So I installed Arch Linux... Is this it?
So I installed Arch Linux... Is this it?
I'm a little bit underwhelmed, I thought that based off the fact so many people seem to make using this distro their personality I expected... well, more I guess?
Once the basic stuff is set-up, like wifi, a few basic packages, a desktop environment/window manager, and a bit of desktop environment and terminal customisation, then that's it. Nothing special, just a Linux distribution with less default programs and occasionally having to look up how to install a hardware driver or something if you need to use bluetooth for the first time or something like that.
Am I missing something? How can I make using Arch Linux my personality when once it's set up it's just like any other computer?
What exactly is it that people obsess over? The desktop environment and terminal customisation? Setting up NetworkManager with nmcli? Using Vim to edit a .conf file?
Welcome to realizing the Memes are all bullshit and its just a solid distro that's worth using for the simpleness. Just go use your computer like the average user is and roll with it
Yep, all this «how do I learn linux» stuff is weird. You don't learn your OS, you use it. Did you need to «learn» Windows? You just launch it and click your browser / file manager / media player and browse, manage files and watch or listen to your media files.
You can just use your PC as you would regularly use your PC and find solutions once you face some issues. Yes, Linux issues are different from Windows issues.
Modern operating systems have made it take very little knowledge to connect to WiFi and browse the internet. If you want to use your computer for more than that, it can still take a longer learning process. I download 3D models for printing, and wanted an image for each model so I could find things more easily. In Linux, I can make such images with only about a hundred characters in the terminal. In Windows, I would either need to learn powershell, or make an image from each file by hand.
The way I understand "learning Linux" these days is reimagining what a computer can do for you to include the rich powers of open source software, so that when you have a problem that computers are very good at, you recognize that there's an obvious solution on Linux that Windows doesn't have.
Didn't bother going through the hoops and installed EndeavourOS which is arch-based with some additional default applications.
For me, the best thing of Arch isn't the distribution but the Arch wiki. An impressive piece of documentation.
Arch wiki is superb, couldn't have installed or configured Arch without it.
Which btw is the reason many people ended up with Archlinux... after the x-th time looking up some configuration issues on another distro and landing there.
The Arch build system is just as impressive IMO. I've written Debian and redhat packages for at least two decades and Arch packaging is just so much easier to handle. The associated tooling for creating and managing build chroots is excellent as well.
That's the main reason my software is in the AUR but nowhere else. I tried to make a deb package and failed so many times so I just gave up.
EndeavorOS is essentially Arch with a gui installer and a few optional pre-installed packages.
Yes, wiki and community are top notch!
Most distros are very similar - it's mostly the same software just using a different package manager.
This is why "which distro should I use" is the most annoying question in this community.
It is definitely annoying but I think it's understandable from people that are coming in from the outside.
There is a pretty big difference in terms of usability between Arch and everything else because of the rolling release model and the AUR. Lots of things you would have to manually install from a git repo or track down a PPA for can be installed like a normal package.
Most of the time it is achieved with the phrase: "I use Arch, btw". 😉
Now actually use it for a couple of years. Then you'll see whats special about it.
For me personally, Ubuntu was breaking on every dist upgrade, the software was always out of date or not available in the repos. Been running arch for 5 years, same install, even transplanted it over to newer computers without issues. When some package is missing, I can throw together a PKGBUILD with chatgpt and put it on the AUR for others to use. It fucking rocks and is extremely sturdy while allowing me to do with it whatever I want.
But yeah, besides that, it's just a linux. The individual things it does well are not even exclusive to arch. Ideally, you should not think about your OS at all and it should be out of your way, while you do something on it.
Makes sense. Do you find that by having the same install for so long (including transplanting it) that you have accumulated a lot of bloat? One of the things I really enjoyed about a fresh install was that I knew there wasn't a build-up of digital junk files, but with Arch fresh installing every once in a while just seems impractical.
I've been using Arch for about 15 years or so, and yes, I build up cruft... in my home directory ;-). The system itself is remarkably good at keeping tidy. The one spot to keep an eye on is /var/cache/pacman, as that's where it stores every package you download before installation and it won't delete it without you asking it to.
