What advantages do distros which are more complicated to set up like Arch or Gentoo have over distros that just werk...

>arch
>complicated

>they're not complicated in the slightest
except when things deviate from the golden path because you don't have the 1/300000 hardware that's guaranteed to work without blobby drivers, in which case you need to learn how lspci works, what its output means, then you have do scrounge around online to debug your xorg.conf, at which point you remember your own mortality and kick yourself for wasting valuable time on this useless shit that gives you absolutely no transferable skills

No Linux distros "just work". They all break.
If you use some automated stuff, it's harder to fix because you don't know what and where it's broken. If you do things manually, you always know what's broken, because you just did it. That being said, I see no advantages for Arch, where you just work harder to use some automated thing + being rolling means it's braking more often.

>learning how the kernel deals with hardware is not useful or transferable
>learning how your display server works is not useful or transferable
>learning to read the output of a fucking basic command is not useful or transferable
yeah I'm thinking you're just plain stupid

Attached: laughingcigar.jpg (343x343, 14K)

JS monkeys earn $250k without knowing what a kernel is at all. They also have sex, unlike you.

JS monkeys are iToddlers who barely know how to use a computer.

>being rolling means it's braking more often.
No, not really. It may have been true in the past, but Linux breaking is extremely rare, software breaks occasionally, but rarely does the operating system.

0.000000001% gains in performance if everything goes correctly because most of the time they lose performance...literally the ricers of Linux world.

>referring to the sexual endeavours of others because he can't validate his point nor has the confidence to use his own experience
Look cuck, your life was a bad run. Just end it

Attached: suggestionshangnoose.jpg (1100x1392, 161K)

>arch
zero advantage, the millionth pointless binary distro
>gentoo
useful to target a specific set of hardware and features, like a specific server/embedded arch

>JS monkeys are iToddlers who barely know how to use a computer.
Where do I refer to sexual endeavours of others?

>too stupid to click the right DOM element
lead by example, you utter waste of oxygen

install xterm than click again

>gentoo
huge waste of time diddling with shit with no perceivable advantage, install what you want, customize your kernel,rolling release
> arch
install what you want, customize your kernel,rolling release
>other distros
bloated with pre-installed crap you probably don't want, little choice in how you want it configured during the installation process
>other distros net install
not as bloated, but still few choices

how do i install xterm if I can't use the terminal?

Ctrl+alt+f1 or ctrl+alt+f2

They're rolling release. So they aren't really comparable to Ubuntu. Better question is, why use one of these hard to setup and use distros over a "medium difficulty" rolling distro like Tumbleweed, which just werks out of the box?

Nothing. If you are comfy using ubuntu, use ubuntu. Distro hopping to other more "elite" distro will bring you nothing but trouble and annoyance...

the absolute state of freetard software

>windowsfag can't into TTY

Attached: 774d5e58-d66c-4308-a243-a265a809ca56.jpg (715x557, 20K)

This is not a pissing contest. Windows and osx having problems doesn't magically solve the problems linux distros have.

You are using a meme distro, what the fuck do you expect?

>Windows and osx having problems doesn't magically solve the problems linux distros have.
You are literally using a distro made by someone on Jow Forums.
If you actually want to try to get into Windows start with something better supported, like Ubuntu, KDE Neon, etc.

Until the rapid updates break it and you have to figure out and vet every major update.

CloverOS and its installscripts are broken as hell. Don't use them. Instead, install gentoo the normal way (following the manual) and add the CloverOS mirrors to your BIN_HOST. This is how you get the best stability without dealing with installing the larger packages from source.

You actually think you'd learn any of that stuff from the situation described up above?

I mean, you're posting a reaction image and greentext like a retard, the best you'd get out of it is some googling skills you'll forget in a week. You'd learn nothing about the kernel at all.

you can troll on Jow Forums

>arch
>customize your kernel
I guess you could grab kernel sources and do that during the install, but last I checked the official installation process just gives you a kernel binary from the repos like any other distro. Gentoo's the only one outside of LFS that actually makes compiling a custom kernel an officially-supported step.

>distros that just werk like Ubuntu
Until you try to dist-upgrade to the next point release, where the Ubuntu hose of cards just collapses. After going through that multiple times I've switched to Debian, wich actually just works. I'm still running the same install from 2011 and never ran into any kind of problem, even though my hardware has changed multiple times: Intel+nvidia(nvidia driver) -> Intel+AMD(fglrx) -> Intel+AMD(radeon/radeonsi) -> AMD+AMD(amdgpu).
>but it's missing firmware
download the $version+firmware install iso.
>but it's outdated
backports, user-mode installs from tarballs/git

I switched back to Windows after using Ubuntu for a year because I realized how much of a pain in the ass it is, installing anything that isn't in the repos.
In general, getting anything working that's not Firefox/LibreOffice is a crapshoot.
Never once got Dota 2 to run on Linux. TF2 worked, though inexplicably the FPS would fluctuate between 60 and 10.
In the end it was too much of a hassle. The customisation was nice, but ultimately I like being able to install whatever I want on my computer without jumping through a million hoops.
>grow up and stop playing games
This is the problem with Fossfags. Every time you point out one of Linux's downsides, they try and twist it into a downside.

