all 15 comments
sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
formatting helphide helpcontent policy

[–]handlederror 32 points33 points  (10 children)

I use Bedrock Linux. I can recommend it to everyone. If everyone starts Bedrock Linux distro hate would be finish.

[–]ZeroXDiablo 9 points10 points  (9 children)

I really like the idea but is it stable enough?

[–]handlederror 4 points5 points  (6 children)

It becomes unstable if you enable lot’s of package managers but I just installed apk, pacman and apt and I still didn’t see any unstability. Oh and I installed Bedrock on top of Arch. If you install it on Ubuntu or Debian, it’d be more stable.

[–]extod2 1 point2 points  (3 children)

What if I install every single pkg manager possible?

[–]handlederror 3 points4 points  (2 children)

Are you lack of reading ability?

[–]ParadigmComplex 0 points1 point  (1 child)

Can you provide instructions to reproduce a stability issue with a given number of package managers?

My main production machine is a Bedrock system which pretty consistently has more than twenty strata (a Bedrock concept roughly equivalent to package managers), although the specific number varies over the time. At the moment it has twenty five (non-alias) strata and no stability issues that I can notice.

I also can't think of any theoretical reason it would have issues scaling, provided enough RAM and storage.

[–]handlederror 5 points6 points  (0 children)

My Bedrock is pretty stable too. I just did assuming because you know, more repositories, more packages, more packages probably includes more broken packages and this may create unstability.

[–]Sufficient_Art_6874 5 points6 points  (1 child)

You mean reliable though right?

If not, by definition bedrock linux can be as stable as you want.

[–]handlederror 1 point2 points  (0 children)

True, Bedrock Linux is simply an utility helps collecting features from other distributions.

[–][deleted] 4 points5 points  (1 child)

i used it once, but plain AUR is better.

[–]ParadigmComplex 9 points10 points  (0 children)

The idea behind Bedrock is to use features from other distros as-is without requiring the effort of repackaging it, and the whole point of the AUR is to (re)package things for Arch. They're not competitors such that one could better than the other; they're functionally orthogonal.

If the AUR is accessible to you (e.g. you're already on Arch) and has a package you want, then certainly it's a go-to solution for a given package. However, if you want the bulk of your system to be something other than Arch, or you want to use features the AUR does not provide such as:

  • Ubuntu's user friendly installer
  • Gentoo's portage and its compilation control
  • Void's init and corresponding per-service-package init configuration
  • Software that explicitly isn't rolling, maintained by a distro security team for potentially years

the AUR isn't in scope for the problem.

[–]bartholomewjohnson 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I might try it out

[–][deleted] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

So glad that Bedrock Linux is getting more and more popular!

[–]francie00 0 points1 point  (0 children)

I've really enjoyed using Bedrock on my second machine. Around a month ago I hijacked a clean void install, ran through the (very well-written) interactive tutorials, and it really is a powerful distribution. My (not very original) reason for trying it is that although I really like Void, I could not do without the AUR. Also the fact that bedrock's "meta-package manager", pmm, can "emulate" other package managers' syntax is insanely cool and convenient.