Arch

But really though, is Arch the best?

I feel like Arch is the Marmite of Sup Forums, why is it so polarising?

Other urls found in this thread:

voidlinux.eu/news/2017/12/ponysay.html
twitter.com/SFWRedditImages

Fox and grapes parable.

because it is popular enough and easy to use to no longer be cool for a Sup Forums neckbeard so they pass around copy pastas and convince themselves that it is a bad distro.

People on Sup Forums use arch because they're all autistic and can't sort out their lives and would rather be retarded faggots and rice up their desktops with the power of autism and slap a anime wallpaper in there to show their autism
Obviously ubuntu mate is the best choice that you could make, everything just works, I'm gonna switch back to it cause I want to learn python and windows is very laggy and takes up a lot of space and since I have little space on my hard drive and the transition is probably gonna make me focus on learning it than playing video games

...

Care to elaborate a bit?

I ask because I actually have Arch installed on my other SSD, and used it primarily until I broke it (it's an easy fix, i'm just lazy, it's trying to look for a partition to mount on boot-up that no longer exists).

What is actually autistic about Arch?

realistically, it's because it's technically practical but also technically bad. Some programmers just want a functional environment that provides them with lots of developer options and resources, like arch. Even if it's super bloated and is horrible at handling processes at lower levels because of systemd, it has a decent repo and the AUR is a great system for developers. The kind of programmer who really likes to have all the best software on his system, however, can really easily write off arch because of things like systemd, even if arch has great resources.
When it comes down to it, though, nobody even has a reason to use arch when void exists.

>When it comes down to it, though, nobody even has a reason to use arch when void exists.
Opinion discarded

>opinion

But void has no packages.

pack up your memes and fuck off

checked and also void has had all the packages I want, but that might not be true for you.

checked
I never said syvinit was better than systemd, they both blow. Runit is patrician tier though.

neckbeards love to hate anything that was once the pinnacle of patrician pseudo-hipsterism and is now too popular for that

>two [2] same digits

Arch us the ultimative troll.
> shill for minimalism, it's actually bloat
> shill fir linux, it's actually GNU+Linux
> shill for building your very own OS, get forced shit instead
> superior AUR, is just a git clone make wrapper
> shill for up2date, break compatibility

Arch does everything wrong

I think to use archlabs. Has anyone used it yet?

People go to plebbit and think only on arch you can rice.

Currently have Arch on my netbook but I'm not a programmer (Would love to learn someday.) What would Sup Forums suggest I replace my arch install with. I was always told early on that Ubuntu was just babies first linux and I should learn the a tougher distro for experience. Now that I know Arch I'd love to pick up a distro with functionality and a ton of support for packages (I find myself humping the AUR constantly due to Arch's lack of proper packages in the main repos).

You'll find yourself utterly disappointed with any other distro.

don't listen to memes. If you've used Linux for a while, in at least a couple of different distros, you probably have a pretty good idea what's important to you. Package selection and management, rolling or regular release, bleeding-edge or stable, how strict they are about free software, how they set things up in the default install. Pick the distro that you think matches your preferences most closely.

compiling from source doesn't count as proper?

arch is neither bad nor good
it's simply a "cool" distro
teenagers like "cool" things

fresh new packages are cool, even if they might be broken
setting up and fixing arch is also cool, even if it's just copypasting into terminal from wiki for every menial task.

antergos is literally a less "cool" arch, so you see it being shitted on more often, same with manjaro

at one point teenagers grow up (hopefully), and then they realize that they no longer enjoy wasting time on fuckups and laziness of arch maintainers, and then their opinion on arch shifts into a completely opposite direction.

in other words, arch is like puberty
some people go through it fast, some get stuck

picrelated - a typical teenager's arch desktop, with shitty modern anime waifu wallpaper and obligatory tasteless lazy rice, that usually consists of slapping some dark theme ( most often Arc ) and trendy icon pack ( flatshit ).

rpm or deb distro, the one that you enjoy the most out of the box

everything else is a waste of time

...

>be arch package maintainer
>change config file on my package ONCE
>the package manager fucking warns you
>it makes a backup of your config
>LMAO ARCH BREAKS YOUR COMPUTER XD ONLEY NON-ADULTS UNLIKE MYSELF HAVE TIME TO FIX FUCKUPS EVERYDAY XDDD THEY USE ANIME WALLPAPER

nice copypasta tho

what are you even implying with this post of yours? Breakage from updating isn't even the main concern when using arch.

So, would moving from Arch to Debian (for example) really be a bad move considering i value having stability and packages galore more than bleeding-edge?

The vast majority of people who shit on Arch are people who hate the stereotype of neckbeard more than the actual distro.

checked and probably since they both suffer from systemdick

nah Debian's a good choice for that. Could use one of the LTS Ubuntus if you don't like it.

>fresh new packages are cool, even if they might be broken
the funniest thing to me is that when I use other distros (like Fedora) with older packages, they're far more likely to be broken than anything I've ever gotten from the Arch repos
any non-rolling release distro I've ever used was also a horrible pain the ass to update to the new version
hell, even when Arch moved to systemd I don't recall there being anything broken
I don't know what packages/setup you have to be using to have Arch break your shit with any sort of frequency, but in the 5 (coming up on 6 now I suppose) years I've been using it, it's been nothing but good to me

yeah but ubuntu sells my keyboard inputs to amazon :S

He didn't say arch is autistic, he said
>People on Sup Forums use arch because they're all autistic and

He was implying that Arch doesn't break shit as often as you say it does.
What is the problem with Arch if it doesn't break your shit? That's the only thing you mentioned in your previous post besides going on about being mature for whatever reason.

