Users of Arch-based distros, why don't you use pure Arch? (ani.social)

submitted 4 days ago* (last edited 4 days ago) by kiri@ani.social to c/linux@programming.dev

110 comments fedilink hide all child comments

(No provocation)

I see these reasons:

newbie
lazy (don't wanna edit config files etc.)
unique features (like assistant/toolbox, some optimizations like in cachyos)
wanna check how different systems are set up (that's rather distrohopping)

Personally, I used manjaro i3 when I was beigginer and wanted to see how tiling WM should be configured (check out ranger config, for example). But after some time, I don't see reasons why not to just customize pure arch (same with debian and debian-based distros).

you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments

[-] wltr@discuss.tchncs.de 7 points 4 days ago

Why Arch based distro then? Why not, say, Fedora? Debian. Popos.

[-] Bimfred@lemmy.world 11 points 4 days ago

The complicated parts of the setup are already done and I still get the benefits of a fast update schedule, without (mostly) having to worry about accidentally breaking something.

And you're right about running another, less finicky distro. It's why I've got Bazzite on the HTPC and the handheld. Because I want those to be zero finicky, as poking around in them is way more of a pain in the ass.