Am i the only one who thinks Manjaro is a hackjob?

Am i the only one who thinks Manjaro is a hackjob?

....I like Parabola.

Compared to what? Name a Linux distro that isn't a hackjob. Ironically, Manjaro is the easiest and most complete package for many DEs and WMs. If you get the i3 version it comes pre-riced with a toolbar, the XFCE version comes with Compton already enabled, and so on. I'm using the KDE version and I've had fewer problems than I did with Fedora, Mint, or Kubuntu.

Typical Holla Forumsirgins not knowing what they're talking about.
Manjaro is the Mint of Arch. It brings literally nothing to the table.
Additionally, X breaking has not been a thing since after 2011 or something. That meme image was made when X.org didn't have autocorrect and when the ecosystem was in the process of DRM/KMS restructuring. There's no way that X breaks nowdays on any distro, except maybe when you use proprietary drivers, and even then you just have to know what you're doing to use the proprietary drivers on a bleeding edge rolling release.

All distros are the same shit, the only difference is the amount it holds your hand. Gentoo is a metadistribution.

Maybe you should try to make an actual technology thread instead of another shitty distro flamewar and shitposting about muh Loonix distros. Try not using Holla Forums for opinions on Linux either, since they're fucking retarded. Incidentally, most of Holla Forums is retarded too (like this thread) but that's probably crossboarders.

No. Manjaro is shit.

...

The moment i went to install something from the Community repo and it wouldn't run without a dependency from the AUR was the moment I purged that nigger trash.

Arch is a fucking mess of a toy distro with a hilariously bad package manager

Install Debian

That makes no sense whatsoever. Show me the package, or it was a package moving from AUR to community at an unlucky moment and the dependency wasn't built yet.

I don't even main arch, I'm just telling the OP that the poster in the picture is a fucking retard.
X doesn't fucking break. It hasn't been inclined to break probably before a newfaggot like yourself even found /g/, well after those images were made. They had a different context back then, in that Archfags were fucking annoying ricer 13 year olds, and Arch was notoriously bad for breakage.

And for that matter, Manjaro is just Arch. It's like saying that Crunchbang or whatever was so much better than Debian. Manjaro is fucking arch, you dumb shit. With pre-installed software for dumbfucks who can't comprehend partitioning, creating filesystems or performing a chroot manually.
And that's cool, there's nothing wrong with that. The problem comes when some retard has the opinion that "it's so much better than Arch lel X broke is not a meme" when it's the same fucking distro, and he's a fucking retard.

Oh boy, I can't wait to install Debianized garbage, with packages older than the kids down the street, on my workstation.

Take the distro flamewars and shove them up your ass, fuckboi. You have an opinion on nothing of consequence.

If you're going to install Manjaro, just install Arch instead. I've never had X break in Arch, but it fucking shits itself every damn time I try to use Manjaro. It's the same damn shit as FreeBSD and PCBSD. FreeBSD works perfectly for me after I get it set up, but PCBSD fucking destroys X somehow.

The moral of the story is never trust a third party like the Manjaro or PCBSD team to make a minimal distro easier to install for you, because they're going to somehow fuck it up 100% of the time. If you unironically think it's difficult to type "sudo pacman -S mate-desktop" then you're a fucking retard who deserves whatever fuckery comes your way.

Manjaro seems shoddly put together.

I feel similarly about Linux Mint, it's slightly more well assembled but ultimately is just Ubuntu with a few extra ppas and a messed up Firefox with adware.

Mint is just Ubuntu without the Amazon spyware, and that right there makes it the best beginner distro out there for people whose hardware won't support Trisquel.

Why install Mint Mate or Mint KDE or whatever when those in Ubuntu have no Amazon spyware?

Biggest gripe with Mint is the inane defaults in Firefox.

because nigger word

[grep deb /etc/apt/sources.list.d/*]

I get bad news for you son...

Or... You could just use Lubuntu or Xunbuntu which are also just Ubuntu without the Amazon spyware or a fucking retarded tablet-based DE.

^Underrated


They both also rehost their mother districutions packages since they're basically just leeches.
Why couldn't they stick to just using Canocials servers if they're not going to change anything of note anyway?


Or just install Debian-XFCE and ditch ubuntu horse shit altogether.

