I’m a little bit underwhelmed, I thought that based off the fact so many people seem to make using this distro their personality I expected… well, more I guess?
Once the basic stuff is set-up, like wifi, a few basic packages, a desktop environment/window manager, and a bit of desktop environment and terminal customisation, then that’s it. Nothing special, just a Linux distribution with less default programs and occasionally having to look up how to install a hardware driver or something if you need to use bluetooth for the first time or something like that.
Am I missing something? How can I make using Arch Linux my personality when once it’s set up it’s just like any other computer?
What exactly is it that people obsess over? The desktop environment and terminal customisation? Setting up NetworkManager with nmcli? Using Vim to edit a .conf file?
You must log in or register to comment.
Welcome to realizing the Memes are all bullshit and its just a solid distro that’s worth using for the simpleness. Just go use your computer like the average user is and roll with it
Yep, all this «how do I learn linux» stuff is weird. You don’t learn your OS, you use it. Did you need to «learn» Windows? You just launch it and click your browser / file manager / media player and browse, manage files and watch or listen to your media files.
You can just use your PC as you would regularly use your PC and find solutions once you face some issues. Yes, Linux issues are different from Windows issues.
You got downvoted but as a Systems Engineer when I get home from work, I want my OS to get out of my way. All these other people are crazy.
This x 1000. I’ve had a buddy razz me over using plain, simple Debian because it’s not bleeding edge and the packages are out of date in some cases. bro I don’t care I just want to play some games and occasionally use LibreOffice for some stuff.
Yep. If I could have a true steamOS that had no desktop mode that would be 60% of my home life. I have an 1135g7 32gb ram laptop for Mint.
Modern operating systems have made it take very little knowledge to connect to WiFi and browse the internet. If you want to use your computer for more than that, it can still take a longer learning process. I download 3D models for printing, and wanted an image for each model so I could find things more easily. In Linux, I can make such images with only about a hundred characters in the terminal. In Windows, I would either need to learn powershell, or make an image from each file by hand.
The way I understand “learning Linux” these days is reimagining what a computer can do for you to include the rich powers of open source software, so that when you have a problem that computers are very good at, you recognize that there’s an obvious solution on Linux that Windows doesn’t have.
I get your point, but for your specific example windows powertools gave my .stl files thumbnails if that is what you are referring to.
You joke, but I was there, 3000 years ago… and DOS, Windows and Lotus 1-2-3 courses sold like hot cakes. Yeah, people had to learn Windows until a critical mass of people knew it so knowledge would self propagate.
the vhs tapes
Didn’t bother going through the hoops and installed EndeavourOS which is arch-based with some additional default applications.
For me, the best thing of Arch isn’t the distribution but the Arch wiki. An impressive piece of documentation.
Arch wiki is superb, couldn’t have installed or configured Arch without it.
Which btw is the reason many people ended up with Archlinux… after the x-th time looking up some configuration issues on another distro and landing there.
And the Arch User Repository is really handy when you need some more users.
That’s not a typo but a jest to the security implications, isn’t it?
It was a joke on the dual meaning of “user repository” which I didn’t think about that deeply but that would have been smart.
The Arch build system is just as impressive IMO. I’ve written Debian and redhat packages for at least two decades and Arch packaging is just so much easier to handle. The associated tooling for creating and managing build chroots is excellent as well.
That’s the main reason my software is in the AUR but nowhere else. I tried to make a deb package and failed so many times so I just gave up.
EndeavorOS is essentially Arch with a gui installer and a few optional pre-installed packages.
You already announced you use Arch… So you’re doing good
Most distros are very similar - it’s mostly the same software just using a different package manager.
This is why “which distro should I use” is the most annoying question in this community.
It is definitely annoying but I think it’s understandable from people that are coming in from the outside.
There is a pretty big difference in terms of usability between Arch and everything else because of the rolling release model and the AUR. Lots of things you would have to manually install from a git repo or track down a PPA for can be installed like a normal package.
So what you’re saying is that the package manager is very different?
My point stands - once things are installed your “Linux Experience” is pretty similar.
NOTE: I’ve used words like “most” and “similar” and “pretty”. Do not ignore these words. They have meaning.
I would say it’s not very different, just one league above all the others that I’ve come across.
The three things that stand out in my opinion is how much their package manager can query packages, it’s rolling release and the number of packages they have in the AUR.
It makes Arch the most complete and up to date Linux distro,
with the exception of a user friendly forum,
that doesn’t look like the nazi soup kitchen from Seinfeld,
and an installer.(BTW)
I use Manjaro and little bit of Artix.
