Why is arch looked down upon here?

I love arch, but am kinda surprised at the reaction it gets here. Why is that? It’s minimal, always up to date rolling release, and gives the user a lot of control over the system.

Attached: image.jpg (1024x1024, 159K)

Other urls found in this thread:

vfxplatform.com/
twitter.com/AnonBabble

>It’s minimal
Ubuntu bootstrapped is smaller than Arch bootstrapped.

Arch is not minimal and it's a meme.

Sup Forums used to unanimously love Arch many, many years ago but it got too popular and too many losers who base their worth around installing an OS entered the community.

Attached: Screenshot_20180321_135631.png (1920x1080, 2.22M)

>minimal

Attached: 15109331939270.jpg (1080x1331, 66K)

I think it's mostly the community, but there are some other reasons as well, like claiming minimalism even though the devs are adding approximately every fucking option available when compiling packages.

Attached: 1520717889692.jpg (383x400, 16K)

Le minimal distro meme xDDD

It's minimal.

Attached: Screenshot_20180321_135829.png (1920x1080, 439K)

Its not minimal at all and it uses systemd. Its basically faggots first meme distro and doesn't do anything well. There is no reason to like arch unless you're new and just learning. Move away from it asap

>they say its minimal so it is
How new are you kid? Every fucking piece of software targeting meme power users will claim to be 'efficient' and 'minimal'

>user says it's not minimal so it isn't
See how that works?

Install Alpine

I'm already using Open-WRT/Lede on my router.

Debian/ubuntu retards don't like it because they're too stupid to use it and gentoo faggots don't like it because of binary packages.

No OP, it is not minimal. You are not using a minimal system.

>too stupid to use it
Elaborate

I use arch because
1-it just werks
2-meme cred
3-nope thats it

After compiling some AUR packages, I idly mused about compiling my entire system from source. There was no way back for me at that point - fortunately, Sup Forums had prepared me well for that moment. Been using Gentoo ever since.

This is the exact reason why people don't like Arch. Obnoxious cunts who think using Arch is hard and some kind of accomplishment.

Allow me to translate
>I'm an arch user and I'm butthurt people think my OS is retarded
Arch is just a less stable, more finnicky style of debian. Package manager? Yup, here you go, just AUR everything you'd ever need! It'll take care of itself! Tweakable? Yup, just run through these 18 hoops just like debian. Minimalist? Nope, but look at the low package count! That means there couldnt be dependencies inside of them!

It's a tryhard distro with no benefits.

Why even care what other people use? Just use what works for you and be done with it.

It's not hard, doesn't change the fact that only retards have trouble with it and they tend to be from Debian and Ubuntu.

The benefits are that it is the only distro that is stable *because* of how bleeding edge it is. Every time there is any issue every other distro is just starting to deal with, Arch already had its repositories updated.

It is simple but it's not minimal. Every single binary from pacman has been precompiled with every USE flag, meaning that every package on your system is more bloated than it needs to be. Ever wonder how your Arch linux kernel works with every piece of hardware out of the box?

Attached: distro_comparison.png (631x300, 139K)

do you have many friends?

swear this is the only voice of reason on this board

>Ever wonder how your Arch linux kernel works with every piece of hardware out of the box?
By not being shit.

Boring office stuff like spread sheets: Red Hat, CentOS
Noobs general: Ubuntu
Entry-level coding: Debian, Void
Reale serious coding, top-end server stuff and hardcore hacking: Arch

The funny part is that most of the people in this thread used to be part of the voice of reason at some point in time. Of course, most of them ended up taking the internet way too seriously and getting themselves asshurt over trivial crap like "os wars" bait. Little kids (and teens, especially) tend to want to fight over something with clearly defined "sides" as they desperately want to fit in with a group. Trolls realize this, and make the baits far too tempting to not bite. I'd be lying if I said I wasn't constantly amused by watching the kiddos fall all over themselves to bite the bait and start flinging shit at each other like good little puppets.

>arch rulez!
>no fayget! install gentoo!
>nuh uh! archlyfe 4 lyfe!
>but muh xubuntu
Each one of them completely convinced that they're the troll, and not the retard getting trolled. That's the best part. Even the ones who actually have the self-awareness to see the game for what it is will try to convince themselves, and anyone who will listen, that they "know" it's bait, and they're just responding "ironically" to it.

Attached: 1506921776052.png (448x463, 211K)

>top-end server stuff ... Arch
Arch for servers? Why?

Attached: 1520803536601.png (492x611, 469K)

>I make things more difficult for myself because I'm smart.

Attached: 1519425741301.jpg (1170x742, 70K)

>working with every single hardware imagineable
>thinking this is a bad thing
I'm now reminded of that one retard that complained on this board about how his school projector didn't work with his minimalist set-up.

Eh, it used to be decent. I remember it was quite popular back in the day, but anything that is popular will quickly be hated on and denounced as "shit" or "for casuals" because whoever is the most eccentric outcast is the best right?

In all seriousness, Arch lost a shitload of popularity when it got rid of the graphical installer; most of the people installing Arch just wanted to pretend they were awesome without having to actually do anything complicated.

