I have been using Linux for a few years, usually some flavor of Debian. But recently I acquired an older Thinkpad and thought it would behoove me to use something more… involved.
So I chose to dive into Manjaro and only broke pacman once. So now the question… can I say I’m using Arch btw or is that a faux pas?

      • HeckGazer@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        22
        ·
        4 months ago

        Don’t update any arch based distro for long enough and your life will be plenty exciting when you do. Bonus points if you use a non-lts kernel that can blip out of existence at any moment along with all the graphics drivers

        • shadowbert@lemmy.world
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          4
          ·
          4 months ago

          I learnt this the hard way when I worked out my shutdown script that did this automatically had stopped working :P

        • Marty@programming.dev
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          How long is to long? I’ve been running the same arch install for a few years and wondering if it supposed to be time for a reinstall?

          *I also have backups of all my configs and read the arch news before updating so I’m not really that worried.

            • Marty@programming.dev
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              ·
              4 months ago

              …oh, yeah I miss read that. I took it as don’t use arch for to long without reinstalling rather than don’t not update for too long. I update about once a week.

      • potentiallynotfelix@lemdro.id
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        6
        arrow-down
        1
        ·
        4 months ago

        Arch is relatively unstable just by being rolling, but manjaro is another level of unstable lol. if wish to use it, im not gonna stop you, but I’d advise you not to rely on the computer you install it on.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Yeah you don’t want your computer to be stable for 5 years going, that’s very un-Arch.

  • AnEilifintChorcra@sopuli.xyz
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    41
    arrow-down
    2
    ·
    4 months ago

    I’d just like to interject for a moment. What you’re refering to as Manjaro, is in fact, Arch/Manjaro, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, Arch plus Manjaro. Manjaro is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning Arch system made useful by pacman, yay and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX.

    • BlindFrog@lemmy.world
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      6
      ·
      4 months ago

      I can see future archeologists (god forbid, Ai archeologists) digging up old posts like this and going, “tf, this was upvoted? Interjecting with too much tangential information? The tone came off rude though?” and not get the reference if they weren’t versed in linux community culture already

      • TwilightKiddy@programming.dev
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        6
        ·
        4 months ago

        Well, jokes aside, people who install Arch usually want maximum flexibility out of their system (I have no idea why you would torture yourself like that otherwise). And after some time spent with Manjaro, I can confidently say that it greatly sacrifices your ability to tinker with the system in the name of user friendliness. A great distro to start with, but if you still like it after a couple of months, you probably didn’t need Arch in the first place.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          3
          ·
          4 months ago

          Oh definitely, Manjaro is all about “mommy knows best”. It’s why people who say “you should use Arch instead of Manjaro” are completely missing the point.

          Technically, Manjaro used Arch exactly as intended, leveraging its flexibility, but it’s very ironic that it used it to remove said flexibility. I’m guessing it’s why some Arch fans feel betrayed and hate Manjaro.

        • lemmyvore@feddit.nl
          link
          fedilink
          English
          arrow-up
          2
          ·
          4 months ago

          Endeavour differs very little from Arch once you’re past the installer. To the point I’ve never understood why it’s a standalone distro instead of an optional Arch installer, as an alternative to/part of archinstall.

  • kittenzrulz123@lemmy.blahaj.zone
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    12
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    edit-2
    4 months ago

    Install Arch, it’s not that difficult if you use Archinstall. Even the “manual” method isn’t hard, just make the partitions and pacstrap all of the packages.

    • genuineparts@infosec.pubOP
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      4
      ·
      4 months ago

      I mean my Job is already giving me impostor syndrome… I really do not need my Distro to make me feel that way…

      • barkingspiders@infosec.pub
        link
        fedilink
        English
        arrow-up
        3
        ·
        4 months ago

        I’ve been a big fan of Manjaro for exactly that reason. Something breaks occasionally and gives my skills a run for their money but a lot of the difficulty of running a rolling release gets nullified by the testing Manjaro does for you. It’s a great compromise, you get almost bleeding edge for much less work than an arch installation can take.

        I love me some Debian for their stability and security, I run Debian or Debian based servers mostly. But I wanted something closer to the bleeding edge for my desktop so I could make use of newer features, run newer packages etc…