Does anyone here actually use Arch?

Does anyone here actually use Arch?
It's just a joke, right?

Yes, but only those with a superiority complex.

We all use debian

I have used arch for over a year and never experienced a problem.

...

kys

pretty sure Arch has the largest userbase on Sup Forums.

I'm using Arch exclusively since 6 years and I'm not even a cs major.
It just needs enough analytical skills to install/tweak your system and to solve the occasional small problems that result from a bleeding edge rolling distro.
If you can get past the installation you'll manage if you are dedicated to learning how to control your system.

>pretty sure

Do you have a single fact to back that up?

yep

if you can read and comprehend a fucking manual arch is stupid simple.

yes, you will have to read the manual for the program you install if you want it to work. No I won't read it for you and tell you what to type... that's what the wiki is for, though.

Did you experience anything at all, other than maintenance of your arch machine?

Don't you see how many assholes are here? If you see people interested in computers and is completely rude, arrogant and unhelpful then you know there are arch users nearby.

Ask yourself, what does Sup Forums look more like? The friendly Ubuntu or Windows forums? Or the arch forum where you are more likely to be doxed and called an idiot than get any helpful advice. Of course there are tons of Arch users here you fucking faggot. Kys

>t. arch user

That is only because if you have any issues with arch then you are a stupid noob and not like superior users like . Just have to avoid being a idiot, anyone who has issues with arch should be shot. Bunch of technological illiterate idiots, helping people is counterproductive because people should learn to read documentation.

Just read the arch wiki, it's in there

typical weekly update
>run update command
>no config files changed? done.
>config file changed? diff file_1 file_2
>merge with text editor, takes up to 5 minutes

it's running webserver, mpd, mopidy, mail server, plex, torrents, flexget, and all traffic is routed through it so it also has squid cache to reduce bandwidth and other QoS features. also made a guest wifi network so the typical scum doesn't have access to my stuff (and I can capture their packets like some kind of evil hacker)

Why use arch over gentoo over Linux from scratch over templeos?


Seriously what's the point?


Arch is gay

Gentoo is gay

Templeos is schway.


But seriously. Why not just make your own distro with Linux from scratch if you're going to use arch or gentoo to stroke your ego?

A beginner might get something changed during updates so that they are not able to boot into their DE again of course (because they are being idiots and not doing diffs on the updated files), but that has the benefit of teaching the user about the underlying system and they need to learn command line text editors like vi. They will be better computer users, only idiots see it as a bad thing to learn more.

>A beginner might get something changed during updates so that they are not able to boot into their DE again
I have never modified the configuration files and it runs GNOME just like any normal other beginner distribution. As long as you don't modify anything GNOME will always work out of the box.

It even survived the conversion from Xorg to wayland and I didn't even notice.

>Why not just make your own distro with Linux from scratch if you're going to use arch or gentoo to stroke your ego?
because of package managers.

this

>Package managers

Thanks, I needed that laugh

I'm using Arch on my primary desktop, my laptop (C720 Chromebook) and my HTPC. Haven't had much problems with it on any of my systems, apart from the occasional Steam breakage and/or performance issues in games due to the driver problems with the R9 290X on my primary desktop. The AMDGPU-PRO driver seems to be working quite nicely though, even if support for GCN 1.1 cards is still experimental. Oh, and my SSD had some problems with NCQ so my initial installation got fucked up, but that was easy enough to resolve.

On my laptop the experience has been absolutely flawless and same can be said for the HTPC. Should probably look into how scaling works (if it works) on Linux, as some things on the screen tend to be too small to be comfortable.

I've also been trying out Ubuntu lately, and will probably look into ElementaryOS soon enough, but not really with the intention of switching but more due to curiosity.

Didn't have much experience with Linux before trying out Arch apart from having played around with Ubuntu, Knoppix, PuppyLinux etc. on some older computers during my teenage years, but the wiki had all the answers I needed and even more.

