Should I download Arch Linux?

Windows fag here
Could you guys tell me what are the benefits of Arch Linux? I'm intersted in testing them but have no idea if it's worth it or not.

Other urls found in this thread:

rufus.akeo.ie/
rule34.paheal.net/post/view/1900377
wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Network_configuration#Static_IP_address
wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/WPA_supplicant
wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/fstab
github.com/karlstav/cava
wikihow.com/Install-Arch-Linux
usesthis.com/interviews/greg.kh/
twitter.com/NSFWRedditVideo

Dont bother

AUR is really nice, but Arch itself is a piece of shit. I can only recommend it if your time is useless and have a ton of free time.

Can you recommend me some "worth it" Linux-based OS?

systemd.

Since you haven't already done it, you won't like it. Your just not cut out for Linux, stay in your safespace OS. Pathetic child that needs to be told what to do and how to think.

Fedora, any ubuntu flavor, Debian if you don't care about old packages.
Basically mainstream distros that work out of the box and you don't have to manually set up shit, although in Debian you might end up setting up some things.

Just go with Ubuntu, you get all the benefits of linux and none of the timewaste that is setting up Arch. If Ubuntu is a nice, polished, well made and repairable car, then Arch is a pile of parts that you gotta put together that might work fine as a car, or might just break down when you need it the most.

>benefit

cloverOS

>windows fag here, should I use linux distribution which doesn't have GUI installer?
Please, don't. Use fedora or ubuntu. And if your gaymes or something will break due to your incompetance, please don't come back here making new threads about how you're incapable of fixing it, because too lazy to google and read.
Then just quietly install windows back.

Now think about what I wrote, if something like this CAN happen, please, don't bother.

If you're familiar with CLI, you'll be fine because Arch doesn't have a graphic installer. Arch users are basically the beta-testers of the desktop solutions for Linux.

Fuck off nigger, in Arch you have to do the work for the computer, it should be the other way around. There is no point in having a computer if you don't automate shit, fucking elitist fuck, what takes you hours to do in Arch you do it in a couple seconds in normal distros.

this, start with something like fedora or ubuntu to start off, you wont have to configure much shit, also use rufus.
rufus.akeo.ie/

Fedora, Ubuntu with gnome, Debian, Korora.

I use Antergos for the pure reason that it has a root ZFS installer, it makes everything a little harder.
If my time in the matter, did not matter, and they had DKMS support I would step straight to Debian 9 on root ZFS.

This.
The archwiki is living proof.
Shit breaks and they can unbreak it in five steps or less.

Why do you use zfs?

If you have no prior Linux experience, don't do it. You'll just frustrate yourself. Arch is for people that know what they're doing.

Just get Ubuntu.

This isn't about Arch, it's about OP being a massive faggot, and not trying it out herself.

>what takes you hours to do in Arch you do in a couple seconds in normal distros
Examples, please. :^)

If you need to ask, don't use arch. There is a vociferous community of trolls who will waste about a week of your life insisting that you load an OS that is unnecessarily complex and picky to set up.

You're best off with any of the Ubuntu flavours (i.e. Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Xubuntu, Lubuntu) you will be fine.

If you know what a rolling release distribution is and want to use one that works out of the box, try Antergos or Manjaro. Don't use arch.

Arch linux is a distribution that offers a small set of packages, but doesn't do much to any of them.
This means, the version you install is configured the same way the developers left it.
When the developers update it, you get the updates, which means you are affected by the changes when they happen.
There is also an AUR which makes it easy to compile applications which are not in the repository easily.

It is directly a contrast to ubuntu LTS (don't bother with other versions of ubuntu)
Ubuntu is a distribution that offers a large set of packages and a lot of them gets configured automatically when you install them.
This usually gives a better user experience as everything "just works" assuming the maintainers does their job.
When software gets updated with new features, ubuntu users won't get them, but they are pretty good at applying security updates.
Once every two years, everything gets updated at once and you have a huge potential mess to clean up one time and then you can use the system for another two years.
There is also a PPA system where people can make a package and have it build on a server so people can install it by adding repositories.

