3 ms·

Manjaro Linux: Making Arch Linux More Accessible

22 points by doener 2y ago

xinayder 2y ago
Correction: freeloading Arch while making the OS shittier for everyone with questionable business and security decisions.
- setopt 2y ago
  Um, I don’t get the criticism, can you elaborate? I’ve used both Arch and Manjaro before (many years ago), but don’t recognize this.
  - Imustaskforhelp 2y ago
    I think endeavour os is greater than manjaro though I use pure arch
  - hiciu 2y ago
    Manjaro users used to come to the Arch forums for support. In one case user came with some kind of a kernel issue and when we started to debug it someone noticed that the kernel version they were using was not in the core or testing repos at the time. (It was newer and bugged). There were many such cases. There is now a policy in place: https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#arch-linux-distribution-support-only https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#arch-linux.... That's not all! Some Manjaro users learned to withhold information that they were using Manjaro and insisted that "it's archlinux", even when their own logs clearly said Manjaro. Also, people behind Manjaro let their ssl cert expire 4 times. At one time they told their users to change their system clocks: https://archive.is/JeOLo https://archive.is/JeOLo. Manjaro people have literally DDOSed AUR. https://gitlab.manjaro.org/applications/pamac/-/issues/1017 https://gitlab.manjaro.org/applications/pamac/-/issues/1017 Would you like me to continue? I think that's enough of examples but believe me, there's more. Have you heard story about manjaro-system 20180716-1?
bcowde 2y ago
Been using Manjaro as my main OS for quite a number of years, very stable. Wasn't pleased to learn of the plans for opt-out telemetry however ...
ChocolateGod 2y ago
> flexibility of Arch Linux and making it more accessible Then don't you remove the purpose of using Arch? It's KISS / setup yourself is part of its appeal.
- setopt 2y ago
  Arch has many other benefits, like Pacman arguably being nicer to use than e.g. APT, and AUR having a wider range of easily installable packages than even Ubuntu PPAs, and less patching of upstream packages. Manjaro just makes it more approachable for people who don’t want to set it up themselves, similarly to what Ubuntu did to Debian.
  - ChocolateGod 2y ago
    Arch has a shell based installer, why use Manjaro over that?
    - z3ratul163071 2y ago
      Arch does not have a shell based installer. If by shell-based installer you mean: you manually run a bunch of sequential shell commands, then yes. For me that does not constitute 'an installer'.
      - NekkoDroid 2y ago
        It does: archinstall. Its been a thing for I think 2 years now.
mightysashiman 2y ago
Always been buggy for me. Has it got better?
- zdragnar 2y ago
  I used it for a few years recently and it was just fine. I had to switch to fedora when my company wanted to try some remote management software, as arch wasn't supported. The day to day difference in stability was identical.
jcelerier 2y ago
I much prefer CachyOS
Philpax 2y ago
Obligatory https://manjarno.pages.dev/ https://manjarno.pages.dev/
- temp0826 2y ago
  I don't get why anyone would care enough, neigh have the time to bother with creating/maintaining something like this. If you don't like it don't use it? I don't see why anyone would be forced into it. (Not a manjaro user, never was, just a bystander but longtime linux user).
flavaz 2y ago
I’m really not sure what the use case of Manjaro is. Arch exists for good reason, and if you’re not comfortable with the complexity of setup just use another distro? Fedora, Mint and Ubuntu both exist if you want a simpler installer. I’ve started using Bazzite on more machines too and couldn’t be happier with the results. Genuinely I think most people just confuse distro with desktop environment. If you don’t actually need arch just go with another simpler distro and set up the DE you need.
- tastyminerals2 2y ago
  pacman and aur with preconfigured DE, it saves a lot of time. I switched to Manjaro after I got tired of tweaking arch even for most trivial things every single reinstall. Its the best distro for learning though. Apt or rpm distros can barely compete with the amount of available and up-to-date packages in aur.
  - lucasoshiro 2y ago
    Some people say that Manjaro is bloated, and I understand. But if you want a customized setup I find it easier to install Manjaro, remove what I don't want and them customize than installing doing the opposite with Arch
- lucasoshiro 2y ago
  > I’m really not sure what the use case of Manjaro is. People who want the benefits of Arch (e. g. pacman, AUR, arch wiki, rolling release, having only one package management instead of using deb + snap + flatpak + appimage + installing scripts) without needing to spend hours installing and configuring Arch. > Fedora, Mint and Ubuntu both exist if you want a simpler installer. In fact, nowadays it's harder for me to understand why would someome install Fedora. There are less rpm packages than deb packages (which is a downside compared to ubuntu/mint/debian); there's no AUR, you'll need to find a way to install what's missing; it is bleeding edge but not rolling release, which doesn't really make sense for me. > Genuinely I think most people just confuse distro with desktop environment In the case of Ubuntu or Mint, yes, it happens. But not in case of Manjaro, if you go to its page you'll still need to choose one of the several DEs that are availabe, there are options even with i3 and sway. It's not like Ubuntu that you'll need to know the existence of Kubuntu
wood_spirit 2y ago
In the past I used to use Debian then Ubuntu but left back when Ubuntu became too opinionated on the UI etc. Just wasn’t fun to tinker with anymore. So I haven’t been following too closely for the last few years. But then this morning I was just pondering which distro to use to breath new life into an old mbp 2014 and googled it and discovered Manjaro. That was just before seeing this on HN! But comments here about telemetry… What is the go to distro for no hassles no nonsense no commercial angle desktop Linux these days?
- Guestmodinfo 2y ago
  You can try Antix linux with Runit init. This is the smallest complete desktop that you will ever get. I got it running on my 2006 lenovo T5200 chipset laptop and I could do ok even zoom used to work. Now I'm using it on another celeron laptop and it works fine
  - Guestmodinfo 2y ago
    Antix linux main guy's name is anticapitalista. So that there tells a lot about that they hate telemetry. Antix is based on Debian stable but they have removed all of the telemetry and systemd. One thing I like about them is they keep trying to get new init systems like Runit and Dinit included which don't spy on users. And it's a complete laptop. Im still finding a reason why should my newer laptop stay on Windows when I'm so happy with Antix linux.
- pixxel 2y ago
  [dead]
deleted 2y ago
[deleted]
tnname 2y ago
I just want to ask why would you want this when Archlinux only takes 15 minutes to install. If you don't want to spend time installing and learning Archlinux, Ubuntu is already there. If you don't want Ubuntu, Debian is a better option with deb. Why would you want to use it if you are not willing to spend time learning about it? I just feel that if you are not going to learn how to install Archlinux and configure anything, Pacman and APT are almost the same. I use Archlinux because Linux, Xorg, Fluxbox, Virtualbox, Firefox are all I need.
xcircle 2y ago
I prefer https://endeavouros.com https://endeavouros.com as an arch distribution