Any new config file will be saved with a
.pacsaveextension, so you'll want to keep an eye out for those, but that's basically itNot in any bothersome way. But if you really want to reinstall often that is valid as well. You can very easily script the arch install process to get you back to the same state far easier than other distros as well. Or you can just mass install everything except base and some core packages and reinstall the things you care about again which almost gives you a fresh install minus any unmanaged files (which are mostly in home and likely want to keep anyway).
The main trash you accumulate are config files in you home directory because they stay after the package is uninstalled. And they just sit there not hurting anybody.
Most of the junk accumulates in /home and I did a cleaning once, where I got rid of a couple hundred GB there, from stuff that was either already uninstalled or still installed but unused for years.
In the other root directories, I didn't find much tbh. My / (excluding home) takes up 40GB and I don't think it was significantly lower years ago as the bulk of it comes from necessary program files.
Yup, Arch is by far the distro I have had the fewest amounts of technical issues with. Yes, you need to know what you are doing or be willing to read docs, but there’s no magical bullshit, maintainer capriciousness and lack of planning happening like I have unfortunately witnessed all too often while using other distros.
Any major Linux distribution has a system for building packages, it's not something special to Arch. In fact, Arch's great advantage of the aur repository actually becomes a disadvantage by introducing instability and insecurity into your system when you add programs from that repository. It's amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe's and then install packages from external repositories with the security of "trust in the repository". How can you trust code with root access to the system just because it's in the aur repository? That's the main question I would ask Arch users.
It's a choice. We know that it's riskier to use stuff from AUR. Which is why it's highly recommended to read the PKGBUILD before installing the package. The basic Arch install doesn't even include an AUR helper. That said, AUR is typically very reliable for packages with a decent userbase. It's mostly due to the community aspect. Bad actors are caught relatively easily as the PKGBUILD is available to look at.
It's amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe's and then install packages from external repositories with the security of "trust in the repository".
As with almost every case of these sorts of comparisons, these are likely separate groups of people holding separate groups of opinions.
I don't use Arch anymore, but when I did I found that the AUR was really useful to quickly install niche applications that would take ages to be approved on to an official repository. Often those would be made by the application developers themselves or members of the community. I would personally vet the packaging script myself, but I'm sure many wouldn't - and that's fine. As with most software, there's some trust involved and often you assume that if you're installing from a reputable repository it's going to be fine. If people aren't vetting the installation scripts and are installing from random repositories, that's really their problem. I'm glad the possibility existed and it's the one thing I've missed in distros I've used since then.
Any major Linux distribution has a system for building packages
I have built packages for all the major ones. Non arch packages are a pain to build and I never want to do it again. In contrast arch PKGBUILDs are quite simple and straight forward.
How can you trust code with root access to the system just because it’s in the aur repository?
Because you can view the source that builds the packages before building them. A quick check to not see any weird commands in the builds script and that it is going to an upstream repo is normally good enough. Though I bet most people work on the if others trust it then so do I mentality. Overall due to its relative popularity it is not a big target for threats when compared to things like NPM - which loads of people trust blindly as well and typically on vastly more important machines and servers.
Not sure if sarcasm or actual disinformation. You're not supposed to trust the aur, that's kinda the whole point of it. The build scripts are transparent enough to allow users to manage their own risk, and at no point does building a package require root access.
Well there is far less malware on Linux tbf so comparison is not completely accurate. But same caution applies, try to vet and understand what you install. That part is also easier with the AUR as it's transparent in the packagebuild what it does unlike random exes with closed source. It's also a large community with many eyes on the code so unless it's a package with few users then it's gonna get caught pretty quickly.
Ubuntu is plastic
Linux distros are made for using, not teaching. That's what LFS is for: https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/
Been running arch for 5 years, same install, even transplanted it over to newer computers without issues.
To be fair, I pretty much do that with Windows 10...
Check your neck for extra beard hairs, or your legs for knee high socks
Knee high socks are for any Linux flavour 💖
I have both
Ooh, a Gentoo user!
You fell for the meme lol.
Arch is great if you want very high levels of customization without having to get into compiling and coding, like with Gentoo or NixOS.
I think of it as the distro equivalent to custom keyboard kit, you get all the parts and can swap them out as much as you want. But you're not designing and fabricating your own circuit board and microcontroller, writing your own custom firmware, getting a custom case modeled and fabricated, etc.
There's a reason "I use Arch, BTW" Is a meme.
