Delusional Archfags

>"Arch is more than a bunch of software. It's a way of thinking and doing. Arch is a philosophy, there is an Arch way of doing things and that will impact your experience as a user. When installing the main Arch, you get a system that is built by you for you."
>not realizing the devs don't care about "the arch way"
>using a bloated system due to no package splicing
>being elitist about using a wannabe clone of a wannabe BSD clone
Archfags gtfo

was an arch fag until i tried debian and realized that arch is shit and bloat

>tried debian
>realized that arch is shit and bloat
what. Stay pleb.

Also, this thread is literal underage bait.

I use Arch out of convenience and documentation, but you’d have to be delusional to assume there’s a real philosophy behind it.

>includes systemd by default, not easy to choose
>(afaik) no way to desperate dependencies and recommended packages
>nonfree shit everywhere with no moral philosophy, on the same level as any other OS that’s closed source

Arch isn’t hard to install either, so they can’t pull the gentoofag argument.

debian uses 100mb less ram than arch running the same tasks with the same wm

According to what?
They both use systemd, so that's not a factor--only arch comes rather barebones and is likely going to have less daemons running in the background. Maybe if you weren't shit your arch install wouldn't reflect that.

so does a debian netinstall and "muh barebones" doesnt stack up in this case. Archs netinstall is 500mb of ram debians is 300mb. Why is arch such bloat when m i n i m a l i s m is the "philosophy"? Ill tell you why, its because the devs are lazy, thats the only minimal thing about arch.

People who choose arch for those reasons are faggots, yes. However it's still a great OS that has a lot of things going for it, it's documentation and the AUR being two big ones. Generally arch tries to render complicated tasks simple by providing utilities that aid in said task - such as using makepkg and pkgbuilds for compiling from source.

It isn't particularly better than any other distro, but that doesn't mean its worse either.

I can't say I've ever so much as tried Arch, but I can only imagine how insecure you are for making this thread.

Post the comics

It is easy to install for expirianced people. Took me a while when I didn't know anything about Linux, but now I can get a desktop in 10 minutes.

Arch is inferior.
Arch is "minimal" because it lacks functionality.
Its a goddamn 2017 and arch dev team cant implement a graphical installer to their os.
Hurr durrr we dont put graphical installer cus "MUH MINIMALISM".

While a fucking debian has more lighter netinstall ISO and gues what... debian has there a legit graphical installler, and you can customize debian the same way you can customize arch.

Or even you know what? Fuck minimalism meme and install fucking linux mint. Bloat? Dont make me laugh, in times of terabyte disks and over 4 GB ram that "bloat" is literally so small it barely exist. Mint can run even on 1 gb ram 200gb disk PC without problems.

Archcucks forever will be laboratory rats for devs.

Minimalism is not and was never part of Arch's philosophy. Please do your research. Packages are individualized for the sake of speedy development and deployment. They, as a total, take up more disk space than Debian's packages. But, there's that mentioned pro of a simplified means of package management. Arch and Debian both have pros and cons and may fit one's needs better than other's.

Graphical installers are for idiots that should stick to Mint.

>Archcuck attempting to damage controll detected.

>c-c-cli b-be s-superio-o-ohhhr for e-everything

Wrong, I use Parabola

CLI is indeed superior, pajeet. Off to your web dev job you go.

arch cucks on suicide watch holy shit

parabola is what arch should have been

cli is not superior for installing a OS you dumb fuck
back to writing fizzbuzz in Haskell faggot

I wonder how some people live shilling a shitty distro for free...
Arch fanboys are the ultimate cucks of the Linux community

Pfft. Superiority of graphical installer its not in fact they made instalation easier but also most of graphical installers automates instalation process, in command install you need to write command for every shit you need in order to set up functional OS (Format disk, install system, install grub, install DM, install DE/WM, install drivers, set up root pasword, install some basic software you use) And you must write command for 1 action then wait and then write another command and repeat.

And in graphical installer for example zen installer you just click on few windows to format drive disk and then you choose kernel, then you choose wm/de, dm, additional drivers and software and you can do something else because installer will do all this job and when it ends, you have fully functional ready for work OS with installed stuff you choosen.

>another brainlet who couldn't make it through the Arch installation

CLI is superior for installing an OS if you're installing on more than one computer.

Who are you quoting?

[max(show x)(concat[n|(f,n)

>try using Ubuntu
>shit doesn't work right, have to dick around endlessly adding repos and workarounds the release system
>try using Debian
>ancient packages
>try using Fedora
>shit doesn't work right
>try using Arch
>it works and is faster than the others, even with fatass Gnome running on it
don't care about your memes, it werks for me

>Implying arch cucks can afford more than one computer

>implying you can't get a bunch of computers for cheap if you get them used from people you know

>ancient packages
just change to the testing or unstable branch mehmet

>change to testing/unstable
>packages are still older
>packages selection is still less varied
nah

Arch is pretty much crap, no one should be using it for what OP's pic states.

Id consider switching but Im in love with pacman and apt-get sounds really faggy to me and I dont want to type hyphens all day.

The main strength of arch is it's amazing wiki. However, I can't stand that it's not as fast as Solus when it comes to updating kernel and system libraries so I had to switch.

just use apt, apt-get is depricated. Also pacman uses hypens too.
Are you fucking kidding me? 50kb/s on solus, 100 times that on arch when upgrading.

Arch has been working great for me up until now, specifically the Arch maintainers keep making Haskell fucking impossible to install. First they decide to dynamically link everything, which was a terrible idea. Once you use the AUR package that lets you actually statically link with stack, everything works fine, until now they fucked up some other setting so that nothing links anymore because of some -fPIC crap. I swear to god, getting Haskell to work on Arch is an uphill battle. It's like the maintainers specifically don't want you using Haskell.

I was talking about how long it takes for solus and arch to land a new kernel and critical system libraries in their repos. Last I checked Solus package server was on some high-end CDN so dload speed is high enough.

caring of ram and hd space when a today pc have at least 8 gb of ram and 1 tb hard disk

Learn a real language

>daemons running in the background don't use any cpu time
damn I wish I had your computer

And despite all this, Arch still runs faster, uses less RAM and it's less bloated than any other system I've ever used.
Shit thread btw. Sage.

This.
Debian now sucks. It's just a shadow of a once great distro.

ask to your mom for a new pc

If CLI wasn't superior, why does OpenBSD use it for their installer?
Pro tip: TUIs aren't CLIs. TUIs and GUIs aren't scriptable.

Besides weebs, nobody has ever taken Arch seriously.

Probably the best answer. If you use a window manager instead of a fully fledged DE, you'll probably find arch more convenient.

I had the same problem. I eventually just gave up and installed everything manually.

EVEN FUCKING VOID HAS AN INSTALLER

>Arch isn’t hard to install either
It's not supposed to be. The wiki describes it as "user-centric." Maybe it's not completely user-friendly, but it still works with people who take five minutes to read the instructions.