22 points by doener 2y ago

Correction: freeloading Arch while making the OS shittier for everyone with questionable business and security decisions.

setopt 2y ago
Um, I don’t get the criticism, can you elaborate? I’ve used both Arch and Manjaro before (many years ago), but don’t recognize this.
- Imustaskforhelp 2y ago
  I think endeavour os is greater than manjaro though I use pure arch
- hiciu 2y ago
  Manjaro users used to come to the Arch forums for support. In one case user came with some kind of a kernel issue and when we started to debug it someone noticed that the kernel version they were using was not in the core or testing repos at the time. (It was newer and bugged). There were many such cases. There is now a policy in place: https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#arch-linux-distribution-support-only https://terms.archlinux.org/docs/code-of-conduct/#arch-linux.... That's not all! Some Manjaro users learned to withhold information that they were using Manjaro and insisted that "it's archlinux", even when their own logs clearly said Manjaro. Also, people behind Manjaro let their ssl cert expire 4 times. At one time they told their users to change their system clocks: https://archive.is/JeOLo https://archive.is/JeOLo. Manjaro people have literally DDOSed AUR. https://gitlab.manjaro.org/applications/pamac/-/issues/1017 https://gitlab.manjaro.org/applications/pamac/-/issues/1017 Would you like me to continue? I think that's enough of examples but believe me, there's more. Have you heard story about manjaro-system 20180716-1?

bcowde 2y ago

Been using Manjaro as my main OS for quite a number of years, very stable. Wasn't pleased to learn of the plans for opt-out telemetry however ...

