Go arch linux reddit Either go vanilla Arch or don't go Arch at all. I mean, they just want the setup part done quick. Arch is a great way to get there, but you can also use SUSE Tumbleweed, Void (closer to Arch in many ways, very simple distro) or Solus, and smaller ones like KaOS or Chakra (both use pacman, with their own repos), or Manjaro if you want closer to an Ubuntu/Mint experience with Arch's up-to-dateness. I've adapted this adage to know that solutions for archlinux are generic enough to work on any other distro. . Plus, everyone always points to the Arch Linux wiki for help, no matter the distro, so I thought, why not just go with Arch Linux? And now, I've been on Arch Linux for about a year. if you consider it "hard work". (Upstream means with the developer(s) of the software directly) This leads to faster packaging of software an less burden to the maintainers of arch Linux Arch is rolling release means, they don't have versions like windows 7, 8, 10. i like using pamac to browse that aur, and install it on arch linux sometimes If you want arch with training wheels still on a distro based on it like endeavourOS might be ideal especially considering their super helpful and active community on their forums and sub reddit in addition to having one of the most vast,useful and detailed wiki’s available on the web with the arch wiki. If you need a daily driver that just works out of the box, start with something like PopOS!, and learn in a more secure way. Arch used to be called "Linux with a nice package manager" Back in those days it was much like Crux, but with pacman serving up bleeding-edge binaries. I've never heard of an arch installation lasting longer than a year. If you can handle Arch, it's an amazing distro. Arch is an awesome distro with incredible customization options and a package manager than compiling from source could never compare to in speed, but there are trade offs there, just not noticeable ones for the “average” Linux (or even arch) user. I've had no issues, except for two months after my initial installation when I ran a command that messed up the permissions on every folder. Hopefully it will only take one attempt but it probably won't. Arch Linux forces you to configure everything in your Linux system yourself. "can you imagine a Windows update that locks you out of your system and requires a reboot whenever you try to select a WiFi network" Hmm Sounds EXACTLY like the majority of my experience on windows, which is why I use Arch, where such issues are rare, and where I can at least control when it updates and schedule significant updates to occur at times when I have time to troubleshoot/fix any A subreddit for the Arch Linux user community for support and useful news. I haven't run arch install yet, but I assume it gives you choices to customize the install. You can always start over. As someone told me long before - Learn RedHat (Enterprise Linux) and you'll know how to operate that; Learn Slackware and you'll know how to operate anything (GNU/Linux). Option 1, go ahead and try to install Arch. I've used Cinnamon w/ Arch Linux since 2017, and I have a new mid-range laptop which means a new Arch instance, and I'm curious about scoping options for a different DE. I then saw that Asahi Linux had an alpha version that would run on my M1 Mac and gave it a try. If it causes you trouble (no shame in that), go for something easier: Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Pop!_OS, Fedora… But honestly if you haven't had much experience with Linux, Ubuntu is the way to go. Yesterday one of my friends argued, that now that Arch Linux has an install script, it "lowers the barrier of entry". The issues with Arch Linux don’t even come from Arch itself but simply upstream issues in the Linux kernel whereas Ubuntu had really bad bugs from configuration changes between updates. But I enjoy Arch Linux so much more That being said I'm planning on switching to it, but I don't know how, because I've never done this to a computer with a removable keyboard. pacman and aur repos are so useful, try it at least on a VM to see how it works. But remember, you need to make some research first. Members Online KDE Developers Are Currently Seeing 150~200 Bug Reports Per Day manjaro uses the same package manager that arch does - pacman on a base level. If I remember correctly, there were some problems with updating libc which corrupted the whole system. Pacman is a glorious wonderful package manager, no matter what distro I'm on i feel upset when I've already typed pacman -S and then realize it has a different package manager, I mean apt-get is A subreddit for the Arch Linux user community for support and useful news. Now arch really isn't hard i agree, but i don't expect most first time users wanting to put in the effort. It should be pretty easy if you follow the guide and if you try to understand. " That's simply because software is written by fallible humans and getting bleeding-edge updates means