If I would recommend anything, it’s either EndeavourOS or Manjaro.
They’re Arch-based and friendlier.I stopped using Arch because I got banned from their forum for changing my username.
What did you expect they are using the same programs.
Read the thread…
Now actually use it for a couple of years. Then you’ll see whats special about it.
For me personally, Ubuntu was breaking on every dist upgrade, the software was always out of date or not available in the repos. Been running arch for 5 years, same install, even transplanted it over to newer computers without issues. When some package is missing, I can throw together a PKGBUILD with chatgpt and put it on the AUR for others to use. It fucking rocks and is extremely sturdy while allowing me to do with it whatever I want.
But yeah, besides that, it’s just a linux. The individual things it does well are not even exclusive to arch. Ideally, you should not think about your OS at all and it should be out of your way, while you do something on it.
Any major Linux distribution has a system for building packages, it’s not something special to Arch. In fact, Arch’s great advantage of the aur repository actually becomes a disadvantage by introducing instability and insecurity into your system when you add programs from that repository. It’s amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe’s and then install packages from external repositories with the security of “trust in the repository”. How can you trust code with root access to the system just because it’s in the aur repository? That’s the main question I would ask Arch users.
It’s a choice. We know that it’s riskier to use stuff from AUR. Which is why it’s highly recommended to read the PKGBUILD before installing the package. The basic Arch install doesn’t even include an AUR helper. That said, AUR is typically very reliable for packages with a decent userbase. It’s mostly due to the community aspect. Bad actors are caught relatively easily as the PKGBUILD is available to look at.
It’s amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe’s and then install packages from external repositories with the security of “trust in the repository”.
As with almost every case of these sorts of comparisons, these are likely separate groups of people holding separate groups of opinions.
I don’t use Arch anymore, but when I did I found that the AUR was really useful to quickly install niche applications that would take ages to be approved on to an official repository. Often those would be made by the application developers themselves or members of the community. I would personally vet the packaging script myself, but I’m sure many wouldn’t - and that’s fine. As with most software, there’s some trust involved and often you assume that if you’re installing from a reputable repository it’s going to be fine. If people aren’t vetting the installation scripts and are installing from random repositories, that’s really their problem. I’m glad the possibility existed and it’s the one thing I’ve missed in distros I’ve used since then.
Any major Linux distribution has a system for building packages
I have built packages for all the major ones. Non arch packages are a pain to build and I never want to do it again. In contrast arch PKGBUILDs are quite simple and straight forward.
How can you trust code with root access to the system just because it’s in the aur repository?
Because you can view the source that builds the packages before building them. A quick check to not see any weird commands in the builds script and that it is going to an upstream repo is normally good enough. Though I bet most people work on the if others trust it then so do I mentality. Overall due to its relative popularity it is not a big target for threats when compared to things like NPM - which loads of people trust blindly as well and typically on vastly more important machines and servers.
Not sure if sarcasm or actual disinformation. You’re not supposed to trust the aur, that’s kinda the whole point of it. The build scripts are transparent enough to allow users to manage their own risk, and at no point does building a package require root access.
Well there is far less malware on Linux tbf so comparison is not completely accurate. But same caution applies, try to vet and understand what you install. That part is also easier with the AUR as it’s transparent in the packagebuild what it does unlike random exes with closed source. It’s also a large community with many eyes on the code so unless it’s a package with few users then it’s gonna get caught pretty quickly.
That is, you admit that most aur users delegate that function to other eyes instead of auditing the external code they are installing. A user repository outside of the official distribution repository is not a secure means of installing packages on the system, which may have root access to the system and the source code may change with each package update. Do you think that every time there is an update to a package that is not widely used, others will audit the source code for you? For that reason I stopped using Aur and by extension Arch, as their software catalog outside of aur is small.
Your comparison was with random exes on the most targeted, malware infested operating system out there.
Many eyes are always better than no eyes. I’m not saying you shouldn’t vet the code stop misinterpreting but no one knows or catches everything by themselves. That’s why security needs transparency. If it’s as insecure as you’re saying we would have way bigger problems but we don’t. AUR is not as safe as the Arch repository sure, but definitely safer than installing random exes on Windows. It’s a flawed comparison you’re making.
