(No provocation)
I see these reasons:
- newbie
- lazy (don’t wanna edit config files etc.)
- unique features (like assistant/toolbox, some optimizations like in cachyos)
- wanna check how different systems are set up (that’s rather distrohopping)
Personally, I used manjaro i3 when I was beigginer and wanted to see how tiling WM should be configured (check out ranger config, for example). But after some time, I don’t see reasons why not to just customize pure arch (same with debian and debian-based distros).
I googled ‘gaming Linux distribution’ and it basically gave me popos and cachy. Didn’t like popos
The installation process is intimidating for a lot of people.
I taught a friend Linux using the Arch install process.
They use EndevourOS because installation took 15 minutes instead of 3 hours.
Doesn’t Arch have an installer these days?
You say this as if discussions here would be based on reality instead of memes…
i’ve been customizing linux for 15 years. it’s nice to just sit down with something that works.
Because the PC enables me do do my hobbies (gaming, 3d modelling and printing), the PC itself isn’t my hobby. If I spend more time tinkering with the OS than having the OS run the things I actually want to do, I’ll go do something else.
I think this is a common misconception about Arch, that it requires continuous tinkering. I see that word used so much, too, “tinkering”.
What I’ve been doing for the past decade is just install Arch, set things up the way I like, and then just keep everything up-to-date as I go. Of course, I install and uninstall things as I try new software, but the OS itself? Zero tinkering. I just use it.
Especially if you only game on it and stuff like that, then simple plain Arch is great. Lean system that just works. Install the things you want and enjoy.
I got two kids and way too many hobbies so I can relate to not wanting to fiddle with the OS. I run Arch on my two home desktop PCs, and my two work laptops. 🤷♂️ Zero maintenance.
Enjoy!
I see what you mean. But in order to reach the point where Arch is configured and my machine Just Works, I would have to learn how to install Arch, what packages I need, what are the ups and downs of the various packages for handling the same things, resolve any conflicts I accidentally created, and then I can get to installing the things I actually want. It’s a lot of work and time that isn’t going into something I consider fun.
Arch is great for people who want to build their OS to be precisely what they want it to be. I happen to not be one of those people.
Why Arch based distro then? Why not, say, Fedora? Debian. Popos.
The complicated parts of the setup are already done and I still get the benefits of a fast update schedule, without (mostly) having to worry about accidentally breaking something.
And you’re right about running another, less finicky distro. It’s why I’ve got Bazzite on the HTPC and the handheld. Because I want those to be zero finicky, as poking around in them is way more of a pain in the ass.
Opensuse tumbleweed would likely be a goos choice.
AUR, etc
As a lazy admin of my own computer, I agree… for the most part. Running Debian allows you to be super lazy, whereas Arch will punish you for that. One update screwed up my GRUB because I didn’t bother reading the news. Totally my fault, learned my lesson.
This means that running Arch comes with some responsibilities that a super lazy Debian admin can simply ignore. Just read the announcements before updating and you’re good. Ignore them at your own peril.
It wasn’t a total disaster though. Just needed to fix my stupid mistake with chroot, and the system was up and running in about half an hour. Debian admins don’t end up with situations like that by being lazy. You would need to be actively trying to break your system to have to pay a price like this.
Other than that, my system has been running smoothly with hardly any interference on my part. The joy of a rolling release…
Why do people say to keep Arch healthy you must follow the mailing list for needed manual changes for some upgrades? It that a misconception?
That’s not a misconception, but with a slight modification. Stick around:
First of all, you can decide to do an upgrade at your own leisure. There’s no need to run it 10 times a day as some memes will have you believe. I upgrade probably once a week, but I feel like that’s a lot. If nothing is broken, no need to upgrade. Of course, I want to keep up with security updates and browser updates, so when those happen, I tend to upgrade too. So probably once every six weeks should be enough (keep up with the browser schedule).
Anyway, the modification I mentioned is that you don’t need to follow anything. The only thing you should to do is to check archlinux.org for any news items before you upgrade. It’s extremely rare that there are manual actions needed, and when there are, it’s even more seldom for a package that I personally have installed. I think maybe once or twice in a decade I’ve had to actually do anything, and it’s been minor. It always has the exact command or tells you exactly what to do. They never leave you on your own with these things.
A lot less maintenance than Windows back when I was running that, I’ll tell you that much.
Thanks for the response and the clarification.
