Go arch linux reddit. Any Thinkpad with +10 years still runs Linux.

Go arch linux reddit Just going though the Installation Guide and the relevant pages linked in there, then installing and setting up the system in whatever way desired, one will have learned so much as a person coming to Linux for the first time. If you are already used to reading documentation, googling technical problems and don't expect defaults to fit your use case, then it's honestly just like maintaining any other piece of complicated software. I've had no issues, except for two months after my initial installation when I ran a command that messed up the permissions on every folder. g. Only once did something go really wrong. I mean, they just want the setup part done quick. This is a community for sharing news about Linux, interesting developments and press. Its all about your time and commitment, if you want to learn about linux and you got the time to tinker, then go for it and try Arch. Just keep it in the back of your mind that when you're ready to give up, install Mint or Ubuntu. I used to think Ubuntu's community was good, but the Arch Linux community is significantly nicer and more helpful. And if the little time and effort is given to do this properly, one will have a Arch Linux's documentation is great in terms of how you should do something, but it skips on what the thing is, and why you're doing the thing. You can keep it as chroot pet indefinitely, can be handy to have a multiarch distro building toolkit around, or pop it on bare metal whenever you feel like it. If I remember correctly, there were some problems with updating libc which corrupted the whole system. Arch will give them the basic knowledge of being able to get it sorted out. I had recently removed the entrity of Windows from my Samsung Galaxy Book Go, I tried to install all types of operating systems from ARM based Linux to ARM Windows 10 and 11 and stupidly normal versions of Windows such as 8 and 10. Currently there are a lot of Arch based distros that are doing things differently than Arch because of the recent GRUB issue. As someone who got started on Ubuntu based distros (like 10 years ago), the most I ever learned about "linux" (meaning the command line, system structure, manually dealing with things GUIs normally handle for you) was either when I forced myself to use Ubuntu server for a year (no DE, launching firefox headless if needed) or when I switched to arch. Let's be clear tho, once you've set up your daily driver, the hard work is done. Everything else I can install manually. 10 CH32V003 microcontroller chips to the pan-European supercomputing initiative, with 64 core 2 GHz workstations in between. No entanto, se você é um usuário avançado e está procurando por uma distribuição Linux altamente personalizável, o Arch Linux pode ser uma escolha melhor. if you consider it "hard work". MS Loves Linux We Prove It! Works on most Ubuntnu/Debian distributions and the almighty Arch/Manjaro! MS Love Linux The Surface Go brings us back to a day when the Eeepc was a pretty compact and kick ass piece of kit. Em resumo, se você é um estudante iniciante que está procurando por uma distribuição Linux fácil de usar, o Ubuntu pode ser a melhor opção. Originally designed for computer architecture research at Berkeley, RISC-V is now used in everything from $0. Because when you don't know much about linux you actually have to read the wiki for a successful install and that take some time commitment. archinstall is a script that quickly runs you through a generic Arch Linux installation. VS Endeavor where they make the choices for you. Well, like I've said learning process is essential and advanced users can skip configuration process by using previous configuration files on new machines (not much hassle) and since Arch is a rolling release, as an experienced Linux user I bet you won't ever have to reinstall it on same machine (even drive swap can be solved by external hdd and rsync or w/e). To quote the description of philosophy of Arch on the Arch wiki: Whereas many GNU/Linux distributions attempt to be more user-friendly, Arch Linux has always been, and shall always remain user-centric. Take your time, and don't worry if you mess up. Arch is rolling and generally speaking, rock solid. There's nothing 'edgy' about using a distro who's documentation has become a go-to reference source for non Arch users. 