▲ 1012 ▼ I use Arch btw (lemmy.ml) submitted 1 year ago by Samsy@lemmy.ml to c/linuxmemes@lemmy.world 107 comments fedilink hide all child comments
[+] MyNamesTotallyRobert@lemmynsfw.com 45 points 1 year ago* (last edited 11 months ago) (4 children) [deleted] permalink fedilink source hideshow 8 child comments replies: [–] tehn00bi@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago I’ve done it both by the book and arch install. Arch install is just nice. permalink fedilink source parent [–] Mio@feddit.nu 14 points 1 year ago This is why arches based distos are taking off. They help with picking packages etc to save time. permalink fedilink source parent [–] apprehensively_human@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (2 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 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 permalink fedilink source parent [–] Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago That's why I went with EndeavourOS - nice installer, some changes and tweaks to the default settings, but after that it uses the arch repositories and there's no difference to arch anymore afaik. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] tehn00bi@lemmy.world 24 points 1 year ago I’ve done it both by the book and arch install. Arch install is just nice. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Mio@feddit.nu 14 points 1 year ago This is why arches based distos are taking off. They help with picking packages etc to save time. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] apprehensively_human@lemmy.ca 5 points 1 year ago (2 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 4 child comments replies: [–] Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de 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. permalink fedilink source parent [–] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 2 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. permalink fedilink source parent hideshow 2 child comments replies: [–] kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] kuberoot@discuss.tchncs.de 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. permalink fedilink source parent
[–] NotSteve_@lemmy.ca 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 permalink fedilink source parent
[–] Atherel@lemmy.dbzer0.com 3 points 1 year ago That's why I went with EndeavourOS - nice installer, some changes and tweaks to the default settings, but after that it uses the arch repositories and there's no difference to arch anymore afaik. permalink fedilink source parent
