Slackware vs Arch vs Gentoo

Install Gentoo.

I'd say they are "worth it" depending on the package. Some packages really benefit from the USE flags.
Typically you'll set your core flags during the install, ones specific to your profile, then you just set others on a per-package basis. In general this means the software you compile will only have the features you're requiring if you don't specify additional flags, making them smaller (and potentially faster)
A specific example is Firefox: it has a number of interesting USE flags including one that fixes an 8 year old bug: bugzilla.mozilla.org/show_bug.cgi?id=594876
There's also flags for using things like your system-wide jpeg library and disabling the built-in one.

Install *buntu

waiting for windows 11, naw, 12, naw 13,

ill just wait until the nuber gets back up to 95

as long as you dont use arch youre fine

It's individual packages, but also stuff with global consequences. For example you can add USE="jack -pulseaudio" to global configuration and use jack audio instead of plain alsa or pulseaudio. Some packages can supply its vim syntax files, you can enable that just by adding vim-syntax USE. Other packages allow you to add/remove certain components/functions, choose whether you want gui or just cli (for example wpa_supplicant), stuff like that.

OP here, thank you all, you have given me a much needed outlook. I'm going to try out Slackware, Gentoo and other similar distributions along with BSD and LFS to get my feet deeper into UNIX. I had already tried Arch and it was relatively tame. Good luck on your journeys Jow Forumsentoomen

Attached: 1517620479254.jpg (1520x1080, 95K)

From my experience I'd also say no. It's a very cool distro but the time you invest to install and compile all your software didn't yield enough advantages (to me at least).

You should include Void in the list of silly hobby OSes. No SystemD, a reasonable package manager, and the option to use Musl, which often gives a smaller footprint and theoretically faster binaries.

What distro do you use?

Redpill?
Sorry, I'm not cognizant of any Russian state sponsored disinformation campaigns in collusion with Donald Trump against any of the GNU/Linux distros.

But the Russians are pro-open source. The Russian govt are trying to move as nany systems as possible to GNU/Linux. They've also donated a lot of money to the ReactOS team for applications that require Win32 support.

Debian on desktop, Void on laptop.

>slackware
Better go full OpenBSD 2bh
>Arch
Best choice for engineering
>Gentoo
Meme time well, don't

Void is dead

voidlinux.org/news/
>last post June 3, 2018
>moving github repo
>finalisation of transfer to new domain
>dead
I don't think so.

Arch if you want an easy to install linux that can be personalized pretty well.
Gentoo is more time consuming but also highly customizable. You can tailor everything to be compiled as exactly what you want it to be. If it doesn't conflict with other things.
Gentoo's portage seems to be better in terms of stability whereas pacman is faster and easier to use.
Depends on your computer. Don't use it on systems with low ressources. But on a chad pc gentoo is hard to beat.

Better than Ubuntu

Just use binaries for big bloatware like Firefox, the base system takes only a few minutes to compile on a chinkpad, t.gentoo user

Gentoo has a relatively long initial setup but once setup it's very stable and your computer will be very efficient unless you bloat it intentionally

Haven't tried Slackware but I spent three years on Arch and have been using Gentoo since last Christmas.
Both have great documentation, I think I slightly prefer the Gentoo community but the Arch community were pretty helpful. Arch feels very rewarding to use in the short term and offers a lot of instant gratification whereas Gentoo is more of a slow burn. There are more packages on Arch but you have more freedom to customise packages on Gentoo. I never had Arch updates break my system but it could happen because Arch is bleeding edge; Gentoo is also rolling release but you have much more control over updates.

Why? just let those compile while you're asleep.

Install gentoo

Unnecessary inneficiency. All the CPU time spent recompiling everything to march=native won't be regained by using said system even for years.

yeah but... who cares? If you really want to bind capital in energy/cpu time you'd have to run a miner or something

just use crux, guy

When you come out the other end, just use Fedora.

Arch.
Listen to me(uses it daily) or the people that respond to this post( only knowlege about Arch is memes).

