Arch Comics

That will not happen since Gentoo users prefer getting shit done over typing screenfetch -s all day.

And that is why Arch is an everything-but-minimalist bullshit poser distro.

I have more (hopefully all) of them.
Is the limit on 8ch 3 images per post?
Not from here, but always where the arch hate is.

why do europoors actually think they're somehow immune from big government garbage like SOPA?

I fell for the Arch meme once. Once I went back to a more stable Distro I just started trying to compile software I used on a regular basis to try learning the ropes of Linux. Far more confident now that I could probably run something like Gentoo with ease now.

We have SOPA. You gave us SOPA... and oh my thank you for that, you magnificent overseas messiah.

God damn the butthurt from that last picture
Did the arch forum call them stupid and they just seethed all day until they sat down and made that piece of concentrated autism?
I dont even use arch but holy shit, most of that picture is 'I am massively assblasted that some people use the terminal and set their system up to work how they feel like instead of using a DE. Why dont they realize how much more mature and adult I am than them?!?!?'

Arch is a special kind of autist club though. I'm running gentoo on four computers but I could (almost) just as easily use ubuntu server for my setup instead of arch etc. Arch people make it seem like arch is filling some niche that's "hardcore and for only people who truly know what they're doing". I could see myself using arch if it wasn't for the autistic forums and systemd, assuming gentoo wasn't an option.

I've never seen this at all. Ive only ever seen it claimed by pretentious retards on /g/ looking for ways to feel superior to "losers" of some kind. Most of that images autism is applicable to anyone who uses anything but ubuntu. Its just making shit up because Idunno, I guess an arch dev fucked their mother and pissed in their breakfast or something.

So if I use antergos should I say I use "arch". It's literally just arch with a gui installer but I feel pure-autists would through a shit fit if they found out I don't bother to install my OS by console every time.

If you think arch sounds okay but systemd and autistic forums, you should check out void

I'd just say arch since its shorter.

Id totally use void if only it had ibus-mozc or fcitx-mozcです
I like how it has an alternatives system, like debian.

This ones my favorite

Eurocuck is far worse off than we are. They have all our problems plus their own shitty corruption and government waste.

Doesn't Manjaro have a GUI installer? If you're going to use an Arch fork, might as well use one that does something different like Manjaro with OpenRC.

The second image is pretty much how it went for me, ending at Debian, although with different inbetween distros. And I have no problem with distros like Mint. If you're lazy then install Mint, as long as you know how to change its configuration where it matters. People forget that you don't have to agree with every little default configuration of these "just werks" distros.
The third image makes it seem like Arch is hard though. It's not, it's just annoying and bad.

Have you ever used arch? It's really not that much work getting things to work... at least on my Thinkpad.

When did anyone ever say it was minimalist?

Arch is simple, not minimalist.

I like debian better but the AUR is nice.

More like you guys had it all along

Arch people won't support you then, they have their own repos, thus they have their own issues.

I think that is a feature of this art form. Just like polandball always has its colors upside-down.

LOL, what a n00b. Updates system using pacman directly instead of through bauerbill.

Where would Gentoo fit on the second picture?

It would be a forking path where you end up living on Mt. Stupid as an "enlightened" hermit for the rest of your life waiting until the day where you reach the full enlightenment of installing LFS.

The /g/ memes don't hold anymore, Arch's package manager has package signing, backs up config files that it replaces, etc.

And since Arch has had systemd for years it's driven away screeching autists. Couldn't be better.

Feels great to have the latest software, not have to deal with Red Hat beta, and don't have to worry about Canonical forcing a meme display server down my throat or have to pick up the pieces of dpkg when it breaks. Kinda funny when dpkg on a "stable distro" breaks shit more than a rolling release does.

Nice barely technology thread, btw.

It went for me like the following (in order): Ubuntu, Kubuntu, Arch Cinnamon, Arch bspwm, Gentoo XFCE+Compiz

Autists BTFO

Arch is an execelent OS, but I like the memes because it keeps conformist newfags who "dun wanna be called autistic" out, and thereby makes the Arch community higher quality.

You fail to see why everyone calls Arch users autistic. And the community is shit. The reason why the Arch community is seen as shit and autistic is because they think they're the next fucking John Carmack elite hacker programmer because they can setup an Arch installation from scratch. The truth is that setting up Arch is easy as fuck and all it takes is basic common fucking sense. The Arch community is full of elites fucks all because they have this ill-conceived notion that because Arch takes extra steps to partition and set up a basic root that it creates this wall to keep "lesser users" out. Its not that, its that some people just don't feel extra steps are necessary. And those people resent the Arch community the most for their elitist attitude towards them

Sounds like you are just butthurt

In countries that make organ donation opt-out they get almost no non-donors. Most people keep the default everything. If you are willing to go beyond whatever your system's defaults are that means you must give a damn about your setup. It means there are going to be more bug-reports, more active community members, less retardation, and less moderation needed.
Its why the Arch wiki is better documented than the manpages of most of the software they describe, becuase it isn't written by a programmer who knows his software in and out, but by users who actually use it for things that the original developers might not have thought of, and can provide all the tips and tricks that you would normally have to figure out on your own.
That's why having a manual installation is nice, it proves you have basic competence and agency.