Tbh I only use arch because I still love openbox too much
Can't you just install openbox on any other distro? Looks like it's available for all the major ones at least.
OP forgot the socks. Classic mistake.
there's arch socks?
Come for the memes, stay for the wiki and AUR.
The meme is mostly a relic from the days when installing Arch was a very involved and mostly manual process -- it wasn't to the level of LFS, but you had to configure most of the base system, and it would leave you with a pretty bare-bones setup (no GUI by default, etc). So it was a pretty big hurdle and successfully installing it did give you a bit of nerd cred, though even then the "arch BTW" meme was tongue in cheek.
These days it's just one of the most well-supported rolling release distros, and it's got automated installers and GUI spins just like any popular distro. The two biggest assets are the AUR and the wiki.
NixOS does kind of feel like the spiritual successor in terms of effort to set up, and in that immutable OSes are kind of the next big thing, like rolling release was fairly unconventional when Arch was taking off.
I use Ubuntu but the Arch wiki is top notch and has helped me solved a lot of problems, especially technical issues like VFIO. I think you’re right that Arch love largely started as a meme to celebrate getting it installed, kind of like the jokes about being unable to exit VIM.
What exactly is it that people obsess over? The desktop environment and terminal customisation? Setting up NetworkManager with nmcli? Using Vim to edit a .conf file?
Welcome to the crowd! Eventually, you realize that an operating system is just an operating system: something you use to get work done, and the less you notice it, the better it's doing its job. The pride of setting it all up mostly ends very shortly after you're done. At that point, you realize that pretty much all distros are the same, give or take.
That said, there are always moments that make you realize that your OS is amazing. When you're faced with a new and difficult task that you don't know how to achieve, then you look at your distro's documentation and solve it in a few elegant steps. And I'm not an Arch user, but that's when the Arch wiki will really be your friend, as well as all the other resources that Arch has for its users. I can't think of examples of these kinds of moments because they're so rare, but those are the moments that feel great and really make you appreciate your OS.
How can I make using Arch Linux my personality when once it’s set up it’s just like any other computer?
Well, do you already have a personality that isn't based on Arch? If you do, get rid of it.
I think you might be missing the part where memes are not real. aur is useful. arch wiki is useful.
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.
I thought it was just a meme.
I see way more complaints about 'elitist Arch users' than I ever do comments from actual elitist Arch users.
It's become a meme now. And I certainly don't take it seriously myself. It's more in fun to me as anything serious. (I don't use Arch by the way).
If you can't joke about yourself about something you do, then you may have a problem and should perhaps consider some therapy perhaps.
FOSS is my personality and Arch is my distro
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
The AUR is pretty awesome. If a piece of software exists on Linux, it's in the AUR. Even software that doesn't have a native Linux version can sometimes be found these, e.g. repackaged versions of Electron apps for Windows.
And once you start really customizing your system, you'll see the value of the Arch Wiki. If there's something you can do on Arch, the Wiki probably has a well-written guide for it.
100% its the Wiki and AUR!
On every other distro, once you want a program not in the package manager, it will likely be broken by the next update. On arch 99.995% of the time it will be in AUR and you can just make a simple PKGBUILD when its not, so your updates will automatically recompile all of your personal projects!
I used the Arch wiki to get gamescope working on Pop OS. It's a great resource regardless of your distro. In many cases the info on there is not even Arch-specific.
You've just made your first post regarding Arch. The cycle is complete.
Arch isn't cool anymore you should switch to gentoo
You misspelled Linux from Scratch.
Meanwhile: NixOS
The cool kids are going back to Slackware.
When you've set that up correctly on modern hardware and got Gnome to run, it's a real achievement.
People like Arch because to many it feels more truly like your system than other distributions.
It isn't that Arch is in some way more customizable than other distros, rather it's that if there is a package on your Arch system, its probably there because it was your choice to put it there in the first place, and so the system can feel more representative of you given it only contains the things you want or need and nothing more from the get go.
The thrilling thing about arch is you get to put together your own user land applications, especially things that could form your desktop environment, audio stuff, etc.
I agree it is not that complicated. If you want more thrill, here is what I recommend:
gentoo Linux
has the option to compile everything from source. This isn't just for bragging rights. This resolves a whole class of software breakages that can happen on other distros (especially when using old or less common applications).
