EndeavourOS Is Hoping To Be The Successor To Antergos - Convenient To Use Arch Linux

[Panda_Wrist]

Arch not having an installer, is what makes installing Arch nice. You can set it up exactly how you want it. Most installers can't handle different partition setups even in the advance configure settings. Most installers I have seen only give you the option for grub. Arch just lets you do what ever you want. And doing a very basic install of Arch is still extremely easy, but I guess since that requires you having just a little bit of basic knowledge of a linux system or reading the wiki, it has way to difficult for some people. OH MY GOD I HAVE TO PUT FORTH SOME SORT OF EFFORT INSTEAD OF CLICKING NEXT THIS IS TO HARD ARCH SUCKS!!!!!!! that how everyone that dislikes Arch not having an installer sounds. But you know what, there are tons of linux distros, if you don't like that Arch doesn't have an installer, don't use it. You have many many other choices.

[hwertz]

You should understand, Arch even in the one-sentence description "expects the user to be willing to make some effort to understand the system's operation." It reminds me a little of gentoo (but without having to build EVERYTHING from source.) (Disclaimer, I've used gentoo but not Arch -- it just seems that way from it's description.) That's the beauty of these Linux distros -- you like Arch except some "rough edges" (which the Arch people won't fix because they view these rough edges as features?) You can use an Arch-based distro that fixes those rough edges.

Zanny: 100% agreed. If I have a technical issue, even if it IS on Ubuntu, I tend to look in an Arch or Gentoo forum first. All too often, the Ubuntu forum has someone saying "this isn't working" and no solution, the Arch and Gentoo forums will have a good technical description of the problem, and often times a solution -- both because the users are more technically minded, and also because of the wider variety of install combinations (so if there's a bug with, say, systemd -- blech! -- ~100% of Ubuntu users will have systemd; the Arch and Gentoo users can find that ones with systemd are having the same problem, ones without systemd are not.)

[Guest]

This completely misses the point. Arch is easy to instal as is, and it's as user friendly as distros can get. Documentation holds the user's hand through the process of installation and beyond. Any effort to make Arch more "accessible" is a waste of time and effort.

[starshipeleven]

get your shit together arch

Oh for the love of Zod.

That's a clear design decision in a distro where you also have to configure everything manually, again by design.

Arch has not and has NEVER marketed itself as easy to use, it's about having more understanding and control over what the system does.

So there is no shit to get together.

[HarlemSquirrel]

When I set out to try Arch Linux years ago I first read a handful of articles about what Arch is and the Arch Way. I knew I was engaging in an educational adventure. It took a few installs to figure out what I wanted and how best to get there. I burned several hours and emptied several cans of beer but learned a ton along the way.

I looked to Antergos to get up and running quickly after re-installing Arch for the like 99th time on my Ryzen 1800X after it broke due to firmware updates or my own curiosity. I loved the choices for desktop environment and a few other packages like LibreOffice. I always had trouble with GNOME and lightdm so after installing I swapped in gdm.

The Arch community could probably get together and compose a reasonable CLI script to take care of disk formatting, boot loader, user creation, graphics drivers, and a DE. I don't imagine the script would be terribly long and would just be available as a quick and dirty way to get up and running. But, where's the fun in that?

[dlq84]

the one time I thought "maybe I'll see what this arch stuff is about" I booted the install disk, got dropped to a cli and thought WTF is this shit? and proceeded to delete the VM.

I don't want to work all that hard to get my OS installed. I really don't. We have not needed to do that for nearly 20 years now.

get your shit together arch

It's obviously not made for you then. Just choose another distro.

[sophisticles]

EndeavourOS is a wasted endeavor because there already exists a convenient to use Arch Linux based distro, a little known project called Manjaro. It hasn't been around that long, and it's not that popular so it's likely these guys haven't heard of it, but if they look around they may find a reference to it somewhere and they may find that they do not have to reinvent the wheel, especially when the wheel they invent it invariably going to be made of inferior rubber.

[loganj]

i would really like an arch installer especially when i have no clue what other packages are needed to run kde/gnome/cinnamon/whatever
the arch wiki is good but not perfect. its more like a place to get you started
forums? what the point when you a blinking ursor and you prefer not to wait for a few hours in hope someone will answer. and don't forget to pray that they won't act as a might lord that is bugged by your problem cause i've seen a lot of such people on this "nice" arch forum.

[randomsalad]

TBH i honestly cant understand how they manage to have all the latest stuff and work with no issues.

It's not all without issues. Things do break. What they do have going for them however, is strong community support that helps them find problems and fix them within a reasonable timeframe. As an example, dmenu was broken for me earlier today (segfaulting when feeding it with dmenu_path and typing anything) but that has since been fixed. Key point however, is that in order to remain stable you have to keep the entire system up-to-date since packages are only maintained to work with the latest versions of everything.

[DanL]

EndeavourOS is a wasted endeavor because there already exists a convenient to use Arch Linux based distro, a little known project called Manjaro.

Manjaro is a bit different in its goals, having stable repositories and such.