>the funniest thing to me is that when I use other distros (like Fedora) with older packages, they're far more likely to be broken than anything I've ever gotten from the Arch repos
yea very funny indeed

What packages have you gotten from Arch repos that were broken?

Manjaro is the best

It's Sup Forums's tradition to bully Arch with very much untrue facts

and some true ones

Well, I think that about wraps up this riveting discussion on distro wars.

t. Ubuntu baby that never downloaded Arch

t. archtoddler who uses systemd over runit

It'd need to actually be minimal for it to be polarising. It's more like the sriracha of Sup Forums: pure reddit trash.

>I feel like Arch is the Marmite of Sup Forums
Nobody claims that Marmite is good though.

i thought strayans did

I’ve been using it for like 7 years now, it’s honestly the best distro for PC’s imo

same

I've been dabbling in Linux since about 1998 or so, when I bought a Linux magazine that came with a CD that had a distro on it (Mandrake Linux, if you're curious).

I've been using it here-and-there, casually, ever since. There is ALWAYS a flavor of the month distro that everyone flocks to.

Distros rise and fall, and only a few have remained fairly popular over the years since then: Red Hat, SuSe, Debian, Slackware, maybe one or two others.

Right now everyone here creams over Arch/Gentoo, a few years later it will be something else. Use the one that fits your needs to best.

>7 years
Then you've only been using it post-systemd, meaning you never even took advantage of the minimalism that made Arch a meme in the first place. Fucking retard.

Arch has been popular for a pretty long time, even Linux books reference it.

systemd move was '12 though, which was only 6 years ago

My bad. You made use of Arch for all of one year before it became shit. Much better.

you do realize that there were (and are) more reasons to use arch than just the init system, right?

I used it since before systemd, fool. I remember editing the rc.conf file. I actually don’t mind systemd, I can’t find any reason to hate it.

Found the nigger cattle. Probably shareblue shills too. Stop trying to trick white men into installing your (((distro))). We're not falling for it.

>void
voidlinux.eu/news/2017/12/ponysay.html

void beats it now in all those areas but repos, though

You look like a retard.

dunno m8, haven't tried void, but Arch just werks for me, and repos are a large part of that

Or maybe they're here to stay. You didn't actually refer to anyother "flavor of the month" distros, so your whole point is mute. But people who use something, then something new comes along, tend to look down on the new thing, so not surprised by your attitude.

...

if you don't care that much it's your prerogative, but void is nothing short of erotic.

I use Void as well as Arch. Arch for x86_64 and Void for ARM and 32 bit x86

I didn't say I don't care, but can you actually articulate why void is better besides the lack of systemd?

use alpine u fegget

alpine has the small part down, but it's a completely different software ecosystem

...

I don’t need a distro for embedded systems.

When it comes down to it, that really is the trade off. The systems are quite similar in terms of funcitonality. The void install base is much smaller and there are fully musl based isos, but other than that you just trade off the Arch repos for a super fast and easy to understand init system.

arch is a leecher distro

arch community doesn't provide anything, they are mindless consumers among linux population. 90% of them are ex-winbabbies "power users" who either got into arch after ubuntu, or straight from win10.

you should use distros that actually help linux move forward.

even their "wiki" is nothing but "to get this piece of shit to work do this and this, if it's doesn't work try this instead". Compared to debian or rhel/fedora wikis which delve into a subject a lot deeper, trying to teach and educate the reader, arch wiki just spoonfeeds its userbase, turning them into retarded scriptkiddies with inflated egos

You mean 'moot'. And I don't look down on the flavors of the month. I was compiling Gentoo back in 2004 or so, tried out Ubuntu when it exploded on the scene, and am currently running Anteregos.

>you should use distros that actually help linux move forward.
so Fedora or Fedora?

>terry davis memes
>shareblue memes
>(((quotes)))
>muh white children
>SHILL FEVER

You have become one with the internet. You are no longer a human, just an autistic meme machine. You have ascended.

router distro

fedora, ubuntu, debian, "freedom"-focused distros if you are into that.

ubuntu doesn't move linux forward, they have kowtowed to Red Hat
debian doesn't move linux forward either, they are well known for being "rock solid stable" or in other words "no progress is made here"
and the "freedom" focused distros are by and far the biggest wastes of time and space as they don't affect the ecosystem at all

If anything, the Arch community moves Linux forward by beta testing the upstream packages before anyone else gets them.

I don't know to what extent Arch provides feedback for these packages.

ubuntu did a lot for linux desktop, from font rendering to getting a shitton of people into linux in first place, acting as a bridge.

Debian is the foundation distro, it's stable branch is rock solid, but it doesn't just magically appear out of nowhere, debian sid is the active development branch.

freedom distros are subject to your beliefs. While you might find them to be "wastes of time", some people swear by the free software philosophy. I support it as well, but im still too dependent on non-free software to make a switch.

>some people swear by the free software philosophy
doens't mean they "move linux forward"

>literal shitposting nation
>praising marmite
Really makes you think.

it's the Brutal Doom of Linux distros

If someone finds and reports a bug that's not Arch's fault, I would guess it gets reported upstream fairly often by the package maintainer or the reporter himself.

... Hey, that you use is Arc?

The issue that if you follow manual you have nothing to boot is funny too. I can't use it outside of VM because I don't know how to configure bootloader on my shitty UEFI thing.