Why would you use arch linux claiming to be minimal when arch linux is bloated with the linux kernel and the gnu system...

>this is what Arch fags actually believe

>has no argument so they call people names
>implications
I am not an Archfag, bud. I merely have used Arch before and I think it is more minimal compared to many of the alternatives out there.

>I think it is more minimal compared to many of the alternatives out there.
Only in terms of "can't do things almost anyone will need automatically". The actual reason is laziness of the developers, muh minimalism is just a side effect.

The end result is usually a computer that doesn't run optimally because the person who set things up didn't really knew what he was doing and just followed a wiki page written by other mostly clueless people. These users also usually don't use some programs just because they are too difficult to get working on the shitty minimalist distro, but would work without issues on ubuntu

The reality is that Arch has more bloated packages than other distros

Nobody who knows anything claims that Arch is minimal. That isn't a design philosophy, nor is it the appeal of the OS.

You cannot fuck up an Arch install. There is nothing to fuck up. All you have to do is partition your drive, make and mount your file systems, install the base packages, set date, time, and locale, and install a boot loader. It takes ten minutes at most.

>arch is bloat
or is it..? :^)

Attached: Screenshot_20180906_223349.png (1763x440, 324K)

>5000 arch packages
So the equivalent of 15000 Debian packages? What the fuck are you doing?

Arch has never been a minimalist distribution. Splitting packages is rare compared to other distributions, and dependencies aren't made optional whenever possible. Arch has never been minimalist... a Linux kernel with every module available and every feature enabled at least when there's no non-bloat related cost, feature-packed/complex GNU tools, nearly all optional features enabled across all the packages, etc. Additionally;
>pacman is fast but not safe, it tends to break shit and config protection is implemented in a terrible way
>there is no official process to verify that a package is stable within the distro, in other distros a lot of packages are in a testing repo despite that specific package's developer claiming it to be stable on its own, because it might not be stable within the environment of a specific distro
>(arch v gentoo related) arch users complain about 'muh compile time' when it comes to gentoo, while in fact they compile a lot of AUR packages themselves, namely the *- git packages that pull the source from a git repo
>but it gets even better: they only compile a handful of packages, and those not being libraries mostly, the self-compiled packages get linked against precompiled libraries from a different setup (e.g. different optimization levels), which can then cause even more instability because it's a clusterfuck of unequal shit
>arch uses (((systemd))) and switching to something else is hard
>the vim package on arch pulls in X, so if you want to have a fancy terminal text editor on a headless server, you need to install a shitton of GUI stuff which you'll never need nor use
>maintainer told the guy who complained to just symlink vi to vim (vi is inferior)

Attached: 8a23c919d6f49d1f96e7de3f6911c1c859b520c8e2c64aadc64064575e1e3049.gif (345x345, 94K)

>caring about 1 gb of space

You minimalismfags are some breed. Go wget, view and delete webpages like stallman somewhere else.

>Packages: 4901
how? :thinking:
my screenshot is 3 years old PC without OS reinstalls and many many packages installed.

Attached: imgur-2018_09_06-22:40:41.png (1994x728, 522K)

>arch users pride themselves in installing arch and learning so much about how linux works under the hood, yet the install is literally copypasting a bunch of commands, usually without proper explanation
>e.g. to chroot into the new install, you use arch-chroot, which automatically bind-mounts procfs, devfs and sysfs, but nowhere on the guide does it say that that's a very important step, so should archfags ever need to fix their system via chrooting from a livecd that doesn't have arch-chroot, they'd be fucked
>the kernel is auto-configured in a just werks way (basically make allyesconfig), which is unnecessary bloat and for such a diy distro, configuring the kernel yourself should be the official way of doing it
>arch cannot boot without an initramfs per default
>pacstrap always installs the same shit, uclibc, dietlibc, musl, gnu-less toolchains etc are not an option from the get-go

Attached: 1516732764879.png (800x867, 840K)

Doesn't Arch still break when you change python versions?

To be fair, you have to have a very high IQ to use Arch Linux. The configuration is extremely difficult, and without a solid grasp of theoretical computer science most of the options will go over a typical user's head. There's also Arch's minimalist look, which is deeply coded into its design - its collective philosophy draws heavily from Donald Judd artstyle, for instance. The Archfags understand this stuff; they have the intellectual capacity to truly appreciate the depths of this OS, to realize that it's not just stripped down- it says something deep about COMPUTERS. As a consequence people who dislike Arch truly ARE idiots- of course they wouldn't appreciate, for instance, the wisdom in Arch's Motto "Keep it simple," which itself is a cryptic reference to Eric Raymond's epic Jargon File. I'm smirking right now just imagining one of those addlepated simpletons scratching their heads in confusion as Judd Vinet's genius unfolds itself on their computer screens. What fools... how I pity them. And yes by the way, I DO have an Arch linux tattoo. And no, you cannot see it. It's for the ladies' eyes only- And even they have to demonstrate that they're within 5 IQ points of my own (preferably lower) beforehand.

