Linux

13996 readers

583 users here now

A community for everything relating to the GNU/Linux operating system (except the memes!)

Also, check out:

Original icon base courtesy of lewing@isc.tamu.edu and The GIMP

founded 3 years ago

MODERATORS

Ategon@programming.dev

anzo@programming.dev

dwraf_of_ignorance@programming.dev

Users of Arch-based distros, why don't you use pure Arch? (ani.social)

submitted 8 hours ago* (last edited 7 hours ago) by kiri@ani.social to c/linux@programming.dev

47 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(No provocation)

I see these reasons:

newbie
lazy (don't wanna edit config files etc.)
unique features (like assistant/toolbox, some optimizations like in cachyos)
wanna check how different systems are set up (that's rather distrohopping)

Personally, I used manjaro i3 when I was beigginer and wanted to see how tiling WM should be configured (check out ranger config, for example). But after some time, I don't see reasons why not to just customize pure arch (same with debian and debian-based distros).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[–] rozodru@piefed.world 3 points 3 hours ago

I don't use Arch anymore but I can imagine that the install process turned a lot of people off it or pivoted them to stuff like Manjaro, CachyOS, Endeavour etc. It isn't until recently that ArchInstall has become VERY good and simple.

Primary factor even with Archinstall is if you're trying to install Arch via Wifi. you have to do iwd and all that and for someone who isn't quite as comfortable on the command line yet that can be daunting. Even now for myself if I were installing Arch I still have to pull up the Arch Wiki during install cause I can never remember the iwd commands for wifi. I've also borked the install a couple times because I either forgot to include the networkmanager or selected the wrong video drivers.