Welcome to realizing the Memes are all bullshit and its just a solid distro that's worth using for the simpleness. Just go use your computer like the average user is and roll with it
Yep, all this «how do I learn linux» stuff is weird. You don't learn your OS, you use it. Did you need to «learn» Windows? You just launch it and click your browser / file manager / media player and browse, manage files and watch or listen to your media files.
You can just use your PC as you would regularly use your PC and find solutions once you face some issues. Yes, Linux issues are different from Windows issues.
You got downvoted but as a Systems Engineer when I get home from work, I want my OS to get out of my way. All these other people are crazy.
Modern operating systems have made it take very little knowledge to connect to WiFi and browse the internet. If you want to use your computer for more than that, it can still take a longer learning process. I download 3D models for printing, and wanted an image for each model so I could find things more easily. In Linux, I can make such images with only about a hundred characters in the terminal. In Windows, I would either need to learn powershell, or make an image from each file by hand.
The way I understand "learning Linux" these days is reimagining what a computer can do for you to include the rich powers of open source software, so that when you have a problem that computers are very good at, you recognize that there's an obvious solution on Linux that Windows doesn't have.
Didn't bother going through the hoops and installed EndeavourOS which is arch-based with some additional default applications.
For me, the best thing of Arch isn't the distribution but the Arch wiki. An impressive piece of documentation.
Arch wiki is superb, couldn't have installed or configured Arch without it.
And the Arch User Repository is really handy when you need some more users.
The Arch build system is just as impressive IMO. I've written Debian and redhat packages for at least two decades and Arch packaging is just so much easier to handle. The associated tooling for creating and managing build chroots is excellent as well.
You already announced you use Arch... So you're doing good
Most distros are very similar - it's mostly the same software just using a different package manager.
This is why "which distro should I use" is the most annoying question in this community.
It is definitely annoying but I think it's understandable from people that are coming in from the outside.
Now actually use it for a couple of years. Then you'll see whats special about it.
For me personally, Ubuntu was breaking on every dist upgrade, the software was always out of date or not available in the repos. Been running arch for 5 years, same install, even transplanted it over to newer computers without issues. When some package is missing, I can throw together a PKGBUILD with chatgpt and put it on the AUR for others to use. It fucking rocks and is extremely sturdy while allowing me to do with it whatever I want.
But yeah, besides that, it's just a linux. The individual things it does well are not even exclusive to arch. Ideally, you should not think about your OS at all and it should be out of your way, while you do something on it.
Any major Linux distribution has a system for building packages, it's not something special to Arch. In fact, Arch's great advantage of the aur repository actually becomes a disadvantage by introducing instability and insecurity into your system when you add programs from that repository. It's amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe's and then install packages from external repositories with the security of "trust in the repository". How can you trust code with root access to the system just because it's in the aur repository? That's the main question I would ask Arch users.
It's a choice. We know that it's riskier to use stuff from AUR. Which is why it's highly recommended to read the PKGBUILD before installing the package. The basic Arch install doesn't even include an AUR helper. That said, AUR is typically very reliable for packages with a decent userbase. It's mostly due to the community aspect. Bad actors are caught relatively easily as the PKGBUILD is available to look at.
Most of the time it is achieved with the phrase: "I use Arch, btw". 😉
Also wearing unix socks might help
EDIT: A more complete guide.
Also, Blåhajar for better pics
In a way this post is just long-form "I use Arch, btw" 🤯
Check your neck for extra beard hairs, or your legs for knee high socks
You fell for the meme lol.
Arch is great if you want very high levels of customization without having to get into compiling and coding, like with Gentoo or NixOS.
I think of it as the distro equivalent to custom keyboard kit, you get all the parts and can swap them out as much as you want. But you're not designing and fabricating your own circuit board and microcontroller, writing your own custom firmware, getting a custom case modeled and fabricated, etc.
There's a reason "I use Arch, BTW" Is a meme.
Come for the memes, stay for the wiki and AUR.
The meme is mostly a relic from the days when installing Arch was a very involved and mostly manual process -- it wasn't to the level of LFS, but you had to configure most of the base system, and it would leave you with a pretty bare-bones setup (no GUI by default, etc). So it was a pretty big hurdle and successfully installing it did give you a bit of nerd cred, though even then the "arch BTW" meme was tongue in cheek.
These days it's just one of the most well-supported rolling release distros, and it's got automated installers and GUI spins just like any popular distro. The two biggest assets are the AUR and the wiki.
NixOS does kind of feel like the spiritual successor in terms of effort to set up, and in that immutable OSes are kind of the next big thing, like rolling release was fairly unconventional when Arch was taking off.
I think you might be missing the part where memes are not real. aur is useful. arch wiki is useful.
What exactly is it that people obsess over? The desktop environment and terminal customisation? Setting up NetworkManager with nmcli? Using Vim to edit a .conf file?
Welcome to the crowd! Eventually, you realize that an operating system is just an operating system: something you use to get work done, and the less you notice it, the better it's doing its job. The pride of setting it all up mostly ends very shortly after you're done. At that point, you realize that pretty much all distros are the same, give or take.