I haven’t run Windows in 25 years and I no plans to. I’ve actually been using linux for my desktop all that time, including gentoo for several years. Personally, I think people should use whatever os they like and the more choices the better!
Got tired of consistently running into problems trying to set it up(e.g, messing up the UUID)
I tried pure Arch. Installed it and then realized I have to set up everything myself and lost all motivation. Didn’t know about archinstall at that time. Found CachyOS and stuck with it. It runs perfectly and I see no reason to switch.
I’ve been using bare Arch for a while but after five or so installs I couldn’t be bothered anymore and realized that EndeavourOS is basically doing exactly what I’m looking for.
So it’s mostly the installer.
Not a masochist and Arch is the only distro I’m aware of that comes close to Windows in terms of package availability (i.e. if it exists and is either open source or prebuilt I can get it on Arch). Cachy specifically for their optimized custom kernels, but lately I’ve been really wishing they had a bigger team and were sponsored, as some packages can lag behind for quite some time. Same for packages in the Arch repo.
While not answering the question, the first “user friendly” arch based distro I tried out was endeavour and I remember going back to vanilla arch after realizing how bloaty it was.
I used EndeavourOS for a long time. I liked it mainly for the Sway config making it all so nice out of the box. And of course the easy install.
What differences are there between Endeavour’s sway config and sway’s own default config?
I’ve ran vanilla Arch multiple times in the past, and each time it was for the 'fun’of building out my system, this was mainly back when I was a uni student.
These days however, I just want something that works well for my use case.
Last time I installed Arch I just told Codex to build an ISO with my favorite stuff, flashed the physical media, and started using it. Now that’s a one step setup
Do you have it detailed somewhere? A blog or something. Would be interesting to see what it looks like.
I’ve spent far too much of my life configuring computers. I want to do as little configuring as possible. Also, I’d heard that Cachy had custom kernel changes that made pretty much any game run better.
Games run phenomenally, not sure why I’d go try anything else. (Bazzite, mint, zorin did not work with my setup)
Same. I worked with Linux professionally for 15+ years but my main battle station runs Bazzite, and home server runs unraid. Pretty much as plug-and-play as you can get. Laptop however is on NixOS so that I can swap configs depending on usecase.
FWIW I tried catchyOS as a comparison to Bazzite and I prefer bazzite.
I do it because if I can save myself some busywork and have a ready to go and maintain system…From after an install, I much prefer that. I don’t see the point of installing purely vanilla Arch. There are use cases where this would make sense, but I honestly cannot be arsed. Garuda Linux takes the pain in my arse out of Arch, makes it fun to use. Easy to keep up with .pacdiffs, merging when appropriate (or skipping pointless mergers because they build the damn distro, so they stop pointless busywork from bothering users).
I get access to the latest software and kernels, smooth performance, and all I have to do is pay attention to breaking changes (implement the fix post update) in exchange. It’s a pretty damn fine deal. The safety nets that Garuda Linux provides over traditional Arch (which is historically minimal by design) is a better deal in my opinion. However, if I had the drive; I feel like I am beginning to understand the workflow enough to potentially reproduce something similar (not one to one) on a vanilla Arch install.
Now don’t get me wrong, the archinstall script is pretty cool, the only bane about it is needing to be connected to the internet. Connecting via a command, rough AF. I honestly might’ve misspelled that command and not noticed during a frantic moment (it was a floptina moment for me, so, Arch isn’t to blame). Garuda Linux lowered the barrier, just enough that I got my foot in and got really comfortable with manual interventions and the like. But they also kept it high enough to isolate me from the AUR, but let me have their nice properly managed ChaoticAUR instead.
Connecting via a command, rough AF
Even more so if you’re using a non-US qwerty keyboard were many of the special symbols are swapped. Christ I spent a lot of time figuring where everything was.
I don’t use Arch anymore but I can imagine that the install process turned a lot of people off it or pivoted them to stuff like Manjaro, CachyOS, Endeavour etc. It isn’t until recently that ArchInstall has become VERY good and simple.
Primary factor even with Archinstall is if you’re trying to install Arch via Wifi. you have to do iwd and all that and for someone who isn’t quite as comfortable on the command line yet that can be daunting. Even now for myself if I were installing Arch I still have to pull up the Arch Wiki during install cause I can never remember the iwd commands for wifi. I’ve also borked the install a couple times because I either forgot to include the networkmanager or selected the wrong video drivers.
