2 ms·
I would really like to run Arch, but last time I checked it was a manual process (so I am on Majaro). The docs are really good. I am expert enough to get a lot
by collyw 9y ago
I would really like to run Arch, but last time I checked it was a manual process (so I am on Majaro). The docs are really good. I am expert enough to get a lot of benefit from that amount of detail, but not expert enough to be bothered with the manual install process.
One thing that gets me is ~12 years ago I used to install distros all the time. There was a semi standard way to partition your drive, / home and swap. Now I look at the partitions that are produced and a lot of the time I have no idea what is going on. And please stop moving the bloody usb drive mount location about.
- nobleach 9y agoI feel the same. 12-20 years ago, I was installing Linux distros (and NetBSD, FreeBSD, OpenBSD...) multiple times in a week. It was such a wonderful playground. As a software developer, now days, I just want something to work without fiddling with it for days. That said, I just installed Arch again a week or so ago. I have 2 observations: 1. Getting it bootstrapped and running is downright annoying. I see little value in it other than teaching someone what an installer _would_ do for them. Do you know how to chroot? mkinitrd? fdisk? install a bootloader? ensure that you have the right drivers/modules to run your WiFi chipset? manually configure everything??? The end product _does_ give you a feeling of accomplishment... but, I'm still not sure it's worth the cost. 2. ArchLinux docs are about the best I've seen. Kudos to the community for doing such a fine job.
- mizzack 9y agoCheck out Antergos. It's effectively Arch with a modern installer.
- AnIdiotOnTheNet 9y ago> And please stop moving the bloody usb drive mount location about. Asking the Linux community to have consistency and standards is like asking rain not to be wet I'm afraid.