Should I try to install Arch or am I good enough with Manjaro? Would having Manjaro make me a cuck? Is using Arch more manly?
Should I try to install Arch or am I good enough with Manjaro? Would having Manjaro make me a cuck...
Colton Jenkins
Other urls found in this thread:
storage.privatevoid.net
twitter.com
Ethan Baker
>Is using Arch more manly?
OP is fucking serious, that's the sad part. Jow Forums is cancer.
Zachary Gonzalez
after the first day they are the same, it doesn't matter.
Charles Allen
>Arch Linux
I used Arch for about 6 years and I've seen it through it's ups and down but I no longer use it for a few reasons.
First, let me dispel the myth that Arch Linux is only for advanced users who know exactly how linux works on a kernel level or the intricacies of the X server or whatever. It probably isn't a great distro for someone who has never used a command line before, but even then it is feasible for someone to copy in line by line the installation instructions from the wiki with no experience and end up with a fully functional system. This might not hold if you want to install some exotic minimal wm setup or set your system up for a very specific purpose, but these are of equal difficulty on any distro.
Arch Linux runs on the principle that all the software is always brand new all the time, and while this rolling release model may seem pretty cool, and is pretty feasible for a personal machine or certain type of person, in practice it can be a bit of a pain. Using it breeds in the user an unquenchable thirst for higher incremental version numbers in everything possible and you end up running pacman -Syu every time you get the chance. "It breaks all the time" isn't really true, but what is true is "if you don't update often, chances are things will stop working". If you don't update for about a month, especially if your thirst for higher version numbers has made you want to enable all the [*-testing] repos (it will), then chances are you're going to have to pull in about a gigabytes worth of updates that can't be expected to leave you with a nicely working system if you stop it half way through. "Partial updates are not supported" yell everyone everywhere, and this is fine if you can keep up with it, but you better not have a limited amount of data because you will be downloading a LOT of data just keeping your system up to date.
Angel Turner
Arch is so adamant about making sure every piece of software on the system is at the maximum version that older versions of packages are simply not available anywhere. This can be an issue if you need a specific version of something, whatever it may be, in your workflow. There are of course ways that you can do it, but arch seems to be engineered in such a way that this be as difficult as possible for you to do, and of course any mention of such activities will have you barred from any all all support (if you can call it support), but I'll get onto that in a bit.
As such, installing arch linux on a machine that you want to "do work" on a daunting prospect. Either you will realise right away that it it can't do what you want without extensive bodging, or you'll experience something close and realise how much effort it could be in the future. While arch breaking everything all of the time is certainly not true, it is true that you can never really trust the future to let you do what you want.
The AUR is touted as arch linux's biggest attraction; a vast, centralised, mostly unmoderated ocean of poorly written (on the whole) and seldom maintained build scripts for every piece of shitware you could possibly imagine. A reliable package on the AUR is the exception, not the rule. Absolutely anyone can upload absolutely anything up there, and unless your package becomes popular it will recieve no scrutiny whatsoever; this makes it not only inherently unreliable that anything there will work, it is also a huge security risk that most arch users, despite loudly and snidely telling everybody "if you dont read all the pkgbuilds then its your fault", don't read the pkgbuilds and leave themselves at risk.
Carson Roberts
manjaro all the way
Xavier Bailey
The main issue, however, is the culture of the users. The type of user that Arch linux attracts is a direct result of what it is. It is a basic and simple to use distro that looks like its complicated and difficult. It's got a reputation for being for "advanced users" when really advanced users would use a distro with proper support. It's a distro where you're encouraged to snidely tell anyone who wants help "ugh no spoonfeeding" yet with a wiki that literally spoonfeeds you every command you need to do things with no real explanation of what happens.
Therefore the average arch linux user is someone who wants to go around showing everyone how smart they are, but without actually having solved anything themself. They enjoy the idea of everyone thinking they're an advanced user and convincing themself that they are, and be hang around in support channels to be deliberately condescending to everyone else. Hang around in the SJW dominated #archlinux channel on freenode for a while or on the forums for endless examples. This makes the community around the distro particularly annoying and unhelpful.
For all these reasons I don't use arch any more, it simply isn't reliable enough to use for anything serious without a bunch of effort that wouldn't be necessary on another distro. Don't get sucked in and let yourself be enticed by the ability to say "btw i use archlinux", just use the best tool for the job you need to do, if that's arch linux for your purposes then fine. If you're just using linux for the sake of tinkering with it, then you'll get more satisfaction from gentoo. If you're going to use mostly gui applications and a big DE then just go with something like kubuntu or whatever, there isn't really any reason to believe that the sum of you + the personally shitty and opiniated people that put arch together can build a more stable and usable base than those who run debian or redhat or pretty much any other distro.
Kevin White
use debian/devuan
Samuel Foster
To conclude, for pretty much any purpose you would want to use gahnoopluslinux, there will be a distro other than arch that will serve you better. If deep down the reason you want to use arch is mostly because of the self satisfaction and smugness you can feel, then you will be right at home in the arch community and I and everyone else urges you to stay there.
If you want a distro that you have to install manually on a command line or build up from a base system yourself, then just download a "netinstall" or "server" version of any of the big mainstream distributions. Installing it is exactly the same as installing arch linux, just substitute "pacman -S" for "apt install" or whatever the package manager is and follow the ironically spoonfeeding list of commands on the arch wiki.
What you will get, however, is much more flexibility in what you install, more carefully curated sets of packages, the ability to go to a rolling release if you want to, but don't have to, a much larger and more competent range of support, have a comfy time talking to other people who use your distro, be able to ask questions and get meaningful answers rather than just snide "check the wiki" or " have you even TRIED anything yet" or "fucking noob", the ability to run exactly the versions of the programs you want, and more importantly the reliability of distributions trusted by industry and enterprise users that you can trust for doing actual things on. You get a community that isn't just filled with self grandiosing neets and sjws (or at least less, gg linux), a package manager that actually has useful features and feels well put together, and a lot more free time that you otherwise would have had to spend chastising others for their choice of distro or saying "i use arch btw" in a fruitless bid to impress people or yourself.
Camden Mitchell
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)
Nolan Russell
I made a pdf for you
Dominic Morris
I use Linux for Work.
I use Red Hat.
Advanced users Red Hat, Debian and Ubuntu. Maybe SUSE.
Other distros are for showoffs or babies
Jason White
check out for archfag tears
Blake Richardson
>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
Andrew Stewart
made a pic for you
Lucas Stewart
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 the board officials 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.
Eli King
"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.
Ryder Torres
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.
Luke Walker
just install Ubuntu or Debian and save yourself time just to show off to other nerds
Hunter Harris
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.
Jacob Sullivan
SPRUDO BAGMAN :DDD
Jace Cox
used ubuntu. it's good but want to try something new.
Jackson Moore
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"
Christopher Baker
debian/devuan or gentoo is endgame.
James Rogers
holy fuck, look at this autism!
Robert Foster
Don't fall for the arch meme. Manjaro is better in every way
Jeremiah Stewart
DELID THREAD
Jeremiah Perez
>Would having Manjaro make me a cuck?
you are already 10/10 cuck for asking
so it doesnt matter
Ian Foster
most based series of posts on Jow Forums
John Green
An hero
Josiah Lee
Liam Ramirez
Install archlabs instead.
Aiden Rodriguez
He uses void
Charles Gutierrez
Not using Kali so you can view the porn you deleted 7 yearsaho with out installing anything
Camden Morris
>Is using Arch more manly?
were you touched as a child?