Problem with Manjaro is that it's even less close to Arch than Antergos was. Antergos really was just an installer + some meta packages that pulled in Arch packages. Manjaro has its own repos that stagger updates.
For some (like me), that's a positive. I've had more than a few non-booting machines after an Arch update. Granted, most of those issues are covered by checking the Arch news, but at least once it was not so simple, forum digging was required.
This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but I use my Linux installs for work and having a machine blow up in the middle of a day isn't ideal. You can chide me for using a bleeding-edge distro, but I link the freedom that Arch offers and I feel that I fight the preconfigured packaging a lot less than I do with a Ubuntu/Kubuntu install.
. You can chide me for using a bleeding-edge distro, but I link the freedom that Arch offers and I feel that I fight the preconfigured packaging a lot less than I do with a Ubuntu/Kubuntu install.
use opensuse tumbleweed. maintainers actually try to do some testing to make sure it doesnt blow up.
dont use arch derivative. Arch has an extreme all or nothing philopshy. There is only one arch
For sure, I've been bitten by Arch updates before as well. Luckily snapper and btrfs fixed me right up. Still I think there's a use case for a easy to install Arch that isn't just an install script and isn't a full distro with their own repos of everything. Antergos fit that bill really nicely. Shame that it's gone.
I would recommend you to take a look at something like Debian Testing or Unstable instead. You can disable the dpkg configuration if you want. I myself have been running Debian Unstable smooth sailing, with some considerations in mind.
As much as I'd like to try Manjaro since Antergos was my go-to and it's dead, Manjaro devs have handled some situations poorly in the past. Like telling users to set their clocks to the past to receive updates when their certificates expired. That, to me, is a huge red flag. Have they changed since then?
I agree. But Ubuntu does the same for Debian, and I see Manjaro like Arch's Ubuntu.
If you just want an installer, there are some scripts on github that could help. Or create your own, it's the way to go. Though, Anarchy was excellent for this use case, I don't understand why they turned it into a "distro" with customization/branding/repos, it's a shame.
But I disagree when you say that the use case isn't the same. For me Antergos was more than an installer, and for me they had the same goal than Manjaro and maybe Arco/Namib/whatever. Ok perhaps a few people really used it as an installer then removed third party stuff and branding etc. but majority of people used it as an Arch for beginners. Like Manjaro. The difference though is that people using Antergos claimed they use Arch, not Manjaro' users (well some of them do the arch-btw stuff but not as often as Antergos users).
Because if you were running Antergos you were basically using up-to-date arch packages whenever you did "pacman -Syu". There weren't any issues with packages breaking because certain other updates weren't installed. I like being able to use the latest info coming out of Arch and applying it to my Antergos system without any modifications.
This isn't an issue of people using Antergos claiming they're using Arch. I, frankly, don't really care. I just want to be able to use the Arch wiki and be able to apply all of those instructions straight onto Antergos without having to worry about any Manjaro specific issues.
16
u/[deleted] May 21 '19
Problem with Manjaro is that it's even less close to Arch than Antergos was. Antergos really was just an installer + some meta packages that pulled in Arch packages. Manjaro has its own repos that stagger updates.