if you're sick of arch elitists telling you you're

>>55950217
Nice share OP :)

>>55950217
Doesn't this completely miss the point of Arch?
If you want to use this why not stick with the netinst ISO of any other distro?

>>55950217
Arch never was hard to install anyway, it never stopped the elitists from blabbering.
Hell, there's always some distro that attract a disproportionate amount of insufferable show-offs because it's 'harder'. I'm just glad that a lot of them are now using arch instead of flocking to gentoo.

>>55950902

The ironic thing is arch attracts so many of those types because it has a wiki that covers just about everything

>>55950934
Wait until they find out about {Free,Open,whatever}BSD's manuals.

>>55950217
Has there ever been a post more cringe worthy?
>duh hurr let's trigger NEETs by using an installer to install a POS distro xDDD

>>55950957
bsd faggot shilling again, no one is going to install that shit

>>55951021
Doesn't matter.
Their manual are great and often also relevant to linux.
Nice contribution to the discussion tho.

>>55951021
At least it's not Arch ¯\_(ツ)_/¯

>>55951059
it's worse than arch, arch at least is usable to a certain degree where as BSD is just full on autism where basic shit doesn't even work properly

>>55951068
Are you talking about desktop or server usage? I only use BSD for server related stuff.

>>55951091
desktop, who the fuck uses arch on servers?

>>55950887
How does this miss the point? Is the point of Arch to manually input commands?

>>55951109
I do.
But I use the LTS kernel.

It's very stable.

>>55950887
The point of arch is it's installation process? For real? No wonder it's shit.

>>55951109
IMHO who uses Arch on desktops? Fedora (other distros are available) also has the latest/newest versions of whatever you need, also has something like AUR named COPR and if you use the netinst you have pretty much the same as Arch.

>>55951171
What IS the point of Arch?

>>55951198
>What IS the point of Arch?
Bleeding edge packages being the main thing

>>55951208
How big is the difference between the package versions for of example Fedora and Arch?

>>55951230
iDunno

>>55950887
By that logic you should have gone with LFS you fucking pussy.

>>55951068
Doesn't the PS4 kernel use BSD?

Why didn't they name the PS4 OS SonyBSD?

>>55950887
>point of Arch
You're right, is not the point of arch, but for some users the point is pacman, AUR and updated packages
I don't use this kind of helpers cause one of these distros from the wiki damaged a couple of luks partitions.

I use archbang as live usb tho.

>>55950887
god you're cancer

Does it detect wifi out of box OP?

How is it different from architect?

>>55950217
well installing grsec patches is not really that hard though

>>55951047
>Their manual are great
Hahahahahahahhahahahahahahahahha!
Haven't laughed that hard in a year! Have you considered becoming a clown? You'd make a fortune!

>>55952644
Have you browsed through the BSD documentation lately? It's really thorough, gnu could learn a bit or two from it.
And no, I'm not much of a showman, clowning isn't for me.

>>55952717
It's a fucking joke, it explains precisely nothing and the only way to get the information someone who's looking at the manual is actually looking for is to google it because it's not actually in the manual.

>>55952644
IDK about their manuals but the FreeBSD handbook is so easy to follow that a 5 y/o could use it. But it lacks content severly

>>55952825
>But it lacks content severly
i.e. it might as well not exist.

>>55952860
True, BSD doesn't have many packages. Specially OpenBSD
-Has no Linux compatibility layer, less packages than Linux
-No MAC
-No ZFS
-No Jails
-Has FBI backdoors that the devs conveniently covered up saying it's just some "bugs"
Might as well trash you PC.

FreeBSD is not all that secure as well.

Overall BSD CANNOT do Vt-d virtualisation of windows guests as well. So there are still NO reason to use BSD, even though it was available before Linux came out.

File: 1467347561788.jpg (26KB, 235x300px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 235x300px

>>55950217
>>55951171
>>55952011
>>55950934

DELETE THIS

File: Fail0126.png (585KB, 580x255px) Image search: [Google]

585KB, 580x255px

>>55950887
>Doesn't this completely miss the point of Arch?
>If you want to use this why not stick with the netinst ISO of any other distro?

Is the Elite Clubhouse getting a bit too crowded?

