Best distro based on Arch

[POWERSLAVE - NO SENTRY WARDS]

I've been a linux user for some time now, and have tried several distributions until I loved arch. Now my question is: what is the best distro based on arch (or even arch itself)?

[HumbleLinux]

Did you try Chakra[distrowatch.com]?

[POWERSLAVE - NO SENTRY WARDS]

HumbleLinux님이 먼저 게시:

Did you try Chakra[distrowatch.com]?

Well yes but.. I wasn't able to install other DE'S. Also, it's not fully compatible with the AUR..

[UnkendTech]

i been told Manjaro

[POWERSLAVE - NO SENTRY WARDS]

Doc Holliday님이 먼저 게시:

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?

[UnkendTech]

love will tear usapart #TI3 MODE님이 먼저 게시:

Doc Holliday님이 먼저 게시:

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?

Arch Linux :)

[blackout24]

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 bullsh1t 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.

[POWERSLAVE - NO SENTRY WARDS]

AbartigerNorbert님이 먼저 게시:

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 bullsh1t 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.

Well, but besides having sperate repositories from Arch, why hate manjaro so much? I have used both arch and manjaro, and I found little difference between them...

[blackout24]

Who hates Manjaro? Most advanced Linux users simply don't see the benefit of using it, when you could just aswell use real Arch Linux. It isn't really suitable for total Linux beginners anyway. You can't expect them to handle pacdiff etc. Besides that, it has the obvious drawbacks I pointed out above.

[Ninlilizi]

Arch.
Sure it has a learning curve... But once your up that hill it becomes the easiest distro to manage and maintain longterm. My arch install have been going fine for 6 years now.

[^:n]

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))

[POWERSLAVE - NO SENTRY WARDS]

madnug님이 먼저 게시:

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))

I have used Manjaro all edtions, and yes, I have to agree... They seem to be fully arch-compatible but filled with bloatware and bugs.. I remember it was hard for me to even get bumblebee working.. However, for new users, the openbox edition of manjaro is probably the best I.ve seem: really fast, smooth, and provides a taste of arch for new users (without the hassle of learning arch for beginners). Anyway, besides manjaro, other alternatves? If not, I will stick to arch :P

[POWERSLAVE - NO SENTRY WARDS]

Bitcrusher ツ님이 먼저 게시:

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.

Arch is not that big compared to other distros because it is a pain in the neck to set up... But after that, we all love it! After installing arch, I can.t get back to kubuntu or linux mint... Mainly due to the outdated packages on their repositories and the PPA annoying system...

[blackout24]

Arch Linux is actually by far the most popular non-Ubuntu distro according to the Steam stats, even more popular than Mint. You'll find it as "Linux 64-Bit", since your typical Arch setup doesn't install "lsb-release", which provides /etc/lsb-release for the Steam survey to figure out what distro you are on.

https://www.archlinux.org/packages/community/any/lsb-release/

Only if you have LXDE on Arch it used to pull in lsb-release as a dependency and system information will tell you that you are runnig "Arch Linux 64 Bit" instead of Linux 64-Bit. All other distros and Arch spinoffs ship with lsb-release.

http://www.gamingonlinux.com/articles/steams-hardware-survey-now-shows-many-distros.1845

[aliceif]

How can you call Mint of all distros non-Ubuntu?
Isn't Mint just Ubuntu with extra packages, just like Kubuntu and such are?
And let's not forget that the steam hardware survey is kind of ... untrustworthy in some ways. With many people never having seen it, or only having seen it on windows and not linux and so on. I would give it as much crediblity as the distrowatch rating, which is not too much.

[blackout24]

If 3 people say that they have only been asked on Windows before doesn't mean anything. That's just how random sampling works.