I’m a longtime Linux user, starting back in 1998 with an early RedHat release before switching to Slackware, and then basically Kali for work.

Most recently after getting back into Desktop Linux I switched to Alpine, because it met my needs for how I used to use Slackware. I like as minimal as possible a system, with everything clear and laid out not hiding behind tools or obfuscation, with security in mind.

I did try Void once before, but ran into issues getting some package I wanted to work, and Alpine was working better for me so I stuck with it.

I’m still very interested in Void, but I wonder at this point, are there any distinct advantages it has over Alpine?

  • Communist@beehaw.orgEnglish
    4·
    1 year ago

    Honestly, it’s just a matter of package availability for me, especially since void has a glibc option.

    I used void for a bit but ultimately switched to arch, but on smaller machines that don’t need anything proprietary or complex I go with Alpine. Void had more packages and glibc though, but that for me made the usecase almost identical to arch so I just stayed with arch.

  • knowncarbage@lemmy.fmhy.mlEnglish
    1·
    1 year ago

    glibc & xbps-src are handy to have, the main branch rolls and xbps feels safe to roll on. If you like minimal you’ll likely appreciate runit.

    • lolzacksnyderfansOPEnglish
      1·
      1 year ago

      Alpine has gcompat which has worked well for me, and when I did try void so many years ago, I remember running into some problem after choosing musl only and then trying to get glibc to run after installing glibc packages. It was a long time ago and I’m sure the issue no longer exists though.

      xbps-src does seem nice though, similar to checkinstall which I used to use on slackware.

      Ultimately I just have to give it a try again and see if I like it better or not.