manjaro review

[saturnian]

Sounds really good: Manjaro Linux 0.8.10 KDE and XFCE Review: Bang on target release after release!

 

I might take a look at Manjaro at some point. I like what I've read about it. But I'm enjoying Arch quite a bit and I think I'll just stick with that for now. Even if I eventually added Manjaro, I'd want to keep Arch, I think.

[securitybreach]

Just remember that Manjaro is not Archlinux. No matter how much it strives to be....

[saturnian]

I know, I know...

 

Still, it looks like it might be a very good distro. I think it would be interesting to get in a good couple of years with it and see for myself how things go. I'm loving Arch, but I have no problem with the existence of Arch derivatives.

[securitybreach]

I do not either until their users claim that they are running Arch when they are not. It becomes a pain when your attempting to help them with something.

[saturnian]

I'm still running ArchBang and Bridge Linux, which are both closer to Arch than Manjaro is, but I have enough sense to know that they are also "not Arch," and I certainly don't go to the Arch forums asking for help with ArchBang or Bridge. But those projects are interesting, too.

 

Sort of along the same lines (but not exactly the same kind of thing), I ran Debian Stable alongside Ubuntu LTS and Linux Mint LTS releases for a long time. Just to see for myself. Well, in the end, I dropped Mint -- Mint's great, but I found that I preferred Debian and Ubuntu. Personal preference. Anyway, seeing what Ubuntu and Mint do (and don't do!), I believe that gave me a greater appreciation for Debian, and I think it has helped me learn more about Debian systems in general.

 

I feel that running Arch derivatives alongside Arch (not instead of Arch) could have the same effect (others may disagree). I think it has already happened here, running Bridge and ArchBang alongside Arch Linux. I see some interesting differences, and I also find that I prefer my Arch installation over the others.

 

For me, the "compare and contrast" method is a great approach to learning. I'm kinda interested in seeing how running Manjaro compares to running Arch over the long term. Maybe I'd learn one or two useful things along the way.

[securitybreach]

Well when you go through a bunch of questions trying to help someone and you keep hitting your head against a wall. Then you ask for some info and realize that they are not even running Archlinux; it get's aggravating to say the least. I enjoy helping others (with any distro) as long as I know what I am helping them with.

[saturnian]

Well when you go through a bunch of questions trying to help someone and you keep hitting your head against a wall. Then you ask for some info and realize that they are not even running Archlinux; it get's aggravating to say the least. I enjoy helping others (with any distro) as long as I know what I am helping them with.

 

Ugh. Yeah, I can kinda see how that would be frustrating, aggravating. It makes me wonder... if someone is using an Arch derivative, why would they even bother to post questions about it at the Arch forums or whatever? I don't quite see how it's possible to miss the point that something like Manjaro is not Arch. It was very clear to me when I was first trying out Bridge Linux, Chakra, and ArchBang that I'd need to go to those distros' forums for help and for any questions. (BATL is a good place for stuff like that, too.) I'm sure I would have understood the same thing if I had been trying out Manjaro.

 

It doesn't take much more than a short visit to the Arch Linux forums and wiki to get the message about all this, seems to me -- even if the user has been "misled" by whatever impression Manjaro might be trying to give, it seems very clear how things stand from an Arch user's point of view. I don't see how anyone could miss it.

[abarbarian]

if someone is using an Arch derivative, why would they even bother to post questions about it at the Arch forums or whatever? I don't quite see how it's possible to miss the point that something like Manjaro is not Arch.

 

A = because there are a lot of small minded petty folk around with no manners.

[securitybreach]

Exactly

Ugh. Yeah, I can kinda see how that would be frustrating, aggravating. It makes me wonder... if someone is using an Arch derivative, why would they even bother to post questions about it at the Arch forums or whatever? I don't quite see how it's possible to miss the point that something like Manjaro is not Arch. It was very clear to me when I was first trying out Bridge Linux, Chakra, and ArchBang that I'd need to go to those distros' forums for help and for any questions. (BATL is a good place for stuff like that, too.) I'm sure I would have understood the same thing if I had been trying out Manjaro.

 

It doesn't take much more than a short visit to the Arch Linux forums and wiki to get the message about all this, seems to me -- even if the user has been "misled" by whatever impression Manjaro might be trying to give, it seems very clear how things stand from an Arch user's point of view. I don't see how anyone could miss it.