ChocolateGod 2y ago

> flexibility of Arch Linux and making it more accessible Then don't you remove the purpose of using Arch? It's KISS / setup yourself is part of its appeal.

setopt 2y ago
Arch has many other benefits, like Pacman arguably being nicer to use than e.g. APT, and AUR having a wider range of easily installable packages than even Ubuntu PPAs, and less patching of upstream packages. Manjaro just makes it more approachable for people who don’t want to set it up themselves, similarly to what Ubuntu did to Debian.
- ChocolateGod 2y ago
  Arch has a shell based installer, why use Manjaro over that?
  - z3ratul163071 2y ago
    Arch does not have a shell based installer. If by shell-based installer you mean: you manually run a bunch of sequential shell commands, then yes. For me that does not constitute 'an installer'.
    - NekkoDroid 2y ago
      It does: archinstall. Its been a thing for I think 2 years now.

mightysashiman 2y ago

Always been buggy for me. Has it got better?

zdragnar 2y ago
I used it for a few years recently and it was just fine. I had to switch to fedora when my company wanted to try some remote management software, as arch wasn't supported. The day to day difference in stability was identical.

jcelerier 2y ago

I much prefer CachyOS

Philpax 2y ago

Obligatory https://manjarno.pages.dev/ https://manjarno.pages.dev/

temp0826 2y ago
I don't get why anyone would care enough, neigh have the time to bother with creating/maintaining something like this. If you don't like it don't use it? I don't see why anyone would be forced into it. (Not a manjaro user, never was, just a bystander but longtime linux user).

flavaz 2y ago

I’m really not sure what the use case of Manjaro is. Arch exists for good reason, and if you’re not comfortable with the complexity of setup just use another distro? Fedora, Mint and Ubuntu both exist if you want a simpler installer. I’ve started using Bazzite on more machines too and couldn’t be happier with the results. Genuinely I think most people just confuse distro with desktop environment. If you don’t actually need arch just go with another simpler distro and set up the DE you need.

tastyminerals2 2y ago
pacman and aur with preconfigured DE, it saves a lot of time. I switched to Manjaro after I got tired of tweaking arch even for most trivial things every single reinstall. Its the best distro for learning though. Apt or rpm distros can barely compete with the amount of available and up-to-date packages in aur.
- lucasoshiro 2y ago
  Some people say that Manjaro is bloated, and I understand. But if you want a customized setup I find it easier to install Manjaro, remove what I don't want and them customize than installing doing the opposite with Arch
lucasoshiro 2y ago
> I’m really not sure what the use case of Manjaro is. People who want the benefits of Arch (e. g. pacman, AUR, arch wiki, rolling release, having only one package management instead of using deb + snap + flatpak + appimage + installing scripts) without needing to spend hours installing and configuring Arch. > Fedora, Mint and Ubuntu both exist if you want a simpler installer. In fact, nowadays it's harder for me to understand why would someome install Fedora. There are less rpm packages than deb packages (which is a downside compared to ubuntu/mint/debian); there's no AUR, you'll need to find a way to install what's missing; it is bleeding edge but not rolling release, which doesn't really make sense for me. > Genuinely I think most people just confuse distro with desktop environment In the case of Ubuntu or Mint, yes, it happens. But not in case of Manjaro, if you go to its page you'll still need to choose one of the several DEs that are availabe, there are options even with i3 and sway. It's not like Ubuntu that you'll need to know the existence of Kubuntu

wood_spirit 2y ago

In the past I used to use Debian then Ubuntu but left back when Ubuntu became too opinionated on the UI etc. Just wasn’t fun to tinker with anymore. So I haven’t been following too closely for the last few years. But then this morning I was just pondering which distro to use to breath new life into an old mbp 2014 and googled it and discovered Manjaro. That was just before seeing this on HN! But comments here about telemetry… What is the go to distro for no hassles no nonsense no commercial angle desktop Linux these days?

Guestmodinfo 2y ago
You can try Antix linux with Runit init. This is the smallest complete desktop that you will ever get. I got it running on my 2006 lenovo T5200 chipset laptop and I could do ok even zoom used to work. Now I'm using it on another celeron laptop and it works fine
- Guestmodinfo 2y ago
  Antix linux main guy's name is anticapitalista. So that there tells a lot about that they hate telemetry. Antix is based on Debian stable but they have removed all of the telemetry and systemd. One thing I like about them is they keep trying to get new init systems like Runit and Dinit included which don't spy on users. And it's a complete laptop. Im still finding a reason why should my newer laptop stay on Windows when I'm so happy with Antix linux.
pixxel 2y ago
[dead]

deleted 2y ago

[deleted]

tnname 2y ago

I just want to ask why would you want this when Archlinux only takes 15 minutes to install. If you don't want to spend time installing and learning Archlinux, Ubuntu is already there. If you don't want Ubuntu, Debian is a better option with deb. Why would you want to use it if you are not willing to spend time learning about it? I just feel that if you are not going to learn how to install Archlinux and configure anything, Pacman and APT are almost the same. I use Archlinux because Linux, Xorg, Fluxbox, Virtualbox, Firefox are all I need.

xcircle 2y ago

I prefer https://endeavouros.com https://endeavouros.com as an arch distribution