When I made a new linux install I chose Arch. I think for me the reasoning is thus. While I have a LOT of experience with unborking server linux installs, with desktop it’s just a pain to deal with. I previously used Manjaro which, while very easy to install, does obfuscate a lot of what happens behind the scenes. When it goes wrong, personally I found it harder to fix.
With Arch, beyond enough to give me a terminal and basic gnu tools, I’ve chosen what I install from then on. I think that means when things go wrong there’s a much higher chance I’ll know what it is and how to solve it.
Time will tell if this plan works out or not though :P
I’ve had the same path as you. Arch has been the simplest distro I’ve tried. And with archinstall it’s a breeze.
I’ve also found that Plasma 6 takes away most of the hassle with setting up a desktop - for my use case.
Been using a PC since Win 3.1 and it’s by far the most stable system I’ve ever had
This is what happens when you think manually partitioning disks and chrooting makes you leet.
Not so glum, chum
When I made a new linux install I chose Arch. I think for me the reasoning is thus. While I have a LOT of experience with unborking server linux installs, with desktop it’s just a pain to deal with. I previously used Manjaro which, while very easy to install, does obfuscate a lot of what happens behind the scenes. When it goes wrong, personally I found it harder to fix.
With Arch, beyond enough to give me a terminal and basic gnu tools, I’ve chosen what I install from then on. I think that means when things go wrong there’s a much higher chance I’ll know what it is and how to solve it.
Time will tell if this plan works out or not though :P
I’ve had the same path as you. Arch has been the simplest distro I’ve tried. And with archinstall it’s a breeze.
I’ve also found that Plasma 6 takes away most of the hassle with setting up a desktop - for my use case.
Been using a PC since Win 3.1 and it’s by far the most stable system I’ve ever had