Why don't you fags like Arch? It's the patrician OS.
>Newest version of everything
>Actually justwerkz
>Only people who hate on it are winfags who don't know how to into linux and ubuntufags who also don't know how to into linux
>Best OS for ricing, not even a competition, second best is gentoo if you're really autistic
>actually stable as fuck, anyone saying otherwise is a liar or a shill
>free systemd
Other urls found in this thread:
all linux distros suck but arch sucks the least
Only edgy kids use arch
Damn dude, I like your colour scheme.
>t. retard
Which OS do you use? Tell us please.
Yeah, sure, whatever. I'll just use my Debian.
I think most Sup Forums users who are not WinBOIs have at least tried Arch.
I would say it's more of a gate way towards using Linux as it was originally conceived.
Arch still kind of fisher prices installing the Kernel and you don't have to deal with source installs unless you want to.
With that said, I think most of the NEETs here would benefit more / get more meaning from learning a good backend development language than constantly ricing out Arch installs.
>Newest version of everything
Do you really need bleeding edge?
>Actually justwerkz
Whats with all the Archfags asking questions on how to do simple task X then?
>Only people who hate on it are winfags who don't know how to into linux and ubuntufags who also don't know how to into linux
Why dont you use LFS then mister Linux guru?
>Best OS for ricing, not even a competition, second best is gentoo if you're really autistic
Ricing is pretty autistic
>actually stable as fuck, anyone saying otherwise is a liar or a shill
Nice argument
>free systemd
But Arch has SystemD?
The best one: Windows X
i'm a maximalist
Debian. Because my primary purpose is work, not ricing. Only kids care about ricing.
>But Arch has SystemD
That's why it's free you retard.
I've used Arch to run servers with uptimes in the months, it's as stable as any other distro and all this bullshit about pacman breaking installation are either lies or posts made by brainlets installing furry dating simulators off AUR.
It's well known that only brainlets hate Arch.
Why are arch users obnoxious cunts?
confirmation bias
Because every time Arch gets brought up or suggested a legion of ubuntucucks pour out of the woodworks saying shit like "noooo arch is too hard, don't learn about your OS, just join the ubuntu herd :)" and "hahaha guys pacman will auto update and break your installation every 12 hours, i know because my cousin heard it from a guy who read it on a forum in 2009" "don't use arch its shit, what, me? No I've never used it"
We're tired of you cucks, so now we're defensive all the time.
>Actually justwerkz
My wifi card, and switchable graphics cards say otherwise.
>defending linux distros on an anime website
It's like you think other distros won't have the same problems. If anything Arch is MORE likely to work because it runs the latest kernel.
Say one (1) benefit of Arch over a minimal Ubuntu installation.
Because I run debian and don't want to update shit everyday.
This kinda. Also arch is comfy, don't know why Sup Forums hates it.
t. arch user
this aint arch you macfaggot
umm look at the logo its arch
Non-free, Systemd-infected, time-wasting distro.
It's also worth noting that Arch does not split packages into runtime and devel, so it's minimal as in the number of packages listed by screenfetch, not minimal as in lightweight.
I see no reason to use it over something like Void, which has an installer.
1. Newer kernels
2. the most comprehensive knowledge base of any distro: archwiki, compared to ubuntu where you're sorting through trash forums and stack overflow links for 2 hours.
U-um... Y-you can d-do everything yourself?
I use Arch + KDE and my systems idles @ ~300mb RAM used
I find Arch to be terrible on laptops, because you run into more problems then what it's worth.
you can change screenfetch logos my dude
>muh free as in freedom
Bet you still use gmail and facebook n shit you fucking retard.
I'm having pulseaudio and some startup lag problems right now. Help me plis ;-;
look at the font rendering and package count. a setup like that requires atleast 500 packages.
also you can change screenfetch/neofetch config to show different logos and info.
You can but you can't change the kernel info, that's arch in his picture. See mine? OS: Ubuntu. but the kernel gives it away.
>atleast 500 packages
>for an open terminal
Why not just use Ubuntu Minimal?
It's much less likely to break when you update but just as barebones and light.
>inb4 "muh upstream updates"
Why do you need those?
Opposite experience fampai, I've run Arch on nearly everything I own with no problems I couldn't fix easily.
What's wrong pal?
>1. Newer kernels
What notable benefit does this give me?
>2. the most comprehensive knowledge base of any distro: archwiki, compared to ubuntu where you're sorting through trash forums and stack overflow links for 2 hours.
I never need to search shit because stuff justwerkz
>U-um... Y-you can d-do everything yourself?
Why would I want to micromanage everything? I have other stuff to do.
>It's much less likely to break when you update but just as barebones and light.
Leave the memes at the door if you want to come talk at the big boys table ubuntubabby, pacman doesn't break installations, it is a meme. You have as much chance of breaking your installation completely with apt as you do with pacman (read: none)
>Why would I want to micromanage everything? I have other stuff to do.
