Manjaro is the distro I’ve used for the longest (like 7 years) and it was mostly fine, until I started using AUR, which you shouldn’t if you use Manjaro because it will cause problems. Holding packages for 2 weeks also cause problems (hence the AUR issue), it doesn’t make it stable. However, if you don’t use AUR, it should be fine. Though just FYI, if you want Arch-based there are better distros out there. If you’re happy with it, there is no need to change.
I have two go-to choices for Arch-based. EndeavourOS is basically what everyone want and expect from Manjaro, Arch with a GUI installer, no bloat, easy to use. You can even install Pamac and use it if that’s convenient for you. Artix comes systemd-free, you can install OpenRC, runit etc. It’s faster for my old laptop.
There is also Archcraft. It might look like a student project (maybe it is), but it’s an easy way to use Arch if you’re comfortable with their design choices. This one also has really nice small scripts here and there.
@muhyb I use EndeavourOS myself, but I was wondering if there’s an Arch based distro that is a bit more stable and that I can recommend to people but still allows for using AUR without much trouble.
The vast majority of Arch derivates are still Arch with some candy on top. Endeavour for example is just an installer, a default package selection, a handful of non-essential packages of their own and some desktop eye-candy – in other words the absolute minimum so it can be called a distinct distro. But it’s very much Arch inside.
Manjaro uses Arch as an upstream distro but modifies packages extensively, uses its graphical installer to actually autodetect and install everything a machine might need by default, has designed an user-friendly package manager interface on top of pamac, adds a driver manager with autodetect, a kernel manager and so on.
Unfortunately this puts Manjaro on the hatelist for two groups: a section of the Arch community who hate anything that makes Arch less hardcore, and Linux newbs that get tricked by Manjaro’s self-claim of “user friendly” and end up bricking their system then go around telling everybody how much it sucks and how “it just broke”.
Ironically, if you leave Manjaro the fuck alone and don’t do dumb stuff like use a non-LTS kernel or switch to the non-stable branches or install critical system components from AUR etc. it tends to be super-stable. Unfortunately it tends to attract users for all the wrong reasons.
To answer your question, to recommend it to people it depends a lot on the type of people. I’m an experienced Linux user, I know what stuff to not do and what to not install from AUR etc. At the other extreme I have completely Linux-clueless family members using Manjaro perfectly fine because they don’t have sudo rights and they can’t fuck it up. But there’s a type of Linux user that falls in between that’s going to mess around and screw up and then blame the distro for things that if they did on Arch they’d get told to GTFO – and I think those people should not use Manjaro or any Arch distro because they’re dumb and hateful and Arch-based stuff requires a bit of brain and a willingness to learn.
I’m quite happy with EndeavourOS and last time I had a problem, it was a GRUB problem and they changed to systemd-boot by default after that. Other than this, never had problems since. To be honest, I stopped recommending Arch-based to people unless they’re somewhat experienced, otherwise I recommend Linux Mint. However, EndeavourOS is what I recommend if someone wants a GUI installer for Arch and I don’t think there is a better option yet.
I have 77 AUR packages installed as we speak. There are no issues with AUR and Manjaro’s delayed packages. AUR are source packages. They will compile against whatever is installed.
Occasionally an installed AUR package breaks because I don’t update them automatically and the system libs have moved too far away from the binary I compiled. I rebuild it and that’s it.
Obviously, you shouldn’t install anything from AUR that will take the system down with it. This is true for any Arch distro.
In theory an AUR package can require an Arch package version that’s not in Manjaro yet. I’ve never had that happen in 4 years and dozens of AUR packages. If it ever did I’d either install an older version of the AUR package or get a flatpak version.
Don’t remember what packages caused problems for me but I had to repair it via tty quite a time. Not updating AUR packages automatically is actually a nice workaround to prevent system breakage which I was also doing it, until it started to cause problems more often. Maybe they fixed it I don’t know (though highly doubt it because of the way they do it), haven’t used Manjaro for 4 years. Then I thought about that, why would I need to deal with these kind of things if I can use my system up-to-date with every part of it. No one uses Manjaro because it’s stable, people use it because it was the only “Arch with GUI” they know at the time. Now we have a lot of these and some of them are better than Manjaro. But again, if you’re happy with Manjaro there is no need to change. I was happy until I wasn’t because of Manjaro’s structural problems (like they nuked AUR once). It’s not a bad thing to recommend a better option if you know one.
I’ve started using Manjaro 4 years ago so basically I picked up where you left.
The situation seems to have reversed, nowadays there are plenty of “arch installers” like you said but Manjaro is actually a “stable Arch” alternative… provided you actually want that and don’t do anything to rock the boat. Using flatpak instead of AUR when possible can help further.
I guess the key point there, using Manjaro as Manjaro, not as Arch. It can be stable that way since they also have their own repos. And I agree that using flatpaks instead of AUR on Manjaro would be better. Though at this point, if I am to switch distros, I would go for Void I guess. It’s actually nice to hear that Manjaro seems more stable now.
