/arch/ General

My waifu > Your waifu

Debian > Arch

Attached: 1539141669056.jpg (480x480, 33K)

You probably don't have an ounce of testosterone in your body.

This is now an Aqua hate thread

Attached: 1539142784185.png (800x1000, 143K)

Attached: 1539156645033.jpg (1024x576, 218K)

Redpill me on Parabola and Void Linux
Why would you use them instead of Arch?

kek, true
t. archtoddler whom never used debian

>t. archtoddler whom never used debian
Are you going to try to claim that testing is stable now?

Attached: 1517014470286.gif (200x150, 2.11M)

Parabola for more freedom, Void if you like ponies.

Aquafags are the worst

Attached: 1539145663270.png (375x523, 260K)

Megufags are scrawny, low test betas who aren't even mildly excited by a real woman. You probably hope "she" has a cock.

Real men prefer Wiz

I hope you're joking.

Whatever you say

Attached: 1539142236155.jpg (1200x869, 185K)

this
I don't use it, but at least they test the packages for 7 days at least before adding them. I use Kali and it never breaks, they use almost vanilla testing most of the time but patch pen testing tools faster. But I'm sure if I were to use vanilla testing (buster) I will have no problems compared to arch, I've used it before and it was cool, but I didn't use it enough (debian buster that is).
Arch broke at least 2 days a week when I updated. Had to redo xorg configs and kernel modules, kek, also is bloated af, a package has a lot of libraries that aren't shared. At that point is like using only flatpaks

Aqua is a powerbank for megumin

>pacman is dum
It's also faster than any other package manager I've ever used.

>"AQUA IS SUPERIOR, i gonna shill her with my arch laptop"
*Pacman bites xorg.conf*
>"NOOO PACMAN NOOOO, I NEED TO FAP TO AQUA HENTAI"
>*Xorg error, Archtank cant load i3"
>I-I will fix it in no time mom, don't worry
>*Drivers sucessfuly loaded, Mintank now activates DE*
>"HA--HA Priopertiary drivers"
>*Cinnamon DE activated, Mintank ready to operate*
>B-UT CINNAMON IS A BLOAT AND BOTNET
>"ArchTank meets unknown error, KERNEL PANIC ACTIVATED"

Attached: 1537892704769.png (1062x664, 114K)

• ᠌ ᠌ •
⎳
᠌ ▬

Pacman = fast, secure
SystemD = fast, secure
AUR = fast, secure
allyesconfig = fast, secure

BASED MINTANK

>Had to redo xorg configs
Oh, so you didn't actually use it. Unless you're talking about when you used it in 2007.

>xorg.conf
It's a good way to tell who has never really used GNU/Linux and just spouts memes when they say stupid shit like this.

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.

Attached: 1539552585109.jpg (480x360, 12K)

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.

Attached: 1539552844011.png (334x346, 109K)

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.

Attached: 1539561023519.png (332x332, 126K)

post fat arch users meme

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.

Attached: 1539421262475.png (1000x916, 23K)

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: 1539413455489.jpg (511x671, 41K)

>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: 1539365688664.jpg (600x600, 486K)

>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.
I don't think anyone has ever claimed this. Arch is good for beginners who want a lot of options and the latest software.
>Arch Linux runs on the principle that all the software is always brand new all the time
No, what you mean is that Arch uses the latest versions of software immediately after testing.
>rolling release
No, what you're referring to is bleeding edge. Rolling release refers to the lack of an actual release and has nothing to do with bleeding edge software.
>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.
You can always compile from source.
>As such, installing arch linux on a machine that you want to "do work" on a daunting prospect
Actually no. Arch was very easy to set up for my work. There was even a ready made package of Sheepshaver. Can't get that on any other distro.
>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.
Is this backed by a statistic or are you basing it from your own habits?
>is the culture of the users
This is always the weakest argument in everything and can be said for literally anything you don't like.
No one ever claimed Arch was minimal.
The Arch install is the easiest and simplest there is. I don't see why anyone would need an in depth explanation of why you'd make a root directory or why you'd set a clock.

Employed Arch user here

Attached: fa8.jpg (500x500, 54K)

*/shit-distro/ General

>tfw i'm fat and i use Arch
>tfw i look exactly like the fat guy in the meme

Says the wannabe BSD poseur.

Arch is the official distros as non-NPCs.

