top 100 comments

sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] 1 point 1 year ago (2 children)

Not sure about this meme. It seems dated. Since they added a walk through installed it's just as easy as Debian.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] [S] 1 point 1 year ago

    Sure, but Debian with the CLI installer. The normal installer is pretty straight forward but not as easy as calamaris or anaconda. I bet people who can install Debian are skilled enough for archinstall

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 79 points 1 year ago

    And now you're lost

  • source
  • [–] 53 points 1 year ago* (2 children)

    If this was accurate, the ropes would have snapped and Homer would go hurddling to the base of the mountain.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 51 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    I've installed Arch manually exactly once. (Just for the bragging rights, lol)

    My go to way is just installing EndeavourOS. It's basically Arch, but with a nicer installer and reasonable defaults.

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I did it once, wrote down all the commands I used in order and then made my own install script. It was a great learning experience

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    i did that once... watched a video of some guy installing it, wrote down every single command, did it myself, it worked! then the clock system broke and i tried to fix it, couldn't do it because dumb, and reinstalled it. exact same commands as before, but it didn't work, no clue why

    then i did the same with some other youtube video, until i just decided to use an arch based distro with an installer

    now i just see people talking about archinstall and i'm like... i could've done it with one command? why did nobody tell me?!?!? or did i just ignore everyone who told me? am i stupid?!?!?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    Tbf you couldn't always. Archinstall didn't come until a few years ago

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    hmmm how many years ago? i started using linux (with fedora, then arch a couple of months later) around the end of 2022 or mid 2023

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I use Endeavour, btw. Nah, I don't think it'll catch one.

    I'm super stoked to be on an Arch-based system, but things have been so easy I have earned no bragging rights what-so-ever with it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (11 children)

    Installing Arch manually is not hard, and there are plenty of step-by-step guides.

    Figuring out what you need next and then managing this mess is more complicated.

    Source: I installed Arch manually btw

  • source
  • hideshow 11 child comments
  • [–] [S] 6 points 1 year ago (8 children)

    Years ago I installed it manually, too. For learning, yes. But regularly, no. The archinstall package is easy but a newbie would struggle there, too. It's just a faster way for skilled Linux Users.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 8 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago* (7 children)

    Newbie Linux users shouldn't go with Arch to begin with, even Endeavour or Garuda, unless they're seeing it as a learning experience and have an IT background behind their back.

    It's not worth it for the average user, and honestly - even for most veteran users for that matter.

    The great power of Arch comes with great responsibility to manage your system properly.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago (6 children)

    Installing it from scratch manually? Maybe no, not for an inexperienced user who's goal isn't to learn Linux.
    But I would argue Arch itself is great for a casual user to have. All the software in one place, installed with the same command, and you only install what you want, so no fiddling with bullshit you didn't ask for.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 6 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (5 children)

    For a casual experienced user - maybe, if bloat is a super big concern and ricing is an absolute priority.

    For a casual newbie - please, no. Arch will immediately force the user to go through a lot of hoops, learn a million terminal commands to make basic changes, and overall it will be a very frustrating and non-intuitive experience. Also, rolling updates will inevitably lead to bugs here and there, and without the experience managing Linux systems, there's only so much one can do to fix it.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago* (2 children)

    Arch will immediately force the user to go through a lot of hoops, learn a million terminal commands

    I don't know if it was ever true, but it's definitely not true now. You don't need to know more scary terrifying terminal commands than you need on any other distribs. And if you need to install any software, you will on average have to use less scary terminal commands on Arch than on, for example, Ubuntu that is usually recommended to a newbie. Most of the software you will ever need is in (from user's perspective) one place. You don't need to connect any additional repositories and don't need to install separate versions of libraries and stuff (and that's done with horror inducing terminal, might I remind you). And don't even get me started on snap and all the headache it brings.
    If you're using your computer as a glorified browser, you don't care about rolling releases. If you use various software, rolling release is better for compatibility.
    I am speaking from lots of experience helping various levels of newbies get into Linux. As much as you might think Ubuntu is "more intuitive" whatever the fuck that might mean, I can assure you, it's not, it's very much the opposite of that.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago*

    Oh, I should make it very, very clear: Ubuntu is a mess that newbies shouldn't touch it with a 10 foot pole. Comparing to Ubuntu, even Arch can look appealing for lack of confusion. Nothing that I say goes to support this abomination, and I did not mention it positively.

