>minimalist distro for advanced linux users
>wiki has step-by-step instructions for everything written for morons
>headers shipped with all packages
>only supports systemd
 Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
 DMT Has Friends For Me Shirt $21.68 |
Nothing Ever Happens Shirt $21.68 |
Install Artix.
This
What is the problem with systemd?
The unix philosophy states that a script or pipeline of scripts, used for a common task, should be rewritten as a program.
It does not state that ANY set of scripts should be rewritten as a program.
Simply put, init is not a solved problem. If you have not yet solved the problem, you are only making a fool of yourself if you think you can write a program which solves it.
Why is it that only nocoders get triggered by scripts?
Still relies on parts of systems due to lack of patching of major DEs
Nobody on artix uses a "major DE"
where is Artix systemd?
idk man Artix's init scripts were literally broken the last time I tried to use it, the only benefit of artix that'd make me consider it is its (partial) AUR support. I'm happy with Void right now.
Who uses that? Install arch the normal way (15 minutes) then migrate to artix (10 minutes)
+- package download and install time
Install arch the normal way (15 minutes) then migrate to parabola (10 minutes)
FTFY
artixinstall when
they already have GUI live installs if you're too stupid to install using the CLI
distro for advanced linux users
isn't true?
90% of the people using arch these days are kids using it just so they can brag about using arch after using install scripts.
Gentoo is the real chad distro, and they even added binaries now. The community is way smaller than arch but the average iq is high. People say it makes no difference, but it really does for the user. You don't have mindless spam on forums and have a much better time.
You also have your init freedom out of the box because the user is respected and isn't treated like cattle.
flags are also really useful if you feel like compiling a program instead of using binaries.
hey, i didn't use an install script. i specifically chose to install it the manual way and now i'm being told Arch isn't the bad-boy distro, its gentoo? frick.
The reason you are cringe is because you're performative. Install Arch manually because it gives you more control, not because morons on the internet pretend it's cool.
but i want my computer senseis to notice me and acknowledge my computer abilities. the real reason i installed Arch manually was as a learning experience.
im using linux mint, and i want to learn more, do you think that it would be better to "learn" Gentoo instead of arch? i heard that if you learn how to install arch it's like better bc you learn more
you can learn more about linux while using mint. There's no need to switch if you don't want to.
but yes, gentoo will give you a much greater understanding of your system than arch.
Thx guys i will consider what you told me 🙂
People who think installing Arch makes them smart are incredibly stupid. You won't learn anything from it besides basic tty commands and how to manually set things up (which have been automated with every other distro now for 15 years). Arch just does their "minimal" install to keep the elitist userbase happy. I remember the insane amounts of seethe when archinstall was added.
Gentoo will teach you a lot more than Arch but you are best off just learning what's what within your own system prior to giving Gentoo a try. Whatever you think you may gain from hopping distros will not be as significant as you think. Stick with Mint, read man pages, eventually when you think you have a reasonable understanding of Linux then give Gentoo a try. But again, don't expect to gain much out of it.
You don't really learn much just by following commands to install a distro. Learn how the packages actually work, what they do and how they are related to each other. You can do that on any distro.
Gentoo is for people who already know at least roughly what they want and need and more importantly what they don't need.
Arch is for ricers who don't mind having an unstable system.
>Arch is for ricers who don't mind having an unstable system.
My arch install is perfectly stable AND ugly as frick, thank you very much.
If you wanna learn you need an ass-broken distribution that will break regularly and FORCE you too learn stuff to fix it. Arch is perfect in that regard
arch breaking is an absolute meme these days spouted by people who either dont use it, or shouldn't be using linux
Try partial upgrades
>"don't have a nice day in the foot"
>*shoots self in foot*
>wow why does my foot hurt ban guns
Every single source says explicitly to NOT do this because shit will break and you're on your own to fix it.
partial upgrades are more a linux design problem.
But if you want those, use Nix or Void
It's more of an issue on rolling release distros. Stable distros rarely bring breaking changes, but rather just patches and bugfixes
You should seriously check out Void, as it's also rolling release and fully supports partials.
https://voidlinux.org
If you use arch, just make an alias of 'pacman -Syu' to 'pacget' or something.
Nah, not interested. Void doesn't ship proprietary software and Nix constantly breaks it in mysterious ways. I'm better off with a conventional distribution
>Void doesn't ship proprietary software
based?