- It gives you the option (emphasis on optional) to use openRC, an alternative to systemd.
- patch any software super easily, working nicely with the system
- customize compile flags on a global level
- have package manager manage software that isn't available in repos, or easily write a package script for it (technically AUR can do this, but gentoo more powerful)
- works like a charm with heavily customized setups, such as musl, or less common architectures like arm or risc-V
NixOS
Takes it a step beyond gentoo and uses a functional, lazy approach in package management. Every package is fully reproducible, has a kind of isolated environment. Your entire setup is reproducible and declared with a single file.
---- below this line is torture. Not recommended
slackware
Idk how it works exactly, but package management looks like a manual pain
Linux from scratch
A book where you create your Linux installation from scratch, compiling every single component until you reach a working system
Notable mentions
- Alpine Linux: uses musl and busybox by default. Extremely lightweight. Some things will not work, but you get the thrill of running a couple MB distro
- void Linux: ok I'm tired of writing so I will not explain that one
Slackware avoids the issue of package management completely.
You just install the entire repository up front, which resolves all dependencies.
If you need software that isn't in the repo, you can install it any way you like from wherever you like, there's no real package manager that gets in the way. Usually you compile it with Sbopkg, a helper script very similar to Arch's AUR helpers. It comes with rudimentary dependency resolution in the form of queue files, which just list what needs to be installed in the correct order for any given source package, and then does it for you.
A more modern approach I follow is to use Flatpaks.nix sounds cool but it also sounds like a PAIN to use until it gets proper support
For some reason I really love how you ran out of steam on this post. Take my upvote, and may you make many whole-enough-assed posts in the future.
Alpine Linux: uses musl and busybox by default. Extremely lightweight. Some things will not work
I use it daily, which things won't work? Honestly it's "just a distribution", you'll have the same experience with it as OP has with Arch.
Void is far from torture. It is just as easy to set up as Arch, if not more so.
I agree, I organized the post wrong. Void should've been up, but it's also a notable mention that I can't write a lot about since I did not do too much with it.
Ha ha, you fool, you fell for the classic blunder!
It’s just a meme, dude.
Not the only meme I fell for... Anyone know the best way to unload 5 thinkpads that originally shipped with Windows 7??
Use it as your daily driver and get really comfortable with it. After this, complain loudly when you see someone doing anything in a different way. Then say "I use Arch btw"
Great, isn't it? You just set up a system you like for you to use, without any bullshit.
Arch is for the most part comparable to Debian unstable/sid, but instead of a normal repository, it instead depends largely on a massive 3rd party repository (the AUR), and for some reason people think that's a feature.
In my experience the AUR is useful but almost unnecessary, and if you want to use flatpak you can get away from using the AUR entirely
Oof, hit them where it hurts 🤕
Arch is too easy to set up nowadays for it to be a "thing".
Maybe 15 years ago when the process was slightly more complicated but even then it's always been paint by numbers.
Even Gentoo isn't that difficult, just time consuming.
Outside of the meme, the only people who make it their personality are generally younger and less experienced users who feel extremely empowered and proud by doing anything useful on the command line. Not like those users on Ubuntu (which they just switched from) who install stuff from a store like losers, nuh uh.
Before Arch you had the same type of people on Gentoo feeling superior because of use flags and watching hours of compiler output, after switching from Mandrake.
Yes, you are missing the fact that it's mostly not people making Archlinux their personality, but people making meme'ing about "Archlinux users" their personality. For the vast majority it's just an OS.
I like operating systems as boring as possible. Let it manage the underlying system while I focus on work. I think you just convinced me to try Arch now.
Arch offers a combination of rolling software updates, a simple but easily customized base, pacman for the package manager, the AUR, a barebones installation process by default, good documentation, and active development. That may or may not be a good combination based on your goals.
Other distros offer a different combination of characteristics. Those characteristics are a starting point and you can get to the same destination no matter what you use. The trick is figuring out what starting point is closest to your destination or which starting point makes the journey fun for you. For some people, Arch is that. For plenty of people, Arch isn't that.
Good now wipe it and install NixOS. You're ready.
That's basically it. Some Arch users are genuinely just picky about what they want on their system and desire to make their setup as minimal as possible. However, a lot of people who make it their personality just get a superiority complex over having something that's less accessible to the average user.