    Generally though, most distros featuring KDE/GNOME will already have everything in one place - but, ironically, not Arch, which actually features three places to look for apps: the official repos for precompiled packages, Flatpaks, or AUR. And without something like pamac - a tool made by Manjaro team available through AUR - you can't have all three in one interface or through same commands.

    If I would choose distro by how easy it is to have everything in one place, this would likely be Fedora/OpenSUSE/Debian with Discover app store from KDE suite. Everything, be it native packages or Flatpaks, is in there, and you can easily select the source for any given app.

    As per compatibility, I'm a strong proponent of Flatpaks. They are not significantly harder to manage than any other apps (in most cases, they don't require any extra configuration), but they will help you avoid dependency issues and they also won't get full access to your entire system, which is to me a disaster waiting to happen.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] [S] 2 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I'm not sure about this. My journey through Linux was Ubuntu > Arch > Debian > Fedora + Arch. Even just Ubuntu gave me enough knowledge to try Arch. Even Windows Powerusers could know shit about partitioning, installing etc.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    I started with Manjaro, and found myself in quite a predicament once I figured out what it means to have Arch under the hood. It was...a rude awakening.

    Then I moved on to Debian and Fedora, and from there I gained enough knowledge to manage Arch systems. Now, I have Endeavour on my main computer and OpenSUSE Slowroll on my laptop.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 33 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    People copy and pasting from the wiki or gpt "pathetic"

  • source
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 12 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    Now I kind of want to see just how broken my install gets if I just have ChatGPT guide me through the whole installation.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago

    It gets real messy, lol. I tried to have GPT guide me through figuring out a Node and nvm error in my Arch WSL and it made nightmare spaghetti out of my npm prefix.

    It eventually got stuck in a loop of trying to make me do the same two things over and over again and expected different results each time.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 27 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I did it the manual way probably about 10 times on my Linux learning journey, it was a really good way to learn how Linux itself worked. Now I just use archinstall every time.

    I've done it, I've gotten the satisfaction from it, but it's not gonna add any more inches to my e-peen.

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 26 points 1 year ago

    I use arch btw, have been for 5 or so years, I open the gates to those who want to use arch install

    You are not any lesser for not wanting to install arch manually

  • source
  • [–] 24 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Oh, you use pacstrap and arch-chroot, do you? Back in my day all we had was cp and install and we liked it that way! Kids these days wouldn't know how to install SLS without their Yays and Pac-men.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 19 points 1 year ago*

    "We need more people to use linux, look at what MS is doing to people."

    People who have never used linux trying to use and learn linux by using an installer built by awesome members of the Arch team.

    "C'mon do you even linux?"

  • source
  • [–] 18 points 1 year ago

    I've been using arch since archinstall came out. I never installed it reading the wiki.

    I sleep like a baby and everything works.

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    I've installed arch several times from scratch. Now if I need to I use archinstall. No shame

  • source
  • [–] 15 points 1 year ago

    What is this magic? You are telling me that a single command would have spared me an entire day of suffering?

  • source
  • [–] 13 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    People here are always talking about different distros, trying this one and then that one until they found what they like. Are you guys really just reinstalling your OS that often? Reinstalling all the programs you want and everything?

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
    [–] 13 points 1 year ago (1 child)
  • [+] 45 points 1 year ago (7 children)
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (3 children)

    The rationale in the OP is that with archinstall, an inexperienced user will have no idea where to even begin diagnosing any issues post install. Whereas installing manually is sort of a barrier to entry that ensures you know what you're doing.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 2 points 1 year ago

    It’s been a while since I installed arch manually, but wouldn’t that only help you understand a bit on disk partitioning and some basic commands like copying files/chrooting? You generally learn that stuff the first time your install breaks on any distro

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    That's a stupid reason to make an installation as painful as possible. I can follow the installation wiki but I just don't have time for this. And an inexperienced user can follow the wiki or another how-to and finish the installation but still be lost if something breaks later on.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 4 points 1 year ago

    It's not being made "as painful as possible", it's just manual. Arch isn't a distro that'll preconfigure things for you so everything's plug'n'play, it's a distro that'll give you access to everything and the power to use it however you like, but with that comes the expectation and responsibility to manage those things.

    Installing arch manually is simply a good lesson in how your system is set up, what parts it's made up of, in part because you're free to remove and switch out those parts.

