Best Arch based Linux

Which one of the gazillion of distros should i use Jow Forums? I was thinking on Antergos or Anarchy

Attached: arch.png (300x300, 11K)

Other urls found in this thread:

wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Based_Distributions_(Active)
twitter.com/AnonBabble

Manjaro /thread

SwagArch

Archlabs

Arcolinux
Archlabs

Antergos is far better than Anarchy, no question.

arch

I like this one.

But whatever, faggot OP, just try them out:
wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Arch_Based_Distributions_(Active)

never use a derivate, it just means some faggot added unnecessary shit you have to maintain / purge and smaller communities; even worse if they introduce their own repos like manjaro

Forgot pic

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

why not just use arch?

This.
Just use Arch. Grab the Zen installer if you don't want the trouble of manually installing your shit.

Just use vanilla Arch for fuck's sake.
As other Anons said, derivative distros are usually garbage.
My favorite ones are Arch (for general use), Void (for 32 bit machines), Debian (for servers) and Slackware (for messing around/actually learning how Linux works).
All of these are independent.

Why not Arch Linux 32?

I tried it, but Void seemed overall smoother.
Also, all 32 bit machines I tried them on were all pretty old, one of them is my trusty T43p.
Void being overall more lightweight is the reason I prefer it for 32 bit old machines.

Antergos + Openbox = Max comfy

How do you define derivative?
Is Ubuntu considered a derivative of Debian? I think so.
But is OpenSUSE or Mageia considered a derivative of RHEL/Fedora? I don't think so.

I use Manjaro almost every time I install Linux, it actually just werks plus the benefits of Arch.

I just realized that the logo looks like an erect nipple

this

I wish I could get my network card to work with manjaro but brainlet here

Didn't Arch dropped support for 32bit last year?

Hyperbola/Parabola

someone post small penus

Artix
Arch/Hurd

I unironicly use blackarch's netinstall. It's light,lightly riced and quick to install and setup as long as you skip downloading the 2k packadges of skid-ware it suggests

I migrated from Arch to Antergos and I want to say a thing: it's perfect.
If you don't want, don't need, don't care, don't bother to manually install the distro, to manually select your ide and packages, to manually search for drivers, then it's perfect.
Do you like Arch? Do you like a distro ready to use? Go for Antergos.

Ps: if you never used Arch, try starting with it, the install teach you a lot.

t. I'm on Antergos+awesomeWM

bump

manjaro is fucking brainlet tier

install gentoo dammit

Just use plain Arch and stop being autistic.

Just use Arch you retard

Archlabs if you want something lightweight that's also a very stable environment.

Install Arch yourself if you want to tweak anything else. The initial setup, as confusing as it may be the first time or two, pays off in how performant the OS is.

Whatever suits your needs, i myself just use Manjaro with kde / i3 on my thinkpad ( travelpad) for instance just because of convenience, its not hard to install a base Arch distro with cli tho, dont shy away theres good guides out there and it should not take more then 10 minutes

you say it like it's a bad thing

it's perfect to have an arch based system without the hassle

>Arch based
Just use Arch

then you should use antergos.
i use it on my shitty laptops and a sane arch install with systemd-boot on my primary machine.

Those two things aren't mutually exclusive

>OpenSUSE
>RHEL derivative
what did he mean by this?

They don't have to be.