TL;DR: Just try out different options and choose for yourself. Don't let your choice define you too much though.

I use Antergos with gnome and it's great

care to explain how you're better off without a package management system?

>Updating an Arch system is always a gamble

Arch user for two years, I never had a problem at all. Ironically, I started using it after Ubuntu nuked itself trying to upgrade to the newest release.

I will but I suggest you improve your understanding of what a package manager is and how it works.


It's a simple system that can easily be made in bash with probably less than 100 lines of code.


Just make a file that has the URLs for the downloads of whatever programs you need .

It's not a complicated thing at all.

Arch GNOME user for 3 years, have not had to deal with any breakage except the time I was fucking with imfinality too much
However updates caused ZERO breakage

Also this

He was asking if you had a single fact to back up your claim that Arch has the largest userbase on Sup Forums, not about the fucking manual.

>if you can read and comprehend

Install Solus and see for yourself. It has a package manager, but no packages

I use Antergos and I've never had any major problems. If things break, I can just reinstall it. It's worth it to have up to date software. If I didn't care about that, I'd just using debian testing.

No, you just choose not to remember your issues, or you don't see them as problems.

i don't use it but
>updating when nothing is broken
first rule of advanced computing is to never do that

I'm not running anything else than Arch in my house anymore and that includes servers and my mother's laptop. It's just been the most straightforward, easy to "debug" and least buggy.

>that result from bleeding edge rolling release distro
Then why doesn't Solus suffer the same issues?

Because Solus doesn't even have the packages to have issues with. kek fuck off

We had this thread a few days ago, to show the mental differences between the average arch sperg to explain why they don't view OP's pic as a problem.

the statement, "I've used arch for x years and never had a problem" conveniently leaves out all of the reading of mailing lists before they update. arch spergs legitimately do not consider this an issue, because of two factors at play: their time is absolutely worthless, so 5 minutes is the same as 5000 minutes, and they need to be different from everyone else. These go hand in hand and complement each other because they didn't have anything to do anyway and can trade that kind of time away to be different. So they simply don't mention all of the gay little psuedo work that never had to really happen to let this situation exist.

it's very similar to slackware's dropout userbase saying shit like "oh all you need is on the CD!" or "nobody needs that" when they try to install anything else because nothing works, 15 minutes earlier having been telling windows users to try linux because of all the freedom and choices of software. dropout distros don't really do anything for the linux community but they have to exist to provide containment since otherwise there'd be something like ubuntu shit-on-purpose edition and we'd have to all pretend to listen to them sperging up proper linux forums and sites, this way they can just gently migrate (fuck off) to IRC circlejerks.

for an arch sperg or any dropout distro, 1 minute = 100 minutes = 1000 hours = 10 years. One of the things I find most entertaining to think about is how you do anything under these conditions, for example how was there even a beginning, middle, and end to reading this post when 30 seconds is also the same amount of time? this is all just failure in a different format to numb yourself to the great many nothing decades that await your shitty life choices

wow... you love to live dangerously. that's about the worst way to update Arch. you're always taking a gamble.

you need to step and learn proper linux update management.

while Arch is easy to set up by following few basic guides, none of these guides are that great and leave you with a shitty system that's a nightmare to manage. there are much better ways to setup Arch.

I use it
Its really good
If you can rean documentation wiki and manuals

>9 lines of autism

Can I get the source of that please? I feel like anger trolling again.
I already insulted Gentoo, Debian and Slackware users in Sup Forums so outsider normies will be a piece of cake :^)

Proper linux update management, like getting a real distro, such as quite literally anything else, that has solved these problems since 2003.

Why is it so hard to accept that these memes aren't true?

I've used Arch for over a year. Never had issues. Literally had 3 """"problems""""" all year, which were some packages throwing errors when updating, which I Googled to easily fix in 5 minutes.

that's literally it. Stop getting trolled guys.

