12 ms·

I like how you picked Arch, which is notorious as one of the few distros without an installer program, and the most difficult to install. I also highly doubt th

• saghm 10y ago
  I've been running Linux for about 4 years now (Ubuntu -> Mint -> Fedora -> Arch over the first year or so, been on Arch ever since), and I've never had to recompile my kernel (I did choose to do it once, but this was because I was interested in trying it out rather than something not working right; I'm a bit masochistic that way).
• smallnamespace 10y ago
  I mentioned Arch because its repos/kernel seem the most up to date and hence most likely to support newish hardware. Plus their docs for getting to run on new laptops seems pretty comprehensive [1]. Looking for directions for that laptop on Ubuntu returns a bunch of frustrated users and rather conflicting testimony: https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&espv=2&ie=UTF-8#q=%22yoga+910%22+ubuntu https://www.google.com/webhp?sourceid=chrome-instant&ion=1&e... Disclaimer: not an Arch user myself [1] https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Category:Laptops https://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Category:Laptops
• btschaegg 10y ago
  This. I'm a big fan of Arch myself, but if you look at the distro's philosophy, manually installing it is actually the point. There are enough other distros if you want to avoid that.