7) My first GNU/Linux experience was Raspberry Pi, thus my first distro is Raspbian, so I'm more used to debian. That's why you're doing this on a spare laptop or a VM. Means arch Linux tries to minimise the changes they make on software. I've used Cinnamon w/ Arch Linux since 2017, and I have a new mid-range laptop which means a new Arch instance, and I'm curious about scoping options for a different DE. Make a folder called gentoo, unpack a stage3 and chroot in. Arch presents a simpler design from the base installation onward, relying on the user to customize it to their own specific needs. If I could change 1 thing, it's uncomment the line in visudo to allow wheel group users to do sudo Yeah, but there are apparently cs2 builds for GNU/Linux according to SteamDB. So I have a Surface Go 2 with Windows 10 home. And also nostalgia for me :) 8) Arch users are generally rude to Windows users and Ubuntu users. The issues with Arch Linux don’t even come from Arch itself but simply upstream issues in the Linux kernel whereas Ubuntu had really bad bugs from configuration changes between updates. Again protected In arch repo or aur, I don't mind compiling it myself though or using an app image. Arch Linux, like other Linux distributions, is what you want it to be, a collection of software organised in just the right way to be usable by a human like you, and like the rest of the community. Take Arch Linux's explanation of Pacman for example: The pacman package manager is one of the major distinguishing features of Arch Linux. I think the best way to learn linux is to install it onto your daily driver. You'll get a menu with options that you can scroll through. "can you imagine a Windows update that locks you out of your system and requires a reboot whenever you try to select a WiFi network" Hmm Sounds EXACTLY like the majority of my experience on windows, which is why I use Arch, where such issues are rare, and where I can at least control when it updates and schedule significant updates to occur at times when I have time to troubleshoot/fix any After running Ubuntu for nearly 1 year and now running Arch Linux for almost 2 years I can say I had far more issues with Ubuntu. Even without knowing what software to install the switch to linux will be frustrating at times. They try to fix problems upstream first. You can get a rolling release sort of experience with Debian unstable, but it just isn't the same and breaks more often than I ever cared for. TL;DR if you want to use desktop Linux and be a sysadmin, go with Fedora. But I enjoy Arch Linux so much more That being said I'm planning on switching to it, but I don't know how, because I've never done this to a computer with a removable keyboard. I only care about the base Arch install, Gnome, Pipewire, and Wayland (or Xorg if using nVidia driver). It has zero full-time developers. Yes, arch Linux worth it if you like to learn how your system works. Yesterday one of my friends argued, that now that Arch Linux has an install script, it "lowers the barrier of entry". Arch Linux is learned from the Arch Wiki and there is no other way. The Arch forum and this subreddit, along with the Arch Wiki, are virtually the only resources I need to get things done in Arch. A subreddit for the Arch Linux user community for support and useful news. Some users recommend Debian as a stable and lightweight distro, while others recommend Fedora as a good balance of security and user-friendliness. (Upstream means with the developer(s) of the software directly) This leads to faster packaging of software an less burden to the maintainers of arch Linux Arch is rolling release means, they don't have versions like windows 7, 8, 10. since i dont know how to install every package via the terminal yet (since im still pretty new to linux) i said i wanted standard arch since . . It forces you to learn, and learn What won me over to Arch was the wiki. With Arch, everything just works and is extremely well documented. ml/c/linux and Kbin. Now arch really isn't hard i agree, but i don't expect most first time users wanting to put in the effort. I also recommend full immersion instead of a wm. Arch used to be called "Linux with a nice package manager" Back in those days it was much like Crux, but with pacman serving up bleeding-edge binaries. If I have friends who want to start using linux and if they are the kind of people who can read wiki or browse forum thread if they have issues, I will just recommend vanilla arch + kde from now on. In this way, you have to solve all kinds of issues on your own, for example audio, xorg, nvidia driver, otherwise you get no computer to use. Sometimes games don’t list GNU/Linux in the game’s listing/store page, but it’s still there nonetheless. Arch is a great way to get there, but you can also use SUSE Tumbleweed, Void (closer to Arch in many ways, very simple distro) or Solus, and smaller ones like KaOS or Chakra (both use pacman, with their own repos), or Manjaro if you want closer to an Ubuntu/Mint experience with Arch's up-to-dateness. Occasionally another package will contain breaking changes which bleeds into Arch, like the GRUB issue awhile ago, As soon as the problem was identified the Arch wiki was updated to reflect the issue and solution. pacman and aur repos are so useful, try it at least on a VM to see how it works. I've always felt that the people that run Arch tend to be people that are Linux savvy, but don't actually run Linux often. MX Linux is still probably the go-to for new Linux users who are used to computing. In my experience Arch is almost unbreakable. nVidia drivers and kernel modules. Arguments that Arch isn't suited well to servers are less about Arch being "easy