If you just wanna use it as a backup, and not access stuff from it directly, it'll be easier to forego rclone_mount and just use rclone directly to backup stuff on a schedule. That's what I do.

I use rclone to create encrypted backups of some important stuff on OneDrive.

Everyone has listed a lot of reasons, and there's also https://manjarno.pages.dev/ which pretty much sums up all the technical reasons.

I'd just like to add why I switched. I used Manjaro for a couple of years, and suggested it to friends and family for a while. It was fine when it worked. But when it didn't, it was a pain to figure out wtf was wrong. Their forum wasn't helpful, and you can't get help in the Arch forums, because it's just different enough. Also, whenever something broke, their logic was always backwards. Like SSL broke for the 5th time, just roll back your clock guys. It felt like being in an abusive relationship with a distro.

I finally switched to EndeavourOS some 4 years ago, and it's been very smooth ever since. In fact, I've had a good experience with pretty much every distro that I've used long term (e.g. AlmaLinux, Debian, Fedora, and even Ubuntu), except for Manjaro.

1. Fish, Alacritty, and Neovim.
2. I'd recommend using bare metal. Containers only make sense for deployment. Otherwise, they're just extra abstractions.
3. Yes. https://neovim.io/doc/user/remote.html#_remote-editing But I honestly prefer to ssh into the remote machine and use the Neovim installation there. It's usually more responsive, and nicer to move around several files.

TL;DR: It's shit. It shouldn't even be considered a distro.

Also, I think the recommendation of Manjaro is outdated. It used to be good maybe 5 years ago. Nowadays, it's better to try EndeavourOS or CachyOS.

I've installed Fedora on my sister's laptop, and I barely have to do any maintenance. She's not very technologically minded, but it's been solid nonetheless. I don't use Fedora on my machines, but for someone else, it is what I recommend.

As far as I know, KDE's gestures aren't customizable yet. They were introduced about a year ago, and for now, they're linked to specific actions. But, there seem to be efforts to make them customizable.

For your other issues, they're related to those specific apps. You're more likely to get support if you file an issue in their GitHub/support forum.

It seems that I'd still need to modify net.ipv4.ip_unprivileged_port_start=80 in sysctl, which I don't want to do. If I do it, the socket isn't even strictly necessary.

This is interesting. I need to figure out how it works for podman and it'll be the perfect setup.

I think it's the masquerade that's causing problems for me. I have to keep it enabled since I'm running a tailscale exit node. But maybe I can selectively disable it here.

I mentioned in the post that it seems to make the client IP opaque to caddy.

IIRC, it can work with pacman using packagekit-qt, but it's not recommended.