Gentoo vs Arch

Debian, fedora and *buntus

thread/

Attached: ARCH GET.png (1884x391, 76K)

it is... can you compile chrome in less than 30 sec ? I think not..

I prefer Arch
Gentoo by default is rc-d which is old... and I really don't mind binary packages. I'm still trying to get gentoo 17.1 working with systemd but I don't have a lot of experience with portage yet to get it working.
it's really not a big deal. I passed 1C/2T 3.7ghz to my gentoo machine and left it to genkernel all and it didn't take much time at all

Attached: gentoo.webm (960x536, 1.24M)

Most large programs have bins you can use if you don't want to compile. I just update about once a week in background when I'm doing other shit. It's not a noticeable hassle at all.
But the time saved because everything just works and never breaks....
I can re-compile my entire system in less than 8 hours. When I update it's only a handful of packages.

Gentoo is a placebo from the point of view of a person who installs and uses it. Gentoo is great in those situations where a mass produced product needs an OS optimized for the hardware and that OS will need to be set up with repos with packages that are tailored accordingly. Installing it yourself, and tailoring it to your hardware, is pants on head retarded because the compiling times eat up any benefit you would see in performance. Summary: Gentoo is a godsend for vendors, but it's a pathetic meme for anyone else.

>is old

Yes, that's why it's good, retard.

Yeah, I would only use this argument if you wanted to learn linux. Do not use gentoo if you want to learn something because it will be gone soon.
OP is asking like they know nothing about linux so there's that

come back when you're done compiling firefox, gcc, llvm, mesa or libreoffice
t. avid gentoo nigger

Fedora or OpenSuse

They target pretty different users, the only common thing they have is "muh hard intall"

Arch has all the """minimalism"" bullshit (which actually just means less work for the developer) and actually doesn't offer many big choices, but has all the fresh unstable software. Ideal for ricer autists who consider fixing their computer their hobby
Gentoo is the polar opposite of minimalism in lots of ways, and is about muh choices (and despite the maymays actually pretty easy to use), offers stable software and lots of other custom shit that most distros do not

>and is about muh choices
Sounds like excuses for lazy developers.Literally the same problem with Arch.

I use Manjaro, what now?

The significant difference is that all choices are supported and don't break with updates like on Arch

For KDE - OpenSUSE definately.

best distro by far
everything just works, beautiful, stable, reasonably up to date

thanks but no autism for me
i like to be productive and live my life

Attached: 21192254_129095927723281_3508685055967343050_n.jpg (596x600, 107K)

>i like to be productive and live my life

Attached: 1484106451606.jpg (776x602, 44K)

also
>AUR
>LTS kernels
>sane, conservative rolling release
>nice black and green theme

best distro so far

>i like to be productive
So arch then.

This post actually convinced me to install Arch.
I base life decisions on repeating digits, so sue me.

Any advantages of Arch over Manjaro?

You don't have 2000+ packages by default and you can choose which programs do you want on your system. It's a little faster than manjaro, at least using i3.

I'm dualbooting Arch and Gentoo right now. I love both, but gentoo is faster.