Archwiki and pacman is great.

Might as well use Slack to be perfectly honest.

used arch for a long time, one day i actually asked myself "why do i go trough all this pain" then i installed ubuntu and changed the wm. still a sperg but now my computer works

this is what I'm talking about, you outright admit you had to google and look something up yet at the exact same moment insist you had no issues ever.

ubuntu, fedora, debian, mint, centos, and everything else have made package management transparent the entire time. "transparent" means you click a button to install a package and it's there. "package management" does not mean forgoing your ability to ever have a job because you need that time to update software. if you have to dedicate a time each week to "package management", it's not really a package manager at all. turning it into a religion to get people to try to accept and tolerate this doesn't really work out.

This is like someone who bought a lemon car and won't admit it because they're fanboys of the brand.
>Welll I bought this car and nothing was wrong with it at all except I had to change all 4 tires to bring it home
>Also it's been through 3 engines
>So if you ignore all that I have to redo all the fluids every month it's a great little car except for the blatant fact it fucking isn't

I use Arch occasionally. It does come with legitimate benefits over other distros - super customizable, super lightweight if you want, pacman >>> apt and yum, access to AUR and cutting-edge packages, and rolling release model. That being said, it is very much a hobbyist OS, even with Arch Anywhere making installs much easier.

I personally use Manjaro because it comes with many of the Arch benefits while being much simpler; but Arch is legitimately not just a meme OS.

3 errors.

Simple ones, not preventing work but just couldn't update.

Come the fuck on dude.

I've used like 5 distros before this.

I went from Windows -> Ubuntu -> Linux Mint -> Debian, to FINALLY arch linux.

the one I've had least issues with was Arch. Infact the forums, wiki and pacman were fantastic.

>Because you need that time to update software
????????????????

Dude you're literally making shit up to make us look like autists who spend all day updating and fixing bugs.

>If you have to dedicate a time each week for "package management"

I don't.

I run "pacman -Syu" every day or two. That's it. It has worked every single time with no errors, except those three times I mentioned where it wouldn't update until I spent several minutes fixing the problem.


Seriously I can't tell if this is just a,meme to make us loOk like autists or if you peolle believe this.

3 errors > 0 errors

>the one I've had the least issues with was arch
>I've
Exactly

>forums, wiki, and pacman were fantastic
I'm sure you fit right in

Everyone else believes in package managers that are actually package managers. dropout distros are all variations of the same anti-software to get you to mentally ban yourself from society and take you to IRC so you can rot.

I have a girlfriend, I go the gym 6 days a week and I have a job.

3 problems that take a few minutes doesn't "block" me from society in any way.

You spend more time on Sup Forums than I do most likely. Does that block YOU from society?

Using arch and have used it for several years. Rarely have any problems, very happy with it.

I use arch with i3 and i love it
never had a problem in going on 3 years
>thinkpad t60

It is just a Linux distribution, you dingus. Of course people use it. Everyone needs an operating system on their computamortar, and some prefer to use Arch Linux. How difficult is this to understand?

The meme about Arch is when kiddies pretend you "graduate" to Arch from other distros or that it's some kind of 1337 distro. It's not. It's just a Linux distribution among many others, fairly popular (as in number of users), more popular than Slackware but not as popular as Gentoo, never mind Fedora, Ubuntu, or Debian. If Arch fits your needs and you like the Arch way, use it. If not, don't.

I've been using Arch for little over a year now on my Thinkpad. It would be a lie if I said I haven't had any problems with it, but I've always managed to solve those problems fairly quickly. All in all I'm pretty happy with it.

gr8 life m8

Why do you need a bleeding edge rolling distro?

Will new OS features really make you code better?

The answer is no, by the way.

Some people don't use your VM OS, terry

That doesn't make anywhere near as much sense as you believe. It's basically a tantrum, for whatever reason.

