Hello, I've been using manjaro xfce for a few months now and I'm starting to wonder if I would enjoy any other distros more, I'm not really a technical person but I really do enjoy linux so i'm willing to learn new things.
I'm looking for a distro that is minimal while not being too complex, (Manjaro keeps breaking itself for a laugth)
Please leave distro recommendations in the comments below I will be sure to play with them in live boot or in a Vm.
Thank you and have a good day, Sebo
#Update: I tryed openSUSE Tumbleweed, EndevourOS and Arch and so far I'm enjoying arch the most (I installed it with help of the wiki and a youtube guide)
EndeavourOS, or vanilla Arch Linux by using the Archinstall script that comes with the iso file (or the old fashioned way of following the Arch Wiki and doing it manually through the command line, if you're up for it). Personally, I'd go with Endeavour. Not only because I'm lazy, it's rock solid in general, and easy to install via the GUI installer (by comparison, the Archinstall interface is...passable, IMO), Archinstall can sometimes fail, and it can be...weird with what it leavws out (ex: I tried Archinall and XFCE once. Still had to install the user dictionaries post installation. Never found out if it still does that in the newer iso's).
Do keep in mind that Endeavour is on the light-ish side, you might need to install a couple of things to make it feel more feature complete, and also you'll have to use the terminal for updating the system, installing stuff, and maintanance--tho nothing is stopping you from grabbing Pamac of the AUR (which is set up and ready to go on first boot) and doing stuff through there instead like you did in Manjaro.
I went from Manjaro to Arch. Installed by command line (took a few tries to get it done... ) I tried their installer but it wasn't very good. Have also run Endeavour on a second pc for a while but I prefer pure Arch.
Is there any noticeable difference between endeavourOS and arch after install¿? From what I have heard and in my limited time using arch or endeavourOS, post install, things seem more or less the same.
The Arch install is much lighter, Endeavour like many other linuxes, installs programs that you may or may not require. I prefer adding programd when I require them
Doesn't endeavourOS give an option to select(or unselect) packages which are to be installed
- Show
this may not be what you have in mind when you said no but this does offer some level of customization of the install. Yes arch is much more configurable during install though
If you like Manjaro but wish it would stop breaking, try EndevourOS ( EOS ).
EOS does not have graphical package management. Try pacseek ( yay -S pacseek ). You can install pamac but please do not. It brings Manjaro levels of quality with it.
He wanted something stable.. Arch based systems require you to read the release notes each time you upgrade to make sure there's nothing special you must do. Those who are unaware of this requirement often end up with broken systems. Also I wouldn't call Arch based systems without GUI configuration tools not being too complex... Arch is for those who like to tinker, edit lots of config text files and read man pages and wiki entries.
Personally, I like Arch Arcos and even Manjaro (Probably EOS as well, but it doesn't play well with Ventoy) - but I wouldn't recommend it to someone who just wants things to work out of the box with minimal tinkering and not require special attention when updating.
Arch is for those who like to tinker, edit lots of config text files and read man pages and wiki entries.
Basically how every linux user should be.
I have never had to babysit an update on Endeavour. It's extremely user friendly, especially if they're already used to using the dumpster-fire that is Manjaro...
How long have you been using it, and on how many computers?
From the Arch wiki:
Before upgrading, users are expected to visit the Arch Linux home page to check the latest news, or alternatively subscribe to the RSS feed or the arch-announce mailing list. When updates require out-of-the-ordinary user intervention (more than what can be handled simply by following the instructions given by pacman), an appropriate news post will be made.
Before upgrading fundamental software (such as the kernel, xorg, systemd, or glibc) to a new version, look over the appropriate forum to see if there have been any reported problems.
Users must equally be aware that upgrading packages can raise unexpected problems that could need immediate intervention; therefore, it is discouraged to upgrade a stable system shortly before it is required for carrying out an important task. Instead, wait to upgrade until there is enough time available to resolve any post-upgrade issues.
So unless Endeavour devs are doing anything special to make sure you can safely upgrade without checking the Arch news (and AFAIK, they don't, like most Arch based distros), you should probably check it. Of course it's a matter of chance if your system is the one that gets hit by some bug or conflict, YMMV, but eventually you'd hit a snag if you ignore Arch's devs advice.
I've been using arch-based distros on multiple systems for the about 5 years now. I never read release notes, and have also never had any system-breaking updates. Occasionally I get problems with AUR packages but they usually solve themselves by doing a clean-build, reinstall, or just by waiting a day for a dependency to update. In the rare case that none of those work, there's usually a message on the AUR package page providing an exact fix. I usually just run "yay -Syu" once a day, recently I've been doing it once per week and still haven't had any real problems with it.
I'm learning this the hard way with Manjaro, but also learning a lot about Linux along the way. Pulseaudio was just completely fucked and I had to switch to pipewire to get it to stop crashing lol
I'd avoid Arch or Arch based distros if you don't want to always tinker with the system to keep it running.
I think Fedora best fits your needs.
If you want to stick with Arch based distros then Endeavour otherwise openSUSE Tumbleweed.