>I use Windows because I want to play games
>Oh? Well, just grow up. Linux is better for adults who don't play games...

>I use Windows because I want to use Microsoft Office
>Oh? Well, you shouldn't. Microsoft Office is a proprietary botnet. You should use LaTeX on Arch instead.

>I use Windows because I want to use this obscure piece of software.
>Oh? Then you're an idiot. You should be using Linux and using this alternative piece of software that barely works and only has a tenth of the features I need.
>I don't want to use that.
>UGH THEN JUST FUCKING CODE IT YOURSELF

everything to do with kernel modules should be identical between debian and ubuntu

Who cares what other people do? I seriously hope you don't compare yourself like you're trying to project on to user there. That sounds like hell.

welcome to adulthood.

There is literally nothing wrong with using Ubuntu.

Attached: ubuntu-512.png (512x512, 31K)

Screenshot for truth

you're all making installing gentoo sound like its a lifetime commitment.
It'd take a day to install at the most.

it takes a day just to compile Chromium

This kills linuxfags

Nothing new. Universal experience of every fucking person that has to use linux excepting freetards.

you're under the misconception that the linux desktop is relevant

based

It takes 0 seconds if you use cloveros repos.

>trusting binaries compiled by some Jow Forums shitposter
aren't you Loonixfags supposed to be technologically savvy?

What's the difference between a Jow Forums faggot and another distro maintainer? I'm not saying to trust it, I'm saying source is always best but that you don't get to complain about compile times.

>What's the difference between a Jow Forums faggot and another distro maintainer?
ah yes, tech savvy indeed

Some more complicated to install destroys have better package managers and repos, which are the only thing that matters once you're reasonably experienced

Attached: Pallass_cat.jpg (949x475, 151K)

Lol butthurt

Not entirely. For example, you can't get rid of systemd if your distro uses only precompiled binaries and all the binaries are compiled with systemd support included. Thus customization is also an important aspect at this level. Close though.

Gentoo is one of the only stable rolling release distros. You dont have to reinstall it every 6 months

To the extent that it is rolling release it is not stable. Stable the sense of "Debian Stable" means that the software is unchanging. If you get used to doing something one way in GIMP in Debian 10, it will be the same for the lifecycle of Debian 10. If you get used to doing something in GIMP 2.8 and Gentoo updates to 2.10 and it changes it, it is "unstable" - not in the sense that it crashes but in the sense of change.

Gentoo might be "more stable" than say Arch or openSUSE Tumbleweed, but as far as it is a rolling release it is not stable.

Again, it might never crash. Same with Arch. It's not crash prone, it's just unstable in the sense of change.

This is arguing over definitions.
I doubt most end users would want to stay on debian stable

This. In reality, when people say stable, they mean "doesn't break", not "stays broken in a predictable way".

Arch isnt that complicated. Gentoo isnt too bad either but takes forever to install cause compiling. As for advantages arch has the software I want and nothing else. Apparently its slightly fster but idk.

i just like the aur and archwiki desu

Then Arch is stable, although it changes every other day, because for most users it doesn't break (very often). FACT: stable means one thing to you and another thing to distro maintainers.

It's not stable because it does break extremely often for most users. The thing is, linux doesn't automatically reload things that are updated, so when X breaks, you won't know about it until you kill X and restart it (which is increasingly uncommon) (also by X breaking, I mean any part of X, your drivers, the kernel, your DE/WM, ...)

boot into cli then and fix it. but i've never had any issues

Arch has officially supported kernel sources also, but it's easier to build and compile a new kernel after you have a base install

If you want to make any serious modifications to your OS, use software outside of the repos, disable aspects of your init system, create virtual encrypted partitions, format luks drives etc... then you end up doing pretty much the same shit on every distro. You can learn just as much from ubuntu as you can from arch. This is profoundly stupid.

Yes, usually I boot a liveusb, decrypt and mount the local disk, chroot and fix it there. But I get tired of it after a couple years. I don't have these problems on gentoo so I just tend to prefer it heavily. Too bad since aur is fantastic.

the arch didn't have the aur i would've abandoned it forever ago

If you use easy distro's like mint or ubuntu you will never properly learn linux and when you will have to work with a server or something like, that not use a beautiful interface you will be fucked up.

I see what you mean and agree.
I hadn't considered that because I'm relatively happy with whatever init system, though I do prefer not having to write my own service files.

