Originally posted by HumbleLinux:Did you try Chakra[distrowatch.com]?
Originally posted by Doc Holliday:i been told Manjaro
Originally posted by love will tear usapart #TI3 MODE:Originally posted by Doc Holliday:i been told Manjaro Manjaro is probably the best I've tried, since it's easy to install and it's basically Arch linux :D. Any other ideas?
Originally posted by AbartigerNorbert:The is no reason to not just use proper Arch. The install takes 20 minutes if you know what you are doing. Even if it takes you longer your only going to do it one time anyway and just keep rooling. I'm using my install now for 2 years so I don't care if I could have saved 5 minutes during the install. At least I know exactly what I have on my system.The spinoff that is closest to Arch itself is Arch Bang as far as I know. All other spinoffs like Chakra or Manjaro use seperate repos or even forked versions of the package manager in the case of Manjaro. The main problem with spinoffs is that it's hard to keep up with a fast moving rolling release base. Manual interventions, which are inherent to this release policy often screw the spinoffs over. I remember that the glibc update caused quite some issues for spinoffs.Another thing to consider is that the community of spinoffs is rather small. The Arch Wiki might help you in a lot of cases and if you find a relevant thread to your probelm on the Arch forum it probably will solve your problem aswell. You won't get any direct support from the Arch community for good reasons. Like I said spinoffs are often quite different from Arch, use their own repos or pacman forks and the users often doen't even know what they have set up and configured. That just makes helping spinoff users impossible and they are better of going to their own forums with people who have the same setup. Something Arch-based only Arch-based and not Arch. The GUI pacman frontends that most spinoffs use are plain bull♥♥♥♥ anyway. Arch packages often display a lot of important information through simply bash scripts in the package. Like how to get a system service going, what you need to configure yourself it. GUI frontends simply can't parse these message and you won't see them and end up spending hours on the Wiki to figure out how to set something up, when all you had to do is follow the instructions if you had used pacman the proper way.When you have everything the way you want it. Just pop in a Clonezilla USB Stick and make and image of your whole disk so you can restore it at anytime. Arch repo packages are very stable. You're more likely to bork your system yourself by being stupid or by trying exotic experimental stuff. Just keep in mind that the AUR only contains unsupported packages and if you replace critical packages with packages from the user repo you're more likely to run into trouble at some point and you should at least be capable to cope with it.
Originally posted by madnug:Manjaro ? Personally, I would rather pick Kubuntu or Mint to install instead because they are easier and even have less bugs while installing stuff, even install the distro itself.And I agree with AbartigerNorbert, ArchBang is the best thing if you want to have a easy to use Arch distro without too much do-it-yourself (even you still have to setup something support AUR (to be more specific - get yaourt by yourself))
Originally posted by Bitcrusher ツ:i mean based on arch... you are not gonna get that much other spinoffs, arch is already not that big compared to other distros, there might be more but if you want arch just use arch.