Attached: 1516231813357.gif (533x468, 424K)

>pacman is fast but not safe, it tends to break shit
Not in the last decade. I swear anti-Arch posters are just uninformed and have no idea about Arch at all. You always post the same stale memes and pasta from 2008. Nobody with a clue claims Arch is minimal, Arch and Gentoo are nothing alike, Arch is the most stable rolling release, bleeding edge distro.
Nobody thinks the Arch install is a learning tool, it's designed for simplicity. It's one of the easiest, fastest installs available.

Many people always ask me how I was able to get into Harvard as a 16 year old who skipped 3 grades of high school. They think I got in because of my scholarly records, but no - the key is the interview. As I sat in the Harvard Dean's office in front of the board of admissions, the Dean asks me "Why should you be a good candidate for this school?" They seemed bored but I replied "Well I was born a child prodigy, placed 1st in my computer science class for three consecutive years, I can code in eight different languages not counting html, play four different instruments, I skipped grades 4 through 6, and graduated my high school as valedictorian at the age of 14. I then worked as an intern at both the Linux Foundation, and NASA." Suddenly the room burst into laughter and many of board instantly started scribbling down "No" near the application check marks. The Dean says "Sorry but you are just not the type we are looking for." But then I said "Excuse me, I wasn't finished... I use ARCH LINUX!" The Dean looked at me like an idiot and said "So....?" Then I replied with a smile: "And I RICED IT!" An audible gasp let out by the board was so loud the secretary had to come in. You could hear a pin drop and then suddenly all at once the entire board clicked their pens on the "Approved Box" and I was instantly handed a diploma and now I'm teaching advanced computer science there. I guess you can say I'm pretty smart.

Attached: kurokitomokospinning_by_setonami-d6e479m.gif (220x320, 1.63M)

I install arch using architect. not that i wouldnt be a be to do it manually, but its just more convenient. The main reason that im using arch is the archwiki and the AUR. Its the ultimate linux distro.

>arch linux is bloated with the linux kernel
at least i can easily get kernel modesetting working on my AMDGPU unlike on gentoo

the muh minimalism meme is from the pre-systemd days. nobody uses it anymore because arch is basically any other distro only with a tedious install process.

How is it tedious? It's faster and easier than any of those graphical installers that take forever to do anything. Those are tedious.

"Does installing Arch Linux make you lose your virginity?"
To answer your question, first, let's discuss what is virginity. What IS virginity? Let's use the colloquial definition of virginity, that is "A virgin is someone who has not rubbed their private parts on someone else's private parts for some duration of time". Notice that you do not actually have to ejaculate, or reach orgasm, to lose your virginity. In order to lose your virginity you simply need to experience sex, which is the rubbing of genitals together, for some duration of time.
Great, so we know what it means to be a virgin, and what it means to lose your virginity. There is one thing you may not have noticed about this definition, however, and that is the duration of time that you must rub your privates against another person's privates in order to lose your virginity. Is a man who sticks his dick into a woman still a virgin if he cums immediately? No, that is silly. He has lost his virginity to that woman. Let's take this a bit further, is a man whose dick only grazes the vagina's entrance before cumming into it still a virgin? No, he is not, despite not even being able to feel the sexual contact. If that man's dick had not actually grazed the entrance to the vagina but only came infinitely close to touching it, well, he still would have experienced the same thing because in either situation he would have not felt it. Thus, we use deductive reasoning to determine that, while one must rub one's genitals against another's to lose one's virginity, this is the equivalent to one not rubbing his genitals against another's; that is to say, therefore, that one does not have to touch genital's with another to lose one's virginity. If one's imagination is able to offer a convincing enough experience, then one has lost their virginity outside of their imagination whilst only experiencing sex in their imagination.

Attached: 1535664652175.gif (240x240, 1.08M)

So let's restate our definition of virginity. Taking the no-touch requirement we explored before into consideration. Virgin - "a virgin is someone who has not experienced sex, whether that be physical or convincing imagined sex". Someone who has lost their virginity - "someone who has experienced sex, or has experienced convincing imaginary sex". If convincing imaginary sex is in effect the equivalent to physical sex, let us define the term "effective sex". Effective sex - "a life-changing experience, physical or mental, real or imagined, that causes one's identity to change in the sense that they no longer feel that the term 'virgin' and all the things associated with it can be used as an accurate descriptor of them anymore".
Ah! Allow me to take a short, mental break after such a rigorous exploration of virginity. We will finish our thoughts afterwards.
...
Let's get back to it, fellow intellectuals! As Albert Einstein once said, no time like the present! Of course, Einstein's work (which many have said is merely a semantics-based interpretation of the work of other scientists who do not receive the name recognition he does) would later lead to the bombing of millions of innocent Japanese civilians. Burning women and children alive in their homes while their husbands were overseas fighting. If they had been with them at the time, however, they still would not have been able to defend against the bomb. Ba! Imagine, a Japanese army clanging their swords up against an atom bomb in a desperate attempt to defeat it. Ahahahahaha, it is quite humorous to conjure up such an image in one's mind, although it would be quite tragic to witness it. Metaphorically, I believe that intellectual exploration is as influential as Einstein (a Jewish man, by the way, which absolutely has nothing to do with his name recognition), but in a peaceful, less abrasive way.

