of stuff.
  
  Thats my experience at least.
  
  2
Mine's been btrfs for a year now and I too have in no way used any of it's features

2

Pacman -Syyu when you're feeling extra desperate XD

11

I get the feeling. I had a fuck-up directory with solutions for my failed android rooting efforts. I tried to flash my phone with a random recovery image I found in an old FAQ section.

11

I've been trying to decide what distro I want to go with for my desktop (Microsoft recently pushed copilot onto my windows 10). While I like the idea of Arch (fast, lightweight) and the fact that it'd be fully compatible with whatever I get on my steam deck, stuff like this makes me think a Debian-based distro would be better.

(That and the fact that most Linux stuff is designed for Debian and I don't have enough experience to try and rebuild Debian stuff for Arch)

7

The aur usually has what I need, only have had to manually build once... Before I found the aur package. Endeavoros is a good easy way to get into arch if you are worried about the manual configuration.

15
- Alright, cool. Why not Manjaro? I did a quick Google search and saw people saying Manjaro is bloated in comparison to EndevorOS, are there other reasons as well?
  
  1
The Deck is configured by Valve in a way uniquely suited to it, and they also make sure it works properly. It's not going to be the same on vanilla Arch installed by you on your own PC.

Common wisdom for a beginner is to use something like Debian or Debian-based like Mint or Ubuntu because they're popular and stable so you can get a safe start. I wouldn't recommend Arch or Arch-based to a complete beginner.

14
Honestly I’ve found the opposite of what you said, where on Debian based distros I commonly had to go to a project’s git repo and follow readme instructions to build when it wasn’t in an apt repository. Meanwhile on arch, the only thing you have to install manually is yay and then afterwards everything is in the AUR. Not saying that makes arch more user friendly than Debian (obviously), but that one aspect I do actually find easier on arch at least if you’re willing to use an AUR helper.

9
- It's mostly game-related tools that I've discovered typically have Debian versions but no apparent (official) Arch support. Seems like most people who develop modding tools, save editors, stuff like that, mainly use windows and if you're lucky will have a Mac and maybe Debian version
  
  Edit: the windows binaries aren't a huge issue, they usually work in Wine just fine; I just prefer not having to use wine.
  
  4
Oh and another point: on Debian every package you get is Debian. On Arch the stuff in AUR is not Arch and is not supported by Arch, it's unstable experimental stuff and you take your chances with it.

In practice, generally, the AUR stuff trends to mostly work fine but it's never guaranteed. It can and it does break spontaneously from time to time.

This applies to ALL Arch-based distros. So if you plan on counting on AUR to supplement your app needs, please reconsider.

Debian stable has ~100k stable packages included. Arch has ~15k bleeding edge packages included and ~80k "varies wildly" in the AUR. It will not be the same experience.

Debian with Steam and other popular desktop apps (like LibreOffice and Firefox) installed from Flatpak will be a much more reliable experience.

8
- The form needs to add "updated system while not using an lts kernal". (Screen flickering is beutiful on an amd and nvidia duel GPU machine)
  
  1
I use mint. Everything works without too much fuss. Certainly easier than dealing with an endless stream of corpo shenanigans. It works quicker than windows ever did.

8
Linux Mint

3
Debian is nice.

3
There's always Fedora as well

2
Wait until you need to validate the installed state of files on the machine. You'll reconsider Debian like many security people do.

1
- I doubt I'll ever have to do that since I don't really work in software development (I'm guessing that's only relevant in software dev?), but thanks for the heads up.
  
  4
- Wait until you need to validate the installed state of files on the machine.
  
  I don't think I've ever had to do that in all my years of using Debian. What does it even mean?
  
  2
Or... install bazzite on one or both... and use an Arch distrobox to get all the Arch/AUR goodness with none of the system breaking risks. I was on Arch for a few years, learned a lot, but as a first distro ? Your funeral...

1
I used to use Ubuntu years ago. The beauty of that distro is that it will fuck itself up. No action required on your part. Versions after 16 would black screen themselves after an upgrade, or the mouse pointer would go on vacation. Even better, it would say your 100% correct password was incorrect and lock you out.

You’re not really any worse off with something like Arch, aside from the initial install. Overall, less headaches for me.

1