That said, there are always moments that make you realize that your OS is amazing. When you're faced with a new and difficult task that you don't know how to achieve, then you look at your distro's documentation and solve it in a few elegant steps. And I'm not an Arch user, but that's when the Arch wiki will really be your friend, as well as all the other resources that Arch has for its users. I can't think of examples of these kinds of moments because they're so rare, but those are the moments that feel great and really make you appreciate your OS.
The AUR is pretty awesome. If a piece of software exists on Linux, it's in the AUR. Even software that doesn't have a native Linux version can sometimes be found these, e.g. repackaged versions of Electron apps for Windows.
And once you start really customizing your system, you'll see the value of the Arch Wiki. If there's something you can do on Arch, the Wiki probably has a well-written guide for it.
100% its the Wiki and AUR!
On every other distro, once you want a program not in the package manager, it will likely be broken by the next update. On arch 99.995% of the time it will be in AUR and you can just make a simple PKGBUILD when its not, so your updates will automatically recompile all of your personal projects!
The thrilling thing about arch is you get to put together your own user land applications, especially things that could form your desktop environment, audio stuff, etc.
I agree it is not that complicated. If you want more thrill, here is what I recommend:
has the option to compile everything from source. This isn't just for bragging rights. This resolves a whole class of software breakages that can happen on other distros (especially when using old or less common applications).
Takes it a step beyond gentoo and uses a functional, lazy approach in package management. Every package is fully reproducible, has a kind of isolated environment. Your entire setup is reproducible and declared with a single file.
---- below this line is torture. Not recommended
Idk how it works exactly, but package management looks like a manual pain
A book where you create your Linux installation from scratch, compiling every single component until you reach a working system
Do people really make Arch their personality? Ive been using Arch-based distros since forever and never really met someone like that. I thought it was just a meme.
I like the minimalism and ability to control more parts of your system as opposed to an automated install process doing everything for you. But you don't have to do that much manually. The main pacstrap step basically sets up your whole system anyway. It's not that different to other mainstream distros. I have always just used it like any other distro.
Edit: Forgot to mention that the bleeding-edge packages and AUR are nice features too. And being rolling release to a lesser extent, just my preference.
I thought it was just a meme.
I see way more complaints about 'elitist Arch users' than I ever do comments from actual elitist Arch users.
Use it as your daily driver and get really comfortable with it. After this, complain loudly when you see someone doing anything in a different way. Then say "I use Arch btw"
People like Arch because to many it feels more truly like your system than other distributions.
It isn't that Arch is in some way more customizable than other distros, rather it's that if there is a package on your Arch system, its probably there because it was your choice to put it there in the first place, and so the system can feel more representative of you given it only contains the things you want or need and nothing more from the get go.
You've just made your first post regarding Arch. The cycle is complete.
Arch is for the most part comparable to Debian unstable/sid, but instead of a normal repository, it instead depends largely on a massive 3rd party repository (the AUR), and for some reason people think that's a feature.
Ha ha, you fool, you fell for the classic blunder!
It’s just a meme, dude.
Not the only meme I fell for... Anyone know the best way to unload 5 thinkpads that originally shipped with Windows 7??
Great, isn't it? You just set up a system you like for you to use, without any bullshit.
Yes, and that's the point of Archlinux. It's nothing special, at least in the way it is configured. You make it special. You build your distribution more or less. You are the opinionated one, not the distribution. I think what people are "obsessed with Arch" is, that you have to manage it yourself and you build it yourself. It is the philosophy that is appealing I guess. In example not much is automated. Stuff is described in the wiki and community and it is expected that you learn the stuff and understand and then do it yourself, instead relying on automated and preconfigured stuff from a regular distro.
On my main system I use EndeavourOS, which is basically Arch, but with some pre-configs and opinions, and comes with some automation tools.
Outside of the meme, the only people who make it their personality are generally younger and less experienced users who feel extremely empowered and proud by doing anything useful on the command line. Not like those users on Ubuntu (which they just switched from) who install stuff from a store like losers, nuh uh.
Before Arch you had the same type of people on Gentoo feeling superior because of use flags and watching hours of compiler output, after switching from Mandrake.
You're forgetting the finest feature - you have to tell everyone in the real world and online that you use arch btw.
Arch offers a combination of rolling software updates, a simple but easily customized base, pacman for the package manager, the AUR, a barebones installation process by default, good documentation, and active development. That may or may not be a good combination based on your goals.
Other distros offer a different combination of characteristics. Those characteristics are a starting point and you can get to the same destination no matter what you use. The trick is figuring out what starting point is closest to your destination or which starting point makes the journey fun for you. For some people, Arch is that. For plenty of people, Arch isn't that.
Yes, you are missing the fact that it's mostly not people making Archlinux their personality, but people making meme'ing about "Archlinux users" their personality. For the vast majority it's just an OS.
I like operating systems as boring as possible. Let it manage the underlying system while I focus on work. I think you just convinced me to try Arch now.
That's basically it. Some Arch users are genuinely just picky about what they want on their system and desire to make their setup as minimal as possible. However, a lot of people who make it their personality just get a superiority complex over having something that's less accessible to the average user.
Nobody's raving about the install, that's just useful for people who don't know what makes a Linux distro.
It becomes your personality after a few years because every update might break anything, and you need to regularly maintain random shit. Also if you forget to update regularly, the chance of everything crapping out rises exponentially.
I hope you're using something like btrfs, because rollbacks are a must.
From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).
Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.
Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0