You mean you actually have a job, responsibilities and other activities that a normal productive member of society should have? Look at him, Arch bros, look at him and laugh.
I've never used either.
Were it not for software freedom you would probably never have been able to play around with a manually-installed operating system in the first place, so don't pretend that it doesn't matter.
>What notable benefit does this give me?
If you don't know what possible benefits a more recent kernel might hold then you're right, Arch isn't for you. Stay on Ubuntu.
>I never need to search shit because stuff justwerkz
Until you run into that one obscure issue like happens on every distro and then you have to spend hours combing forums, whereas on Arch a turboautist has already encountered that problem and documented it + 10 fixes on the wiki.
>what is base and base-devel
>implying ncmpcpp and neofetch are the only packages he uses
kek'd alright, I don't have to 'maintain' my arch like the memes though, people around here act like arch is fucking gentoo or something, it can be as 'set and forget' as ubuntu or any other distro after you get through the installation.
I do care about software freedom, but the crying about systemd is just fucking ridiculous, it doesn't affect your average user at all either.
Of course Pacman itself doesn't break shit and you know that's not what I meant, but try denying that the vast majority of people have to obsessively check the website before updating, just in case.
Arch is user-centric, don't deny that Arch is a distro you have to put a lot of effort into maintaining if you actually want the upstream updates.
Most beginners don't want Arch because of the rolling release, they want it because they like the idea of building up their own system from scratch. Ubuntu Minimal is objectively better if that's all you want.
that's not neofetch
>If you don't know what possible benefits a more recent kernel might hold then you're right, Arch isn't for you. Stay on Ubuntu.
I askes you what benefits it brings. I wanted a answer, not an inane snide comment.
>Until you run into that one obscure issue like happens on every distro and then you have to spend hours combing forums, whereas on Arch a turboautist has already encountered that problem and documented it + 10 fixes on the wiki.
I'll give you this.
I love it. what's the background source?
What did you mean then pal? If you're talking about AUR then you're right, but if babby wants to break his installation with a bunch of AUR shit then that's on him, he'll learn and next time he won't do it, there are disclaimers everywhere anyway.
>Most beginners don't want Arch because of the rolling release
Says who? You? Arch's bleeding edge software is the main draw, even more so than the DIY aspect, if you want to just DIY I see no point not using Arch for that anyway though, it has better learning resources and a DIY community built around it.
I don't have the time or care to list every fucking change in the linux kernel, if you actually want to learn then go here kernelnewbies.org
>115 packages
That isn't Arch.
What can I do with arch that i can't do with noobuntu?
>I don't have the time or care to list every fucking change in the linux kernel, if you actually want to learn then go here kernelnewbies.org
So you have time to defend Arch on an anime forum, but no time to actually clarify your points? This sounds afwully like you don't actually know the benefits of a newer kernel and just read on the Arch forums that it is "good".
You type like a literal neckbeaed manchild which leads me to believe you're either baiting or a lost cause.
In any case, my only point is this:
If you only care about building your own system from scratch, get Ubuntu Minimal.
If you only care about getting your packages from the upstream but you're disinterested in setting up your own system from scratch, use Antergos or openSUSE Tumbleweed.
If you care about building your own system from scratch AND getting your packages from the upstream, use Arch.
>he doesn't know how to get an ultra minimal arch install
Feel better about yourself for using a "not beginner friendly distro"
Systemd is free software, it's shit, but not unethical.
I agree that it doesn't matter to the average GNU/Linux user, but we're talking about Arch, whose users (supposedly) really know how their system is put together. If anyone cares about init systems it should be they, else they'd be using another distro.
Fortunately, you can pretty easily switch to OpenRC on Arch, but why go to the trouble to begin with?
like a lot of people on Sup Forums I'm sure, I used to use Arch back when I was new to GNU/Linux and installing my own system seemed like an interesting endeavour. But eventually there came a time when I really did understand how most of the system worked and I began to resent having to install the OS on new computers. It was then that I stopped caring about Arch.
I'm sure that this is pretty typical path, so it feels weird for me to say don't follow it, but just know that Arch typically doesn't lead anywhere except back to where you began.
>building up from scratch
Okay, let's look at this from the perspective of an ubuntu minimal user and an arch user
>Huh, I've run into some weird issue that I can't find anything on, I guess I'll post to the forums
>posts to ubuntu forums, average joe has no fucking idea how to help because he doesn't use minimal install and never ran into that problem, have to wait days for someone who knows his shit to answer
>post to arch forums(implying you couldn't find it on archwiki because it's so comprehensive), everyone there built their OS from scratch and is much more likely to have encountered your issue or understand why you're having it, near instant help.
That's a valid point, hadn't really thought of that.
Don't you think the Arch wiki is *usually* sufficient to help an Ubuntu Minimal user, though?
Every single Ubuntu problem I ran into was fixed using only Arch wiki. It's pretty applicable to any other distro out there.