or hard to break" and more about Arch being "somewhat less reliable than other freely available alternatives. RISC-V (pronounced "risk-five") is a license-free, modular, extensible computer instruction set architecture (ISA). Might be a bit late for this, but IMO debian is great for offline usage, because you can get the full package repository on DVDs (or USB sticks today, I guess) and install any and all packages you need from there, so you could download the 50-ish gigs of packages at a friend's house or somewhere (you can even buy pre-burned disks) and then install everything offline. Option 1, go ahead and try to install Arch. You can always start over. If you need a daily driver that just works out of the box, start with something like PopOS!, and learn in a more secure way. The distribution is intended to fill the needs of those contributing to it, rather than trying to appeal to as many users as possible. Hell even Valve has chosen to build their SteamOS off of Arch. Chances are you will find either a debian-based server or a Centos/RedHat based server. 19 votes, 39 comments. Thinkpad is perfect for Linux. If you want arch with training wheels still on a distro based on it like endeavourOS might be ideal especially considering their super helpful and active community on their forums and sub reddit in addition to having one of the most vast,useful and detailed wiki’s available on the web with the arch wiki. If it causes you trouble (no shame in that), go for something easier: Ubuntu, Linux Mint, Pop!_OS, Fedora… But honestly if you haven't had much experience with Linux, Ubuntu is the way to go. And in that case, I think Arch can be the best beginner distro, depending on the person. I have Arch or Manjaro on my laptops, on T450, X220, T440p, T470. They seem to like making decisions for us, hoping for the best, and occasionally blaming users when they don't work out, e. I’ve used many distros in the last 16 years of being a Linux user/linux professional: arch, Ubuntu, rhel, centos, Amazon Linux/AL2, gentoo, Fedora, SuSE, raspbian, and I believe I ran Debian for a short time too. But don't go straight to arch. I think if someone wants to get into the Linux arch is the perfect way so they understand how their system works. I'm planning on installing a Linux distribution on a high-end laptop, and I couldn't choose between Arch and Debian; I have them both downloaded… Skip to main content Open menu Open navigation Go to Reddit Home There are only 2 advantages to arch linux (or arch linux based distros): Recent kernel versions so better performance in general Better knowledge about linux so easier troubleshooting Most people in arch will know their way around terminal, using logs, etc, so its very possible that it may be the reason they get things working. Before Arch install, I would tell people that don't want to tinker with it as much to install Endeavor. They'll use Windows, get annoyed with Windows for some reason and install Arch for a week or two and then go back. Mint is also popular, but it can feel too much like Windows. Fast forward in time and we have the Surface Go. Watch popular youtubers who install Arch on camera like a "Beavis and Butthead " cartoon, because you won't learn anything from these "video tutorials". Reddit holds "Free Speech" in the highest regard, but only so long as it doesn't offend their own American sensibilities. As the others said the Wiki is all you need for the installation. Arch is an awesome distro with incredible customization options and a package manager than compiling from source could never compare to in speed, but there are trade offs there, just not noticeable ones for the “average” Linux (or even arch) user. Also Arch users are generally arrogant and they have an eltist attitude just because they use a harder distro. If learning is what you want, then go Arch (you could go the Gentoo way also). But I do install other distros for testing mainly on T450 and T440p. My main boxes I also use vanilla Arch and I maintain them (no reinstalls there). Any Thinkpad with +10 years still runs Linux. But realistically, even if you go with an installer, you are in Arch and learning about the system from inside has its advantages. So far Arch and Pop are the only two distros I haven't completely broken unintentionally. But I also use XFCE4 and Gnome. That's how I got started. If you want to learn more Linux, go with Linux From Scratch. I'd even struggle fixing a lot of problems with "easy" distros. I worked as a Linux server admin for near a decade and used Ubuntu, Debian, and Crunchbang for years. I was constantly finding myself on the Arch wiki and after Crunchbang went dinosaur I gave Arch a try and loved it for what I needed. my friend reccomended another arch distro (wich i cant name due to rule 1) wich is "arch, but easier" but the reason i dont want to install that is since it lacks things like the Discovery or Gnome store. With Linux if anything at all goes wrong, audio stops working for example. Reddit has long been associated with disinformation, conspiracy