I learnt to code before I was 10, why not? Also why not mention the word “syntax”? Kids are just less experienced, but they’re not stupid. They can understand a concept if you explain it to them.

The main disadvantage is that it’s less automated, and also you don’t get automatic updates without any other package management system in place. If you’re using something like e.g. source packages from the AUR then that solves both those problems and there’s no downsides (beyond extra computational power/time you spend waiting) so long as the package maintainer does their job correctly.

Can it mess with my system in any way?

Not… really? I guess if you’re downloading random tarballs off the internet and running make install without checking the integrity or trustworthiness of what you’re downloading then you could get a virus. But if you’re certain the source you’re getting is legitimate, then I suppose the only way building from source could “mess up your system” is if you mess up your system libraries or something whilst trying to install dependencies.

Do you have a Ryzen CPU by any chance? I had an issue like this for ages and it turns out it was a faulty Ryzen power state that was disabled by default on Windows, but not on Linux. If this happens to be your issue, there are ways you can disable the power state in software: https://wiki.archlinux.org/title/Ryzen#Soft_lock_freezing

What really? I thought the screenshot looked like electron/web app slop but I was like, maybe they’ve just gone for a “modern” gtk/qt theme. It’s actually just a Firefox PWA?

I use catgirl

If you want a gui editor maybe Kate?

Thanks, didn’t realise I could do that!

I continue to fail to see the issue with the author, the person whose actual labour goes into the software, not your labour, deciding that they are fine with their source code being used in any way the general public sees fit provided they simply credit the author and provide a copy of the MIT licence. If I give you something, you’re not stealing by accepting my gift. They’re choosing voluntarily to make their source code available under such a licence. If they weren’t okay with that, they would’ve chosen a copyleft licence.

And you’re dismissing their voice as irrelevant, but as the consumer of the product, their voice is most critical

That seems insanely entitled, but you’re allowed to not use non-copyleft software if you really care that much. The authors of permissively licensed software aren’t forcing you to use their software.

There are plenty of valid reasons to license a work as MIT or BSD or similar. Firstly, libraries are almost always going to be permissively licensed, not just because it allows proprietary software to use those libraries, but also because it allows permissively licensed FOSS to use those libraries. If I want to use a GPL library, it’s not just that I have to make my software FOSS, it’s that I have to make my software GPL specifically. If I want to make a FOSS MIT program, I can’t use any GPL libraries.

Secondly, sometimes it’s because, well, as the licence text provides, I don’t give a shit what you do with the code. I write lots of little tools that are just for myself and I share them in case they’re of use to someone else. If some big corpo uses it in their proprietary money-making machine it’s no shit off my back. It was just a little tool I wrote for myself and it doesn’t affect me if other people use it to make money.

I think GPL is reasonable if a lot of labour goes into a project, and you’d be discouraged from working on it if someone was leeching off of it for their proprietary software. But my MIT/BSD code requires 0 maintenance labour from me, and I don’t care to control how other people use it. That’s the whole point of MIT/BSD/Apache/etc. It’s the “don’t give a shit” licence.

Author: “I consent to my code being used for proprietary programs!”

Compant: “I consent to using this FOSS code in my proprietary program!”

You for some reason: “I don’t!”

Most GUI package managers are just wrappers for the package manager CLI.

Nushell looks cool but I prefer to stick with the POSIXes so that I know my scripts will always work and syntax always does what I expect it to. I use zsh as a daily driver, and put up with various bashes, ashes, dashes, that come pre-installed with systems I won’t be using loads (e.g. temporary vms).

who were originally unhappy that I formatted away their Windows partition

?!?!?? You can’t just do that without telling someone? What about their files?

Funnily enough one of the points where Arch distinguishes themselves from other distros is that they’re not strict about only including free software in their repos and are completely fine with including proprietary software alongside foss. There’s Parabola if you want Arch but with a strong political line on free software

Do people really make Arch their personality? Ive been using Arch-based distros since forever and never really met someone like that. I thought it was just a meme.

I like the minimalism and ability to control more parts of your system as opposed to an automated install process doing everything for you. But you don’t have to do that much manually. The main pacstrap step basically sets up your whole system anyway. It’s not that different to other mainstream distros. I have always just used it like any other distro.

Edit: Forgot to mention that the bleeding-edge packages and AUR are nice features too. And being rolling release to a lesser extent, just my preference.