Then again, am I really using these Haskell libraries? I just want to use pandoc. I love Arch, but the organization of the official repos is sometimes suboptimal.
Last I checked (which was some time ago), pandoc-bin doesn't require the haskell dependencies. I saved quite some installation time (and screen space during installation) by switching.
Someone has never done software development or worked on a build pipeline and it shows. Obviously complex software has lots of dependencies especially compiling from source.
or you can't buy if you're not successful enough or you're in the wrong country. For example, in my country, the minimum cost of a 1TB SSD is about $85 and a salary of $2,000 is considered a very successful salary at the upper limit
It's not about storage. It's about complexity getting back at you, for example not knowing what caused a problem because multiple programs are stepping on each others feet
For me it's not about the size, it's about the understanding. I'd really like to understand what everything on my system does and why it's there. It seems impossible with modern systems. Back in the '90s I needed a secure email relay - it had lilo, kernel, init, getty, bash, vi, a few shell utils (before busybox..), syslogd and sendmail. I'm not sure any more as it was a long time ago, but I think I even statically linked everything so there was no libc. I liked that system.
For me it was a problem with update frequency and how long they would take. Once i got rid of my flatpaks and moved to stable firefox i update once a week instead of daily now and it takes seconds instead of minutes. Probably also solvable with auto updates.
You realize you don't have to backup the actual "bloated" programs. Just maybe their configs and any files those programs generate that you'd like to keep, right?
What I find interesting is that no one is asking about the quality of code, nor do they seem concerned about the dependencies but they do care about that one package/app/program of any size they see and don't immediately know why it's there.
This, MFers will have the most top spec computer and worry about bloat while I install random shit for fun on my 320gb had drive that's also my boot drive on my core 2 duo computer with 3 gigs of ram that struggles to run firefox and thunar at the same time (also cinnamon is the best running on my computer from my testing, xfce is laggy af and I'm not even going to mention kde, bspwm or any other since the, either lag beyond usability (KDE) or just straight up crash my computer into tty when i try to launch them (bspwm), one massive note is that I'm using software rendering since the GPU on the core 2 duo is struggling with even drawing the boot screen)
Literally have probably a ton of overlap software from installing the desktop environments and other random (well not very random, stuff I used on windows before) software that I don't bother googling the deleting commands since apt installed them all as snaps because I never noticed in my first three months of use, fuck you Ubuntu, Xubuntu and all other derivatives, this shit makes me not want to use Ubuntu ever again (not like i can, my pc is fucked and no other drive is bootable, i can't even boot an install usb)
to be fair - core 2 duo computer with 3 gigs of ram - you're using the desktop I had in 2009. At some point, do you think that it's time to upgrade? no, wait, I think I had a core 2 quad actually...
I actually wonder if we could ever agree on a definition?
Maybe:
Bloat: any unnecessary, superfluous software, software package, or feature that is unused or unnecessarily inefficient, and/or uses system resources to an unessasary or unreasonable degree.
What do you guys think? Because then we can still argue about bloat and what reasonable is! And that's what it's all about. Arguing for the sake of it!
For me unfortunately it has been
Step 1 install literally the most universally compatible distro possible
Step 2 audio drivers craps out. No fix is available. Trying to apply workarounds completely Bork the system
Step 3 install again. graphics driver is problematic, refresh it giving it MOS permissions. I miss the MOS permission screen at the reboot. Look for how to do obtain that option again. No easy way to do it at all. Bork the system again
Step 4 install again. Notice touch screen support is completely useless, and pen is not supported.
Step 5 Ask myself if keeping a 1200$ computer with tinny audio, no graphic hardware acceleration and a half functional display can be justified in any way. It can't.
Step 5. Back to windows. Bloated, but it works.
Unfortunately system support is still very iffy on some models. I'd really like to embrace the distro life but can't.
I've seen "Step 3: Buy a Mac" plenty of times for exactly that audience. They like tinkering as a college student and when they enter the working world they realize that tinkering all the time impedes their financial bottom line. Then they go from Linux fans to hardcore Linux haters ("it's for playing around, not serious work"), even though a convenience distro like Fedora would have solved all their problems in an instant.
Neofetch is unmaintained btw, fastfetch is a good replacement... for whoever needs that. I wrote my own tool for getting system info and I like my terminals to have free space
You know how some people compete to see who can get Doom to run on the craziest platforms, like a calculator?
Installing Arch with the fewest packages is like that. There's something oddly satisfying about stripping everything back to the most basic level - to make things work for you within the most constrictive environment you enforce for yourself.
It's like eating a spicy shellfish dinner and super gluing your asshole closed.
Started playing with arch this week for the first time. Got a pretty good laugh when I realized that I forgot to install a dhcp client and had to boot the install media again to add networking.
I appreciate what they’re doing and I’m going to keep poking at it, but my first impression is that philosophy is driving and the utility is in the back seat.
So just run archinstall Personally as a relative newbie I found arch a lot easier to deal with than fedora and ubuntu, both of which have had me in dependency hell on previous attempts to switch to linux. Not only that but I have a much better idea of what makes up my system.
It's definitely a philosophy, and you have to understand the implications. But I'm not sure utility is in the back seat. It's just that you personally own your own config.
> Install NixOS
> Learn about Nix
> Organise your dotfiles
> Learn about flakes
> Organise your dotfiles
> Learn about modularisation
> Organise your dotfiles
> ...
Yeah I remember that one time I tried to uninstall Banshee because I didn't want it and Ubuntu's repos were set up that it by default just tried to uninstall GNOME entirely. And it was GNOME 2 so uninstalling it was a bad thing at the time.
You also control what's being installed on other distros. In fact, other distros split their packages in a way more modular way which allows one to pick and choose what one needs granularly. In Arch, the package count is lower because the maintainers don't split stuff up. But you get all the so called bloat when you installna regular package
Flatpaks have helped me a lot reducing bloat, avoiding dependency hell.
That said, probably there's some overlapping dependencies that, if installed in a different way I could save some space, but it's not worth it in my opinion.
I'm also using rootless podman+systemd for certain services, but that's been a mixed bag compared with plain old docker or LXC.
You don't use GNOME to get rid of bloat. You use it to get a fully functional opinionated desktop without tweaking too much.
If you want no "bloat", whatever that is, use some minimal compositor like Sway or something.
Personally, I say: Give me all the bloat, I love it! I love every cool and quality of life feature there is. I have enough space on any desktop computer.