If you use Arch Linux, you would think you were also interested enough to pay closer attention to Arch happenings and the latest and the greatest. There are other distros if you're not interested in keeping tabs on your operating system. Calling it a "dropout distro" is needlessly hostile and frankly anti-tech. If it doesn't suit your needs, don't use it.

>It's just a joke, right?
Your pic? yeah, I've been updating my shit daily for long time and I've never experienced any issue related to it, but if you run into a problem you can always chroot to rescue the system if you know what you're doing, also is right.

How's this for 0 errors, I used to use Debian and at one point apt decided that my upgrading was a good time to completely get rid of Xorg. If I didn't notice that the list of things that apt was gonna do was especially long and read it carefully, I would have been stuck in a tty with no browser because I didn't know very much at the time and certainly wouldn't have figured out a fix or even thought to grab a text-based browser or one that will run in a framebuffer and figure things out there. And Debian is supposed to be rock solid. When I was helping a friend install Ubuntu (his choice) we had a second partition set aside and were going to wipe and install it just on that partition. Ran through the installer to that point and we were very careful to get it right so that his windows partition would be left alone. And yet the Ubuntu installer decided that it would format both partitions and not just the one we told it to. Luckily I had made him back up his data before then but that was a horrible surprise from the very first thing a new user who doesn't know what they're doing yet would see.

werks great on muh desktop.

Using arch since 2005, 4 computers, only 3 times have I had to chroot to recover a system and each time was because nvidia fucking sucks huge cock.

these threads just like all other hipster oriented threads operate as a sine wave the high being "immmama bettur than u!!!!!!!!!" and the low having seen other evidence being "guys it's just a distro, if you don't like it then don't use it", fiercely trying to ignore the 2-3 "if u dont use arch u should be banned from linux" threads per day, that they probably made.

whenever everyone is actually "getting along" fine, hipsters take a big dump for attention, and 30 minutes later when all the counter arguments are posted all of a sudden they're the pacifist political mediators

sure then stop calling ubuntu a "normie" distro

you won't, so I will keep calling arch/slack/gentoo dropout distros

Describe this chroot to recover a system thing.

Please

>>config file changed? diff file_1 file_2
>>merge with text editor, takes up to 5 minutes
get etc-update, there's an arch port of it in the AUR
i used gentoo before arch, and gentoo's etc-update is awesome

I use arch because I'm lazy. AUR means I never have to package anything myself, because I can lean on the hard work of other spergs, but unlike Gentoo, I can still use Pac-Man to call for bins when I don't have forever.

I turn the system on, there is no display or terminal after the bootloader.

I put in a live cd,

I mount my disks

arch-chroot /mnt

I then find the offending shit from nvidia and delete it all.

Reboot, get my X working from inside as necessary.

That is literally what has happened 3 times. Usually I just change back to software rendering because I so rarely need the nvidia cards.

system is unable to boot so you boot a working system (ubuntu lol) as essentially a repair cd which lets you pass through resources and drivers to the other OS through that command chroot, which lets you have a better platform than just editing files by accessing the drive since the os can try to tell you why it isn't working.

what isn't mentioned is when chroot fails it's le reinstall time but that's fine because I spend months remembering the install process by heart and it only takes me 30 minutes flat yo

hard work doesn't mean it's good work

Oh ok thanks fellas

Sounds important. I feel like I should write this down in a notebook.

Master race reporting in.

Meh, lazy optdepends good, depends that it's there at all.

you can read the pkgbuilds if you want, they are usually like 5-10 lines that just grab the bin and place it on your system.

The only big as fuck ones are for shit like browsers and wordprocessors.

I'm using LFS

that's Cool as shit dude, every other distro is 0 lines because you don't have to read anything because these problems have been solved in 2003. Also 0 for browsers and wordprocessors. Aaaand everything else.

>packages
>solved in 2003

Please kill yourself.

