• czech@kbin.social
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    1
    ·
    1 year ago

    I had been off Linux for a few years but recently returned to arch. I didnt feel like mucking around with everything from scratch so I tried the included install script. Next thing I knew I was in a full xfce environment with everything working out of the box.

    If arch can drop you in a full DE of your choosing, from an install script, what is the point of these other options? Genuinely wondering what’s going on with them and if I should check them out.

    • RickyRigatoni@lemmy.ml
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      0
      arrow-down
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      These other arch distros usually come with pre-compiled kernels with special options for different platforms, repos with different package versions to offer some level of stability, custom scripts to manage services and updating, and their own config files for various things. It’s pretty much what you do with regular arch but someone else is doing most of it for you.

  • Reva@startrek.website
    link
    fedilink
    English
    arrow-up
    0
    ·
    1 year ago

    Too many distributions, not enough desktop environments. Distributions don’t really vary that much other than how they’re installed, what the release model and what the package manager is.

    What really matters is what you run on it, but for some reason people insist on “distro-hopping” and not on “desktop-hopping”.

      • Reva@startrek.website
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        1 year ago

        Why? There’s not many that actually do unique things. KDE/GNOME are the big ones, then plenty of macOS clones without much substance (i. e. Cutefish, Pantheon), the lightweighter Windows clones that all somewhat work the same (Xfce, LXQt, MATE, Liri), and that was basically it. They all do the same thing Windows or macOS do, featuring the same design choices and look and feel; oh look, a full-size taskbar with a clock in the right corner and a start menu in the left corner! Riveting.

        The only ones that really have something unique going for them are Trinity, WMaker/GNUstep, Enlightenment/Moksha, CDE, EMWM and maybe Sugar. You’ll notice that they’re not exactly the most popular or well supported ones.

        Where’s really creative and innovative ones like ROX used to be? Where’s the funky 3D desktop environments? Where’s ones with completely new control schemes like a radial menu or a modern take on iconification? Where’s dockapps? Where’s innovation?

    • Acid@startrek.website
      link
      fedilink
      English
      arrow-up
      1
      ·
      1 year ago

      I think only endeavour and Manjaro still hold any use of the arch based distros.

      Endeavour generally has nice tools and is pretty much what you’d do with the install script so it just saves a few steps.

      Manjaro because it’s a gateway into learning arch for better or worse.

      But other than those two I don’t see the point of any other arch distros other than to be made for the sake of it.

      (I forgot steam os 3, but that’s a different topic)

      • Ghost@lemmy.ml
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        0
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        edit-2
        1 year ago

        https://github.com/arindas/manjarno

        https://www.hadet.dev/Manjaro-Bad/

        Manjaro also has a “rolling release” model that isn’t actually fully rolling release. They hold back packages for a few weeks which in return has almost always destroyed the AUR for not only manjaro users but Arch users.

        They lie about it being fully rolling. Not just that they have forgotten to sign their signature keys multiple times before releasing big updates.

        Sure it’s an easier Arch for “beginners” but I’d say it’s easier to just install arch on a VM if you really want to learn and use arch that bad a VM is the best way.

        Pure Arch is better than Manjaro. Hell I hate Ubuntu but I’d rather use that over Manjaro

        • Acid@startrek.website
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          0
          arrow-down
          1
          ·
          1 year ago

          You know that’s not a Manjaro problem that’s a user problem, you’re specifically warned that AUR compatibility is not guaranteed with Manjaro https://wiki.manjaro.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository

          But people often ignore this and then complain that Manjaro isn’t stable.

          And yes Manjaro is fully rolling just because they delay packages a week doesn’t stop it being rolling, that’s like calling tumbleweed not a rolling release?

          I’m not arguing that Manjaro is better or worse than Arch just that if you use it as intended it functions correctly and is a good way to learn Linux and Arch.