I just wanted the workflow, ok?

Endeavour does it for me.

No nonsense arch setup without any bells and whistles.

Yeah, I get that. I do, however, really like how FireDragon comes with a lot of the extension I'd like to use, and with searx as the default web search. It also takes almost no time to switch to a much better KDE layout as opposed to the seemingly script kiddie dr4a6onized default.
- I wouldn’t use firedragon. It is a very outdated fork of librewolf, which is hardened even more. While librewolf is only a few days behind regular Firefox, firedragon sometimes is months behind making it a horrible choice for security.
  Edit: seems to no longer be the case
- You can't install FireDragon on any other Linux distribution?

EndeavourOS ftw imo

In any case, I end up wasting all that saved time on the semiannual rewrite of my neovim config anyway.

be satisfied with neovim config
see someone has created a shiny new config on github
add similar stuff your config
break everything
spend a week fixing everything
be satisfied with neovim config
repeat the above steps indefinitely
What's some neovim config you always keep?
- Over the years of using Vim both professionally and for my own uses, I've learned to just install LunarVim and only add a handful of packages/overrides. Otherwise I just waste too much time tinkering and not doing the things I need to.
- I usually keep most of the config. I just move them around to make it more comprehensive. The only time I made a huge change during a rewrite was when I learnt about treesitter textobjects.
Same until I started using helix, where my only config is adding another language server and setting a theme
- welp, there goes my Tuesday.
I agree, also thanks neovim 0.10 making me spent half a day tracking that obscure line that was throwing errors.

Those two days aren’t really spent configuring, they’re spent learning.

First time maybe, the second time not really
- second time doesn’t take two days, but yeah you’re right.
- Idk, install arch, then pull make files and dot files from git, wham bam, done how I like it on no time flat.
Learning to install Arch, now that's a transferable skill.
- If you actually try to understand what's happening, I think it's one of the best ways to learn how a system is composed, at least if you install manually. What's a partition, file system, what does mounting do, chroots, you name it.
  I don't use Arch anymore but still think it's a great distro to learn the basics while still having the luxury of new binary packages. Manual Arch install abstracts basically nothing away from you, for better or for worse.
  Currently on NixOS, I'd say while its engineering is better overall, the things you learn there are much more distribution-specific or maybe concept-specific and often not applicable to other distributions.
  I guess there are also probably ways to install e.g. Debian manually, I've never seen instructions for it though as there was always the focus on the installer, and frankly I'm not a big fan of apt and all. It always seemed to be much more convoluted than pacman plus it does a lot of stuff for you, whether you want it or not was my impression.

What about just using archinstall?

Took me 5 minutes.
- I mostly appreciate the pre-installed browser that takes many less steps to harden than a fresh install.
- Quoting the great Michael Scott: That's what she said.
That's like reaching the top of Mount Everest with oxygen and fixed ropes. You can only brag until you talk to a /real/ climber.
- archinstall saves you like <15 minutes of boilerplate
- You can if you break it.
Doesn't work well enough for a novice. I went back to Manjaro.
- Why use arch based distro if enabling AUR breaks it in no time?

I was once checking out Garuda, because the name popped up a handful of times. Outside of the absolutely repulsive front page, the moment i saw unmarked and unexplained “fun scripts” in the installer, i unplugged the installer

Very fair. I'm a far cry from an advanced user - I know just enough to be dangerous to myself, and didn't see that. As I said in another comment, though, I do like that the default browser is somewhat hardened and uses a decent searx instance as the default search. It does seem to be marketed towards teenagers, though, unfortunately.
- It’s not even really about how advanced you are. Using something more trustworthy, and something you can depend on, is always better. For arch(-based) distributions, i would always recommend Endeavour. Plain Arch will just do it too, if you can follow instructions as listed

2 days?

You guys stop configuring?

Endevouros

Or you could use something stable

I Syu every other day and I literally cannot remember the last time I had to fix anything in my Arch setup (outside of initial setup)
- almost every time I Syu something breaks.
- But you get updates frequently. You could have a system that you can setup automatic updates that happen infrequently
Arch is pretty stable and often more usable than something based on Debian from my experience fedoras better but has so many more bugs compared to arch. I chose arch because everything was broken on Debian and fedora based stuff. Leave me alone with your philosophy about "out dates software is stable software".
Not everyone uses a ten year old system and bugs in graphical software that exist when the new version of Debian drops exists for pretty much the whole releases lifecycle from my experience and that's painful.
- Debian is literally one of the most stable systems out there. It only pails in comparison to RHEL and RHEL like systems but the stability difference isn't huge. Arch on the other hand you get updates daily and they create breaking changes.
- Arch is pretty stable
  No, it's a rolling release. Stable means that behaviours don't change during a support cycle of a major version. A rolling release can't be stable since it doesn't have major versions.