Arch constantly breaks on me. Maybe give it a while.
Skill issue
You're forgetting the finest feature - you have to tell everyone in the real world and online that you use arch btw.
I like to do this to irritate people because I have a steam deck.
"I got a steam deck for Christmas. It runs arch, btw"
That must be fun, when you're not busy doing crossfit or planning your vegan meals.
oh, he didnt forget
a lot of people base there personality off it because they installed it from scratch and customize it exactly how it fits them. ofcorse that's not going to be everyone because everyone is different.
Am I missing something?
Yep. You got meme'd -- Arch is a distro like any other.
How can I make using Arch Linux my personality
That cracked me up x)
Anyway, I'd say it's good that the OS is out of your way once set it up. Even though I don't use Arch directly, I like how comprehensive the AUR is (even though there may be repositories more packages, like nix and whatnot), think the ArchWiki (like the GentooWiki) is a very useful resource, even if you use a completely different system.
This is probably true of most distros.
This is why I still don't know more about computers. Lol. Switched to using Linux as my primary years ago, thinking "I'll learn more about how computers work, and become better at this by forcing myself to use Linux." Found Ubuntu, it worked well, then found mint, it worked so well I never needed to actually do anything, and switched to fedora when I realized how much I like Gnome, and still never needed to actually do anything, because shit just works. Once you've made the switch, Linux is super unobtrusive. It's just sorta there, in the background, doing everything for you while you play YouTube videos or watch porn. Lol. I still don't know much about computers, but I now recommend every switch, because seriously, almost no one is computer illiterate enough not to be able to use mint or Fedora.
If you want to learn more about computers by using Linux, I suggest something like Gentoo. Don't know if it's still the case, but I started with Gentoo back in 2003 and it took me 3 days until I even had a GUI. Learned a ton in the process about Linux under the hood and how it all works together. Thanks to Gentoo I have a well paid career as a Senior Linux System Administrator.
That being said, i should mention that I grew up with DOS, so I didn't have the same apprehension as some people, when it comes to the command line and editing config files.
Let me ask you... Why would you do something like that? I mean, Arch is just a piece of software, why would you wanna be obsessed with or turn it your personality?
Don't you have anything more meaninful to worry about?
You'll know it when you feel the satisfaction of getting to enter
pacman -Syuin the terminal several times a day and a new update or two comes in. lolIt's like owning a screw driver, a really nice professional grade, well forged screw driver, with a molded grip handle.
Does it do anything that the $1 cheap knock off screw drivers can do? No, its just a screw driver.
If you use it every day, you may grow to like all the tiny features and comforts and customizations, or maybe not.
ArchLinux is a tool just like embedded linux systems, does basically the same thing as every other OS, its not life changing, but if you may grow to like its little details just like a custom screwdriver.
Does it do anything that the $1 cheap knock off screw drivers can do? No, its just a screw driver.
I got a chuckle out of that
Nobody's raving about the install, that's just useful for people who don't know what makes a Linux distro.
It becomes your personality after a few years because every update might break anything, and you need to regularly maintain random shit. Also if you forget to update regularly, the chance of everything crapping out rises exponentially.
I hope you're using something like btrfs, because rollbacks are a must.
Sorry you've had such a rough go, just remember your experience isn't everyone's experience.
Sure, and not every arch user ends their comments with btw.
But that was consistent across multiple years, devices, and derivatives. It's usually a 5 min fix/workaround, but it's still annoying.
Fresh packages all the time without any hassle or snaps/flatpak/appimages, and theoretically never needs to be reinstalled. What's not to love.
OP was pretty fucking snarky though, ngl. Some of us enjoy using arch based distros without being walking memes, and far more people complain about people talking about arch than actually talk about arch these days.
😂
I'm trying out Arch on my laptop atm, and tbh the only real advantage (at least for me) is that the packages tend to be a lot fresher than on Debian-based distros. The question is how many of your packages you really need to be that fresh.
I think a lot of Arch users feel like wizards because they connected to the home wifi using the command line, but if you've tinkered with (/broken then had to fix lol) other distros, you will have done all this stuff before
I find OpenSUSE Tumbleweed a good solution for up-to-date packages without slow install times or hours spent compiling and configuring things. It's straightforward but current.