Attached: Pax_tux.png (267x380, 103K)

Like an atom bomb, a good intellectual argument is unable to be countered, no matter how much manpower or courage one possesses.
So the initial question which was proposed was whether or not installing Arch Linux can be considered the equivalent to losing your virginity in the time-tested way of rubbing ones genitals against another's genitals until ejaculation or alternatively orgasm has been achieved. Well, from our prior deconstruction of virginity, we know that virginity is lost by participating in effective sex. Effective sex - "a life-changing experience, physical or mental, real or imagined, that causes ones identity to change in the sense that they no longer feel that the term 'virgin' and all things associated with it can be used as an accurate descriptor of them anymore". Well, to the question "Can installing Arch Linux be considered losing your virginity?", I boldly answer YES - yes, of course it can! Think about it, when you rice your Arch Linux, how does it make you feel? For an intellectual, Arch Linux touches them in ways normal distributions do not. It shatters their ego as an intellectual into pieces, alas not destroying it in its entirety, only with the most honest intentions of allowing them to deconstruct it in an even more intellectually robust form.

Attached: 1497706876995.png (602x500, 27K)

Thus, if they were virgins prior to the installation of said version of Arch Linux, the element of their ego, their identity that tells them "yes, you identify as a virgin" is now destroyed. Thus, for an intellectual, installing Arch Linux is the equivalent to losing said intellectual's virginity. HOWEVER, I should note, that for a pleb, installing Arch Linux will not have the same effect as he will not be able to truly understand its minimalism, practicality, and truly splendorous package manager, and therefore his ego will not be shattered, as he will not even be able to comprehend the intellectualism the distro presents in its true form. He may laugh, me may chuckle, but the intellectualism will be totally lost on him. Hell, he may even feel as if he understood it for its intellectual proposals. Perhaps he will tell people at parties that he has lost his virginity installing Arch Linux, but the pleb will know, and the people will know, if not too polite to call him out, that he has not truly lost his virginity. Only the intellectual's virginity is lost via installing Arch Linux.
I hereby conclude from this rigorous intellectual exploration of the question "Does installing Arch Linux cause you to lose your virginity?" to be answerable, and that answer is "YES! - If you are an intellectual, that is"

Attached: c4b.png (1465x1007, 67K)

I am being very productive anons. Stop bullying me. I've just installed few more things for my productivity increase.

Attached: 5000packages.png (1249x419, 302K)

>archwiki
Sucks.
>AUR
Might as well install gentoo, there at least you get support for the packages you install
>Its the ultimate linux distro.
lol

>Might as well install gentoo
I don't think you know anything about Arch or Gentoo beyond memes.

I'm running gentoo right now, but ok

That doesn't contradict what I said.

REEEEEEEEEEEEEE

I have a gentoo install too.
You have literally no arguments beyond spouting memes from 2010. Kill yourself.

This, its like, fuck man, just write your own cpu instructions, intel and amd are so fucking bloated.
And while you're at it, go ahead and get rid of that fucking gigantically pregnantly bloated cpu architecture, and replace it with your own.

That ought to get you started, after that you should get rid of binary and replace it with a higher based system to get rid of bloat.

>Kill yourself.
ok

Attached: me.jpg (300x229, 10K)

>arch thread
>quickly degrades to autism
Color me surprised

Attached: 1535834228906.jpg (720x532, 65K)

Not only that but it is an arch thread that is secretly a forth thread

Attached: 26.jpg (240x320, 19K)

next you're going to tell me to join your discord server, aren't you?
fuck off, altright neonazi

Lol that is the other evil discord.

There is the good forth discord and the evil one. THe guy running the evil one posts like women cut up and shit and lolis and nazi shit. I run the good discord but I can't get enough guys on it because it takes superior autism to even understand what forth is for and usually those types of autists are very anti javascript

post link then, .

Good riddance desu

Some people get hardons for broken configs or somthing

Attached: cf2d3b0.png (597x425, 317K)

>all these tryhard memes and pastas
>ppl won't just admit they don't like Arch for [insert anecdotal raisins]

>unironically using arch

Attached: gentoomoan.jpg (1920x1080, 244K)

is linux from scratch truly minimalistic?

it's truly autistic

I just use it cause it werks and I'm too lazy to install something else

dependencies
you can have [or not] whatever you want without pulling everything under the sun

I'm using Arch + Sway right now to shitpost, watch LP's and play on Retroarch efficiently.

>many packages install and many broken xorg
why so little uptime fag?

Attached: 2018-09-06_20-05.png (439x67, 2K)