Is there anyone shitting on arch that has actually installed

Is it really that hard to install?

File: 2017-07-16-232953_520x219_scrot.png (9KB, 520x219px) Image search: [Google]

9KB, 520x219px

>>61403167
partition hd, select timezone, select mirrors, pacstrap, install de.

thats literally all it is, it isnt hard

actually i tell a lie there might be more but if there is it isnt much, havent installed in a while

File: 1460391732541.webm (1MB, 640x360px) Image search: [Google]

1MB, 640x360px

I hate Arch because it gets all the attention with its expansive AUR while ignoring the superior Portage package manager and the Overlay system.
Also it's a generally dysfunctional system that breaks when you so much as use a single 3rd party package or update.

>>61403189
so basically debian net install?

>>61403189
>partition hd
This is the hard part for me, i get so confused. (Size of partition, type, swap partition etc..)

>>61403204
from what i gather yeah, never did a net install of debian. if you can install any other CLI installer you can install arch. its just babies first non-gui distro so it gets a mythos of being hard.
Its hard if you consider something like ubuntu or mint the standard though, i guess.

>>61403219
thats not really hard though, you can google it. its just remembering it.

Besides you can just install it all on one partition, nearly no one needs swap and you dont have to have a seperate home partition

>>61403167
>>61403189
I only installed two distros in my entire life, Debain and Ubuntu and never used them. Just installed Arch yesterday and haven't got (that many fucking) problems with it. And I'm a total noob, just read the fucking instructions.

>>61403240
that was basically my experience with linux. I did use ubuntu for about 5months but when i wanted to learn more i found it getting in the way and i broke ubuntu more than ive ever broken arch.

installed arch maybe 3 or 4 years ago now and never went back. theres very slightly more initial headache for plenty of benefits(in my opinion)

>>61403195
>breaks from 3rd party
False

>>61403219
There is a fair few good tutorials on YouTube for installing

File: screenFetch-2017-07-16_13-52-30.png (531KB, 1600x900px) Image search: [Google]

531KB, 1600x900px

i installed it in a VM to see if i could. I don't understand why people would prefer it to Ubuntu or Linux Mint. Tasks that have been very simple to do in "noob" distros are needlessly tedious in Arch, and I don't see the benefit of running this "distribution" unless you just want to stroke your ego and pretend you're smart for typing a bunch of shit

>>61403133
Are you >implying that Arch being a pain in the ass to install is not a valid reason to shit on it? Even Gentoo is easier to get working.

>>61403446
what did you find tedious?

>>61403489
You can install Arch in a few minutes to get it running.

>>61403167

both arch and gentoo have very beginner orientated installation guides where anyone with even some basic gahnoo/loonix experience can install them and get a reasonable working system (x, login manager, de, etc)

hell, there are plenty of first time gahnoo/loonix users that have installed arch/gentoo, the only barrier to entry is being able to read the documentation and/or be able to google if something goes wrong, which outside of user error is very rare

the secret club meme is just so autists can feel some sort of achievement from installing a distro without an installer

>>61403520
Getting to a text console doesn't count as "getting it running" in the current year. If an experienced Linux user can spend 3+ hours trying to set up X, on hardware that works perfectly fine in every other distro, then something is wrong with your packaging.

>>61403508
the installation. as you can see from my cap I didn't bother fixing the font rendering, but I have tackled the font rendering issue in Manjaro. Fonts just look good out of box in Ubuntu, and you don't have to edit files in the terminal to set your password, device name, username etc. I just don't see the point or how it's a benefit

I did put Manjaro Xfce on my old laptop just for fun, would have put Arch on it but again, Arch didn't have the wifi drivers or an ez-mode installation or live iso to test it out. it just seems incomplete. I know that's kinda the point of it... but how is that good? what's the benefit of Arch vs Antergos or Manjaro?

i have arch installed on two servers, one with systemd and one without, and both suck. the package manager is the only decent thing that's come from arch

>>61403668
also, Arch was harder to set up in VM than any other distro I have tried (Manjaro, Solus (lol), Debian)

i might come off as harsh, I'm sure that if I was a little less lazy and could be bothered to plug an ethernet cable into my laptop I could have installed Arch on bare metal, configured it properly and enjoyed it and participated in screenfetch threads, It's just not my cup of tea.