I think arch is a great distribution and it forces you to learn how stuff works, how software projects work with each other, how to troubleshoot and how software projects updates differently.

Just install Ubuntu, here's the instructions:

you go to ubuntu.com
download a live distribution, put it on a USB or CD or whatever
boot on it and select "try"
Once on the desktop, you open "gparted" you format your drive and create an ext4 partition on /
open a terminal and type :
sudo mkdir /mnt/drive
sudo mount /dev/sda1 /mnt/drive
cd /mnt/drive
wget "download.sourcemage.org/image/official/smgl-stable-0.61-basesystem-x86_64.tar.bz2"
tar xvjf /root/smgl-stable-0.61-basesystem-x86_64.tar.bz2
mount --bind /dev /mnt/drive/dev
mount --bind /sys /mnt/drive/sys
mount -t proc none /mnt/drive/proc
mount -t devpts none /mnt/drive/dev/pts
chroot /mnt/drive
passwd root
echo "faggot" > /etc/hostname
echo "faggot" > /etc/defaultdomain


Modify the fstab
nano /etc/fstab


edit your lilo.conf
nano /etc/fstab

lilo -A /dev/sda 1
lilo
ln -sf /usr/share/Europe/city /etc/localtime
cast -r locale
exit
reboot


Welcome to elitist club. :^)

Not explaining acronyms... Pretending that they know best. Making you the reason why the distribution fails, not the developers.

See this...

AUR = arch user repository
LTS = long term support
PPA = personal package archive

what's up with wizardshills lately?

No dataloss ever. Backups are just incremental snapshots I can shoot to another machine's pools.
I use bad SSDs that dump sectors in my laptops and just mirror them.

My CentOS box runs root ZFS and has another pool for data.

Move along, nothing to see here.

While I support OP tying Fedora, please stop recommending Ubuntu
kek

You're wrong, Arch is used by intelligent professionals. Pic related.

Wizards is a moneygrubbing company, but magic is such a fun game.
See you at FNM

Is this Professor Xavier..?

I know you're joking but it's Greg Kroah-Hartman, one of the leading kernel developers.

If you need to know any software developers, greg and linus should make that list.

RPM distros:
Fedora
OpenSUSE

DEB distros:
Ubuntu GNOME
Kubuntu
Xubuntu
ZorinOS Lite

Don't go with regular Ubuntu since Unity will be discontinued next year so getting used to it won't be worth it.

Note if you have an Nvidia GPU; standard (open source) drivers suck. You'll have to download and install official proprietary drivers.
In case you use an AMD GPU, you'll be fine even with open source drivers. Same applies if you use iGPU.

"I am trying out Arch Linux on my MacBook as I wanted to see how that distro was due to hearing good things about it. So far I'm impressed with it, and given that openSUSE doesn't work on the MacBook Pro yet, I'm sticking with it for now."

Who could have thought, that person with brains would use arch and likes it.

>go to google.com
>"source mage" site:rule34.paheal.net/
>No results found for "source mage" site:rule34.paheal.net/.

Huh. I guess if it exists, there is NOT always porn of it.

try wizard porn

oh there is wizard porn surely, but I want source mage porn

Source Mage is all about magic and wizardry.

It's good.

>"source mage" site:rule34.paheal.net/
there is linux porn, ubuntu porn,tux the penguin porn, somebody even uploaded ""archlinux porn""
>rule34.paheal.net/post/view/1900377
I want source mage specifically tho, its my fetish

Well it depends on your time.
To use arch linux, you must learn many stuff, and of course spend alot of time to configure and setup your arch linux. Especially you will need time to learn to configure your arch linux.


But if you dont have time or you just dont want to spend time on plaing with terminal and stuff, and just have some nice working linux without putting big effort in setting up, try linux mint.

Try Antergos or Manjaro first.

Nice quick automatic installation so you can see what the fuzz is about before deciding you want Arch enough to go through the retarded installation procedure.

