Our friend eznix is not happy with Garuda

I watched his 1st video and I kind of understand where he’s coming from. Also, I do agree with him. So posting it in our forums too, to see what you guys have to say.

Video 1, in this his really triggered :smiley:

Video 2, breaking things down and a long review.

Please watch both.

1 Like

Never heard of eznix :sweat_smile:


So what’s wrong? I don’t think I posted this under the technical area it’s under the pub. Kind of confused.

1 Like

Nothing at all. What happens after the OP is what is important. The OP has the potential to turn into distro bashing. Just a friendly reminder.


Oh yeah… my intention was not that. If that happens please all by means remove this or lock the thread.


In response to the first video:

  • Garuda attracts many entry level Linux users - I agree
  • Garuda is only popular because of it’s looks - It isn’t only the looks, it is the ease of use and tooling
  • Garuda is fragile judging by the forum posts - It is a support forum, of course there are many people reporting problems

Garuda isn’t for everyone. It is for someone who wants a system that gets you started quickly and makes it easy to make a lot of things work without having to have a full understanding of those things.

There is no way I am watching a 40+ minute video about why a distro sucks…


I’d watch a +40 minute video of why “EndeavourOS Sucks” just so I can tell them how absolutely wrong they are about everything :slight_smile:


I don’t watch videos. Think it is my age.


And stuf as forks is also known in linux world… manjaro forked mint welcome and ubu mate forked the manjaro version etc etc… i dont hop only use what i know to use…Freedom is here everywhere.

1 Like

I migrated to EOS from Garuda and if they had a forum comparable to this one, I’d still be using it. I did break my Garuda install a couple of times but it was my fault–I was tinkering. Garuda reminds me of a hand-built muscle car–it invites tinkering! I know my own limitations so I keep all my files backed up. I lost a little bit of time reinstalling but I gained valuable experience swimming out of my depth. Garuda is interesting, innovative, and yes–very pretty to look at. It probably does attract people who shouldn’t use it. Freedom includes the freedom to act against one’s own best interests!


I think eznix was having trouble even trying to explain his view. Made me laugh. I understand some of his points. I think Garuda is a different distro and not for everyone. Some new users can be challenging with their lack of understanding no doubt.

1 Like

I find it interesting that my videos are getting some attention on EndeavourOS forums. I see everyone is keeping it civil and not bashing me or Garuda. I do have a tendency to ramble on and on. I try not to repeat myself incessantly, and the 12 minute rant did do that since it was not a planned video but a knee-jerk reaction to forum posts. The 41 minute video does get into several specific problems I have with Garuda and the way the distro is built and run. I did not want the video to turn into an hour plus and I neglected to talk about the theme and style issues, as they are less important and up to personal tastes. However, it is still fun to see some discussion on this forum. Thanks. :slight_smile:


Forks are fine, all well and good. My problem with Garuda developers is that they systematically removed all attributions to the original project from where they forked code. The example I showed in the 41 minute video left one email address, but no mention of where the code came from and what project originated that code. If that behavior is abiding by the license of the original code, it still is obnoxious and offensive.

I said i understood his point about Garuda, the forum and the users he was referring to. It is an Arch distro for certain users. I didn’t have any problem with that or the videos.

This is more concerning, if true. If you can put together a list then this can be addressed (noone is going to scrub through a 40 minute video for that).

I’m a little disappointed by this. I’d like view Arch and its derivatives as a collective, and each one should be adding something to the ecosystem. There should not be competition, but rather collaboration. Arch, EnOS, and Garuda serve different purposes and different audiences, but the efforts are all in the same direction.


The author attribution appears intact in this example, but the originating project is completely ignored. Is this common practice? If so, I am disappointed. Please correct me if I am mistaken.

1 Like

What are you expecting to see in this source file?

1 Like

Some reference to the originating project from where the source was forked. Is that not usually done?

The project readme seems pretty clear: