this post was submitted on 29 Jan 2026
49 points (90.2% liked)

Linux

61675 readers
450 users here now

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

Linux is a family of open source Unix-like operating systems based on the Linux kernel, an operating system kernel first released on September 17, 1991 by Linus Torvalds. Linux is typically packaged in a Linux distribution (or distro for short).

Distributions include the Linux kernel and supporting system software and libraries, many of which are provided by the GNU Project. Many Linux distributions use the word "Linux" in their name, but the Free Software Foundation uses the name GNU/Linux to emphasize the importance of GNU software, causing some controversy.

Rules

Related Communities

Community icon by Alpár-Etele Méder, licensed under CC BY 3.0

founded 6 years ago
MODERATORS
 

I've been using Debian (and formerly Ubuntu) for many years.

But I've been wanting to tell people that I use Arch.

I've been considering the following distros:

  • Arch
  • Cachy
  • Manjaro
  • Any others?

I'm leaning towards Arch or Cachy. This is for a mediocre laptop that I'm planning to use as a media center: Kodi, Retroarch, Steam, etc. Should I even be using Arch for this? Maybe Debian is more stable...

Sorry if this has been asked before. Thanks for any tips!

top 50 comments
sorted by: hot top controversial new old
[–] exu@feditown.com 3 points 9 hours ago

Arch if you want to do the install completely by yourself and/or have some setup that can't be replicated by the usual installers.

EndeavourOS/Cachy if you want a simple GUI installer for Arch, but you don't get bragging rights.

Don't use Manjaro

[–] _stranger_@lemmy.world 2 points 11 hours ago

Used to be Manjaro, because it's got sane opinions and I'm not looking to make maintaining that machine a new hobby. I don't mind the curated "almost" rolling release, but they're getting worse about simple things (like maintaining their own certs) and I've decided to move on.

[–] vaionko@sopuli.xyz 6 points 15 hours ago (1 children)

Just plain Arch, been using it for the past 5 years. Haven't told anyone unless askes though.

[–] CrabAndBroom@lemmy.ml 1 points 5 hours ago

Same here, just plain Arch (BTW). I also don't mention it IRL unless someone asks, and they never have lol.

[–] mech@feddit.org 6 points 16 hours ago

Here, I fixed your post for you:

I’ve been wanting to tell people that I use Arch.

I’ve been considering the following distros:

  • Arch
  • Not Arch
  • Not Arch
  • Any others?

I’m leaning towards Arch or Not Arch.

[–] inzen@lemmy.world 3 points 17 hours ago

I use cachy os for the optimizations on modern hardware and access to newer packages. I use it on ny pc for gaming and laptop for development. I find it more convenient than arch. But I can't say if it is better.

[–] rav3n@ttrpg.network 2 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Manjaro is the best, but you'll have to see it for yourself.

Don't trust the "wisdom of the crowd." It does not exist.

[–] communist@lemmy.frozeninferno.xyz 2 points 16 hours ago (2 children)
[–] Fizz@lemmy.nz 2 points 7 hours ago (1 children)

Most of that is pedantic. Its a solid distro with a sane out of the box configuration. However you shouldnt use the AUR on it unless you know what you're doing.

Most of it speaks to their lack of competency. Issues like this are less frequent on arch and the whole point of this distro is that It's supposed to be an easier arch.

it is in fact harder arch.

[–] rav3n@ttrpg.network 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

Yeah, none of that matters.

On the other hand, https://www.bitdefender.com/en-us/blog/hotforsecurity/tampered-linux-mint-iso-linked-on-official-website

Nobody mentions this because it's not 'cool' and doesn't make you fit in with losers/strangers on the internet.

All of it matters, hard disagree, even if none of them are individually that bad it shows an insane degree of incompetence

the linux mint thing happened one time and was resolved, it shows no history of being incompetent, that's why it isn't mentioned, it's hardly worth mention, one security breach in the entire history of the project is not a big deal.

furthermore i personally don't think mint is a good distro either so, whatever.

[–] glitching@lemmy.ml 2 points 17 hours ago (3 children)

can someone who runs arch btw on weak hardware, like dual-core U-series i5 and such, tell me how they're handling AUR and friends? every time I bring that up I get downvotes as if I'm some MICROS~1 agent paid to besmirch arch btw's good name and whatnot...

the idea that I hafta build and compile shit on a puny dual-core in 2026 is fucking ludicrous to me, never mind the bloat and cruft from all the build tools and deps for every possible stack. so what obvious solution am I missing? like, how do you handle a full system upgrade, say you got like ten things from AUR in addition to regular packages, what does that look like?

