From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0
I have been looking around and found a few new Distros which I plan to test and perhaps use. These are all Arch based.
Exodia (dwm, bspwm) Arch Distro: https://exodia-os.github.io/exodia-website/?ref=news.itsfoss.com
CachyOS (gnome, kde) Arch Distro: https://cachyos.org/
XeroLinux (Stable base Arch): https://xerolinux.xyz/
#Linux #Distros #ArchLinux #Arch #Technology #Software #OS
I had been off Linux for a few years but recently returned to arch. I didnt feel like mucking around with everything from scratch so I tried the included install script. Next thing I knew I was in a full xfce environment with everything working out of the box.
If arch can drop you in a full DE of your choosing, from an install script, what is the point of these other options? Genuinely wondering what's going on with them and if I should check them out.
These other arch distros usually come with pre-compiled kernels with special options for different platforms, repos with different package versions to offer some level of stability, custom scripts to manage services and updating, and their own config files for various things. It's pretty much what you do with regular arch but someone else is doing most of it for you.
What advantage do these have over Arch besides possibly an easier installer?
I think only endeavour and Manjaro still hold any use of the arch based distros.
Endeavour generally has nice tools and is pretty much what you’d do with the install script so it just saves a few steps.
Manjaro because it’s a gateway into learning arch for better or worse.
But other than those two I don’t see the point of any other arch distros other than to be made for the sake of it.
(I forgot steam os 3, but that’s a different topic)
https://github.com/arindas/manjarno
https://www.hadet.dev/Manjaro-Bad/
Manjaro also has a "rolling release" model that isn't actually fully rolling release. They hold back packages for a few weeks which in return has almost always destroyed the AUR for not only manjaro users but Arch users.
They lie about it being fully rolling. Not just that they have forgotten to sign their signature keys multiple times before releasing big updates.
Sure it's an easier Arch for "beginners" but I'd say it's easier to just install arch on a VM if you really want to learn and use arch that bad a VM is the best way.
Pure Arch is better than Manjaro. Hell I hate Ubuntu but I'd rather use that over Manjaro
You know that’s not a Manjaro problem that’s a user problem, you’re specifically warned that AUR compatibility is not guaranteed with Manjaro https://wiki.manjaro.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository
But people often ignore this and then complain that Manjaro isn’t stable.
And yes Manjaro is fully rolling just because they delay packages a week doesn’t stop it being rolling, that’s like calling tumbleweed not a rolling release?
I’m not arguing that Manjaro is better or worse than Arch just that if you use it as intended it functions correctly and is a good way to learn Linux and Arch.