You're retarded

You domt even know what he's talking about.

make sure you jot this down too: all arch spergs secretly have a second computer or at least second partition or drive somewhere that has ubuntu on it or whatever distro they insist is anti-tech because it's "too easy" to bail them out and get them online to be able to look up how to unfuck their recent arch explosion.

I'm not even kidding.

In my experience Arch works flawlessly as long as you use it and keep it updated.

If you leave it off for months, renamed/replaced packages will start to accumulate and dependency problems will arise, eventually leaving to a system that can't be updated without a lot of manual fiddling.
It also depends on how many packages you have, though.

Pacaur -S whateverthefuck
Install? [Y/n]

Apt repo-add ppa:launchpad/obscure_dev
Apt install obscure-package
Install? [Y/n]
Reconfigure later with sudo dpkg --reconfigure -i

Solved in 2003

i don't think they understand that "solved" doesn't always mean "not needed anymore"

And I'm absolutely sure you've never looked at stackexchange on your phone to unfuck your windows.

Just like my car example
>It works perfectly fine as long as you spend hours on it every day.

conveniently leaving out reading mailing lists that other arch spergs insist are there. I honestly would have no clue those existed, I learned about them from arch spergs trying to push off this fake idea that they're hardcore.

Both of these posts only work if you just "leave out" whatever time you spent fixing the "package manager" and its inability to be a package manager.

It is going to be much simpler for you if you just say you think you're better than everyone else, because that's what this is all about. There is no benefit to choosing something this stupid in this age.

I don't read a mailing list. I don't read the arch front page. If my computer were a person, I'd be in jail for child neglect.

I don't read a mailing list.

I don't interact in any with any Arch resources besides when I need to figure out how to do something once every month or two.

Can you please stop pushing this retarded meme?

Ok we get it. Everyone who uses arch is a fat retarded neckbeard who doesn't do anything but fix shit when pacman fcks up his entire system. - hahaha very funny. Ok dude.

Never fixed the package manager. It's a seedbox. I SSH in, start the deluge daemon, make sure the VPN is connected, start stealing. If it doesn't work, I just buy it. Didn't even bother installing X11. Tmux + ncurses is cozy.

>>It works perfectly fine as long as you spend hours on it every day.

Why do u keep repeating this shit?

I BTFO you earlier in the thread and you just decided to ignore my responses and start pushing your memes again.

>the statement, "I've used arch for x years and never had a problem" conveniently leaves out all of the reading of mailing lists before they update.
Ain't nobody got no time for dat son.

>arch spergs legitimately do not consider this an issue, because of two factors at play: their time is absolutely worthless, so 5 minutes is the same as 5000 minutes, and they need to be different from everyone else.
I honestly don't have that much spare time these days.

>dropout distros don't really do anything for the linux community
Except one of the most controversial additions to the GNU/Linux ecosystem was picked up by Arch first - SystemD.

The points that you've made here are how Arch used to be circa 2012 and before. These were the days when arch used sysv, pacman was a horror to deal with, and lastly, only actual spergs used it for anything other than a laugh. It got better, systemd seemed to fix so many of the issues arch faced, shortly after pacman stopped being a pile of shit and actually became useful.

I use it on my laptop these days, update once a week and never have issues aside from needing to update the pacman mirrorlist every now and again. Is it the only distro I use? No. Is there any benefit to using it over anything else? Well it provides relatively up-to-date binaries that not many other distros do that without the seriously real risk of borking your system (hello, plebian sid).

I swear to God that the "arch is shit" meme is older than most of the kids who post here these days. If you don't like the distro or the community around it, use something else. It's not for you. I don't honestly care if you use Mac OS or Gentoo for your daily needs. As long as a computers software fills your particular usecase, that's all that matters.

but user...

It's so much funner to make strawmen arguments and make things up to make it look like all Arch users are fat idiotic neckbeards who don't do anything but fix problems they arise everytime they use their system...

what's the point of bringing up actual points when you can just make up that Pacman always breaks, installing packages requires 5 hours and everything needs 8 hours of maintenance a day?