If you’re paranoid you should be on an immutable distro cause xz backdoor was in some official repos. Repo maintainers do not catch everything either it was just a mere coincidence someone caught it(again thanks to transparency & many eyes on code) before mass deployment. Installing anything with root access is a risk. Going online is a risk. But there are ways to mitigate risk. Some security you’re always gonna have to trade for convenience.
there is far less malware on Linux
That’s a common misconception. Linux is the most popular OS for servers. There are a lot of malware for Linux, probably even more than for Windows.
I think you’re missing the context. We’re not talking servers here but desktops. Arch is typically used on desktop systems. The threats that face desktops and servers are not the same. Same goes for risk and potential damage. Also please provide a source if you’re trying to debunk “common misconception”.
Makes sense. Do you find that by having the same install for so long (including transplanting it) that you have accumulated a lot of bloat? One of the things I really enjoyed about a fresh install was that I knew there wasn’t a build-up of digital junk files, but with Arch fresh installing every once in a while just seems impractical.
Not in any bothersome way. But if you really want to reinstall often that is valid as well. You can very easily script the arch install process to get you back to the same state far easier than other distros as well. Or you can just mass install everything except base and some core packages and reinstall the things you care about again which almost gives you a fresh install minus any unmanaged files (which are mostly in home and likely want to keep anyway).
I’ve been using Arch for about 15 years or so, and yes, I build up cruft… in my home directory ;-). The system itself is remarkably good at keeping tidy. The one spot to keep an eye on is /var/cache/pacman, as that’s where it stores every package you download before installation and it won’t delete it without you asking it to.
Any new config file will be saved with a
.pacsaveextension, so you’ll want to keep an eye out for those, but that’s basically itWhich is a good point to remind people to install
pacman-contriband make runningpacdiffregularly a habit…
Most of the junk accumulates in /home and I did a cleaning once, where I got rid of a couple hundred GB there, from stuff that was either already uninstalled or still installed but unused for years.
In the other root directories, I didn’t find much tbh. My / (excluding home) takes up 40GB and I don’t think it was significantly lower years ago as the bulk of it comes from necessary program files.
The main trash you accumulate are config files in you home directory because they stay after the package is uninstalled. And they just sit there not hurting anybody.
Yup, Arch is by far the distro I have had the fewest amounts of technical issues with. Yes, you need to know what you are doing or be willing to read docs, but there’s no magical bullshit, maintainer capriciousness and lack of planning happening like I have unfortunately witnessed all too often while using other distros.
Ubuntu installs upgrade well in my experience, unless you add weird and outdated software from external sources. A bit like manually installing pkgbuild files you found on Github. Stuff will break in the same way when dependencies don’t get upgraded.
That said, Arch installs will break when a random library decides to update, and Ubuntu will break years later when you decide to upgrade.
Except for maybe Gentoo, Arch is the most “gets in your way” OS I’ve seriously used. You need to be conscious of stuff like your bootloader configuration, the network manager you use, and sometimes the kind of Bluetooth daemon you’re running, or software may not work or break your boot. It’s pretty easy to use if you install Arch by picking the exact same software you can also find in other distros (i.e. the Ubuntu style grub+systemd+NetworkManager+Gnome set, or the Fedora systemd-boot+dracut+NetworkManager+Gnome set). Following the Arch guide without copying a preexisting software set will make your life very difficult, as I’ve found out.
Been running arch for 5 years, same install, even transplanted it over to newer computers without issues.
To be fair, I pretty much do that with Windows 10…
Linux distros are made for using, not teaching. That’s what LFS is for: https://www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/
How is this relevant? They were talking about how Arch has a great user experience
Replied to the wrong post by accident.
Ubuntu is plastic
Most of the time it is achieved with the phrase: “I use Arch, btw”. 😉
Also wearing unix socks might help
EDIT: A more complete guide.
Also, Blåhajar for better pics
In a way this post is just long-form “I use Arch, btw” 🤯
Don’t forget shitting on Arch-derived distros.
We save that for Manjaro, endeavor and the others are pretty cool
Yeah I know. Derivate distros are cool only if they don’t stray too far from Arch. How dare a distro do something different.
Keep it up, it’s a super cool look (and healthy) for a distro to hate on its own downstream.
Check your neck for extra beard hairs, or your legs for knee high socks
Knee high socks are for any Linux flavour 💖
I have both
Ooh, a Gentoo user!
You fell for the meme lol.
Arch is great if you want very high levels of customization without having to get into compiling and coding, like with Gentoo or NixOS.