>>61403189
restart the computer and cant boot into the OS because you didnt install a bootloader

question for arch guys...

besides the name being cooler, why is pacman better than apt?

>>61403638
I'm >>61403240
Installed it with XFCE and LightDM. Took less than 40m to get a functioning OS with GUI environment and I'm completely retarded, I don't know shit about linux, or any OS, for the matter.

>>61403712
there it is, i knew i forgot something.

I shit on arch BECAUSE I can set it up, it's literally the worst Linux Distro imaginable.

pros:

> "it's arch linux"

cons:

> systemd (but openrc is supported too if you want to roll everything by yourself manually lol)
> bloated af but yet somehow considered minimal by the peanut gallery
> regular breakage of everything for no reason and it's not the maintainers fault the users upgrade when they break stuff ur a noob lol
> worst community in the history of the world, your problem is never a problem of the ecosystem because it works on my box ™
> the AUR , arguably the worst collection of software ever, mostly not maintained by anyone

bottom line, I couldn't think of a worse distro than arch. It's exactly what I would have expected people who think they're too hot for making DEBs and RPMs would make. It's made by idiots for idiots. If you're too dumb to make your own debian packages, obviously know that ubuntu is 4noobz, think you know how to linux SHOULD be since you're 17 and a computer genius and have no job and have a huge chunk of time to waste then arch linux is perfect for you.

>>61403735
it has never broken for me, commands are easier to type once you memorise them, no need for dist-upgrades every once in a while (i'm comparing this to debian testing, where that was necessary to upgrade certain packages)

Also, can I use it without a bootloader? Or is there any way of speeding up the boot process, without waiting or selecting the OS? I have installed GRUB, btw.

>>61403759
Cool story, bro. Here's mine:
>follow the instructions for the base install
>everything works fine
>reboot into the new system
>try to set up X from the console
>install xorg, startx, xterm, openbox, kernel drivers, xorg drivers, firmware, etc
>run startx
>"no screens detected"
>check the X setup instructions again
>I didn't miss anything, but it's still fucked
>check the logs
>no error messages, but Xorg is not loading the video driver for some reason
>even though the driver is installed, the driver .so exists and is in the right directory
>won't even load the fallback VESA driver
>start googling shit and fucking with the Xorg config
>literally zero progress after three hours
>uninstall, back to Debian

>>61403815
without bootloader: UEFI
with: configure grub or extlinux to skip the menu screen or set a lower delay

>>61403133
Just saying, but archanywhere.

>>61404060
t. retard

>>61404063
Got it. So I'll configure grub to skip the menu.

Another thing, I wanted to install Windows on a secondary disk, and whenever I wanted to use it I'd hit F12 to change the disk to boot. Would it work like this having installed Arch using legacy Bios?

>>61404060
For me it was this way
>partitioned my disk
>formatted the volumes
>installed the system
>chroot into Arch
>install various packages
>pacman -S xorg, xorg-server
>pacman -S xfce4, lightdm, lightdm-gtk-greeter
>pacman -S grub
>grub-install
>rebooted
>it werks

>>61404103
Well, this retard had no trouble installing Gentoo, so what's Arch doing wrong?

>>61404182
yep that will work fine

>>61404239
Great, thanks mate.

>>61404233
Look at my posts. I don't know anything about loonix and still installed it without much problems. Maybe you fucked up somewhere?

>>61404078
pleb

>>61403133
I got sick of the damn rolling release and -syu every time I started mu computer, thats why I switched to Debian. But arch is great for someone who wants rolling release.