I guess it's nice if all you want is a distro with the latest cutting edge software. It will break a lot, you'll be expected to fix it yourself, and will be bitched out if you talk about problems on their forums/IRC, but you'll have the latest versions of everything. If you just want a working OS, stay away.

>It will break a lot
ikr? mine just won't stop breaking. at least 8 or 9 times a week.

Install it on your desktop, you mongoloid

Microsoft sucking Debianfags get really butthurt over it because it's everything they wanted to be.

>he thinks greentexts are real

Attached: IMG_5617.jpg (2048x1024, 435K)

>It will break a lot, you'll be expected to fix it yourself
Just keep a live USB handy so you can chroot into your installation and downgrade any problematic packages.

Not anymore. The arch linnugs and the 44444get threads have made arch acceptable.

Attached: 1519720856044.png (512x512, 51K)

Debian: when you're too fucking dumb for Arch

Been using Arch for 2 years now - not so much as a single crash. Arch instability is a meme

>arch looked down upon here?
I wish

I recently updated an arch system that I hadn't booted in about 1.5 years. Took me about an hour to resolve all issues and finally getting it up to date. Main issues were fucked dependencies and version conflicts because my system was too old. But after updating twice to old snapshots of the repos it worked without further issues.
In hindsight, had it been a Windows system, the update would probably have taken longer.

I don't know what you guys are doing wrong with your Arch installation. I've been using it as my main work desktop for 5 years already with minimal downtime. The biggest outage I've had was 5 hours. The non-boot-after-update happens once every few months, so it's not a big issue.

>The non-boot-after-update happens once every few months, so it's not a big issue.
That sounds kinda ominous.

I used arch for a long time. I hate it because it reminds me of what a little fag I was before I actually learned GNU/Linux. I also hate it because once I tried NixOS/Gentoo/Debian I realized what piece of shit it is. dependencies break and conflict all over the place, god forbid you use it with something like cabal you will actually get AIDS. while AUR is cool it's also a piece of shit as well since most people putting stuff there are absolute morons. archlets will defend this by saying they can control the bitrot and symlinks cumming all over their OS, but truth be told they do "fresh reinstalls" and portray that as some kind a feature

>I used arch for a long time.
And then you spend the rest of your post proving that you've actually never used it at all AND you're easily meme'd by other shitposting faggots on Sup Forums. Good job. Your efforts at fitting in are really paying off.

It takes a lot of time but a little skill to install and setup. You just have to follow instructions and not be a retard. But it's still much harder than full-auto-retard installer that most of the distros have, so it attracted many autismos and elitismos that aren't really all that tech-savvy and it kinda damaged the reputation of Arch itself. It's a good distribution overall, and top layers of community are really the tech elites, writing good documentation and shit for the whole Linux world to use.

>my anecdotal experience doesnt match another users therefore hes lying

Yeah, pretty much. Anyone who's actually used any of these systems for any amount of time can easily tell when they're seeing an asshurt kid parrotting memes.

Personally I don't have a huge amount of experience diving deep into linux other than knowing some basic management stuff, I don't really have a dog in the fight... But arch is the only thing that runs with no issues and no slowdown on my '15 chromebook pixel 2 that I picked up at a garage sale for $50. I've had ubuntu, mint, gentoo, elementaryos, and arch on here, and arch is the only one that runs like a dream on this shitty hardware.

Anecdotal and doesn't mean much, but I guess I'll fall for the minimal meme since it's the only one that runs perfectly on the crappy hardware.

>error: failed retrieving file '' from repo : Operation too slow. Less than 1 bytes/sec transferred the last 10 seconds

Attached: 1432259490310.jpg (700x700, 68K)

Whether or not compiling your own kernel is a hassle is besides the point. It's just a fact that a gentoo user will have a less bloated kernel.

fuck you all

Because there is probably no single thing that Sup Forums likes. It is an awesome distro.

Attached: arch users.jpg (991x1184, 76K)

Arch users are smarter than anyone else.
If you don't use Arch, it means you're too dumb to use it.

I used Arch for ~2 years around the time it started becoming a meme on Sup Forums. It wasn't too bad to use when it worked, I happily spent time bringing it up and ricing out my desktop like other people. Doing everything in rc.conf using a single runlevel seemed to make sense and was easy to customize.

At first I didn't really mind fixing things that updates would break, but eventually it started getting old. The devs would post important updates on the website about system-breaking packages that would cause dependency loops. A few times a month I would need to figure out what sort of manual intervention I would need to do just to keep the system up to date. Over time I found a system would slowly degrade into a state where every update meant something would go wrong and require fixing. Only a complete reinstall would bring everything back into harmony, but it never lasted for more than 6-10 months before things started to fall apart again.

The last straw was during a kernel update triggered by a routine pacman -Ss. The init ramdisk failed to build correctly but pacman happily installed it anyway. It wasn't a problem to fix, but I was floored that the devs weren't even checking the return code before moving ahead with installing a broken initrd. It really spoke to the problems at the core of the distro. I moved away from Arch and never went back.

Meant pacman -Syu, not -Ss. You can tell it's been a while since I used Arch...