Two days are worth the years you're gonna spend living with that system.

I installed arch last night in less than 20 minutes. The longest part was figuring out how to connect WiFi from the terminal. But I googled it and it was easy.

Quickly having a working system vs. Quick debugging if something inevitably doesn't work.

Only two days for arch btw? That's nuts.

arch makes doing complex things easier though

I didn't spend 20 minutes setting up Arch.

I use Arch btw.

Garuda breaking after one update

So just don't update it then
- It doesn't tell you up front that it's going to break

I config like 30 mins a day its never good

I'm installing Debian next time. Arch is OK but it breaks too often and keeping everything working in an Arch installation is a full time job. Void Linux is like Arch but more stable. Voids weakness is that some of the underlying libraries are different (something about multilib and glibc I think) and there are certain Linux programs that can never run in void and you can't get them. Monodevelop and virtual box for example. I might have to switch to something else soon just because I need this stuff. (yes I know about qemu and bochs, yes I know about compiling basic c# programs via the command line, and all of that is unsuitable for my use case). Void seems to be a great choice as long as you don't need to use Monodevelop or virtualbox though. It's great at gaming once you switch to x11.

There's a good chance Debian will have a harder time playing steam games due to older mesa drivers or something but it might be a necessary tradeoff.

Edit: also, WTF is the font situation in Void Linux? Half my webpages are have some shitty font front the 90s instead of whatever the normal font is and most of my pdfs look weird and can't be printed because of it. I have just about every single thing in Void repository with the word "font" installed yet I still have to get out my Ubuntu laptop every time I want to print a pdf.

I use arch as a daily driver. Very seldom have any issues, and any issues I do have are from the software. I.e. mesa breaking vaapi, grub breaking boot, etc.
Use stagnant software if you can't spare 5 minutes once in a while rolling back problematic packages.
I use Debian Stable as my daily driver. No issues with steam. No issues with old packages, everything just works and is, I'm not sure why I'm shocked at this, kinda stable.
- I've had a Debian server in my basement for 4 or 5 years. I've encountered a total of 2 entire issues the entire time I've had that running. One of which was actual bullshit that I'm still pissed about but the other issue I eventually fixed on my own. It has worked well enough that Debian deserves a go at being a daily driver next time I do an os reinstall.
  I really really wish I could come up with a command line script way to issue a command that makes the computer reconnect to the wifi without human intervention of any kind, without so much as even a single ui password dialog, but that's not a distro specific thing. I use iwctl right now, it seems to be the most reliable and I've tried them all.
This isn't actually true. They offer both glibc and musl these days. Glibc is the normal one most Linux distros use. Musl doesn't work with some things, but is still desirable to some people for various reasons. Flatpak could be used to work around this, as it should pull in whatever libc that the program needs. Distrobox would also work. Though again this only applies of using the musl libc version.
Another potential sore point is not using systemd init. There are some things dependant on systemd, though generally there are packages which act as a replacement for whatever systemd functionality is needed.
I still have no idea what's wrong with Voids fonts though. You are on your own there!

Try Endeavour OS. You only need to do ******* to turn Endeavour into Arch.

We all have different definitions of "working system". I call a first time boot into alpine linux (after installing docs and ditching busybox) or openbsd a fully working system.

10 minutes, that's the time i need to configure my system from A to Z, and after that all i do most of the time is updating it.

Yeah, it is obvious hyperbole.

Immediately get to work with Manjaro✅

until it violently shits itself
- -native Arch, probably
Imagine using an arch based distro that dies on try using the AUR lol, why even bother?
- 1.It doesn't die
  2.The issue is blown super out of proportion
  3.Arch is more than AUR. It's a bleeding edge, very lightweight distro. And both characteristics go into Manjaro - granted, there's a two week review period and some stuff installed on top. At the end, you get a super snappy, super nice system with a lot of value added on top of it.
- I'm a Linux noob, using Manjo for almost two years no prob One time an update needed manual intervention and I've fucked it up. But afaik on Arch this also happens so 🤷‍♂️