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
I have been looking around and found a few new Distros which I plan to test and perhaps use. These are all Arch based.
Exodia (dwm, bspwm) Arch Distro: https://exodia-os.github.io/exodia-website/?ref=news.itsfoss.com
CachyOS (gnome, kde) Arch Distro: https://cachyos.org/
XeroLinux (Stable base Arch): https://xerolinux.xyz/
#Linux #Distros #ArchLinux #Arch #Technology #Software #OS
I had been off Linux for a few years but recently returned to arch. I didnt feel like mucking around with everything from scratch so I tried the included install script. Next thing I knew I was in a full xfce environment with everything working out of the box.
If arch can drop you in a full DE of your choosing, from an install script, what is the point of these other options? Genuinely wondering what's going on with them and if I should check them out.
These other arch distros usually come with pre-compiled kernels with special options for different platforms, repos with different package versions to offer some level of stability, custom scripts to manage services and updating, and their own config files for various things. It's pretty much what you do with regular arch but someone else is doing most of it for you.
They are either customized for looks or for performance.They are there for easy of use.
So they're just desktop environment reskins? With sons basic config files changed? What's the point? You can download some packages and files any time from normal Arch for the same outcome.
Even if I don't use this distro and just use plain Arch myself, I know that CachyOS is a bit more special as it at least compiles the arch repo packages for a newer x86 target and with additional compiler optimizations again that improves performance on newer CPUs. You can achieve the same on an Arch system with the wonderful ALHP project I use on one system but Cachy certainly makes this more accessible.
I plan to go these route but to also bring in the Garuda repos and some tweaks they make. I am running Garuda right now and it works really well for gaming and I like some of their scripts, like garuda-update
What advantage do these have over Arch besides possibly an easier installer?
I think only endeavour and Manjaro still hold any use of the arch based distros.
Endeavour generally has nice tools and is pretty much what you’d do with the install script so it just saves a few steps.
Manjaro because it’s a gateway into learning arch for better or worse.
But other than those two I don’t see the point of any other arch distros other than to be made for the sake of it.
(I forgot steam os 3, but that’s a different topic)
https://github.com/arindas/manjarno
https://www.hadet.dev/Manjaro-Bad/
Manjaro also has a "rolling release" model that isn't actually fully rolling release. They hold back packages for a few weeks which in return has almost always destroyed the AUR for not only manjaro users but Arch users.
They lie about it being fully rolling. Not just that they have forgotten to sign their signature keys multiple times before releasing big updates.
Sure it's an easier Arch for "beginners" but I'd say it's easier to just install arch on a VM if you really want to learn and use arch that bad a VM is the best way.
Pure Arch is better than Manjaro. Hell I hate Ubuntu but I'd rather use that over Manjaro
You know that’s not a Manjaro problem that’s a user problem, you’re specifically warned that AUR compatibility is not guaranteed with Manjaro https://wiki.manjaro.org/index.php/Arch_User_Repository
But people often ignore this and then complain that Manjaro isn’t stable.
And yes Manjaro is fully rolling just because they delay packages a week doesn’t stop it being rolling, that’s like calling tumbleweed not a rolling release?
I’m not arguing that Manjaro is better or worse than Arch just that if you use it as intended it functions correctly and is a good way to learn Linux and Arch.
New Arch and Ubuntu spins, there's a new one every hour!
With AI generated distros, everything is possible /s
I heard good things about Garuda Linux
If you don't want the themed desktop (KDE) then Garuda KDE lite is great. They also offer other desktop environments that I also think is without the skin
This is what I'm using the last year, really enjoying it. Most stuff does just work, Proton installed by default, haven't had trouble running nearly anything I've wanted to play.
Is this GNOME in your screenshot? The task bar at the bottom looks great. How you make it look like that?
Dash to Panel, I use it on PopOS and it's great. For a "start menu" I recommend ArcMenu.
I use arch btw
I just would love to see more ditros focused on a single DE, making a unique user experience.
Don't forget System Rescue - https://www.system-rescue.org/
Formally Gentoo based. Ideal for testing virty infrastructure, fixing systems, recovering data of broken systems and resetting passwords on Windows. You can of course use it to install Arch.