Imma install Archmerge because it's riced up as fuck. It's all icons and fluff, it makes me feel like a schoolgirl...

Imma install Archmerge because it's riced up as fuck. It's all icons and fluff, it makes me feel like a schoolgirl. Why can't Windows look this good?

>arch
BLOAT

What WM does it use?

Then what do you suggest? Clearly you're omniscient when it comes to linux distros.

Debian net install. or gentoo(meme)
> inb4 old packages

>another arch installation script

Its called gnu/linux

Not him, but Debian, Gentoo, Void, Devuan.

why Devuan? its a clusterfuck. use void instead of devuan

its just linux
they both suck alot

This. using arch should never be easy.
it should be in the rules that even leaving it installed is a noob move. Real pros manually reinstall arch every time they boot their computer.

just install manjaro
install adapta-gtk-theme
install halo-icons-git
and there you go, there's your fucking archmerge
you're gonna have to put a little bit more effort for conki though, or just copy someone's config. It's that simple

it's not about hard with no purpose, it's about giving you a choice, so when you're using installation scripts that choice is basically being decided by someone else ( the one who wrote the script). What you're left with is the typical stuff such creating your account, choosing mount points, choosing additional software. For most that's enough, I use them myself

but what if you choose to have the other persons setup?

is this the new desktop thread

:thinking:

...

why do you keep putting those sluts as your wallpaper

How is 1229 packages for xfce fucking bloat?

test

-w-

Please be nice to Isac

...

windows desktop

windows desktop

This is such a fucking meme.

Guess what, most people will install shit within a set amount of parameters, there's only so many browsers, so many file managers, so many DEs and WMs. So it's quite likely that a script will meet many of those parameters.

Theres no issue, if you want to manually install then manually install, but others may decide to use a script. What harm does it do? Does manually installing Arch really make someone a super leet hax0r? Not really, they're just copy pasting the Arch wiki.

You learn as much using Debian, or Mint, or any other distro as you do with installin Arch, because a one time copy paste fest isn't the same as using a fully running system and encountering all those little caveats and issues.

I've been using Arch for 5 years, Linux for 11 years, and setting up Arch AFTER the install teaches a hell of a lot more than installation itself, and the experience of distrohopping, googling, hitting the forums for al the problems I have far outweighs what one learns from manual installation.

That looks fucking useless

utility value is subjective you retarded cretin

ben stop posting in r9k and pol

Oh, so the only utility value you perceive is screenshotting for Sup Forums

fucking queer.

What font do you use there?

woah rly makes u think

spoonm is a notoriously bad ricer

irony

laughed out loud

shut up

it's listed right there

that high horse is out of reach of your crap desktop

btfo

You are not a girl.

i'm

she's

he is ive known her since preschool

Yes she is, I know her IRL.

mental illness

Stop pretending and apologize to ubuntufag already!!!

>o many DEs and WMs.
this.
how many people use kde and DONT use kwin?

I think installing it once can teach you a lot, as a beginner, but after the first time you don't really learn anything beyond refreshing your memory. Partitioning, package management, display servers, bootloader, drivers; It makes you do all these things manually and you realise it isn't difficult at all and mistakes can easily be fixed. I agree that you learn a lot more setting it up afterwards, but what you do learn the first time you install it is quite important as well.