I’m a little bit underwhelmed, I thought that based off the fact so many people seem to make using this distro their personality I expected… well, more I guess?

Once the basic stuff is set-up, like wifi, a few basic packages, a desktop environment/window manager, and a bit of desktop environment and terminal customisation, then that’s it. Nothing special, just a Linux distribution with less default programs and occasionally having to look up how to install a hardware driver or something if you need to use bluetooth for the first time or something like that.

Am I missing something? How can I make using Arch Linux my personality when once it’s set up it’s just like any other computer?

What exactly is it that people obsess over? The desktop environment and terminal customisation? Setting up NetworkManager with nmcli? Using Vim to edit a .conf file?

  • cupboard@kbin.earth
    71·
    5 months ago

    It’s amazing that people criticize Windows security with .exe’s and then install packages from external repositories with the security of “trust in the repository”.

    As with almost every case of these sorts of comparisons, these are likely separate groups of people holding separate groups of opinions.

    I don’t use Arch anymore, but when I did I found that the AUR was really useful to quickly install niche applications that would take ages to be approved on to an official repository. Often those would be made by the application developers themselves or members of the community. I would personally vet the packaging script myself, but I’m sure many wouldn’t - and that’s fine. As with most software, there’s some trust involved and often you assume that if you’re installing from a reputable repository it’s going to be fine. If people aren’t vetting the installation scripts and are installing from random repositories, that’s really their problem. I’m glad the possibility existed and it’s the one thing I’ve missed in distros I’ve used since then.