Here's a question. Should i go Wayland with Weston or stick with X? I'm setting up Arch Linux as a webserver, probably with Cinnamon. Won't do much else with it.

And what do you need a GUI on a server for?

If it's required take X. Servers are for reliability not for beta testing I guess.

@ctwx It's my first Arch setup, so I would like to do that stuff as well. You make a good point on reliability, so I'll go X.

@theuser you can always switch later on. 🙂 Or you could try it in a virtual machine.

Arch on a server? Why?

Arch may very well be the worst choice for a server

In opinion any distro can be a good server system. You just need to handle it the right way. :)

@willol In what way? As mentioned, I wanted to have everything set up manually for educational purposes.

@theuser learning new stuff is great. But Arch is a rolling distro meaning there are always new updates coming out which can be unstable. Typically on a server you want a distro which has been very well tested and won't need to be updated for several months like Ubuntu LTS, Red Hat Enterprise, or Cent OS.

@Devman or Debian 😃

@Devman Thanks for the insight, I had this mindset that Arch was quite stable given its barebones nature. I only really have a couple of years of experience as a Ububtu end-user. Still, I'll give Arch a shot for learning purposes.

First off, Wayland is still in alpha, so it's not recommended for daily use, let alone server use. Second, Cinnamon doesn't support Wayland yet, so go with X.

Or, if you're really, really hurting for Wayland, use Gnome or KDE.

@theuser
To piggyback, Fedora or openSUSE make great rolling release distros that are also stable for servers, though honestly Arch will do you just fine.

It honestly doesn't matter what you run on your server, so long as it keeps working for you.