Arch is perfect, it's like THE Linux. It's not really opinionated about anything, it just helps you do it. Hell you can "pacman -S apt" and slowly become a debian
That's the magic of it: latest software, rolling release, edit some config files, do anything you want, spend half your time tweakin'
No longer using Arch, but I can tell you what I liked about it:
- it basically only does what you explicitly tell it to, making the setup very flexible. There's no stuff the OS hides behind its own tools really (resulting in little to none "DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE" situations).
- It is very up to date and the rolling release generally works well, there's no pain with changing releases or anything.
- The package manager, including creating your own packages, is dead easy and fast. Caveat is that once you look deeper into it, it gets more complex as you need to keep a container for clean building around. Still, with the right tooling, it's very manageable.
- As already mentioned, the documentation is very good.
- Packages are very close to upstream, in most cases just being something like "./configure; make; make install".
- Generally very unopinionated.
It's a linux distro, just like all other linux distros... Idk what to tell ya
troll detector noisy
I think arch peaked in its popularity in 2016 or so. It felt like an elitism thing was going on around that time that has 1. Faded off and 2. Been dispersed into other distros because as it turns out there are other good choices, too.
Besides. How are you going to become a rising influencer rehashing the same old takes as the prior generation of dorks? Can’t keep people coming with Arch is the greatest YouTube videos forever.
You must have missed the small print that says "Personality not included". Linux is simple, individual character is hard.
You forgot one thing: “I use Arch BTW!”
Before the install script, i setup arch manually and added the gnome package that bringd DE and all the good Gnome stuff with it. it was then just the same as any other Gnome DE really. People taut the AUR, but OpenSUSE has same with their software.opensuse.org where packages maintained as experimental or community can be accessed (or by adding OPI). Since OpenSUSE had built in snapshotting, rollback and GUI admin (plus curation to do cleanups and maintemamce already OOTB) I uninstalled Arch. The ArchWiki though, that thing is a masterpiece
I prefer a minimal install of Debian personally. Someone should make a rolling release apt-based/debian-based distro and I'd hop right on it. Technically Kali is one and I do daily drive that, but it's not something I can really recommend to people as a general use distro.
Anyway if you want something more tangibly different (and difficult to install) try running OpenBSD :)
Debian unstable: am I a joke to you?
Huh, is it actually rolling release and cutting edge? I thought it was just Debian + 1 or 2 versions ahead.
I also felt a little underwhelmed, I thought the installation would be more difficult.
If you are not in it for the memeing I find it to be a great distro.
I think any person with ability to read and follow instruction can install arch in 15 minutes (excluding waiting for things to download), there is nothing special about it.
Those people are mostly just a meme, I rarely see people actually doing that anymore, although I'm sure they exist. If you want my personality out of it, spend more time customizing. You can look into optimizations, theming, or delve into window managers if you really want to make it your own. There's a lot of options.
I mean if you want to be blasé about the fact not everyone has the same technical skills as you, sure…
Now use Gentoo
I can only use Arch, because I know how I set it up.
Preinstalled distros, even arch based seem overwhelming to me nowadays. I just prefer to set up Arch Linux myself so I know what minimal steps I did and what package I have
If you want a challenge that may or may not be worth it, try configuring NixOS. And I mean really get into it, try to configure everything using Nix. It's very time consuming but not boring, each configuration varies person to person (i.e the way you organize it) so it can be quite fun if you have the time.
Also nixpkgs (what Nix and NixOS use) has like, all the packages
Just do
./install_arch.shI really like Arch because it’s bare metal but not too much => it’s very easy to choose the components you need for your installation and exactly fine-tune your experience without spending too much time with something like Nix/LFS/Slackware.
- it’s community supported, lightweight, fast, and easy to use when you know what you’re doing (wow this sentence is dumb but you get me right?)
You should go for a distro that matches what you want out of your system. You want stable? Find some strong LTS distro like Ubuntu. You want ULTRA STABLE? Go for an immutable distro. Do you want to use your system for gaming? Go for a distro with wide gaming support, built-in drivers with options for proprietary drivers.
It's less about what base distro you're using and more about what you like about that particular flavor of distro.
For example, I use my PC for gaming mostly, but also coding. I switched from Pop! (Ubuntu based) to Garuda (Arch based) and I love it because it's really good for gaming, comes with Mangohud, Gamemode, Steam, Heroic, controller drivers, graphics drivers, etc, all optionally pre-installed. I also really like KDE apps because they're performant and slick so I got the Plasma version.