This is retarded. Why do retards keep getting dubs? Using a nice DE doesn't prevent you from learning about the inner workings of your OS. And this whole "learning linux" thing is a cringeworthy meme. You don't need to "learn linux". It's not a fucking programming language you dumb zoomer. You use gnu / linux as your daily driver, or for work projects, then you know how to work with it. It happens pretty fast. Only subliterate animals and people over 80 have to "learn" an operating system.

>You can learn just as much from ubuntu as you can from arch.
>You can
But you won't, because Ubuntu installs in a few clicks.You learn nothing about partitioning, setting up networks, etc. Ubuntu doesn't PREVENT you from learning, but it certainly doesn't encourage it.Will you remember everything involved in installing Arch? Maybe not, but it shouldn't be as nerve wracking if you need to delve into a problem, because you've already been in the nether regions of your OS before.

time learning about arch is time wasted

Thoughts on void linux?

t. retarded that never did anything besides write code
I didn't say that the only way to learn is installing arch, but arch force yourself to not depend of a graphic interface and consequently learn how to deal with linux. Some jobs require linux knowledge and trust me, with knowledge in mint they will laught of you.

It's not just learning about Arch,most of it applies to the other distros as well. In your attempts to push an outdated meme, you're actually making Arch out to be more complicated than it is. It's complicated enough to teach you how everything fits together, but it's easy enough to be successfully accomplished by someone new to Linux. Do it once.Use an installer the next time, and enjoy having a clue about what's going on.

WHY do you insist on Ubuntu instead of something like Lubuntu? Ubuntu is bloated fucking garbage. Lubuntu just works, too, faget.

debian aint hard to get to work either

What? You have to do all of that if you intend on customizing your setup at all, using an encrypted partition, or even using a swap partition now. Ubuntu stuff is great for gnewbs, but it offers all the flexibility you'd expect from any modern distro if you're not a gnewb too.

even an ubuntu command line only install is bloated. an ubuntu cli install uses more RAM than a Debian OpenBox install. Debian with a fucking GUI uses less RAM then a text only Ubuntu. Ubuntu is bloat, its engrained into its very being

>installing anything that isn't in the repos.

>You have to do all of that if you intend on customizing your setup at all, using an encrypted partition, or even using a swap partition now
So they did away with the point and click options for these? They were there the last time I looked.

You're clearly a neet.

>knowledge in mint
Lololololol

Mint, like ubuntu, is debian based. Further, no one mentions their personal distro of choice on a resume. Using any linux distro in a serious fashion gives you a good working knowledge of linux, along with the package manager, init system, and other defaults of that distribution. Using arch or gentoo does not make you more knowledgable than a debian user, than a sparky user, than sabayon user, than an ubuntu user, than a slackware user etc... An 8 year old can learn how to partition a disk at the command line. Your distro does not make you more intelligent. Period.

Literally who gives a fuck about bloat? The cost of buying more ram is FAR less than the time wasted (at my pay rate) with these meme distros.

Yes, they've been gone since at least 2016. Also at around the same time they broke manual partitioning, stopped working with LVM (unable to delete them, just goes into an infinite loop, then crashes the installer) and encryption. Also couldn't create new LVM partitions.

>sperging about literal megabytes of RAM in the age of GB
My Ubuntu headless install with a couple important things running (ZNC, transmission-daemon) is using literally 198MB/3.7GB

It's lean, clean, sane, and does exactly what you tell it to do without ever getting in your way.

>buying more RAM solves all the ill effects of bloat
you are retard.
Please do explain what you can do faster on Ubuntu than Lubuntu. Protip, nothing, since everything is faster on Lubuntu, and by your very own argument, this means that Lubuntu is what YOU should prefer over Ubuntu

And if Debian was your base instead it would use half that amount.

Trash. Worst package manager in the world (can't even cleanly remove packages without borking the whole system), shit repos, unstable. Not a single noteworthy feature.

>uses less RAM then a text only Ubuntu

retarded faggot doesn't even know the difference between then and than

your opinion is shit, kill yourself

I doubt it. But literally what difference would it make if this were true? Either way it's not going to max out the RAM even on a 1GB Raspberry Pi.

Changing some settings in a DE like hostname, and managing mounts and the like can obscure learning them the "right way" like hostnamectl and mount commands, but I largely agree that the benefits of using a WM over a DE are overstated in that respect.

Used to have really great repos, gone massively downhill around 2018. Was my daily driver up until late that year however

>retarded faget who doesnt understand what a typo is
typical ubuntard

>faget
you're a fucking retard, admit it and kill yourself

>But literally what difference would it make if this were true?
Well what is all this extra memory being used for that Debian deems it unnecessary for the same setup. You have code running that is most likely unnecessary. Although the performance implications may be minimal in your particular case (I would argue setups using more RAM, whether you have it to spare or not, would have notable performance degradation), there may be stability and security issues.

The real question is, is what is this additional code in an Ubuntu CLI install doing that isnt running in a Debian install, and why do Ubuntu devs feel it is necessary or beneficial?

no you're