Yeah, Fedora just hates my computers. Even GRUB installed through Fedora seems to have issues.
So Arch-based it was for me. It felt smooth than either Kubuntu, Ubuntu Studio, KDE Neon, or Fedora KDE!
I’m on 4 - 6 weeks of Void now and I have to admit I’m really loving it. Still love EOS, it lives on my laptop and will never go completely away, but falling into the Void has been good. Package selection is actually much better than I expected, it’s quite good, to the point I don’t miss the AUR too much.
I am absolutely not a Systemd hater, in fact I actually quite like it, but Runit is dang fast and simple.
Edit: Repos definitely need some upgrades though.
2 Likes
Same regarding Void. I built up a base install a few weeks ago and learned some new things that Arch takes care of. Void-packages is very interesting. The distro is geared for more experienced users and I don’t think I’d recommend it for end users. It’s definitely a terminal-centric distro and isn’t always the latest/greatest package-wise, which for most is likely OK.
I like the xbps tools, and xcheckrestart, which tells you which apps to restart after you install some new software and if your system is already up to date.
I’d like to try AntiX at some future point. EOS runs well on my other computer.
I use the Nix package manager to supplement the packages that aren’t in the Void repos. Of course you can build missing things from source, but using Nix on Void is usually quicker and simpler. However, you should install Nix via the instructions here: https://nixos.org/download.html. Nix itself is in the Void repos, but their package has some issues, so I install Nix the Nix way, not the Void way. Void does force one to learn Linux/GNU fundamentals, similar to Arch. It won’t hold your hand but if you know what you are doing or are willing to learn it will treat you well.
2 Likes
Each distribution has a favorite desktop environment with which it works optimally. At that time, e.g. Suse preferred KDE, then interestingly they switched to Gnome. MX Linux does the same with Xfce.
After having tried arch,*buntu,manjarno,fedora,solus,gentoo,endeavour,and finally lfs
i might be addicted to the aur and arch’s simplicity
so my answer would be arch and in the worst case scenario(an hypothical wipe of archlinux) gentoo (if i had a 16+ cores cpu) or something fun like freebsd
Probably pure Arch
I would have never thought of the Nix PM. Thanks for that! Yes, you are very much blank slating it with Void which is part of what I enjoyed. You definitely do need a good understanding of the fundamentals of what’s core to a distribution or you will not have a good time, but if you do it’s a fantastic, small base. It also, and I know this sounds stupid, just feels “old school” in a way. And I like that.
Of course, you could achieve same or similar with a vanilla Arch install.
1 Like
I started with Antergos, whose demise was the inspiration for EndeavourOS. Converting that install to vanilla Arch and later Endeavor was an amazing learning experience. I liked the fact that I could start with a reasonably complete install and then learn from that, vice starting with vanilla Arch and doing it all the Arch way. That being said, Void allows one to learn some different things than Arch, such as MUSL-C and Runit. Having the Arch experience behind me, I did the opposite order with Void, started with the minimum and built it to what I wanted. I like both distros.
4 Likes
I put my selection in Distrochooser and it could not recommend any distro for me 
Surprised to see 
was not in the list.
1 Like
At the time I made this post I realized Spiral Linux was making a very good distro based on Debian, and therefore about two months later it has become the one most likely to stick with if I cannot have EndeavourOS.
But there’s one obstacle, some of you already know what it is… cannot… resist… green… must… download… that OpenBox thing… argh! LOL actually didn’t, was fixed by Bunsen Labs Beryllium which is also based on Debian. 
I like Debian but now I have the option of not choosing it directly, instead choosing one of its “clones” that could do it better, such as “automatically” enabling 32-bit repositories to make it easier to install Wine. 
But be forewarned that it’s not always pleasant. My attempt to “use” siduction was ugly and if not, updating it was very slow, it took at least four hours including a brief power outage. Almost forgot, “gdialog” like ten times. It was irritating, no other distro did that to me before.
1 Like
I agree about your statements on spiral Linux. I’ve been exploring in VM
I have a basic bias against anything Debian based. I hate how slow and cumbersome apt seems to me. I just avoid it.
Really pacman seems the fastest to me, though rpm isn’t quite as bad as apt. Rpm is slow too, but it seems more robust. Apt packages often seem to have ‘issues’.
LOL I wrote that before noticing that there’s a new release up and announced on Distrowatch. WTF is with their subtitling of the releases?
It’s based on Debian “unstable” branch, yes, I should have been reminded a thousand times… so stop distro-hopping! 
If not EOS, I would probably use Linux Mint or Debian Sid.
1 Like
Lilidog, PCLinuxOS, Bodhi, AntiX, or Siduction.
Earlier in this thread, I once wrote that if I could no longer have EOS, I might get used to Manjaro. That I would like to partially recant herewith: I only know this much, that it will definitely be something based on Arch. In any case, I will not bother with rpm or deb. I left all that long ago …
3 Likes
Just tried out Siduction Kde. I’m impressed because it’s rolling and it’s on Debian unstable and has the 6.1 kernel. It works really well. Only complaint is it has a bit more Kde software that i don’t normally use. I’m not an lts kernel user normally.
1 Like
I didn’t find this at all. Matter of fact it’s very fast and works as well as EndeavourOS Kde which i use.
2 Likes
I have tried the new siduction xfce live and I found it to be fairly fast with running apps and downloading/installing apps. I plan on installing it to multiboot with my other distros tomorrow on my main laptop.