Just about everything on the arch wiki also applies to every other distro
I'm the same way, that's why I don't think an Ubuntu Minimal user would be severely disadvantaged so long as they're aware of the Arch wiki and capable of following instructions.
>inb4 Arch users call this cuckery
I started messing around with this theme called Chicago95 for xfce and after I got it all set up and running my pulseaudio went to shit and I some small bits of lag when I log into my PC. Sad Reeeeeeeeee ):
I wrote a long post replying to you but the system thinks it's spam for whatever reason, the gist of it is that you ignored my points and didn't give any good reason why ubuntu is better than arch for DIY install when arch has a community fully geared towards that.
meant forbut that guy summed up my point, arch has a community ready to help with even the most obscure shit, most ubuntu users got handheld through the installation and won't be able to help you.
I don't think Chicago95 has anything to do with it because it's just a theme, but idk.
You asked me to list changes, I linked you to a (retard-friendly)resource that lists all the numerous changes in this kernel..there really is no helping you, stay on Ubuntu.
>arch has a community ready to help with even the most obscure shit
I definitely agree here, I just don't see why Ubuntu Minimal users can't also take advantage of that user.
Did you completely uninstall it? This is why I'm always telling you niggers to install Timeshift, or any other CLI system back up. It's a life-saver for when you do some dumb shit and break your OS.
Because they're different operating systems for a start, a lot of systems are handled differently in arch as compared to ubuntu, if you really know your shit you can interpret general advice but we're talking about newbies here. What are you going to do as an ubuntu minimal user when someone recommends a fix geared for arch and points you to an AUR? Probably be very confused if you're new.
i use the arch wiki too, and i run ubuntu on my laptop. it's so well documented, i don't even bother looking up the issue elsewhere first.
Yup! It came as a zip that contained all the icons and stuff. I made and deleted my .themes and .icons folders just in case. I didn't know about timeshift until now. I'll install it when I wake up in the morning.
Basically my point is, if you're going the DIY route arch is better in every way, you have the community, the wiki and you get to play with upstream packages/kernels while learning on the way. I don't see any advantages to using ubuntu minimal over arch for this purpose.
>3dpd
at least get with the times, pleb
illya is my gf nerd
Arch likes to update too much. I mean, I love some new hot updates as much as the next person but not when they get in my way. Also, after some time I just understood that I'm not a minimal kind of guy. Hunting for dependencies and building your system from a minimal base is fun only a few couple of times. As much as I hate Canonical, I must admit that I like having decent fonts in Firefox, codecs, video thumbnails in file manager, etc. out of the box.
Yeah, it's definitely got a ton of content that is applicable to any distro, but at the end of the day it's written for Arch and certain things don't carry over.
"Noobuntu" because I have shit to get done
that's very true. one day i'll update my laptop to arch
stop following me and my gf around
You can run arch while not being a minimal kind of guy, you just need to get a preconfig distro like Antergos or Manjaro. For example Antergos (i'm not as familiar with manjaro but probably it too) come with codecs, vid/pic thumbnails and you choose your fonts. Although it's pretty easy to install all of this shit if you want it, so I prefer it isn't included.
Install Gentoo you faggots
It's f u n, once you go down the rabbit hole and make arch your hobby there's no going back, you'll be one of us.
That's fine, I just don't agree. I guess this really comes down to personal preference/experience.
I prefer slower release cycles and can't think of a problem I've had with Ubuntu that couldn't be solved with the Arch wiki, you obviously have a different experience.
Arch is a perfectly good distribution with a fantastic community which benefits users of all distros, I just don't personally like rolling release distros.
autistic please leave, this is a thread for discussing useful operating systems.
not as good as gentoo tho.
>loli@qt
>(｡>﹏
ive done it in VMs before, i have one such VM on my desktop. installing it for real is on my backlog of things to do, for sure
Any suggestions?
did you know you can choose NOT to update your packages? Having the option to right out of the repos when you see a new feature you like is really handy though.
Sounds like a really strange issue, sorry user. I have no clue. Time to go tell the arch forums you dun goof'd or reinstall.
>Arch
>not the ultimate autistro
top kek, enjoy setting config protection on each file individually
SystemD
and Void is a lot better.
Sure, to each his own. Like I said in another post a lot of the archwiki is transferable, it's a great resource. I personally prefer having the option to try new releases without having to compile it myself all the time, but yeah Ubuntu is better for set it and forget it type guys we agree there.
>SystemD
muh systemd boogeyman reeeee
>and Void is a lot better.
how? what are the benefits of running void over arch beyond muh free as in freedom cuckware
>he doesn't know
there's a way to spoof kernel in screenfetch? pls tell, I want to pretend I run gentoo with 400 day uptime.
...
Fuuuuuuccckkk. Anyways, thanks for your time. Really appreciate it (:
when I used it like 8 years ago it had the habit of blowing up my configs and making the system unbootable with some random update to libc or something.
Debian is great.