Personal Manjaro is a different beast. it fill some holes, a bridge to Arch on one side but for lot of stuf is subjective. its also doing there own stuf also. As endeavouros does also there own stuf. both cant be compared, what ever you like or not is pretty subjective.
Manjaro was my beginning point to arcbased distro like antergos
But is kinda difficult to explain. but on hype-nation manjaro sure is trending
as long a distro got a story and a place in eco system its fine. distroâs can be pretty subjective.
fairly to say my wife is using manjaroâŚsetup her pamac to dont use a password, she didnt ask for help , that is fine for me. must fairly to say my kalu also dont ask for password because im lazy
This may be an insignificant issue, I just wonder about a.) stability and b.) update volume in regards the number of packages included in various distros.
opensuse tumbleweed 12,000 +
arch 11,000 +
manjaro 11,000+
kaos <1,000
bluestar 1,300+
arco 1,200+
Kaos & manjaro are both different beast. Arco is fully arch based like endeavouros. but difference of kaos & manjaro is, Manjaro most stuf needed from Arch beside the videodrivers / kernels systemd there is some they compiled of there own. in unstable can be edgy overtime even more then arch it self. Kaos, uses the arch-base as base but is mostly from scratch. thats a huge difference of both of them also kaos is more complete to QT. chakra i dont know, i read is semi-rolling model. as stability it can be subjective.
Do those numbers include AUR packages? In my experience tumbleweed didnât have all the software packages i needed, but AUR had them most of the time.
sorry, my research into package numbers was only as deep as the package lists contained on distrowatch. The significance (and accuracy) of the numbers may be questionable. I do recall sensing during my time using openSUSE Tumbleweed that the updates seemed the most frequent compared to several other distros.
I tried Manjaro a long time ago and while it worked, I didnât like how far away it was from pure Arch. Seeing how they are now going down the route of pushing things like FreeOffice, Iâm glad I never stuck with them. I really see Manjaro imploding in the not-to-distant future.
Next up was Antergos, which I used for a LONG time up until the project ended. Like you, I loved pamac and when I first started using EOS, I was lost without it. But believe me, youâll soon forget about it and take to yay and pacman like a fish to water. I love how EOS is even closer to pure Arch than Antergos was.
i stil love a gui but i prefer a gui that works nice with pacman. other then that viewing only packages from aur or other mirrors i have also a gui for. because personal to view software with PKGBROWSER is nice you view stuf fom aur or select mirrors/repo to view in. but is just a viewer stil. like pamac otherhand it get support for snap etc⌠But you have those to look in history of manjaro, they always wanted to create a bin type of software you can run side by side , doesnt mather version. but on that point is it dificult to setup because its was also a idea of Roland (founder) bit this case, supporting snap or flatpak would be more mainstream. you got to love it or hate it
Especially since the Arch page has two searchable databases, one for repo and one for AUR. Basically as easy as searching with Pamac but in your browser.
each package you can see when it was updated , unmodifieded files even search in aur general also see which packages is explicit installed or installed as depency, which is orphaned is pretty much.
Tried out Manjaro after Antergos released the info they wouldnât continue the distribution.
For me, it feels somewhat off; I definitely will go back to a more Arch-centric distro.
BUT the installation process using Manjaro-Architect (CLI) was the BEST I encountered in the past year (I regularly test arch based distros and their installers).
No problem installing LVMonLUKS with a separate home partition, working hibernation with a swap file and a choice of I think up to ten DE.
I really hope EndeavourOS will eventually have a competitive installer. For me, this is the main selling point of any distribution.
I know users prefer GUI installers, but Calamares just doesnât get the job done if you want anything else than a basic installation.
But itâs still in its early development phase so I will regularly check back for progress in this regard.
Sounds good - but isnât this âCalamares netinstallerâ basically still calamares? The open issues on GitHub regarding LVM and LUKS donât look very reassuring.
But donât get me wrong, Iâm still rooting for EOS and looking forward to testing your implementation. If you can get my standard encryption scheme done you would sure be ahead of the competition
Like us the Calamares project is an evolving project, weâll take it one step at a time. Since Cnchi gave up on us weâre trying to head in a new direction.