Big surprise, the arch baby is a nigger loving memester

It's really not my fault that you are a fucking retard who thinks that X breaks in the year 2016 on any distro, except maybe with proprietary drivers during ABI increments.
Reiterating that shit is the real meme spewing. Also, I already said that I don't main Arch.
Take the nigger-tier distro flamewars elsewhere.

Holla Forums just wants their life to be hard sometimes. Let people use what they like.

I've personally had more issues on manjaro than my own arch install

Last time I tried to use Manjaro I couldn't get either of its graphical installers to detect dmraid partitions properly, and then when finally got it installed with their terminal installer I got a kernel panic. Fun times.

Manjaro feels like the next Ubuntu to me.
Very comfy, install is easy as balls, everything preconfigured works fine, but it allows for customization.
In the half year I've been running it I've replaced systemd with OpenRC without many issues, removed PulseAudio and NetworkManager and installed wpa_gui. It isn't hard, and it doesn't bitch about this kind of changes. Very flexible, would recommend to anybody who just wants an easy to setup binary distro without many bells & whistles. Knowing arch is a big advantage though.
At least it isn't as bitchy about some customizations as Ubuntu is, which feels nice.
Though, I've just switched to Slackware 14.2 (won't go current) yesterday. Life's comfy over here too, but it requires quite a bit more work to set up as I want it. I want to try to set up runit or OpenRC, as I don't like the default startup scripts. The network startup scripts don't allow me to simply start dhcpcd with wpa_suppliant without waiting for a connection, and it does a lot of unnecessary stuff that makes the bootup time suck.

Antergos > Manjaro (coming from someone who used both in his babby years 3.8)
Now, if you're talking about the AUR, it's not and actual advantage. The average PKGBUILD quality in here is horribly low compared for example to the layman overlays.

No i share your views op

Can you name some differences?
I might give it a try tomorrow.

Not that user, but basically all it does is give you vanilla arch with an extra repo IIRC. Manjaro is basically its own distro while antergos is more of an arch linux installer.

Aaah like that, will see what I'll do with it.

Arch is bad. Its maintainers are bad. Its maintenance model and policies are bad. Forced bleeding edge is bad. How could something based on something so bad be good. That doesn't even make sense.

Picture is an Arch maintainer

Jesus Christ the faces are even creepier zoomed in. Also

Can someone please explain to me why specifically Manjaro is so bad? I prefer it to arch simply because the Community JWM version of manjaro literally gives me 100% of exactly what I want in a default system.

I've been an arch user for the better part of 4 years, but Manjaro just seems to fit my purpose but without ever having to go through manual installation or keep tally of all the packaged I'd want to install upon setting it up.

Also, I'm not entirely sure, but I do believe that Manjaro holds packages before pushing updates. I haven't taken an explicit look yet, but it doesn't update nearly as often as Arch, something that I rather enjoy in retrospect.

So please, Holla Forums, can you give me a non-ideological reason as to why it would be best to stick with Arch. I have heard of Manjaro as "fishy" before without any further explanation. If Manjaro is to Arch as Mint is to ubuntu/debian then I don't see why sticking to it is so bad.

Because it's
1) not an original distro, so it has the bugs of the upstream one and its own ones.
2) using itw own repositories, which are basically "delayed Arch". Not more tested Arch, just delayed.
3) made by retarded people (cf the SSL "just go back into the the past solution").

Which only means it has more users and testers overall, leading to a better quality product. Arch isn't as buggy as you might think. Yes, there's some bugs that occur due changes arch enforces, but those are fairly minor and easily spotted and corrected.

That's simply untrue. It has 3 release channels: stable, testing and unstable.
Unstable has all the arch packages at most a day after they release on arch.
Testing is the testbed before the packages are pushed to stable. Some packages are put on hold here, and some receive bugfix updates. If everything works correctly, it's pushed to stable, and all the packages are updated.
Stable is the repository used by default. While it's true that sometimes a bug or two manage to get through, they get patched out faily quickly. In half a year of using manjaro I only noticed two: They changed the default theme due to a gtk3 update, I didn't notice that and kept using the broken theme, without installing the new one, and they once let an arch package slip through (qbittorrent) that was built against a newer version of Qt than manjaro stable had, causing it to not to work.

Only fair point. I wholeheartedly agree that some of the devs are legitimately retarded and so is most of the community. Doesn't stop it from being a nice, preconfigured Arch that supports OpenRC and allows for easy customization.

It happened twice

Am I the only one who read that as 'handjob'?

Introducing the new Handjob Linux powered by Canonical®

use Arch Linux