>>55950217
Nice op. No one cared

>>55951021
this, I had it with bsd shills taking every chance to push their shit

>>55954432
buttmad archfag detected

>>55950887
>>>55950217 (OP)
>Doesn't this completely miss the point of Arch?
>If you want to use this why not stick with the netinst ISO of any other distro?
I do not think it truly matters because people are going to install these utilities anyways when I use antergos with open box why would have had to go through all the trouble to set that up if I can do it all at once and then add and remove the stuff I don't want

Does it support FDE?

>>55956465
I use windows......

>>55950887
Because I want the AUR without having to do manual partitioning.

>>55957531
Just make one partition.....

>>55951198
> What IS the point of Arch?
Packages work transparently, without additional layers.

>>55957589
>wanting to reinstall your distro

>>55957594
I think he meant in comparison to other distros. Nice try, though.

>>55957758
Yes, in comparison to other distros. In Debian there's dpkg-reconfigure. Even in Gentoo there are some tools to automate configuration. In Arch, there are none, you write it by hand.

>>55950217
>and yeah, it can install grsec for you
Installing grsec is the easiest part of using grsec.
Living with grsec on your desktop computer is a completely different thing that expands way beyond installing a custom kernel. Last time I tried it, about 6 months ago, it was quite a challenge to have Steam start properly. But no games could run, despite my multiple attempts at tweaking configs.

>>55950902
This. Arch is ridiculously easy to install. Faggots like >>55950887 who have used Linux for two weeks and 1) think the length of installation for your distro is proportional to that of your ePenis and 2) think that the installation time of a distro is more important than the daily usage of the distro and 3) think that because they can install Arch even though they've never used Linux before they are a natural at using MUH CLI are cancer.

Has anybody here ever been on the #archlinux irc on freenode? I idle there for memes.

In order to demonstrate how retarded the Arch userbase is on average, here's something that happened:

>guy starts shitposting about how he can't wait for linux 4.7 to be in arch
>goes on forever about how he wants it really bad
>wants to be on muh bleeding edge
>STABILITY BE DAMNED I'M NOT A NOOBUNTU USER WHO EVEN CARES
>IF YOU CAN'T FIX STUFF WHEN IT BREAKS YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO BE ANY GOOD AT LINUX
>ten minutes later
>same guy:
>how do you add users from the cli again

REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

>>55957782
>Debian automates configuration of packages you install
>Gentoo automates configuration of packages you install
I use Debian on a server and Gentoo on my desktop, and I can assure you that I have never installed a program and had it automatically create a dotfile that was preconfigured and jistwerks.

Also, what does this have to do with the "additional layers" and "transparency" buzzwords?

>>55957863
>>>/v/

File: 1467589036759.jpg (13KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

13KB, 225x225px

>>55957912
Good meme, friend.

>>55957892
dpkg-reconfigure would sometimes create and edit config files for you. It's a layer of abstraction above plain config files. I Arch there are no such layers, therefore it's transparent.

>>55951180
Yeah, the kernel is the main reason people have problems with arch...

>>55957934
It's still transparent. If you don't like the config file it auto-generates, edit or remove the config file. In the meantime, at least your package is usable.

And it won't generate the config file unless you tell it to. Have you ever used Debian?

>>55950887
>the point of Arch is that it's hard to install
upboat xD

>>55957989
I am unfortunate enough to use it at work. Compared to pacman, apt/dpkg is overcomplicated and utterly unscriptable.

>>55957782
>>55957934
that's not a layer of abstraction. that's a tool that does stuff if you explicitly run it on each individual package you want to automagically configure. it doesn't make anything abstract. it just edits config files when you explicitly run it from command line and leaves them there for you to look at and edit or whatever you want. "abstraction" implies that it hides something, when it doesnt.

>>55958030
Well, yeah. Compared to the 2-3 things pacman can do, it's pretty complicated. Other than that, everything is just as one-liner-y as Arch. What about it is unscriptable?

>>55958054
Short of using yes, you basically can't make it non-interactive.

>>55958074
>what is the -y flag

>>55958085
There are cases when it asks user input even with -y.

>>55958092
The only time that happens is when the package itself prompts you and the package has a bug and fails to understand the -y. This happens with one or two packages every few years. In these cases there are very simple workarounds.

>>55958113
And I should note that this happens in Arch as well.

>>55958122
And I should note that pacman --noconfirm is widely known to bork things, and there are big warning signs all over the place in official Arch documentation not to use it.