Nah, actually pretty backwards. A good operating system should be able to run any kind of software, no matter the license
Cringe actually. It's my machine, if I want to run an EVIL mp3 codec on it then it's my God-given right to do so, and any homosexual OSS evangelist saying "b-b-b-but proprietary" can suck my miniscule penis.
You can still run that codec, there's no technical limitation preventing you from doing so, you just have to install it yourself.
Yes. It's still trivial to install proprietary software with a different package manager if you so desire
I am the manjaro user from above and again, I had no issues since multiple months. Now I know that might change the more bleeding edge you get, but I really don't think it's that big a problem.
On the contrary I had constant issues on my stable release mint distribution after it's end of life. You just keep collecting accumulating more and more shit over time. At one point my (manually edited) gtk-theme broke and I was stuck with a shit layout (I was too stupid/lazy to fix it). I have to say, that cinnamon is very shit. This was at a time when mintupdate didn't yet exist (or at least I didn't know of it) and so I had to ditch the system for my current one. I did not have this accumulating shit issue as much on rolling release. But that might not be a point of me using rolling release, but rather sane program choices. I don't use the absolute garbage pile of cinnamon anymore as an example (i3 is simpler and you will know what you do instead of being confronted with insane config shit everywhere you go).
It werks on gentoo
Who gives a shit that Arch doesn't break on gentoo. Are you moronic? Pay attention to the discussion into which you're barging.
You sound broken.
Gentoo also conceded to binaries, so it's a cucked distro.
>having choice is being cucked
no reason to use it over arch/void now
Arch and void don't have use flags or portage. Gentoo doesn't have binary versions for 99% of its packages, just for the kernel, some browsers, libreoffice and rust
>use flags or portage
anti-feature that ends up producing very brittle systems
>Arch user calling other systems brittle
i never did partials on arch so mine were fine
Did you also check the homepage before every update?
>2019
>gives you the exact commands to fix the issue
No, I'm not moronic so I'm signed up to the mailing list.
In gentoo you get to see it immediately after installing the package.
people have wanted this for a long time. Not everything is worth compiling.
it's still better. You can use binaries for things you don't care about and compile with flags for things you do. It's also completely empty and allows you to build your environment right off the bat as you see fit.
Can I get rid of elogind with gentoo? I think dbus is still needed for firefox though. I dunno about udev or if I should care.
>Can I get rid of elogind with gentoo?
depends on the de, iirc kde won't work without this since they rely on systemd. I know certain programs are also hardcoded to need systemd, and that's a sign of a moronic dev.
You'll need to look into this depending on what you want to do. You're pretty much building your environment from scratch. You can use systemd for example if you think that's the best.
When I look at the dependencies it says xorg-server depends on elogind, what happens if I remove that use flag? I don't use a desktop environment, just fvwm.
iirc you can use xorg without it, but this can cause issues, which is why people usually use it alongside x.
Stuff like this is your hw though. Start reading documentation/manpages to troubleshoot your issues or learn things, and then use the old search engine approach only if you're stuck. The gentoo forums are also pretty helpful as long as you aren't expecting everyone there to do the work for you. They'll help you out, but only if you show you're actually trying on your own as well.
No it's the opposite, arch is unironically for user who want just werk linux distro
This, it literally is like Windows you just choose the default option and hit enter
>I don't know anything about how computers work.
Yes, we know.
>minimalist
>ugly ass logo with "scars" designed by edgy teenage moron
why not just text bro
You have to be advanced to fix everytime it breaks up, no?
No. All you ever need to do is downgrade <PKG>
At least for me as a manjaro user that is the case. And I had no issues since 6 months or so.
I agree with what you said, this is also my experience with arch. But identifying which package causes the error and downgrading it is stuff for advanced users. Only in our IQfy bubble full of wizards this is "just one command, you fricking moron".
You can just rollback using the archive mirror, not really advanced. Biggest problem with Arch is that no one knows how to use it, including its users.
other anon here,
Arch is for advanced users, or users who want to learn and get knee deep into configuring a linux system.
So it shouldn't cater to normies. (and it doesn't)
Normies should never install Arch, that's my thesis.
the ALA is not that difficult to use. If you get how pacman/mirrorlists work, it is very easy to go back to a date
>not that difficult to use
it isn't at all, yet a lot of (most of, probably) arch users have no idea it exists and how to use it, they really need to link to it in the install guide
I guess most people just do
pacman -U file:///var/cache/pacman/pkg/package-version.pkg.tar.zst
or just downgrade
https://github.com/archlinux-downgrade/downgrade
it's honestly been too long, i can no longer imagine being new to computers/linux
like i still remember certain things, like being scared of bootloaders to the point of just reinstalling an os if it ever failed to boot
but as for why idk, i think it was just irrational fear, like i convinced myself it was too hard, so it was only hard until i actually tried it
I remember I was so proud of myself, the first time I manually fixed my bootloader. it was from messing around with Arch too, funnily enough.
nowadays I just use Mint. it's like a less gay version of Ubuntu.