 

Exactly

[sunrat]

We get the same at Debian User Forums. Recently someone posted a problem and it turned out they used Handy Linux. I said what Linux?

Regularly we get posts about many Debian based distros like Tails, Crunch, LMDE, SolydXK, even *buntu. They usually get a polite referral to the distro's forums, but some posters in a bad mood will just tell them to p*** off.

[abarbarian]

I do not really have a problem with folk asking for help with a derivative to do with the base of the os as many derivatives have very small forums etc. So asking for general linux help anywhere is reasonable.

 

The pig ignorants who post,

 

"use Majaro"

 

"I use Manjaro"

 

"Manjaro is better than Arch"

 

or some such as their entire posts really are the scum of the universe. That is like walking down the street and spitting in folks faces and laughing about it.

 

Naturally when I post " use Window Maker" that is obviously quality helpful advice of the best kind

[sunrat]

Naturally when I post " use Window Maker" that is obviously quality helpful advice of the best kind

Not quite. The best is "use siduction."

[Robert]

I recently tried several Manjaro Live distos and found XFCE one of very few distros of 2013-14 that actually worked correctly, for me meaning upping the DPI worked fine and larger mouse cursors could be chosen. It's one I will try on a hard drive when I have time and a free drive. I have tried around 25-30 distros that I was unable to accomplish this "simple" task on so this was big news to me.

[BarryB]

Barry waddles up to soapbox_ Manjaro is a good distro...so is Arch...that isnt the problem. Most of the really frustrating questions come from mostly inexperience users. It is the same for RPM based distros..."I downloaded openmandriva package XXXX why doesnt it work in Mageia....or I did this fix in PCLinuOS but it borked my opensuse install" see it all the time. Yes we guide them to fourms that would probably help more...but sometimes I think we leave them with a poor example of why..."That distro is trying to be like us...but it isnt good, so ask them" is really not an answer. (And this is Linux wide..no one distro fourm can lay claim) The other issue is small minded folks, they appear to be more experienced, but for some reason hava a need to start issues...well that really aren't issues...those are the ones that ask what I call setup questions...( If they are both RPM why dont they work...or my fav..."why doesn't Arch install like Manjaro..." I am willing to bet in most cases the answer is known...the sad part is we can get drawn into these types of questions...and try to defend something that really doesnt need to be defended. the other part that is truely sad is new users reading fourms trying to get help are exposed to this useless banter....and decide linux isn't worth it.

 

FWIW..I run both Arch and Manjaro...and find both a ton of fun...along with Magiea...opensuse..openmandriva...PCLinuxOS..Salix...Bodhi..fedora.etc etc

 

 

Barry waddles away from soapbox.

[securitybreach]

I completely agree Barry but one of my issues is when people come and say: "Look at my new Archlinux install" when in fact they just installed Manjaro. Then you have to go through the notions of explaining why they are not the same and that they use different repos, different upgrade parth, etc. I run across this all the time...

[BarryB]

Yeah, I feel for you...and in a way I think the Arch world is the roughest in that confusion at this point...kind of like when ubuntu and debian where gettting through their "Ubuntu is based on Debian , but not excatly debian...growth pains. Im not saying anyone should not be frustrated at times...especially when IMO both Distros are making the efforts to ensure a clear line between themselves. What I have seen is that it is difficult sometimes to get people to understand a fork...and it really doesn't mean...if "B" is derived from "A" then everything from A will work with B... Most in this group have the experience and know that...but Im willing to bet more one of us had a slght hard time with that when we began..( of course I could have been the only one :'( )

All we can do on our part is to try and keep educating folks as we go...understanding that the background work by the user might not be complete...or even attempted. There is a down side to that...some will not do the background work at all, most of us have been the family, neighbor IT" person" and have run into the "I have you, why should I learn" and that does not stop, just because someone decide to give linux a fling...and that also carries into foums as well IMO.

I actually handle those much better than the mindless disto wars that pop-up, IMO those are more destructive than anything Windows has ever done...

[abarbarian]

I'm willing to bet more one of us had a slght hard time with that when we began..

 

I had a great deal of trouble with understanding why when looking for a solution to a problem code and file/folder locations posted in forums or on the net did not work for me.It was quite a while before I realised that some files do not exist on Arch that exist on say Debian. So some code posted about a solution in Debian saying do this with this location just did not work for my Arch. Also different distros ship with different tools so once again some code solutions do not work as the needed tools are not installed, and even if you install the tools they will not work as the code examples are asking them to do stuff the distro is not set up to do.