Trying to help people pick not shit options is a nice goal.

Lol just because your new and no one has posted the screenshots of the developers saying it aims to be anything but minimal yet

Not many in tech because of my strict opinions on literally anything related to technology.
>so what language should we use for this project guys
>lol just let user deal with that or he'll start raging about it like always

But that's not really what's happening. It's mostly just assblasted kiddos fighting over what they think is the best distro.

>Lol just because your new and no one has posted the screenshots of the developers saying it aims to be anything but minimal yet
Been coming to Sup Forums since before you even started fapping, kiddo. Arch doesn't aim to be "minimal" (read barely functional), it aims to be a basic functional OS that provides a foundation for power users to make into what they want on their personal machines. You minimalist faggots think if you're not using an OS is that's only one step above a BIOS, then it's not minimal enough.

It's pointless and it's userbase is cancerous. It isn't minimal, they don't even split the dev files for packages into separate -dev packages. It's rolling release but so are a ton of other distros. Also it doesn't give the user any more control over the system than any other distro.

The board is full of normies now, most couldn't install arch or use anything much more complicated than OSX

Fuck off, pick a side or kill yourself you shitskin whore.

As Sup Forums gets collectively stupider as time passes, the minor level of GNU/Linux competence required to install ArchLinux becomes a increasingly bigger obstacle, which in turn triggers ever higher levels of rage among the ever more prevalent dimwitted Sup Forums userbase.
It's no accident that the increasing level of Arch "Fox and Grapes" syndrome coincides with a directly proportional increase popularity of Manjaro and other "Arch for dummies" type distros.
In reality, the arch installation process actually simplifies the steps which should in any case be considered absolutely minimum must-have skills of any GNU/Linux user with even a modicum of ambition to advance past the "noob" stage.

arch is fine, it's just that many arch users treat it as some kind of video game. they don't really do much with it except ricing, take pride in using an elitist OS and look down on "noob" distros. in many ways it's the dark souls of linux distributions

>tfw can install Arch the manual way but still use Antergos because it's braindead easy

vfxplatform.com/
I'm a victim of this at work and they use this god horrible Mate desktop. It's so shit that I can't imagine anything worse. Basically it's CentOS + mate and some locked library versions to support 3d software. What is your opinion about this? I already know mine: it's shit.

even with mdadm, dm-crypt, btrfs root in a sub-volume, and encrypted grub partitions?

You seem fairly wise, for an anime faggot.

>The non-boot-after-update happens once every few months, so it's not a big issue.
I don't know what you guys are doing wrong with your Arch installation.

You say systemd like it's a bad thing.

Yes for encryption but I'll have to follow the wiki closely for mdadm and btrfs because I don't use RAID or btrfs.

Attached: Screenshot_20180321_164426.png (1920x1080, 235K)

What are you using now, user?

people claim it to be minimal yet it uses 100 Mb ram when idle.

That doesn't seem like much.

I honestly can't even tell if you're being facetious.

At the risk of pissing off everyone, Windows 10 is what I use as my primary desktop. I use Debian VMs for development and also deploy it onto servers.

lmao. Maximum pleb.

Thanks user. It took a long time to realize that achieving satori meant being a pleb all along.

>pacman -R avahi
>:: libcups: removing avahi breaks dependency 'avahi'
>pacman -R libcups
>:: gtk2: removing libcups breaks dependency 'libcups'
>:: gtk3: removing libcups breaks dependency 'libcups'
>:: qt5-base: removing libcups breaks dependency 'libcups'

Arch users can't install common graphical toolkits without installing avahi.

pacman -Rdd avahi
Wow, so hard.

One of a few sane posts here.

Enjoy your inevitable system breakage. Debian derivatives split important libs, and Gentoo can compile graphical toolkits without botnet features baked in.

If it's actually unnecessary, then nothing should break.

>systemd
>sudo

>implying there is anything wrong with either

why? the last thing the devs care about on alpine is the desktop

It's the new Install Gentoo. Memeing kids into installing an embedded devices OS on their desktop.

I have tried Gentoo for a short while, found the handbook better documented for the core install than arch along with a more advanced set of tools and finer control. I prefer the arch wiki for quick tips on certain applications after the core install.

I still use arch on both my desktop and laptop as I might be relocating soon so I'd prefer sticking with a binary based distribution on my laptop since I won't have access to a desktop for cross compilation nor the time to meddle with a new OS.
Switching from systemd to OpenRC is not reason enough for me to invest a great deal of time migrating my current configuration or learning a new set of tools.

In the short time that I have been meddling with Gentoo I didn't really make much use of the USEFLAGS, tweaking the kernel was handy but I'd rather just have everything I need especially on a laptop for quick and easy plug and play access to new hardware without meddling with the kernel every time.
The AUR plays a huge part for me as well, I know gentoo has overlays but the AUR seems far larger and fairly simple to get going with the aid of a helper.

Nearly 2 years now and I haven't had any major issues with arch using i3wm + XFCE goodies on top so I am sticking with it.
If I start having major issues and no time to fix them I'd revert to a live distribution and DE.

Memes

Attached: Arch_Comic_1.png (650x4377, 871K)