Works on my machine.
based
distro for advanced linux users
I don't even know how computers work and I run arch, no issues
I will show her my for loop to get her on her knees, if you know what I'm saying
>minimalist
>Empty install takes 2gb of space
more like scamrchlinux
sd is not THAT bad, you just deal with it and you forget it exists, since it just werks™
>Arch Linux is a minimalist distro for advanced users
The Linux youtuber grift channels have done more damage than Microsoft ever could.
install gentoo
Anyone not running root on ZFS and snapshotting before upgrading is a fool. Easiest rollbacks ever, no dependence on caching settings or external servers.
>Arch
>minimal
good one
>daniel micay
stopped reading there
Systemd is not that bad
complain about systemd but insist on using a monolithic kernel. LOL
Arch is a useless distro now
if you can run a fully free distro, use Parabola
otherwise use Artix
how is it useless?
because Artix does everything Arch does without SystemD and Parabola is fully free
there is no reason to use any other arch-based distro (Hyperbola is good too but they're switching to BSD)
>without SystemD
undesirable
ur loss
boot times without systemd are instant. The system itself runs even smoother. That's what happens when you have a basic init system that isn't doing much.
Black person I WANT my init system to be doing stuff. My boot takes as long as it does because I want my system in a particular state when I sit down at it, and systemd ensures that's the case.
It isn't even that long, couple seconds. If I was that impatient I could install an SSD.
other init systems are doing stuff too, just in a more efficient manner speed/resource wise. I would actually say for the average person, running an alternative init system is better.
The average person doesn't run Arch. They don't even run windows. Frick off LARPer.
I'm talking about the average person on linux, maybe try to larp your way into taking context cues
I love the scraping sounds of goalposts shifting.
moron
distro for advanced linux users
that's just a meme. it's really a distro for people who don't want to manually compile anything.
>minimalist distro
no, packages ship with everything enabled, along with docs and headers, they're as far from minimal as you can get
>advanced users
no, it has a guided installed and a wiki so popular that even users of other distros use it
>only supports systemd
because the aim of arch is /simplicity/
what you mean EVERYTHING? is that why the linux kernel is 200MB? how big is it if I compile from source?
not literally everything, but the packages tend to be pretty thicc with any remotely common feature turned on, and there's very few split packages
like the kernel package just has all the modules in it, while actual minimal distros split the modules and firmwares into different packages, so you don't have to install hundreds of megs of drivers for hardware you aren't using
I still love the mostly-minimal arch distros as well as the AUR. I'm using Artix right now. if I switch it's either Gentoo or Void for the minimalism, or Parabola for the freedom.
i'm using arch as well, but because it's simple, not because it's minimal
it's minimal compared to many other linux distros out there, most notably fedora and debian-based ones. of course it's not going to be as minimal as Gentoo or Void, but Gentoo takes 3 days to compile a browser so that's not a compromise I'd take. I also think Hyperbola (arch-based, for NOW) is more minimal than Void.
they're anti-pulse actually
https://wiki.hyperbola.info/doku.php?id=en:philosophy:incompatible_packages
>https://www.hyperbola.info/packages/?sort=&q=pipewire&maintainer=&flagged=
so is the audio jut alsa or is there some other linux audio server that i don't know about?
>Gentoo takes 3 days to compile a browser
my first gentoo install which i did in 2011 took me only 3 hours from start to a graphical desktop with firefox
now sure, things like browsers are much bigger now, but so are cpus
pic related, the cpu i had in 2011 vs. the one i have now
i'm considering installing gentoo again, especially now that they've made binary packages more accessible (since i still don't really fancy building things like gcc, llvm, clang, rust, etc)
yeah but I have a Sandy Bridge laptop with an HD3000. I get a build error before I even get to build it from the AUR. how much of a difference does compiling from source make in terms of size and performance?
it depends what you're comparing it to
the arch kernel+firmware packages vs. a host-only linux build is a massive difference in size, because probably 99% of modules won't need to be built or installed at all, and out of the hundreds of megs of firmwares, you may only need a meg of them for your hardware
the kernel is probably the most extreme case of size difference comparing a generic install vs. hardware-specific install, because drivers make up the bulk of the size of linux, and one machine only needs a small fraction of them
I'm confused between linux-hardened (my kernel), linux-hardened-headers, and linux-firmware packages. which one is best to compile from scratch for a minimal install?
and how do I build from source? I tried building from the AUR but it gave errors.