I used it daily for 2 years. It's a meme and a waste of time.

How so? I started with Arch, went all around the fucking world and now I'm back.

godspeed, user.

I like you.

OpenBSD might be a viable choice over slackware if someone wants the BSD and has a GPU which is NOT NVIDIA

Gentoo ain't as memish as the trolls want you to belive, but it is a big setup and you HAVE to read into the system itself quite well if you don't want to maintain it every other day.
Got to have clue about scripting ideally.

The redpill is: slackware is closest to unix/BSD in the linux distro (that matters/d) world as possible, but has only ONE lead developer and NO package manager.
Arch is a distribution which is mostly about maintaining it cutting edge while not having to tinker around with compiling and thus not having as much control over it as with
Gentoo, which is the most customizable distro where you don't have to touch the source code of the packages you want to install but still can set most/all important features yourself AND have the package manager manage those settings for every update and dependency resolving.

If you are asking for which distro to install:
Gentoo or OpenBSD, no meme.

After all firefox and the office suite will be one of the applications used most for most people. It just doesn't seem right to have a system with all the packages custom-compiled for the computer and each other and then just throw a big binary, compiled with whatever options, in there. It's a viable solution for proprietary stuff you can't get otherwise though.
FFADO will be the big test for gentoo. I have a arch desktop on one partition and a relatively virgin gentoo on the other. I wonder whether my fw interface will run better/the same/not at all. On Arch it runs okay with pulseaudio (can't really get around it) but is still glitchy. It seems there are random crackles in the audio. And this is not a clipping issue. Jack also works but you'd be damned to rely on it for low latency stuff.

If Gentoo has such a great package manager then why must it also have such a terrible installation process?

Because the major part of the install is not something a package manager can usually do for you. You unpack the snapshot, set up the config, run the emerge sync and world and of course install a few more things like the bootloader, the kernel, and all the utilities. It's not THAT MUCH of a big deal actually and the portage related stuff is the easy stuff because it installs stuff for you automatically. Just don't fuck up the bootloader and don't forget to load your keymap if you have to decrypt your volume with a passphrase at boot and then it's...well not THAT MUCH of a big deal. Also, steal the genfstab script from Arch!

*the stage archive.

I can only recommend installing it from a Arch desktop. A gentoo specific boot medium is not needed, any linux will do. But if you do it the first time, do it from a minimal medium, p-please! With ttys and a text browser for the tutorial. It's part of the experience!

>Redpill
Just take the poo pill and use windows.

How about the packages on Gentoo? Are they as up-to-date as Arch's? Note: If I make the switch from Arch to Gentoo I'm willing to give up a little up-to-dateness for being able to compile packages.

wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/arch_compared_to_other_distributions#Gentoo.2FFuntoo_Linux
I'd consider it a little bit more on the side of stability.
On the other hand, arch hasn't broken with a -Syu for years for me, so that's not really an issue anymore. Btrfs snapshots are nice to have anyway.

FPBP

They are two sides of the same coin. The package manager empowers you with USE flags and complete customization, but as a consequence you must compile shit. It basically makes the user a developer/maintainer.

Also the install is kind of a meme. These days, Gentoo takes like 30 minutes of actual work because everyone just does a stage 3 install and then it takes a day or two letting shit compile, depending on your system.

Probably slightly more conservative than Arch, but very slightly. I haven't used Arch in forever though, so I'm not positive.

>Gentoo takes like 30 minutes of actual work because everyone just does a stage 3
Exactly. The first time I did a gentoo install (16 years old) I did a stage1 or stage2 when that was still supported. This was at least twice as much work and also other parts have become much easier

By the way, how do you go about your kernels on gentoo? Do you do it the classic way with a custom kernel and no initrd? I have a genkernel currently but I think I'll swap it out with another one, not sure exaclty what one. I need a initrd though. No idea about the new way of doing it with dracut

FreeBSD has ports and an easy-to-use installer. What's Gentoo's excuse?

that's just not the concept. There are gentoo based distros that can do that though