This sort of scenario applied to all the distros I tried until the penny dropped.My first hurdle was figuring out what the heck "#" and "$" meant at the front of code.

 

[saturnian]

In any case, looking at the Manjaro site, I don't see them claiming that Manjaro is Arch -- only that it's based on Arch. Maybe things have been stated differently in the past, I don't know.

[securitybreach]

In any case, looking at the Manjaro site, I don't see them claiming that Manjaro is Arch -- only that it's based on Arch. Maybe things have been stated differently in the past, I don't know.

 

I think they changed that later on but a lot of the users simply think that they are the same thing. I never go to the Manjaro forums but I do see this frequently on my Archlinux Community on G+. So I imagine something has these people believing that there is not a difference besides the installer.

[saturnian]

Article titles like this certainly don't help: Manjaro Linux: Arch Linux For Newbies

 

People just need to do more reading, I guess. The folks you're talking about have probably not read something like MANJARO: A DIFFERENT KIND OF BEAST!, or seen threads like this one: https://forum.manjar...hp?topic=5091.0

 

Manjaro also provides update packs (see http://manjaro.org/2...-is-online-now/), which reminds of Linux Mint Debian Edition and a few other distros. I see pros and cons about update packs.

 

Also, I'm assuming that it's still true that with Manjaro, the packages follow this path: Arch Repos > Manjaro Unstable > Manjaro Testing > Manjaro Stable.

 

So, package management is a major difference between the two distros; from my perspective as someone relatively new to Arch and Arch derivatives, that's something I'd mention to Manjaro users who are think that Manjaro=Arch. But I'd also direct them to this wiki article, or course: https://wiki.archlin...hp/The_Arch_Way

 

Especially the "User-centric" section:

 

Whereas many GNU/Linux distributions attempt to be more user-friendly, Arch Linux has always been, and shall always remain user-centric.

 

Arch Linux targets and accommodates competent GNU/Linux users by giving them complete control and responsibility over the system.

 

Arch Linux users fully manage the system on their own. The system itself will offer little assistance, except for a simple set of maintenance tools that are designed to perfectly relay the user's commands to the system. Arch developers do not expend energy re-inventing GUI system tools; Arch is founded upon sensible design and excellent documentation.

 

This user-centric design necessarily implies a certain "do-it-yourself" approach to using the Arch distribution. Rather than pursuing assistance or requesting a new feature to be implemented by developers, Arch Linux users have a tendency to solve problems themselves and generously share the results with the community and development team – a "do first, then ask" philosophy. This is especially true for user-contributed packages found in the Arch User Repository – the official Arch Linux repository for community-maintained packages.

 

Anyway, it seems to me that if you're someone who wants to run Manjaro or another Arch derivative, it's really important to have some understanding of how those derivative differ from Arch Linux. I'm even tempted to say that Arch derivatives are better for users who have run Arch than they are for folks who have never run it. But one cool thing about trying out an Arch derivative first is that it might result in your wanting to run the real thing. That's what happened with me; I think what struck me most was the coolness of pacman, which I got a feel for by using Bridge Linux, Chakra, and ArchBang. The fantastic Arch Wiki was also a huge selling point for me.

 

But another thing for me was seeing some things done in those derivatives that you wouldn't necessarily see if you installed Arch on your own. What "they" think is good for you instead of what you'd really want, that sort of thing. All that might be fine for a certain type of user, but many others are gonna say, "Okay, that's nice, but I really want Arch Linux." If you look at it like that, Arch derivatives can be a very positive thing for Arch Linux itself.

[abarbarian]

I do not think any sensible Arch user has any problem with any derivative as long as they make it clear that they are different from Arch.

New users are not a problem either, most folk are usually happy to help.Not everyone has been taught to help themselves so total duh Q's are ok too.

The problem lies with the small minded dickhead trolls who keep on posting, who only post to cause grief.

Edited June 24, 2014 by abarbarian

[securitybreach]

I do not think any sensible Arch user has any problem with any derivative as long as they make it clear that they are different from Arch.

New users are not a problem either, most folk are usually happy to help.Not everyone has been taught to help themselves so total duh Q's are ok too.

The problem lies with the small minded dickhead trolls who keep on posting who only post to cause grief.

 

Exactly

 

I really enjoy helping others as long as I know what I am dealing with.