I'm confused... Is this GNOME or some kind of WM?

i3wm

oh, yeah, now I see it in screen...
Weird font spacing, though

Salutations Archers,
I went from Debian to Arch because Debian is too old for the Ryzen chips. I kept getting freezes etc...
My problem is that when I log in to Arch now. I have to run this command to connect to my wired connection
sudo dhcpcd
How do I connect to the internet automatically. I guess I could put the command in my ~/.xinitrc file...

Another thing, I have a second HDD in my build. When I want to back up to the drive I have to mount it. Is there a way to "permanently" mount it? Or is this the redpill that every time a babby OS boots, it mounts your additional drives.

>wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Network_configuration#Static_IP_address
if you use wifi, then
>wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/WPA_supplicant

as far as your second question goes
>wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/fstab

systemctl enable dhcpcd

this will work:
if you want to do the easiest setup. you can also create a static ip like here:
and never have to dhcp again.

Personally, I choose static addressing but it really just has yo do with how you want to administer and run your home network.

Thanks for the help anons. I know Arch gets a bad rap, but this is why (I think) it's good.
There is a supportive community, and sure you can't be too much of a brainlet to fix these things. But you learn more about computing along the way.

Godspeed

is that an actual visualizer?
the fifo stuff I've found sucks fucking ass

It's cava
github.com/karlstav/cava

damn, they changed a lot since I last tried.

Top pep

But serious, anyone use smgl unironically?
It looks fucking appealing to me but after years of distrohopping (debian, arch, gentoo, alpine, then again arch and finally ubuntu) im not sure wether its worth the hazzle because lettuce be cereal, ubuntu just werks

But at the same time smgl looks fun af. Pls halp

It's nice cause muh rolling release, but the packages breaking compatibility meme is somewhat true. Debian is probably better.

Take an online IQ test. If you score less than 150 the answer is no because your simple mind will not be able to comprehend the complexity of Arch GNU/Linux. If you manage to get past the magic IQ limit then welcome to the superior master race.

What half of these guys in thread are on about ?
Arch has entire page dedicated to installation, you just follow it step-by-step and you're done. Pretty much all common errors are listed on the se page with instructions how to fix them.

I'm a brainlet, but Arch was my first distro. And how difficult can ot be to install DE straight away ? You just follow instructions on fuckin wiki.

Don't use it on your main pc. If you have spare laptop (will have to manually make wifi to work).
Or better yet, use it in VM, it's fun distro. Not best for daily use though

BUT if you're competent enough, you can make any distro work for you. :^)

do it the easy way and use the zen installer, then decide for yourself

>Should I download Arch Linux?
Only if u weigh more than 100kg and have no job.

>brainlet can install arch
Of course: wikihow.com/Install-Arch-Linux :^)

It probably looks intimidating, but you really just comparing what is on your screen and what is says in the installation guide. Then it just copy-paste.

It can take some time to install, but the process is pretty fun.

Real developer use fedora, over neckbeard autist virgin kiss less archlinux.

What about Greg: usesthis.com/interviews/greg.kh/
?

All of the distros are literally just the same shit. The only thing that actually makes a difference is how much documentation a distro has for looking stuff up, so using any of the popular distros works. Prove me wrong.

No, its too hard for beginners and will only get you frustrated. Install *buntu like every other newbie to Linux and get some practice first.

Then install Source Mage.

Different softwares included. different services running by default. Different menu layouts, pref and settings panels, features included or omitted in others distro's version of the same de.
Different amount of packages avialable in defaut repos.
drivers, codecs..pretty long list by the time your done tbqh

Arch is not a beginner or learning distro. It's meant to be easy and intuitive to people who already familiar with GNU/Linux. Even Gentoo is more of a convenience than a hindrance to people with special configuration needs since Portage does like 98% of the work these days.

Most distros are simply the same software with different presets. If you want to pop in a Live CD, install the OS to a hard drive and immediately boot up into a usable desktop, you will still have the same useful Unix-like utilities under the hood.

You know how everyone is always talking about systemd absorbing everything? This is one of those things.

sudo systemctl enable dhcpcd
or
sudo systemctl enable dhcpcd@

Invoking "ip link" will give you a list of adapters, should you need it.