I think of it as the distro equivalent to custom keyboard kit, you get all the parts and can swap them out as much as you want. But you’re not designing and fabricating your own circuit board and microcontroller, writing your own custom firmware, getting a custom case modeled and fabricated, etc.
There’s a reason “I use Arch, BTW” Is a meme.
Tbh I only use arch because I still love openbox too much
Can’t you just install openbox on any other distro? Looks like it’s available for all the major ones at least.
Come for the memes, stay for the wiki and AUR.
The meme is mostly a relic from the days when installing Arch was a very involved and mostly manual process – it wasn’t to the level of LFS, but you had to configure most of the base system, and it would leave you with a pretty bare-bones setup (no GUI by default, etc). So it was a pretty big hurdle and successfully installing it did give you a bit of nerd cred, though even then the “arch BTW” meme was tongue in cheek.
These days it’s just one of the most well-supported rolling release distros, and it’s got automated installers and GUI spins just like any popular distro. The two biggest assets are the AUR and the wiki.
NixOS does kind of feel like the spiritual successor in terms of effort to set up, and in that immutable OSes are kind of the next big thing, like rolling release was fairly unconventional when Arch was taking off.
I use Ubuntu but the Arch wiki is top notch and has helped me solved a lot of problems, especially technical issues like VFIO. I think you’re right that Arch love largely started as a meme to celebrate getting it installed, kind of like the jokes about being unable to exit VIM.
What exactly is it that people obsess over? The desktop environment and terminal customisation? Setting up NetworkManager with nmcli? Using Vim to edit a .conf file?
Welcome to the crowd! Eventually, you realize that an operating system is just an operating system: something you use to get work done, and the less you notice it, the better it’s doing its job. The pride of setting it all up mostly ends very shortly after you’re done. At that point, you realize that pretty much all distros are the same, give or take.
That said, there are always moments that make you realize that your OS is amazing. When you’re faced with a new and difficult task that you don’t know how to achieve, then you look at your distro’s documentation and solve it in a few elegant steps. And I’m not an Arch user, but that’s when the Arch wiki will really be your friend, as well as all the other resources that Arch has for its users. I can’t think of examples of these kinds of moments because they’re so rare, but those are the moments that feel great and really make you appreciate your OS.
I think you might be missing the part where memes are not real. aur is useful. arch wiki is useful.
The AUR is pretty awesome. If a piece of software exists on Linux, it’s in the AUR. Even software that doesn’t have a native Linux version can sometimes be found these, e.g. repackaged versions of Electron apps for Windows.
And once you start really customizing your system, you’ll see the value of the Arch Wiki. If there’s something you can do on Arch, the Wiki probably has a well-written guide for it.
100% its the Wiki and AUR!
On every other distro, once you want a program not in the package manager, it will likely be broken by the next update. On arch 99.995% of the time it will be in AUR and you can just make a simple PKGBUILD when its not, so your updates will automatically recompile all of your personal projects!
Well these days we have flatpak to solve the “not in the repo” (or ‘old version in the repo’) problem.
Only for (some) desktop applications. The AUR has everything, including CLI tools, configurations and even some niche scripts
Exactly. I hate when people constantly bring in Flatpak, because I’d be happily using Debian, if I could have Qtile Wayland with Qtile-extras and Hyprland in the repos with all their dependencies. But that’s never happening, especially for Qtile. These are window managers, you can’t package them in a Flatpak. And what about niche cli tools, as you mentioned? Or what about the latest Neovim on Debian? Yes, there’s a Flatpak but do you really want to mess with a Flatpaked CLI app? I know I don’t.
Yeah imagine having to type in
flatpak run io.neovim.nvimto launch Neovim
I used the Arch wiki to get gamescope working on Pop OS. It’s a great resource regardless of your distro. In many cases the info on there is not even Arch-specific.
Do people really make Arch their personality? Ive been using Arch-based distros since forever and never really met someone like that. I thought it was just a meme.
I like the minimalism and ability to control more parts of your system as opposed to an automated install process doing everything for you. But you don’t have to do that much manually. The main pacstrap step basically sets up your whole system anyway. It’s not that different to other mainstream distros. I have always just used it like any other distro.
Edit: Forgot to mention that the bleeding-edge packages and AUR are nice features too. And being rolling release to a lesser extent, just my preference.
I thought it was just a meme.
I see way more complaints about ‘elitist Arch users’ than I ever do comments from actual elitist Arch users.
Also, I never saw anyone saying anything about a “year of the Linux Desktop”. It’s just a meme.
Both were a thing in discussions many years ago. That’s why they became a meme.