If you're not a retard there's nothing to maintain. Even I, a literal retard, have not had a problem yet and I fucked with my configs hardcore. It's very over exaggerated.

It's not that either. I wouldn't mind going through "all those extra steps" for a Debian install, I have to drop into a shell during installation anyway to get full disk encryption set-up where things get a bit more manual than on Arch. It's that what Debian offers me is way more and way better than Arch, there's simply no comparison. If Debian installation was complicated as fuck where you would have to spend 1 month studying it in a VM I would still use Debian.

I regret signing that shit because If I die in a car crash I don't want my fucking organs living on and something keeping me attached to reality in whatever way it is. Call me illogical but i have mini panic attacks if I seriously think about it.

why is even everyone installing arch?
all the reasons I usually read are nonesense
well, it comes barebones, but once shit is installed, it's huge due to no package splitting
same with any other distro, granted, it will teach 2-3 steps how to create a filesystem etc, but thats it, enough for 20 minutes in a vm
complete nonesense, in case someone doesn't want to remove things, he can just get a netinstall from another random distro
systemd

Because it's a rolling that works, and is maintained. It doesn't touch upstream (except in really rare cases), it just gives me the software.

Red Hat beta is not fucking maintained, they always freeze KDE in a horrible state, and you have to trust some third-world repository for any software that may infringe patents.

Debian is old as fuck, testing and unstable breaks more than Arch does. Arch doesn't break, and when it does there's usually a front page post days before the update telling you that it will break.

Tell me where I can find an RSS feed that tells me what I'll have to do when my Debian unstable or testing has a break? Usually caused by them patching the shit out of the software, for what it's worth.
Oh, that's right, you have to follow the autistic mailing list.
Yeah, nah, Arch is simple. That's what I like. It's not hard, it's just simple. It just gives me the software. Debian does not give you anything more than Arch does.
Unless you're talking about the fact that it gives you dpkg, which is a piece of dogshit, and horribly Debianized software, in which case I can only imagine that you like eating shit. If that's the case, carry on.

Fuck off with the distro flamewars, faggot, this isn't even a Linux discussion, it's just shitposting.

Oh, and can't forget the worst cases of Debianized software: them patching OpenSSL which neutered the entropy pool when generating keys, and the whole libav fiasco of them trying to "deprecate" ffmpeg.

Debian based distros are a joke on the desktop. Unless you're fucking retarded, and want to eat the shit that is Mint, Ubuntu, or Debian stable, that's all well and good, but don't pretend that it offers you anything special besides a clusterfuck of a package manager.

I'll just take upstream, thanks.

All of these criticisms were fair at the time but most of them have actually been fixed.

While I agree that some Arch users (specifically the chan types) can be elitist dicks I think it's a partial misunderstanding of the philosophy behind the OS. It's supposed to be bare bones. You're supposed to install only what you need, instead of most OS's where you get a bunch of programs you'll never use and you uninstall them. The idea that the more minimal the system the less issues, and when you have to do everything manually you'll understand your personal system better and will be able to problem solve more effectively. This isn't for everyone so you get a combination of purists and hardcore casuals (like windows posters who hate CLI) getting pissy with each other.

That's the reason I like it. Other than that the community is fucking shit and the installer is something they gotta improve if they still wanna be relevant in the future it's not hard to understand but it's just a fucking turn off for people not used to shit like that.

What's the point of using manjaro for the reasoning that it's based on arch? Aside from having an installer, it doesn't make anything you would use arch for easier, it even adds steps in some cases.

Don't get me wrong, it's a decent distro but its main selling point is just being based on arch without delving into the reasons to use it in first place.

Manjaro is a rolling release distro that doesn't waste your time and makes it relatively easy to remove systemd. That's the appeal as I see it.

Like your doing in removing systemd?
If you say so, autist.

Manjaro is also full of incompetents that tell you to change back your system's time when they forget to update their certs.

That's a bullshit reason. You can do that on most other distros with even more minimal results.

Important thread. Dumping some more.

...

It really isn't. Debian is far more suitable for that. It has optional dependencies and debug symbols and development libraries in separate packages. Arch doesn't bother with that, so you constantly get dependencies you don't strictly need and your packages arer larger than Debian's because they include things you probably won't use.