>linux-hardened-headers
How do you plan to compile that?
one doesn't compile a package with headers
Yes you fricking imbecile moron paygay. I'm asking the guy who clearly doesn't know that so he can figure out that he has a gap in his knowledge.
God I fricking hate paygays, every single one of them is dumber than dirt.
I think the anon already understood.
>I think
Biggest lie in this thread.
headers come with the source code, they're only split in binary distros because they're only used for compiling other things against it (in the case of linux, out-of-tree modules)
linux-hardened is just a different configuration of linux, on arch the linux package also bundles all the modules in the same package. making a minimal linux install mainly consists of building only the modules you need, disabling the rest
as for firmware, those are binary blobs, you do a minimal install of those by just whitelisting the ones you need and not installing the rest
I see
what are -headers packages even for exactly? so you think I should first start with building the -firmware package first before building linux? is a smaller, compiled from source kernel/firmware also better for security (less lines of code, etc.)
and is building from the AUR really building from source? or are you missing out on options?
>what are -headers packages even for exactly?
>what are -headers packages even for exactly?
for building software against the API of other software
>you think I should first start with building the -firmware package first before building linux?
there's no source code in -firmware to build, it's just a bunch of binary blobs, you trim that down by only installing the specific firmware you need, like i already wrote
>and is building from the AUR really building from source? or are you missing out on options?
they're just shell scripts which make a package, building source code is optional, there's many aur packages which don't build any source code
they also don't provide any means of configuration outside of editing the pkgbuild directly, unlike gentoo, which has configuration concepts like use flags
you may notice a pattern there, minimal = only exactly what you need
this is why minimal installs are considered advanced, because the more minimal you go, the more familiar you need to be with exactly what you need, which your typical user doesn't know
also, since gentoo recently made binary packages a bigger priority, you can just use binaries for some of the big packages that would take a long time to build on your 2nd gen core-i cpu, but still potentially benefitting in other ways like compiling linux, mesa, media codecs, etc for your cpu
like you may not notice if libreoffice is built march=native, but maybe you will if x264 is if you do video encoding, for example, and the latter is much faster to build since it's smaller
hyperbola is the most BASED linux distro there is
>no systemD
>no Dbus
>no sudo
>anti-java
>anti-rust
>no dbus
does that mean no pipewire and kde? iirc both heavily use it. do you just use pulse or alsa for audio?
>https://packages.artixlinux.org/details/fortune-mod
>The specified package fortune-mod could not be found in the Artix packages database.
?????????
if you'd please refer to the file name
now show your repos
you're SUPPOSED to have arch repositories supplementing artix repositories, idiot. rtfm
>kernel ain't boot
>process to install kernel has changed since I used Gentoo before so I don't know what the frick I am doing
>not sure if simple kernel misconfiguration or if it isn't even being installed
>caps lock and scroll lock flash on keyboard when try to boot
Arch didn't have this problem
Hello everyone I am here to shill linux mint!
can I remove ~~*~~*~~*(dbus*~~*~~*~~ on Arch? if not, then it's not a minimal distro
I will say that the Arch wiki is the single most impressive and complete Linux wiki or related to Linux website I have ever seen
you haven't seen the Gentoo wiki
I have, and it's a very solid second place
When I was on Mint, any time I had a problem, the Arch wiki turned up in my searches. Not the gentoo one.
That's why I'm on Arch.
>AUR riddled with broken packages and malware.
>Constantly ships broken updates to users which means you have to set up a fricking Arch Linux news feed to check if updating is safe.
> Wiki is fricking garbage technobable which isn't maintained or updated which means even Fedora and Debian has better, more concise wiki's now.
The age of arch is gone . The distro is low quality midwit bait. In 2024 you pick Fedora for bleeding edge and Debian for everything else.
>what is opensuse or nix
> Nix
Shit no one needs
> Opensuse
Have you used zypper?
zypper isn't not that bad. i know it's quite slow but it werks smooth yet
arch is a just works distro.
no moronic choices based on ideologies
there's no minimalism for minimalism sake, the base install is just small
no anti systemd contrarian bullshit