But since then it’s basically only used ironically because people quickly noticed they’re a meme.
It was certainly said seriously in the late 1990s and early 2000s. It was the kind of phrase you’d find in computer magazines that came with a Linux CD-ROM stuck to the cover.
This guy from Intel claims to have been the first to use it in 1999, but I think it was a more widely used hype phrase around that time, when desktop Linux was becoming just about usable.
It’s become a meme now. And I certainly don’t take it seriously myself. It’s more in fun to me as anything serious. (I don’t use Arch by the way).
If you can’t joke about yourself about something you do, then you may have a problem and should perhaps consider some therapy perhaps.
FOSS is my personality and Arch is my distro
Funnily enough one of the points where Arch distinguishes themselves from other distros is that they’re not strict about only including free software in their repos and are completely fine with including proprietary software alongside foss. There’s Parabola if you want Arch but with a strong political line on free software
The thrilling thing about arch is you get to put together your own user land applications, especially things that could form your desktop environment, audio stuff, etc.
I agree it is not that complicated. If you want more thrill, here is what I recommend:
gentoo Linux
has the option to compile everything from source. This isn’t just for bragging rights. This resolves a whole class of software breakages that can happen on other distros (especially when using old or less common applications).
- It gives you the option (emphasis on optional) to use openRC, an alternative to systemd.
- patch any software super easily, working nicely with the system
- customize compile flags on a global level
- have package manager manage software that isn’t available in repos, or easily write a package script for it (technically AUR can do this, but gentoo more powerful)
- works like a charm with heavily customized setups, such as musl, or less common architectures like arm or risc-V
NixOS
Takes it a step beyond gentoo and uses a functional, lazy approach in package management. Every package is fully reproducible, has a kind of isolated environment. Your entire setup is reproducible and declared with a single file.
---- below this line is torture. Not recommended
slackware
Idk how it works exactly, but package management looks like a manual pain
Linux from scratch
A book where you create your Linux installation from scratch, compiling every single component until you reach a working system
Notable mentions
- Alpine Linux: uses musl and busybox by default. Extremely lightweight. Some things will not work, but you get the thrill of running a couple MB distro
- void Linux: ok I’m tired of writing so I will not explain that one
nix sounds cool but it also sounds like a PAIN to use until it gets proper support
It has a lot more support than you think. As a gentoo user, I am jealous of nixos often seeing more support than gentoo, when gentoo is older and seemingly easier to support. But nix seems to have a bigger hype nowadays.
Gentoo, while source-based and having an interesting approach with USE flags, does not come with NixOS’ strengths.
I’d even say that Gentoo’s packaging might be better in some aspects than that of nixpkgs, which does feature options that you can change via overrides but generally isn’t as modular as Gentoo’s system. But the mistake a lot of people – and I’d say you as well – make is that they look at the wrong parts for comparison, and don’t understand what makes NixOS so powerful. It’s not the sheer amount of packages or how they’re built, but rather the module system, the declarative nature and the option for rollbacks at the “package manager” level. Yes, these features come with increased complexity. However, I recommend not to look into what people have published in GitHub as their configurations, as these are rather general and as such more complicated than one needs for casual use.
Alpine Linux: uses musl and busybox by default. Extremely lightweight. Some things will not work
I use it daily, which things won’t work? Honestly it’s “just a distribution”, you’ll have the same experience with it as OP has with Arch.
Bunch of random small things gave me issues. Sdkman (kinda like a Java version manager) and transmission on arm64 on wireguard would not work either.
I ran transmission and WireGuard for ages before I recently switched my server over to x86, worked fine?
Idk about Sdkman though, I don’t do Java development, but if it’s written in Java itself I fail to understand why it wouldn’t work 🤔
My setup was really weird. I was running it under a network namespace. Maybe that’s why? The app would run like normal, but it would not successfully create any connections. I replicated the same setup on glibc and it worked.
For some reason I really love how you ran out of steam on this post. Take my upvote, and may you make many whole-enough-assed posts in the future.
Slackware avoids the issue of package management completely.
You just install the entire repository up front, which resolves all dependencies.
If you need software that isn’t in the repo, you can install it any way you like from wherever you like, there’s no real package manager that gets in the way. Usually you compile it with Sbopkg, a helper script very similar to Arch’s AUR helpers. It comes with rudimentary dependency resolution in the form of queue files, which just list what needs to be installed in the correct order for any given source package, and then does it for you.
A more modern approach I follow is to use Flatpaks.