I'm fairly sure you know people use Arch, so what's your actual question? Why? I personally use it because I can set it up just the way I like it and because it's a rolling release distro, also AUR is really nice. And I haven't experienced any of the downsides. The installation can be a hassle first time, but just following the wiki it's not that hard. And once you get it up and running you're set. I also haven't encountered any big issues when updating, sometimes there's announcement from Arch about updates, but they're pretty straightforward on what to do. And no breakages whatsoever either.

I don't see why I wouldn't use it. I'm sure other people have something to say about that but I can't personally think of any reason why I shouldn't be using it.

I am using it at the moment.

>I don't see why I wouldn't use it

LOL u have to spend 18 hours a day configuring pacman, and [issue i made up]! LOL ALL ARCH USERS ARE NEETS

Yeah, that's pretty much it. I haven't really seen any actual issues being mentioned, except maybe for systemd, but even that works really well for me and I don't really have issues with it, so for me personally it's not an issue.

People like to say that you have to spend a lot of time configuring it, but after the initial setup (which I admit is harder than most, but still very manageable with their Wiki) I haven't had to do much of configuring. Once you set it up like you want it, you're pretty much set. There could be some config file changes during updates you might want to merge, but apart from Arch server list (which I manage automatically with a pacman hook) there haven't been any since I started using Arch, I think a year ago.

lol but x always breaks lol xDDD

then u need to go on Arch forums and they're all elitists so when you ask for help they instead Dox you and order 6 carded macbook pros to your home so the FBI come to investigate and then they swat you at the same time xDDDD

LOL ALL ARCH USERS ARE FAT AND DUMB NEETS. LOL LOL U NEGLECTED TO MENTION THE 25 HOURS YOU SPENT UPGRADING YOUR SYSTEM XDDD

Why is this meme still active? Arch is a good distro, it's lightweight and the archwiki is the best documentation I've seen for any distro. And the whole thing about it being a time sink distro is a meme too, takes 20 mins to setup and install every application you want.

I use Arch

it has its quirks but overall it's the best distro out of the many I've tried

18 months now on my main computer. Legitimately zero issues. It's been great. The AUR and the wiki are not memes.

Been using Arch for 2 years and am still waiting for the magical system breakage everyone talks about to happen.

I know you're trying to be ironic but hilariously enough your post is literally sandwiched between more of the same doublethink you are making fun of me for saying exists.

>people say you have to spend a lot of time configuring it
>it's true because of the initial setup
>but if you forget about that then you're set!

>the timesink thing is a meme
>it only takes 20 minutes (?) to setup and install every application you want

You cannot seem to understand the difference between 0 minutes and 20 minutes, or however long the "initial setup" is. no matter how fast you are, this setup will always take more than 0 minutes which is why you are probably ALL FAT AND DUMB NEETS LOL XD

stop "recommending" arch to newcomers at large, they won't remember you and you won't win special snowflake points, and they'll assume all linux is timesink shit like this just like every journalist who reviews a 10 year old version of slackware and says linux sucks.

ubuntu and "normie" distros have done more than you ever will to bring linux into wide acceptance, I know you think you're being clever by pretending it's the 80s and people still meet on IRC but you aren't "teaching" anyone by telling them to rtfm and ban them from the chat for a few days. why would you ever choose something that takes longer on purpose? because this gay little irc culture has fooled you into thinking you're smarter than everyone else for picking something shitty. I don't call them dropout distros for no reason.

pretending to be a mediator and saying "oh it just isn't for you then" after you've ironically recommended it is worse because this will not remove the bad taste in the newcomer's mouth. This is just a dodge at what you know you're doing, ironically recommending a piece of shit so you can pretend to be smart when they hate it.

I suggest you losers migrate to BSD, it's more "pure" (shitty) and suits your needs better