Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Manjaro 18.0 Released For An Easy-To-Use Arch Linux Desktop Experience

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Manjaro 18.0 Released For An Easy-To-Use Arch Linux Desktop Experience

    Phoronix: Manjaro 18.0 Released For An Easy-To-Use Arch Linux Desktop Experience

    For those looking at an easy-to-use Arch Linux desktop experience, Manjaro Linux -- like Antergos -- fills that void. Manjaro today is celebrating their big "18.0" release...

    http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?pag...-18.0-Released

  • #2
    I really believe that if a distro has its own package repository, developed its own GUI package manager, and even replaced the CLI package manager with their own, still calling using it a "easy-to-use Arch Linux desktop experience" is misleading at best. Maybe an "easy-to-use Linux desktop experience" would be more fitting.

    Comment


    • #3
      happy to see my favorite distro having a new version

      Originally posted by euler271 View Post
      I really believe that if a distro has its own package repository, developed its own GUI package manager, and even replaced the CLI package manager with their own, still calling using it a "easy-to-use Arch Linux desktop experience" is misleading at best. Maybe an "easy-to-use Linux desktop experience" would be more fitting.
      they didnt replace pacman, pamac cli exists but it is just an alternative, also most of the packages are still from arch

      Comment


      • #4
        Originally posted by euler271 View Post
        I really believe that if a distro has its own package repository, developed its own GUI package manager, and even replaced the CLI package manager with their own, still calling using it a "easy-to-use Arch Linux desktop experience" is misleading at best. Maybe an "easy-to-use Linux desktop experience" would be more fitting.
        Except the part where it's compatible with all things Arch, and requires all Things Arch when it comes to packages to work, don't start debates of semantics dude, it's pointless.

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Kivarnis View Post

          Except the part where it's compatible with all things Arch, and requires all Things Arch when it comes to packages to work, don't start debates of semantics dude, it's pointless.
          Arguing about pointlessness is pointless as well, however nobody will stop you from making the point. either way, pamac is a libalpm frontent, just like pacman. anyone would argue that reinventing the wheel, is a little weird, especially if that wheel is one of the main features of what constitutes a distribution, especially one like Arch, which doesnt have an specific DE.

          Comment


          • #6
            Oh cool, now I can have a distro with 4.19 kernel during install. That means internet access with MT76 wireless USB devices like I have by default now no extra work needed! Last I used their install media, it didn't support wireless on a macbook air though Needed internet access or more manual work with external files to get the driver for that working(which iirc, meant you couldn't use it during install and would have to pull updates afterwards).

            Originally posted by Kivarnis View Post

            Except the part where it's compatible with all things Arch, and requires all Things Arch when it comes to packages to work, don't start debates of semantics dude, it's pointless.
            Actually sometimes there are differences with Manjaro's repo such as with an openSSH release I think(Arch held back because of breakage/compatibility issues, while Manjaro pushed it forward in the name of security for which it got a bad reputation for not being serious about security in the past), another case in 2016 was holding back on an xorg update because of AMD users being affected, whereas with Arch you could enjoy the newer xorg if you were Intel/nvidia GPU user. I remember trying to use one of the AUR packages for xorg to get the newer version that was required to use a virtualization feature I wanted(spice related I think), but that caused alot of problems. Likewise, AUR packages sometimes lose compatibility from subtle differences, though it's usually only a temporary thing. With the openSSH update in 2017 I think several months many AUR packages that relied on the older version ABI would fail to install.

            That said, having used both, I tend to prefer Manjaro as it provides a nicer install experience and defaults that I prefer. One other advantage used to be the BFQ scheduler by default(the kernel they ship has few extras/differences), I remember not having a fun time with default font rendering back then with Gnome and Arch(I went with KDE with Manjaro, and that afaik does some font rendering stuff by itself?) and having to read quite a bit up on that where you'd get nice font rendering in many other distros. That said sticking to upstream and it's defaults is usually preferred.

            Comment


            • #7
              Originally posted by euler271 View Post

              Arguing about pointlessness is pointless as well, however nobody will stop you from making the point. either way, pamac is a libalpm frontent, just like pacman. anyone would argue that reinventing the wheel, is a little weird, especially if that wheel is one of the main features of what constitutes a distribution, especially one like Arch, which doesnt have an specific DE.
              nobody is stoping you in using pacman, good things is that pamac exist for those that prefer it. Having a 2nd tool for accesing packages doesnt make it less arch-based

              Comment


              • #8
                manjaro is awesome, Im glad it is improving

                Comment


                • #9
                  Originally posted by polarathene View Post
                  snip.
                  I didn't say identical, I said that is in fact, heavily based on Arch and not some crazy off shoot long distant cousin of a cousin.

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Kivarnis View Post

                    I didn't say identical, I said that is in fact, heavily based on Arch and not some crazy off shoot long distant cousin of a cousin.
                    > Except the part where it's compatible with all things Arch

                    That sounds like it implies you don't get compatibility issues like I described? It's effectively Arch for the most part, but the differences are enough that you won't get support from Arch communities majority of the time they're not too friendly about such users and consider the difference to be larger for some reason, even Antergos which iirc is more closer to Arch than Manjaro is.

                    I don't agree with Euler either, his comments would be better aimed at something like KaOS.

                    Comment

                    Working...
                    X