theories, astroturfing, and many such targeted attacks against the truth. Endeavor is still a good option, though Arch install is probably better if you want to customize it. If you can handle Arch, it's an amazing distro. social/m/Linux Please refrain from posting help requests here, cheers. As someone told me long before - Learn RedHat (Enterprise Linux) and you'll know how to operate that; Learn Slackware and you'll know how to operate anything (GNU/Linux). I directly installed arch Linux on hardware while I had no experience in using Linux at all. Lack for respect for the truth. I've adapted this adage to know that solutions for archlinux are generic enough to work on any other distro. It should be pretty easy if you follow the guide and if you try to understand. Remember view settings for each folder (edit) I know from Windows that developing your own file manager can be complicated, perhaps Linux doesn't face some of it's challenges. Linux has applications that allow you to run Windows applications without installing Windows. Which installer/distro is the closest to a vanilla Arch install that even the Arch community thumbs up on? I think it's a wonderful idea. Many Arch users have started on Ubuntu and eventually migrated to Arch. But my question is (as an Arch user myself), that why would anyone want to use Arch Linux, who needs a low barrier of entry? Arch Linux is not that good. As you can see, all my Thinkpad's Arch has been my shit for years, a tiny bit of a learning curve, but 'nothing a Unix Guru can't handle! ;-) well worth it to compile your own kernel with only the software you want, every package compiled for source on the fly! Arch is designed for users who desire a do-it-yourself approach, whereas Ubuntu provides a preconfigured system. Back in the day many diatros didn’t graphical installer or installed a X windowing system (Xorg) also know a days neither openbsd or freebsd does by default. When using debian/ubuntu based distributions the package system broke A LOT, When I started using arch all these problems went away! Arch is the fastest distribution I have ever tried. If you plan to use arch, start with an Arch based distribution which already gives you a DE. Xfce and KDE Plasma both seem like they have strong proponents, and their users overlap with the type of user I am. I've never heard of an arch installation lasting longer than a year. No. Members Online KDE Developers Are Currently Seeing 150~200 Bug Reports Per Day manjaro uses the same package manager that arch does - pacman on a base level. Pacman is a glorious wonderful package manager, no matter what distro I'm on i feel upset when I've already typed pacman -S and then realize it has a different package manager, I mean apt-get is Go ahead and clear your terminal again, and then type: archinstall. It is solid. Arch Linux forces you to configure everything in your Linux system yourself. Please also check out: https://lemmy. Plus, everyone always points to the Arch Linux wiki for help, no matter the distro, so I thought, why not just go with Arch Linux? And now, I've been on Arch Linux for about a year. Members Online KDE Developers Are Currently Seeing 150~200 Bug Reports Per Day It's not really something you need to do in one go. Then you can easily get familiar with linux, and arch in particular. Debian users are not. Arch is very stable. " That's simply because software is written by fallible humans and getting bleeding-edge updates means hitting bugs before the rest of the Linux community. they do have an alternate pm, and lib called libalpm with a gui called pamac, both are interesting and optional and can be used on arch linux as well. Hopefully it will only take one attempt but it probably won't. Live arch with `arch-chroot` was enough to bring back the system from the dead. But remember, you need to make some research first. I would totally go to Debian on the server side and not Arch. Either go vanilla Arch or don't go Arch at all. #4 is why I use Manjaro on only a few systems these days. I'd also add Debian or any Debian based distro. If you're looking for tech support, /r/Linux4Noobs and /r/linuxquestions are friendly communities that can help you. Have experienced mint and Ubuntu using a usb, but decided to go with arch as I plan to use it for work/study in… "The real Arch Linux is the friends we made along the way" is technically correct, as those friends may help you on the Arch Journey. Just finished updating my T440p with Arch and Plasma. I haven't run arch install yet, but I assume it gives you choices to customize the install. i like using pamac to browse that aur, and install it on arch linux sometimes If you want arch with training wheels still on a distro based on it like endeavourOS might be ideal especially considering their super helpful and active community on their forums and sub reddit in addition to having one of the most vast,useful and detailed wiki’s available on the web with the arch wiki. New to linux. wkmqdx wtnfl mle wejkb cjggix ufpz rerk ymfmycdc cysnd niquc