hitting bugs before the rest of the Linux community. If learning is what you want, then go Arch (you could go the Gentoo way also). I’ve used many distros in the last 16 years of being a Linux user/linux professional: arch, Ubuntu, rhel, centos, Amazon Linux/AL2, gentoo, Fedora, SuSE, raspbian, and I believe I ran Debian for a short time too. they do have an alternate pm, and lib called libalpm with a gui called pamac, both are interesting and optional and can be used on arch linux as well. There's nothing 'edgy' about using a distro who's documentation has become a go-to reference source for non Arch users. VS Endeavor where they make the choices for you. Arguments that Arch isn't suited well to servers are less about Arch being "easy or hard to break" and more about Arch being "somewhat less reliable than other freely available alternatives. The distribution is intended to fill the needs of those contributing to it, rather than trying to appeal to as many users as possible. When using debian/ubuntu based distributions the package system broke A LOT, When I started using arch all these problems went away! Arch is the fastest distribution I have ever tried. If you are already used to reading documentation, googling technical problems and don't expect defaults to fit your use case, then it's honestly just like maintaining any other piece of complicated software. Live arch with `arch-chroot` was enough to bring back the system from the dead. I settled on Linux Mint and got it running as best I could on my old Mac. Its all about your time and commitment, if you want to learn about linux and you got the time to tinker, then go for it and try Arch. Open menu Open navigation Go to Reddit Home. They'll use Windows, get annoyed with Windows for some reason and install Arch for a week or two and then go back. Let's be clear tho, once you've set up your daily driver, the hard work is done. To quote the description of philosophy of Arch on the Arch wiki: Whereas many GNU/Linux distributions attempt to be more user-friendly, Arch Linux has always been, and shall always remain user-centric. New to linux. Some users recommend Debian as a stable and lightweight distro, while others recommend Fedora as a good balance of security and user-friendliness. r/LegionGo A chip A close button. I used to think Ubuntu's community was good, but the Arch Linux community is significantly nicer and more helpful. Members Online KDE Developers Are Currently Seeing 150~200 Bug Reports Per Day Go ahead and clear your terminal again, and then type: archinstall. Have experienced mint and Ubuntu using a usb, but decided to go with arch as I plan to use it for work/study in… Means arch Linux tries to minimise the changes they make on software. Mint is also popular, but it can feel too much like Windows. MX Linux is still probably the go-to for new Linux users who are used to computing. It has zero full-time developers. They try to fix problems upstream first. In my experience Arch is almost unbreakable. Yes, arch Linux worth it if you like to learn how your system works. Get app Get Selected "Arch Linux install medium (x86_64, UEFI)" option I read up on Arch, and despite its lightweight approach, the talks of its steep learning curve kept me away. I've always felt that the people that run Arch tend to be people that are Linux savvy, but don't actually run Linux often. Just keep it in the back of your mind that when you're ready to give up, install Mint or Ubuntu. Xfce and KDE Plasma both seem like they have strong proponents, and their users overlap with the type of user I am. So I have a Surface Go 2 with Windows 10 home. Hell even Valve has chosen to build their SteamOS off of Arch. Because when you don't know much about linux you actually have to read the wiki for a successful install and that take some time commitment. Take your time, and don't worry if you mess up. Back in the day many diatros didn’t graphical installer or installed a X windowing system (Xorg) also know a days neither openbsd or freebsd does by default. That's why you're doing this on a spare laptop or a VM. After running Ubuntu for nearly 1 year and now running Arch Linux for almost 2 years I can say I had far more issues with Ubuntu. Endeavor is still a good option, though Arch install is probably better if you want to customize it. 19 votes, 39 comments. As the others said the Wiki is all you need for the installation. Before Arch install, I would tell people that don't want to tinker with it as much to install Endeavor. Only once did something go really wrong. archinstall is a script that quickly runs you through a generic Arch Linux installation. But my question is (as an Arch user myself), that why would anyone want to use Arch Linux, who needs a low barrier of entry? Arch Linux is not that good. You'll get a menu with options that you can scroll through. crvjmn uyiza wxxv yczwrz yoq nxmhuj guqx jfry suozskg qoxwhx
Go arch linux reddit. I mean, they just want the setup part done quick.
