There have been multiple accounts created with the sole purpose of posting advertisement posts or replies containing unsolicited advertising.

Accounts which solely post advertisements, or persistently post them may be terminated.

So I installed Arch Linux... Is this it?

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?

Quill7513 ,

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

vort3 ,
@vort3@lemmy.ml avatar

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.

SynopsisTantilize ,

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.

knova ,
@knova@infosec.pub avatar

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 I’ve had a buddy razz me over using plain, simple Debian because it’s not bleeding edge and the packages are out of date in some cases.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.

prime_number_314159 ,

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.

Laser ,

No longer using Arch, but I can tell you what I liked about it:

  • it basically only does what you explicitly tell it to, making the setup very flexible. There’s no stuff the OS hides behind its own tools really (resulting in little to none “DO NOT EDIT THIS FILE” situations).
  • It is very up to date and the rolling release generally works well, there’s no pain with changing releases or anything.
  • The package manager, including creating your own packages, is dead easy and fast. Caveat is that once you look deeper into it, it gets more complex as you need to keep a container for clean building around. Still, with the right tooling, it’s very manageable.
  • As already mentioned, the documentation is very good.
  • Packages are very close to upstream, in most cases just being something like “./configure; make; make install”.
  • Generally very unopinionated.
vort3 ,
@vort3@lemmy.ml avatar

What do you mean by people being obsessed over Arch?

Archlinux is Linux, it’s just a minimal distro that allows you to only use whatever you want to use. I have no idea what’s with being obsessed over it other than «use arch btw» which became a local meme recently.

octopus_ink ,

Fresh packages all the time without any hassle or snaps/flatpak/appimages, and theoretically never needs to be reinstalled. What’s not to love.

OP was pretty fucking snarky though, ngl. Some of us enjoy using arch based distros without being walking memes, and far more people complain about people talking about arch than actually talk about arch these days.

BaalInvoker ,

Let me ask you… Why would you do something like that? I mean, Arch is just a piece of software, why would you wanna be obsessed with or turn it your personality?

Don’t you have anything more meaninful to worry about?

lung ,
@lung@lemmy.world avatar

Arch is perfect, it’s like THE Linux. It’s not really opinionated about anything, it just helps you do it. Hell you can “pacman -S apt” and slowly become a debian

That’s the magic of it: latest software, rolling release, edit some config files, do anything you want, spend half your time tweakin’

Kerb ,
@Kerb@discuss.tchncs.de avatar

afiak the prase “i use arch btw” is mostly sarcasm,
instead of genuine appreciation.

its mocking the stereotype of arch users that constantly bring it up to sound smart or feel supperior.

think of arch like “vintage car culture” with a touch of minimalism.
its restricting and breaks all the time,
but thats kinda the point because fixing it becomes a part of your lifestyle.

nous ,

I use it precisely because it doesn’t break all the time and is less restricting… Don’t know where you got the idea it is not.

cupboard ,

I also feel like it "breaking all the time" was part of the stereotype itself. I stopped using Arch because it was stable for almost 3 years and part of the point of using it in the first place was learning Linux by fixing stuff that broke - except that stuff never broke so I grew bored of it.

Norodix ,

I also felt a little underwhelmed, I thought the installation would be more difficult.

If you are not in it for the memeing I find it to be a great distro.

vort3 ,
@vort3@lemmy.ml avatar

I think any person with ability to read and follow instruction can install arch in 15 minutes (excluding waiting for things to download), there is nothing special about it.

thingsiplay ,

Yes, and that’s the point of Archlinux. It’s nothing special, at least in the way it is configured. You make it special. You build your distribution more or less. You are the opinionated one, not the distribution. I think what people are “obsessed with Arch” is, that you have to manage it yourself and you build it yourself. It is the philosophy that is appealing I guess. In example not much is automated. Stuff is described in the wiki and community and it is expected that you learn the stuff and understand and then do it yourself, instead relying on automated and preconfigured stuff from a regular distro.

On my main system I use EndeavourOS, which is basically Arch, but with some pre-configs and opinions, and comes with some automation tools.

Shareni ,

Nobody’s raving about the install, that’s just useful for people who don’t know what makes a Linux distro.

It becomes your personality after a few years because every update might break anything, and you need to regularly maintain random shit. Also if you forget to update regularly, the chance of everything crapping out rises exponentially.

I hope you’re using something like btrfs, because rollbacks are a must.

octopus_ink ,

Sorry you’ve had such a rough go, just remember your experience isn’t everyone’s experience.

Shareni ,

Sure, and not every arch user ends their comments with btw.

But that was consistent across multiple years, devices, and derivatives. It’s usually a 5 min fix/workaround, but it’s still annoying.

electricprism ,

Did you use arch-install or manual classic install

GolfNovemberUniform ,
@GolfNovemberUniform@lemmy.ml avatar

Isn’t the archinstall command just one word?

electricprism ,

Never used it, memory fuzzy I’m sure you’re right

SentientFishbowl OP ,

Both :) Manual classic install doesn’t strike me as particularly complicated.

h_ramus ,

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.

SentientFishbowl OP ,

Arch wiki is superb, couldn’t have installed or configured Arch without it.

Aurenkin ,

And the Arch User Repository is really handy when you need some more users.

lord_ryvan ,

That’s not a typo but a jest to the security implications, isn’t it?

Aurenkin ,

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.

seaQueue ,
@seaQueue@lemmy.world avatar

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.

Maragato ,
@Maragato@lemmy.world avatar

Most of the time it is achieved with the phrase: “I use Arch, btw”. 😉

nichtburningturtle ,
@nichtburningturtle@feddit.org avatar

Also wearing unix socks might help

EDIT: A more complete guide. https://feddit.org/pictrs/image/3d0ce385-8cf2-4dd3-b5f5-950100cf21ba.webp

30p87 ,

Also, Blåhajar for better pics

SentientFishbowl OP ,

In a way this post is just long-form “I use Arch, btw” 🤯

lemmyvore ,

Don’t forget shitting on Arch-derived distros.

seaQueue ,
@seaQueue@lemmy.world avatar

We save that for Manjaro, endeavor and the others are pretty cool

lemmyvore ,

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.

Deckweiss , (edited )

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.

Maragato ,
@Maragato@lemmy.world avatar

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.

SexualPolytope , (edited )
@SexualPolytope@lemmy.sdf.org avatar

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.

nous ,

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.

cupboard ,

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.

yardy_sardley ,

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.

ChonkaLoo ,

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.

lud ,

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…

SentientFishbowl OP ,

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.

nous ,

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).

danielquinn ,
@danielquinn@lemmy.ca avatar

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 /car/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 .pacsave extension, so you’ll want to keep an eye out for those, but that’s basically it

Deckweiss ,

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.

skullgiver ,
@skullgiver@popplesburger.hilciferous.nl avatar

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.

mostlikelyaperson ,

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.

atzanteol ,

Linux distros are made for using, not teaching. That’s what LFS is for: www.linuxfromscratch.org/lfs/

ReveredOxygen ,
@ReveredOxygen@sh.itjust.works avatar

How is this relevant? They were talking about how Arch has a great user experience

atzanteol ,

Replied to the wrong post by accident.

  • All
  • Subscribed
  • Moderated
  • Favorites
  • •
  • [email protected]
  • random
  • lifeLocal
  • goranko
  • All magazines
    •