>if Arch was not autistic and unironically good and stable: The distro

What is the point of using
>Debian, Fedora, OpenBSD, guix if it's outdated
>Ub(L)untu if it's bloated
if Anarchy Linux exists and is much better and complete than all distros together

Attached: anarchy-linux-1.jpg (695x521, 40K)

Other urls found in this thread:

youtu.be/6Dfs740dONI
twitter.com/SFWRedditGifs

Ok

It's just Arch with the old installer that was included with Arch about a decade ago.
Also ads on their homepage, complete with a whiny pop-up about how the entire project is ad-supported, if you use a blocker.

Attached: anarchyads.png (1278x1045, 108K)

ouch, not a good look for analchy

But how does it compare to gentoo?

>Linux distro page has Google adds
>Of Apple products
This is kind of sad.

If it's just arch, why not simply install arch?

Attached: 1541538358996.jpg (353x401, 56K)

Antergos already exists my man. I don't even bother to install Arch the official way anymore, just use Antergos.

>apple ads on distro page
>systemd
>literally its arch with an ancient installer

just install artix with runit

>debian
>outdated
Debian sid is not outdated while being more stable than many other distros' LTS releases.

The absolute STATE of archfags.

It's complete and does not require you to wait 30 minutes to compile a fucking paint package.
>artix
>aka "type pacman -Syu to ruin everything": the distro

this is the footfag of arch-based distros

I fucking hate it, i have it on a laptop and sometimes is a fucking nightmare.

IT'S LITERALLY ARCH WITH AN INSTALLER
THAT'S LITERALLY IT
HOW IS ARCH MORE STABLE THAN ARCH

Arch and Debian user here, it always baffles me how people know so little of Debian even though Arch is supposed to be the leet kids distro. I like both for different reasons but I always laugh when I see people crying over wifi firmware or non-free software for Debian. It's like they're incapable of using search engines. No wonder Ubuntu is so popular, if people could do any research there would be no reason for it.

youtu.be/6Dfs740dONI

everything works out of the box. i dont have to spend an evening configuring the system.

t. archlinux user for 10 years who recently switched to fedora because he didn't have enough will to install & configure arch on his new system

i just want to shitpost and compile a program or two once in a while. i don't care about ricing, all my shit has default looks

Name one provable non-subjective benefit of using this over Ubuntu.

I'll wait.

no, the reason why people don't use debian anymore is because the devs were too indecisive on the systemd matter.
as a result the switch was horrible and debian users blamed systemd, even though it just worked on every other distro.
now that systemd became the defacto standard, people in the industry just laugh at you for using debian.
heck, even ubuntu has better devs than debian at this point

>IT'S LITERALLY ARCH WITH AN INSTALLER
It's not, you mongoloid.
If you can't read text that is 4 seconds long... then you probably will never understand why Anarchy is much more complete (and way better) than Ub(L)untu.

Canonical puts actual spyware in their shit.
Almost any distro is better than Ubuntu.

What problems were there with systemd?
I don't recall anything in particular (my home server runs Debian Stable).

I’ve never understood those who have a stance on it and why. I just compute how I want and say fuck the politics. If this board had its way I would be shivering in fear of the opinion Jow Forums might have on me based on minute choices.

Go ahead and slap some rgb on that Manjaro box you might have. I don’t care what you use. I do however like giving critiques of rice.

Manjaro? I use Windows 10 on my desktop.

People meme hard on Manjaro instead of just welcoming their fellow freeware brother with open arms.

rgb?

Want to know how I know you are new?

new?

I never had any issues with systemd on Debian, any. And Ubuntu has always been more buggy and prone to crash than Debian. I don't know what you're talking about. Without Debian there's no Ubuntu, the Ubuntu devs depend on Debian to have their careers. Ubuntu is a poor man's Debian all around whether you like it or not.

systemd still supports the old init scripts
the support wasn't meant to start the whole operating system, but rather for single daemons that are no longer under active development to still be usable
but because debian devs didn't have time to rewrite those as they debated whether to switch or not till the last moment, they just used the existing scripts instead of the new way (services/targets)
this lead to the already heated debate on systemd being flooded by angry debian users.

it's all in the past now, but a lot of debian users/devs still have this ingrianed hatred for systemd
so a lot of other distro devs and users, especially sysadmins who know how to fully take advantage of systemd, tend to joke about debian users being brainlets

How so?

>so a lot of other distro devs and users, especially sysadmins who know how to fully take advantage of systemd, tend to joke about debian users being brainlets
Got links/source for what you're saying? Claiming debian is for brainlets when those people use Ubuntu is rich to say the least.

this is some just some trivia you get to hear when going to linux talks.
when it's a systemd talk just ask the angry people why they hate it and if they use debian.
maybe you find some juicy bits in the mailing list.
not gonna google for your amusement

Yeah, so nothing substantial, just people having preferences.

>>aka "type pacman -Syu to ruin everything": the distro
every arch based distro and arch itself does this because they are rolling retard

>t. seething debian brainlet

> It's not, you mongoloid.
it literally is

>ads
>Fedora, outdated
>Ubuntu bloated, when it's just a debian live installation
>knock off arch
>features a custom repository with additional packages. (botnet)
wew

There is no ads.

Attached: nothing.png (1326x728, 60K)