I'd like to get away from "arch bad for new users" - eviltoast

When I say arch I mean the arch distro and all of its offspring.

Endeavouros

Arch-gui

Manjaro

Artix --maybe not though

My first enjoyable distro was manjaro, the manjaro element less so but using arch clicked for me. But even so if my first experience was using arch and archinstall then yes its not the easiest but its also not that difficult, arch is treated like a boss battle in darksouls.

So when a pre configured GUI arch is recommend I would like to see less scar mongering.

  • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    102·
    9 months ago

    I’d agree, but this is true of most distros tbh. Like obviously loads of stuff is gonna break on arch just due to the bleeding edge release cycle, but I had fewer issues running arch than Ubuntu, mainly due to PPAs and snap bullshit

    • KISSmyOS@feddit.de
      1·
      9 months ago

      obviously loads of stuff is gonna break on arch just due to the bleeding edge release cycle

      I keep reading this as if it was fact, but Arch never broke anything for me in several years.
      You do need to do a bit more to maintain it, but IMO it’s less effort than a release upgrade on a versioned distro. And if you automate it you only need to deal with it once.

      • gh0stcassette@lemmy.blahaj.zone
        2·
        9 months ago

        Yeah, like 98% of the times something broke while updating, it was something to do with ZFS, because the ZFS drivers aren’t in the kernel for licensing reasons, and there’s always a specific latest kernel version they’re compatible with that’s 1-2 versions behind current. Also the initramfs would sometimes get rebuilt without ZFS if there was a version mismatch, which prevents the system from booting properly, but it’s Fine because Half the Point of ZFS is snapshots.

        Someone using arch in a more sane way than I was would probably have no issues (unless they use proprietary Nvidia drivers, which will VERY occasionally break, but that’s nbd).