[–] ozymandias117@lemmy.world 1 points 2 hours ago

Back in 2015, I was using Arch on a single core Intel Atom 1.5GHz processor with 1GiB of RAM

Most packages came from binary packages, and the AUR was the exception when I needed something specific outside of the main repos

[–] spacemanspiffy@lemmy.world 4 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

One suggestion is to look for -bin versions of the packages you want. Those are precompiled and should install only marginally slower than a regular pacman package.

[–] glitching@lemmy.ml 1 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

first time I heard of this, thanks. so running it thusly it's no different than a copr or apt repo?

[–] spacemanspiffy@lemmy.world 1 points 15 hours ago

Not quite as that its user-created and submitted.

But yeah lots of packages have a -bin counterpart that will install a lot quicker than compiling it for yourself.

[–] Jaaaardvark@lemmy.zip 2 points 14 hours ago* (last edited 14 hours ago) (1 children)

You can use an AUR mirror repo to avoid compiling. Chaotic looks like the most popular one.

[–] glitching@lemmy.ml 1 points 13 hours ago

thanks, this looks good, gonna try it out with my next build

[–] FirmDistribution@lemmy.world 45 points 1 day ago

But I’ve been wanting to tell people that I use Arch.

Biblically accurate arch user

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 12 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Stay away from Manjaro.

I've heard great things about Endeavor and Cachy, but personally use Garuda. Highly recommend it.

[–] spicehoarder@lemmy.zip 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Tried Manjaro for a few months before it broke. EndeavourOS has been treating me well for about a year now.

[–] Crozekiel@lemmy.zip 3 points 11 hours ago

Same. Tried manjaro twice, fully broken after a few months every time. Thought Linux was just too much work and I wasn't smart enough. Been on Garuda for over 3 years without issue.

I feel like manjaro keeps people from adopting Linux. I have friends that will argue about my Linux experience because they tried manjaro and think that's how all Linux is.

[–] SaltyIceteaMaker@lemmy.ml 1 points 17 hours ago

aight let me tell you MY arch experience. itll be a long one.

i first installed arch with the install script and later manually, i ran this setup for quite some time, and as time goes, small erros cascade into bigger ones. it got to the point where i was reconfiguring system configs every week to fix something that broke from an update. the thing that ultimately caused the most trouble was converting my existing ext4 system to btrfs. this caused all sorts of issue primarily with gaming performance (i had to disable cpu boosting in order to not have constant lag spikes for example). this old system was a mess held together with duct tape and hope, it broke with EVERY update, and not at small scales. at some point i had to reinstall grub everytime i changed something in my boot order. Ultimately i decided 2 days ago it was time for a reinstall. i tried installing it normally, i followed the official install instructions and got greeted by a grub shell. i fucked something up during the install, so i decided fuck it, i will use archinstall script again. then it took me legit 6 hours to get my system running in a way i could use it, tgen the next day an additional 3 to get everything set up so i can game with proper OBS recording and all.

now i have a perfectly functioning Arch setup. and a lot more performance (even tho the setup should be the same, like i really dont know what was wrong with my old setup)

arch WILL be a hassle at some point. in turn you get bleeding edge packages, no bloat, complete customisation, a great learning opportunity, the AUR, and (if properly set up) great performance.

i like arch. i wouldnt use anything else.

[–] DaveX64@lemmy.ca 3 points 22 hours ago

EndeavourOS is my first choice, CachyOS is my second choice.

[–] xvertigox@lemmy.world 6 points 1 day ago
[–] ashenone@lemmy.ml 23 points 1 day ago

EndeavorOS is my go to for arch based systems. But with the archinstall script I'd say just give vanilla a go

[–] thingsiplay@lemmy.ml 10 points 1 day ago (1 children)

EndeavourOS. It's like Arch, but a bit easier with a few automation and gui stuff builtin. It's still heavy on terminal usage and it comes light out of the box. I switched from Manjaro to EndeavourOS, because Manjaro gave me some problems (especially their package manager and because of the AUR too, and I didn't like the maintainers, no further comment). It's my daily driver for years now. I use it for everything, daily usage, little programming, gaming on Steam and especially RetroArch too. I'm a huge RetroArch fan. :-) So if you plan to use base Archlinux or Manjaro, then I can recommend to use EndeavourOS a lot.