Fedora's XFCE spin if you're happy with your current desktop environment. If you want to try a different Desktop, try the standard Workstation version, or the KDE spin if you're really into customization. Stable, up to date, and easy to maintain
(Manjaro keeps breaking itself for a laugth)
Are you perhaps using the AUR more than you should on a Manjaro installation? Just for your information; because Manjaro holds back packages for a couple of weeks, any package from the AUR might conflict with those 'outdated' packages and thus cause some breakage. If you really need those packages, then you should consider container solutions like Distrobox to resolve this. Note that trying things like installing a custom kernel won't work through Distrobox.
So the main options probably consist of:
-
Just plain Arch;
archinstallhas made it a lot easier to install. Furthermore, after everything is set and done, it can literally be Manjaro without outdated packages and less bugs etc, or actually whatever you would like your Linux installation to be. Setting up is the most daunting part though. Fortunately, the Arch Wiki does an excellent job in providing a resource at every set of the journey. Recommended if you're not scared of setting up your system from a blank slate. -
Any other Arch-based distro, really. There are a ton of recommendations found in the other comments and there's even more if you check out Distrowatch for Arch-based distros. If you kinda know what you'd want from a future system, but can't be bothered with setting it up directly from Arch, then this might be recommended based on the specifics of your demands and to what degree existing distros align to that. For whatever it's worth, I think Garuda Linux is an interesting option for those that want to move on from Manjaro. Similary to Manjaro, it's opinionated on how your system is/should be configured. That's why it's also one of the few Arch-based distros (like Manjaro) that offers -out of the box- the means to rollback to a working system whenever anything unfortunate befalls your system, Garuda achieves this through coming pre-configured with Btrfs+Snapper. It should be noted, though, that Garuda is considered bloated by some. However only you can decide for yourself if their offering is bloated to you or not. So check out its Xfce edition -or any that sound interesting to you- for yourself, if you're interested. If you think it's interesting, but are still too much bothered by the bloat, then perhaps their Lite versions are more to your liking.
There are a lot of options beyond Arch-based distros. However, as I don't know what made you gravitate towards Manjaro in the first place and what you've come to (dis)like since, it's hard to pinpoint what exactly you'd like. If the AUR has been your main reason for using Manjaro in the first place, then it's important to note that Distrobox also grants access to the AUR from any of the other popular distros out there. So you're not confined to just using Arch(-based distros) unless you really need some custom kernel that is somehow only available in the AUR.
- If you checked out Manjaro for its unsuccessful attempt at providing a stable rolling release, then you should check out the most successful attempt with openSUSE Tumbleweed. It has a respectable amount of packages and enables users through OBS (OpenSUSE Build Service) to extend this significantly. Its installer offers the option to go for a minimal installation.
- If rolling release has scarred you, but you still want up-to-date packages, then consider Fedora. Huge community, AUR-like repo in COPR and once again a very respectable amount of packages make it definitely worth a mention. It offers the so-called Fedora Everything ISO (Network Installer) that acts as the installer for minimal systems.
-
Arch and Arch-based distributions (like Manjaro, EndeavourOS, Garuda ecc.) will teach you to do maintenance to your OS to keep it working: they're powered by bleeding edge packages and those for sure break way more often than other distros.
If you ever get tired of this thing, Debian is the exact opposite side of the spectrum: you have older software in your repositories but that's very well tested and it will hardly ever break. And if you ever need the latest applications, there's always Flathub.
This is the peaceful life I chose for myself.Manjaro may lead you to believe that Arch distros bteak. It is not Arch, it is Manjaro.
For me, Arch or EndevourOS have been very stable. Manjaro was / is a time-bomb.
Yes, yes yes. As a person who's used EndeavorOS for at least 3 years, if it breaks, it's because I broke something, (like accidentally deleting my DE), not because my apps went to dependency hell.
Arch distros still require you to read the release notes before updating. It's not a hassle free affair, and those who don't do it are bound to break their system once in a while.
During the 3 years I spent on Endeavour it happened a couple times that new packages would break something: once with ALSA and once with PipeWire, so mainline packages and not something from the AUR. I managed to get things fixed but they've been both busy afternoons.
Small inconveniences aside, I had a really great time with that distribution
If you're not a technical person, Fedora. I'd choose GNOME (ie the default) or KDE Plasma Wayland though. Wayland is far more secure than X(org), and that's what XFCE uses.
if you are willing for forget the minimal aspects, I would recommand garuda linux, it has an horrendous default theme and pretend to be for gamers, but in reality it is a solid arch install with good gui tools for updates and system maintenance, and it also has things pre-configured that would take a while for you to do, like the magical btrfs snapshots, which means if you or an update break something, you can make your system go back in time without losing any personal data all from the grub menu
I second Garuda. Much better than Manjaro tbh, and they don't have 2,763 controversies surrounding them.
Nobara Linux (also aimed for gamers) has similar btrfs snapshots though not as intuitive and it’s not enabled by default also it’s based on Fedora. I have the KDE flavor as my main OS but I’ve never used the snapshot feature yet.
Manjaro is not breaking it self. You are and you have to learn to prevent that. Going with some immutable is not going to teach you much.
Why is Manjaro shitting the bed when other distros aren't? EndeavorOS isn't, Garuda isn't, even regular Arch isn't.
I suspect it has something to do with them deleting the pacman lock file in their system package update scripts to run a nested instance of pacman before while the first instance is still running...
All to avoid their users needing to manually run a few changes that the Arch Devs have labeled as need manual intervention.
