Why do vanilla Arch users say....?

I have run vanilla Arch for several years myself (that was a few years ago) but I just don’t find it worth my time anymore when you have EndeavourOS. I have never understood why vanilla Arch users come up these arguments about the manual Arch installation.

A few of the arguments I’ve heard:

  1. The manual Arch installation doesn’t take a lot of time if you know what you’re doing.
  2. You only install your system once every few years, you don’t install that often.
  3. You learn how your system works and you really get into your system by installing Arch manually.
  4. You should do a manual install if the archinstall script isn’t good enough for a custom partition setup.

My replies:

  1. Yeah sure but you can get to the same custom setup if you use an installer, be done faster and get to using your system. Your system is a tool not, the goal is not the installation.
  2. If you’ve installed Arch the manual way so many times you just don’t care for a manual installation anymore and again the goal install the installation but being able to use your system.
  3. Maybe the first few times you learn something new when you have to setup things you don’t have to setup when using a distribution with a graphical installer but after that you don’t really learn anything unless you to install and configure something different. Also mostly what you do is typing over commands in a wiki it’s not like you memorize them so that the next time you can do it out of memory without needing the wiki. Typing over a few commands is not really getting into your system. You still have to install all the dependencies of a desktop environment, yes you can choose to install the minimal package so you system doesn’t get “bloated” but you can still do the same after installation on an Arch-based distribution. Installing a display manager from the command-line during the installation process is not getting into your system. If you really want to learn and get into understanding how Linux distribution works than you have LFS. However that’s not for everyone and most users just want to install their system and get on with it, even a lot of Arch users.
  4. What’s the install script for then if you can’t even do a custom partition setup without it even crashing?

I’m sure there are some valid arguments for running vanilla Arch but most of the arguments I hear are just not true. What are your opinions on arguments like these or do you have some real arguments why someone would want to run vanilla Arch, please share I’m interested in hearing them? :slight_smile:


Arch is a DIY distro, so I understand why they promote the manual installation, it allows the user to better understand the inner workings of the OS and in case of problems the user should have a basic understanding on how to troubleshoot the system to get it back in a working state.

I did personally start using Linux a couple years ago with Manjaro, then when they decided to maintain their version of Mesa with the proprietary codecs disabled I jumped ship and installed EOS. In the meantime I installed Arch inside a VM just to tinker with it and I guess I learned some basic, but useful informations.

I also believe that an OS is just a tool, not a cult, but for distros like Arch, Gentoo and even Debian I’d argue that having a better understanding of how to partition a drive, how to restore a bootloader in case it breaks (thanks GRUB for the continuous lessons /s), how SystemD operates and stuff like that can really help you out.


That part I get but I don’t get all the arguments why doing it manually is so much better than a graphical installer. If something breaks with EndeavourOS I still will have an idea of were to look because I mostly know the components that are involved because I have run Linux for such a long time and because I have experience with Arch as well. However after so much DIY I rather just install and get on with it, I guess everyone is different. That’s what makes EndeavourOS a good distribution for me.

I guess I can just close this topic, even after all these years I seem to sometimes forget that different distributions have different philosophies :man_facepalming:. Thanks for reminding me!

1 Like

I value my time and it is not no ones business is it a script or my mom who installs my system.

I guess some of those neckbeards with anine avatar in their profile just feel them selfs more superior when they can google ‘n’ paste commands from Arch wiki to get TTY.

But then again Arch is a DIY distro so anyone should take some time to learn how sh*t work because it is not that basic cake from super market. Or even better use some normal human distro like Fedora or Buntu where everything is ready.

I am not a smartest person but I love to test and learn stuff and then help others best way I can and that’s why I really respect this purple community.

BTW : I did not mean to be hatefull anyone who watch anime :smiley: I just wanted to express how much I hate this poisonous aspect of todays social media where everyone thinks that they are center of universe.



Often times I wish the graphical installers had a button, which said stop after the partitioning after all the file systems are mounted, and allow the installer to tinker, then restart the actual install process. I often want to reorganize the disk layout, and it s much easier to do in then, rather than later. As such I often just do a manual install, or resort to a minimal install, and have to retrofit after, but I would like to let the installer do the basic work.

1 Like

They aren’t really arguments honestly,.

If you want to truly be the overseer of your system, Arch is the way to go.

Endeavour isn’t Arch, so there’s no reason to compare them the way you are trying to. You don’t have to use it.

But there is one caveat to remember.

Endeavour could go away tomorrow, and Arch will be fine. If Arch went away tomorrow, we’re out too.

That being said, use whatever you like.


:astonished: :open_mouth:
Woah woah woah WOAH WOAH THERE!!!
:scream: :scream_cat: :exploding_head:



Would any EndeavourOS user that switched to Arch still be welcome here in the EndeavourOS community. Just asking in case I decide I would want to run Arch again and because I really dislike the Arch forums?

Of course :enos_flag: Some on the forum didn’t even use eos actually :slightly_smiling_face:


Yup. No one really cares that much although if you’re asking for help, you should ask on your respective forum.

I don’t even use Arch everyday anymore, I mostly use Fedora and thus far even I’m still somewhat welcome lol. Ish.

Although I’m sure there’s a few who would like to see me go.

1 Like

I haven’t needed help in a long time, it’s only when there is a general/bug problem that I respond on forums and of course the social aspect of it.

I’ve decided to just stay with using EndeavourOS since it works for me with the advantages of Arch and a rolling release distribution and the community around EndeavourOS is awesome. If EndeavourOS ever retires then I will then decide what I do then but I hope that never happens :slight_smile:

If you want to truly be in control of your system, LFS is the way to go. :stuck_out_tongue:


I would rather help my wife clean than do that.


Cleaning or cooking, no problem, but clothes ironing … (I hate this)


For me, there was value in installing Arch “the Arch way”. That being said, EndeavourOS is Arch for people who don’t need to prove they can install Arch…and the forums are nicer here.


Well I’ve done Debian netinst installations (even on Sun Microsystems hardware), Gentoo compiled from source code, and vanilla Arch-Linux. I enjoyed the process, learned much about many things Linux. What does all that prove? That I’m good at following instructions. That’s OK, I’m a desktop user and hobbyist, if I ever get to the point where I don’t think there’s more to learn, that’s about the time I’ll get a ‘reality check’. :wink:


I think most of the "regulars"here either run Arch currently, or used to.

1 Like

OMG Gentoo…glad I tried it but…the compiling…so…much…compiling…

Also, “vanilla” Arch is an oxymoron. If it’s done correctly, it’s a one off product. There’s no default Arch even if you use the installer. It drives me up the wall to hear “vanilla”.

I don’t know, I think “vanilla Arch” means, “Just plain Arch” because there are a few Arch-based distros around. Same as with “vanilla Debian”.