    And sure, there's no magic bullet to make sure a new user understands everything they did, but I think in the end, if you're not willing to read, learn and troubleshoot, you might just want a different distro.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 11 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    Archinstall made my root partition 25 GiBs the first time I ever messed around on arch. That was fun when it filled up.

  • source
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (7 children)

    Gentoo stage 3 here.

    They discouraged earlier stages in the wiki :(

  • source
  • hideshow 7 child comments
  • [–] 14 points 1 year ago (5 children)

    I'm sorry, sir, but the tests indicate you have Stage 3 Gentoo.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 5 child comments
  • [+] 10 points 1 year ago (2 children)
  • [–] 10 points 1 year ago (10 children)

    Wht does it even matter if you don't install Arch manually? Is the whole point of the arch installing? I don't think so, it's using. If you don't find anything joyful in manually installing arch it's perfectly fine to manually install only once to make sure you know how it works. And just use archinstall in every following installation that's not shamefu

  • source
  • hideshow 10 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (3 children)

    cause you can then say "I installed arch manually, btw"

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 3 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    The "btw" is insincere if they didn't do it manually, they should be prohibited from using it.

    Arch's tag to neatly summarise the aloof snobbery must be preserved. If archintall script users can say it; how long until "I use manjaro btw", or "i use endeavouros btw". At which point it just has no value - I don't believe these people are genuinely considering themselves superior to other users - as reflected in several other comments here.

    Archinstall script should be modified to install a keylogger that will bork the system if ever "arch btw" is detected.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    If one has installed arch using the installer, what is the correct way to impart upon the world that you are in fact a user of arch. Can one very quickly and silently breathe out the words "iusearch"?

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (4 children)

    No! Heathen! Download the source for every package and compile it yourself! Compile the kernel yourself, compile the compiler yourself! Never script anything, always do every step manually, every time! Using tools that make things convenient and foolproof makes you weak and unappreciative of the real hardship and struggle it requires to checks notes use a personal computer!

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 4 child comments
  • load more comments (1 reply)
  • Went with EndeavourOS instead so at least I have more than an ice cubes chance in hell of not borking my install

  • source
  • [–] 7 points 1 year ago* (last edited 1 year ago)

    hardmode: I did a fresh install on a HDD that is on verge of being dead. Every-time this thing boots it's a miracle. Somehow dd blanking the disk, plenty of smartctl offline disk surface scans and finally putting btrfs with data in DUP profile resurrected the HDD. I have run btrfs scrub daily or else the os install may bitrot and well.. expire. :D

    Edit: Todays catch, I was too late and now I have fix 3 files:

    Error summary:    read=112
      Corrected:      109
      Uncorrectable:  3
      Unverified:     0
    
  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    Installing Arch 'the proper way' is a pilgrimage all Linux users should take. After that, they can fly with EndeavourOS at their convenience.

  • source
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    I followed the wiki and pulled off a successful install..... On a vm. Once I felt confident and ready I remembered arch install was a thing and thought "sure I'll try it, it'll definetly break and I'll just use the wiki to install" then it worked without a hitch. I'm still running arch with no issues.

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago (1 child)

    The one time I tried to manually install arch on a VM years and years ago it didn't work and I wrote Arch off. Guess what I'm running now? Well, Cachy, but lol. It's Arch. And guess what? It's got a simplified install process.

  • source
  • parent
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 1 point 1 year ago

    Very easy nowadays, even manually with all the guides, so you can cross that one off quite easily.

    Arch Wiki is great, but it's mostly oriented on people who already know something. And installation page should be very clearly written for absolute noobs.

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 5 points 1 year ago (1 child)

    I installed arch without it and it was a fucking struggle. Didn't know it existed til after. Like actually hours after

  • source
  • hideshow 1 child comment
  • [–] 8 points 1 year ago (2 children)

    Cause following the arch wiki is sooooooo much of an efort

  • source
  • hideshow 2 child comments
  • [–] 6 points 1 year ago

    I found the effort was in researching and choosing which components to use, rather than actually installing once chosen. It’s easy if you know exactly what you’re gonna install, but on that first build it definitely takes effort if you want to read into all the options and make educated choices

  • source
  • parent
  • [–] 3 points 1 year ago

    Falls off a cliff and has no snapper enabled so the system is broken

  • source
  • load more comments
    view more: next β€Ί