Akinator is based

>implying Aqua will even care for a sub-30cm dicka

where do I subscribe?

>I CAN COPYPASTE FROM A WIKI!!!

Attached: 1528047405053.jpg (233x326, 16K)

>I don't think anyone has ever claimed this.
>No one ever claimed Arch was minimal.
Are you new on Jow Forums or what? That's what everybody claimed when Arch was Jow Forums's favored distro.

No, that's what retards who have never used Arch and trolls who dislike Arch have always claimed.

Now THIS is a general I can get behind

Attached: spurdoarch.png (1280x1280, 355K)

>retards who have never used Arch and trolls who dislike Arch
Being minimal is considered an advantage here.
Why promote something as good if you dislike it?

Because they don't understand it and have been deliberately misled by anti-Arch memes.

This.
The real intelligence comes from being smart enough to not waste your time with dumb shit.

Is that megumin's dick?

>I use Kali
stopped reading here

Arch Binus

Attached: 123131231231312.png (1379x1189, 648K)

Video games are for NPCs.

Attached: no.webm (464x848, 425K)

Want her to smash my balls until they've turned into a fine white paste desu

I can relate to this

>pleasuring the Gentoo community with her feets like that
FUCKING HELL

Attached: 1539527321035.webm (464x848, 919K)

What is it about this broken shit that makes it attract all these idiots? Pic related is the Arch Linux user: Look, mom!! I installed ARCH LINUX!

Attached: kid-on-computer-2_tnvltp.jpg (500x362, 36K)

Arch is the best sysd Gnulinux because of its logo. The logo is kino. But seriously use slackware or gentoo you faggots.

>slackware

Attached: 1535705013926.jpg (340x480, 104K)

>3D

Attached: 1539139083756.jpg (1366x1366, 411K)

Is this the new arch meme thread?

Attached: 1538862982739.jpg (225x225, 13K)

Firstly, it should be "set up" not "setup", though that is inaccurate terminology anyway. Secondly, the use cases for Arch and Gentoo do not overlap at all. Only morons whose thoughts are dictated by memes believe these two GNU/Linux distros have anything in common.

NO-I-KNOW-BETTER-NO-U-type.

lol what's the new Jow Forums's favourite distro, kubuntu?

>her

Can you at least pretend not to be butthurt by the truth?

at least they're real

MEMES xD

imagine being this butthurt

Attached: 1539546733911.jpg (468x895, 85K)

Arch is such a fucking timesink, don't even get me started on "muh tiling WM"
All these fags pretend like the time they're saving with i3 or polybar is actually important, as if they weren't a bunch of NEET neckbeards
>t. former arch user

Attached: nothinpersonal.jpg (479x720, 27K)

Do you really expect anyone to take the opinions of a frogposting scum seriously?
Fuck off.

Why is it impossible to reason with you people? All you do is spout memes at any response. Go back to /b/ and Reddit if you want to do that.

I just wanted to say that I appreciate the work you guys have been doing
>t. Manjaro user

Go back to r/unixporn.

Because gentoo is a meme

When using the teravisin meme you don't have to use a quotation mark.

I don't use Reddit or UNIX, so just grow up.

#metoo

Attached: f.png (500x250, 72K)

aur is full of build scripts.

what do you think?
What's with the arch bullying on Jow Forums recently anyway? (Maybe it has been a while but I only noticed recently), I thought Arch is the most liked distro on Jow Forums, what happened?
pls explain

Arch is not great, but all the other options are worse. Whats the point of running linux if your just going to make an inferior imitation of windows gui's with more glitches? Where is the tech support/tutorial community outside of the arch wiki? Forum posts from 8 years ago are useless.

Windows 7 is the most liked distro heref

arch is a reddit distro now.

install debian testing.
break free.

Who use arch Linux?

what's that supposed to mean? What's Jow Forums distro in your view then?

gentoo or debian/devuan

>monthly fee

openSUSE

Isn't gentoo even more of a meme than Arch and actual timesink unlike what Arch is memed to be? Also why debian, makes me hard to believe Jow Forums would prefer distro with the most outdated packages.

gentoo is at least a timesink that's worthwhile
and you don't have to use debian squeeze, you know
it's ok. I'll let you continue to use your babby distro

reddit uses firefox too, why does Jow Forums prefer it over other browsers then?