Cachy OS is probably a good choice too, because their focus on performance optimizations. But they do also have a bit more, let's say bloat, out of the box and their branding is a bit strong it seems. It's a bit farther away from base Archlinux than EndeavourOS is.

[–] dessalines@lemmy.ml 9 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Same, I use endeavorOS. Its just arch with a nice installer.

[–] FauxLiving@lemmy.world 5 points 1 day ago

I was teaching a friend Linux, by ways of running through the manual Arch installation process and finally got to be on the other side of the 'Ok, now that we've spent a ton of time doing this the hard way, here(endeavorOS) is how you use tools to do it in 3 seconds'.

[–] HexagonSun@lemmy.zip 14 points 1 day ago (6 children)

I was using Endeavour, btw. Needed almost zero tinkering and was good to go straight away.

But I run Linux on an ancient 2012 MacBook Pro, so eventually swapped over to Debian, btw.

load more comments (6 replies)
[–] CheesyFox@lemmy.sdf.org 7 points 1 day ago (2 children)

i use cachyos, runs swimmingly for me. I'm not sure arch is good for your usecase tho.

Mediacenter/homeserver? I'd personally choose something like fedora, but debian sounds fine too

[–] ada@piefed.blahaj.zone 1 points 16 hours ago

I use cachyos on my homelab/media server, but that's mostly because I've got more familiarity with it, which makes troubleshooting easier

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] mub@lemmy.ml 11 points 1 day ago

EndeavourOS is the way to go, btw.

[–] Echolynx@lemmy.zip 2 points 1 day ago

I tried it, liked it, bricked my system, and now I enjoy EndeavourOS because it's simple and easy.

[–] oscardejarjayes@hexbear.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

I use Arch btw. The best Arch distro is just normal Arch linux. If you really want stuff from other "Arch distros", you can add their repos or customize your configs. There's nothing you can do in an Arch distro you can't do with Arch itself.

[–] oscardejarjayes@hexbear.net 3 points 1 day ago

Also, Manjaro bad. Cachy, EndeavourOS etc. are fine.

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 5 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Don't use Manjaro it's a wildly unstable piece of shit

[–] rav3n@ttrpg.network 0 points 16 hours ago (1 children)

I've been using it for 5+ years with no issues specific to Manjaro.

Arch on the other hand has intervention notices on its front page. Manjaro holds updates back a bit so they don't have to deal with the bleeding edge of Arch.

[–] buckykat@hexbear.net 1 points 9 hours ago

In one year of using Manjaro I had updates completely break the GUI and drop me to a terminal twice

[–] Veraxis@lemmy.world 4 points 1 day ago

I use plain Arch for desktop, but for servers I use headless debian. A media center is sort of in between, so up to you. In terms of resource usage on an older laptop, I expect the choice of DE would matter more.

Wait...so you're looking for a solution with zero problems because of...clout or something? I don't get it.

If you like Debian, just stay with Debian. Especially if you're not familiar with what running Arch really means in the deeper sense. Mostly that the guardrails are off, in a sense.

CachyOS puts a ton of work into adding UX helpers that makes it pretty user friendly, but it's still going to have a lot of manual intervention required, but that's a feature to some.

If you have an AMD laptop, maybe look into installing SteamOS and Kodi as a non-steam app. That could be your sweet spot.

[–] LeFantome@programming.dev 6 points 1 day ago (1 children)

Probably not a universal answer as you are optimizing for different things.

I will say that EndeavourOS is essentially vanilla Arch once installed. If you really love configuring everything yourself, vanilla Arch is what you are looking for. If you like Arch but just want to fire up a system with sensible defaults, EndeavourOS adds a lot of value without corrupting the purity of the base system.

So, my vote is for EndeavourOS.

Cachy adds the most additional functionality but also changes the base system the most. If you have a T2 MacBook, this is the best option for sure.

I would avoid Manjaro.

Garuda has fans. A bit much for me.

load more comments (1 replies)
[–] HelloRoot@lemy.lol 8 points 1 day ago

I prefer plain old arch

[–] shittydwarf@piefed.social 6 points 1 day ago

I use Arch btw. It's quite touchy, definitely not the best distro. Do it

load more comments
view more: next ›