Debian or Arch

Which one is the least bloated distro for a minimal install?

Other urls found in this thread:

crunchbanglinux.org
twitter.com/NSFWRedditGif

CRUX

Obviously arch has less bloat but it comes at a price, you know, it's your precious time. Debian would take less time unless you have lots of experience using arch.

Busybox

> arch
> time wasting
When will this meme end? Are you all unironically installing os without knowing what you want from it? Installation takes 10m, basic important configiration ~1h. That's it, you got fast, lightweight, beautiful distro.

Yeah, I installed Arch and Win 7 in dual boot on a laptop recently... Arch took less than 1hr to install and set my DE and other important programs up. Win 7 took over 3.5 hours to install, get Windows completely updated, find and install all the drivers individually, and find and install all the programs that I regularly use. The lack of a package manager on Windows is extremely frustrating as is their ridiculously slow system update procedure.

Gentoo

Gentoo

Will I have to compile and configure everything I want to install on it?

>pacman -Syu
>oh_shit.jpeg

>backup configs
>write a script to install all important shit
>never care about update fuckups ever again
Seems good.

Yes, that's literally the point of using Gentoo. You do however end up with the most minimal distro.

Pacman -Syu hasn't broken anything for me in several years. The only issues I ever had with Arch updates breaking shit was when I was trying to use ATI proprietary drivers years ago. Since I've been using laptops with Intel GPUs I haven't had a single issue.

Debian > Arch

Simplicity over bullshit for the same softwares used at the end and I speak as someone who used BSD, Debian and Fedora in the past years. Arch is a pain in the ass to install and barely has legitimate reasons to exists besides pleasing autistic people

Perfection is simplicity

For the minimal of minal of them, go to crunchbanglinux.org

I used it on my old Pentium MMX 133 and ran fine as a firewall

No, some packages have binaries. For example Firefox and LibreOffice

It is a pain in the ass to install in multiple RAID volumes across multiple HDDs + VLM if needed. On a single one, it is fine, agreed

It's literally not, though. They have extensive documentation on RAID and LVM. I installed Arch on a shitbox when I was 14 and did a RAID 0 and LVM setup just for the fuck of it. It took less than an hour. It's possible you're just retarded.

Well, it is funny that Arch gives me errors that Debian don't

Debian > Arch any fucking day

Why do you lie on the internet? That's not nice

Lie? You expect me to have taken a picture back then to prove Arch crashes during install with a new DVD disc? How retarded can you be?


Oh right, you use Arch so....

Do you want bleeding edge software, and don't want to waste time compiling? Arch.
Do you want a stable just works system? Debian.

Both are pretty minimal if you use debian net install.

Heh, I actually had debian crash on install the one and only time I decided to try it out. I couldn't for the life of me get it to install on that computer so I just said "fuck it" and installed Arch again.

I asked why you lie on thw internet, I didn't asked you to guess what OS I'm running, it's not arch btw.

Implying I am lying - how the fuck can you fail a Debian install? Used a 15 years old DVD drive and scratched disc? LMAO

When did I said I failed at a debian install? You're so excited about shitposting you don't even know who you're replying to anymore.

You also forgot to greentext something, kid.

I'll quote you bitch then
>Heh, I actually had debian crash on install


Now fuck off bitch, crash = fail and everyone know that. Keep talking shit kiddo

I've never said that thought, that's other user.
That's why I said you're getting too excited about shitposting and you can't even tell who you're replying to. You should really take a break, kid.
Oh, and you still owe me an answer about why you lie on the internet.

SHit sitting unaccessed on your hard drive doesn't make your computer slower, and using a little more of the RAM you paid for doesn't hinder your ability to edit text. Install a .deb or .rpm, bistro and then use your computer as a means to an end instead of being a sad shit making it an end in itself because you don't actually do anything with it.

>mfw arch lusers couldn't pass entry level linux cert exams

> linux cert exams

I'm not saying it's worthwhile to get those, just that Arch lusers who claim to be "learning linux" are learning fuckall by doing nothing all day the hard way.

>comparing a shit os to a shit os

I second this, most new arch users only learn to copy and paste code from the wiki, they dont take their time to find more info that isn't in the it. If something breaks, they just install an easier version of arch or another distro lol

If you realy want the least bloated go with gentoo, between arch and debian its almost the same, chose if you want rolling release or not rather.

openbsd it's the most secure

Pretty easy to be secure when you can't do anything with it because it has no software.

Arch is a pretty good distro for your main computer, since the AUR has almost everything.

Debian is much lighter though (not by package count, but that's because arch packages themselves are bloated) and is great for any other computers you may have.