Anyway, yeah, focus less on "this distro is Arch based" and more on what each distro can provide you as far as your personal tastes.
I’ve been using Debian for many years now. The hardest part about switching my desktop to arch (partly to try something different, partly for later kernel / tools) was not that arch is difficult, but that I need to type ‘sudo pacman -S’ instead of ‘sudo apt install’ to install new packages. It is functionally the same in my day to day use which is fantastic.
I have used a number of distros over the last 15 years. Once I found one I liked, I stuck with it. I understand the package manager, some of the special features of the distro I use and I don't really have time to relearn this every couple of months on new distros.
If I want a different "feel", I change my DE. But that's about it.
What do you mean by people being obsessed over Arch?
Archlinux is Linux, it's just a minimal distro that allows you to only use whatever you want to use. I have no idea what's with being obsessed over it other than «use arch btw» which became a local meme recently.
I tried it out because of the memes and stuck with it because there wasn't a bunch of extra stuff I don't need distracting me. I kinda forget I'm using arch btw
Did you use
arch-installor manual classic installIsn't the archinstall command just one word?
Never used it, memory fuzzy I'm sure you're right
Both :) Manual classic install doesn't strike me as particularly complicated.
Uhh, I thought this was just a meme
now start using it for a while and you will notice the difference!
you will see you have all of the latest versions of programs, that other distros wont have for 6 months!
you will learn that the AUR has every package you could ever want!
you will see that the Wiki has extremely comprehensive answers to every question!
That's like seeing the Otaku gang, deciding to give this Anime a go, watching Dragon Ball and asking "what's so special about this?".
Some people make some random thing their personality, others enjoy the same thing without making a big fuzz about it. Arch is great because of the wiki and the AUR, other distros have their own pros and cons.
The one benefit Arch has for me (even though I no longer use it as I found I'm not too fond of rolling releases), is that the AUR with an AUR helper takes care of getting any Linux packages installed. No need to copy commands off a github repo or something like that.
afiak the prase "i use arch btw" is mostly sarcasm,
instead of genuine appreciation.its mocking the stereotype of arch users that constantly bring it up to sound smart or feel supperior.
think of arch like "vintage car culture" with a touch of minimalism.
its restricting and breaks all the time,
but thats kinda the point because fixing it becomes a part of your lifestyle.I use it precisely because it doesn't break all the time and is less restricting... Don't know where you got the idea it is not.
I also feel like it "breaking all the time" was part of the stereotype itself. I stopped using Arch because it was stable for almost 3 years and part of the point of using it in the first place was learning Linux by fixing stuff that broke - except that stuff never broke so I grew bored of it.
I tried it and was underwhelmed, but also overwhelmed.
I love the idea of choosing everything I want, but Arch also meant the pain of learning to install everything I actually need first.
Is there a minimalistic distro that installs all just the essentials (drivers, services like DHCP, a package manager, desktop GUI), and then I choose from there?
Debian Netinstall.
I'm using Arch because you start with nothing and you can make any system you want. I have disk encryption, btrfs as a filesystem, secure boot with my own custom keys, I'm running self-build kernel, I'm using apparmor and I can use any program from AUR, etc. Thats my personality. Things that you can't see but are important to me.
On other distros some of these things would be very hard to do. Especially without Arch Wiki.
I have been a GNU/Linux user for about 15 years. During that time, I have alternated between Arch and Gentoo.
Gentoo is very time consuming and complex, and Arch is a pain to keep clean. However, the ability to customize the system to your preferred configuration is a big draw for both.
For a light user like me, patching and customizing to PKGBUILD is just fine. Personally, I sometimes wish for something like the USE flag in Portage.
You have reached the pinnacle of Linux, every other distro you try from now on will seem bland. 🧗🏼
using vim to edit a .conf file
that's the nixos people
Ya, its just some people over exaggerated a bit. As long as you don't do stuff that obviously tries to mess with core system stuff it should be fine.
I just wanted a distro built to my specs, up to date, uses pacman, not run by a for-profit company, with good documentation. The hype is mostly Reddit elitism and gatekeeping. I like that nobody has slipped branding and extra bookmarks into my browser.
anime waifus
