|
|
|
|
|
|
by ssl-3
517 days ago
|
|
|
Perhaps off-topic, but as someone who shares dissatisfaction with all things Poettering: Using Void on my main desktop has been fun and I've learned a lot about how modern Linux systems fit together whether I liked it or not, because the instructions for using ZFS root at that time involved starting mostly from scratch. But I feel like a lot of people who use Void are using it mostly-headless, and that this means when something does go wrong then I'm in mostly uncharted territory. How does Alpine compare in the day-to-day business of using a computer, do you suppose? |
|
|
This is why I used Slackware 20 years ago. Slackware then tried to compete with Ubuntu and Fedora and IMO lost its way.
> How does Alpine compare in the day-to-day business of using a computer, do you suppose?
For day to day usage I think there are similairities, but I can share some reasons I prefer Alpine:
- Not rolling release, possible to stick to a version and just get security updates
- Focus on minimization. A minimal Alpine install is about 500mb, 700 after I install X and my WM and a few other core things. A void install was something like 1.2gb even trying to keep it minimal.
- Because Alpine, IMO is more dedicated to musl, the ports to musl have more care behind them and seem to work better, just anecdotal maybe biased experience.
- I prefer apk over xbps, one thing xbps can't do afaik is search files in packages, e.g. apk search library.h will return a result if it exists.
- I still feel void gets in the way more than it needs to. Installing or overriding a bootloader and custom kernel was easier in Alpine then void, only barely, but enough I noticed.
That's probably it.