My desktop machine would like to disagree.
Manjaro is the distro I’ve used for the longest (like 7 years) and it was mostly fine, until I started using AUR, which you shouldn’t if you use Manjaro because it will cause problems. Holding packages for 2 weeks also cause problems (hence the AUR issue), it doesn’t make it stable. However, if you don’t use AUR, it should be fine. Though just FYI, if you want Arch-based there are better distros out there. If you’re happy with it, there is no need to change.
@muhyb What arch based distros would you recommend?
I have two go-to choices for Arch-based. EndeavourOS is basically what everyone want and expect from Manjaro, Arch with a GUI installer, no bloat, easy to use. You can even install Pamac and use it if that’s convenient for you. Artix comes systemd-free, you can install OpenRC, runit etc. It’s faster for my old laptop.
There is also Archcraft. It might look like a student project (maybe it is), but it’s an easy way to use Arch if you’re comfortable with their design choices. This one also has really nice small scripts here and there.
@muhyb I use EndeavourOS myself, but I was wondering if there’s an Arch based distro that is a bit more stable and that I can recommend to people but still allows for using AUR without much trouble.
The vast majority of Arch derivates are still Arch with some candy on top. Endeavour for example is just an installer, a default package selection, a handful of non-essential packages of their own and some desktop eye-candy – in other words the absolute minimum so it can be called a distinct distro. But it’s very much Arch inside.
Manjaro uses Arch as an upstream distro but modifies packages extensively, uses its graphical installer to actually autodetect and install everything a machine might need by default, has designed an user-friendly package manager interface on top of pamac, adds a driver manager with autodetect, a kernel manager and so on.
Unfortunately this puts Manjaro on the hatelist for two groups: a section of the Arch community who hate anything that makes Arch less hardcore, and Linux newbs that get tricked by Manjaro’s self-claim of “user friendly” and end up bricking their system then go around telling everybody how much it sucks and how “it just broke”.
Ironically, if you leave Manjaro the fuck alone and don’t do dumb stuff like use a non-LTS kernel or switch to the non-stable branches or install critical system components from AUR etc. it tends to be super-stable. Unfortunately it tends to attract users for all the wrong reasons.
To answer your question, to recommend it to people it depends a lot on the type of people. I’m an experienced Linux user, I know what stuff to not do and what to not install from AUR etc. At the other extreme I have completely Linux-clueless family members using Manjaro perfectly fine because they don’t have sudo rights and they can’t fuck it up. But there’s a type of Linux user that falls in between that’s going to mess around and screw up and then blame the distro for things that if they did on Arch they’d get told to GTFO – and I think those people should not use Manjaro or any Arch distro because they’re dumb and hateful and Arch-based stuff requires a bit of brain and a willingness to learn.
I’m quite happy with EndeavourOS and last time I had a problem, it was a GRUB problem and they changed to systemd-boot by default after that. Other than this, never had problems since. To be honest, I stopped recommending Arch-based to people unless they’re somewhat experienced, otherwise I recommend Linux Mint. However, EndeavourOS is what I recommend if someone wants a GUI installer for Arch and I don’t think there is a better option yet.
I have 77 AUR packages installed as we speak. There are no issues with AUR and Manjaro’s delayed packages. AUR are source packages. They will compile against whatever is installed.
Occasionally an installed AUR package breaks because I don’t update them automatically and the system libs have moved too far away from the binary I compiled. I rebuild it and that’s it.
Obviously, you shouldn’t install anything from AUR that will take the system down with it. This is true for any Arch distro.
In theory an AUR package can require an Arch package version that’s not in Manjaro yet. I’ve never had that happen in 4 years and dozens of AUR packages. If it ever did I’d either install an older version of the AUR package or get a flatpak version.
Don’t remember what packages caused problems for me but I had to repair it via tty quite a time. Not updating AUR packages automatically is actually a nice workaround to prevent system breakage which I was also doing it, until it started to cause problems more often. Maybe they fixed it I don’t know (though highly doubt it because of the way they do it), haven’t used Manjaro for 4 years. Then I thought about that, why would I need to deal with these kind of things if I can use my system up-to-date with every part of it. No one uses Manjaro because it’s stable, people use it because it was the only “Arch with GUI” they know at the time. Now we have a lot of these and some of them are better than Manjaro. But again, if you’re happy with Manjaro there is no need to change. I was happy until I wasn’t because of Manjaro’s structural problems (like they nuked AUR once). It’s not a bad thing to recommend a better option if you know one.
I’ve started using Manjaro 4 years ago so basically I picked up where you left.
The situation seems to have reversed, nowadays there are plenty of “arch installers” like you said but Manjaro is actually a “stable Arch” alternative… provided you actually want that and don’t do anything to rock the boat. Using flatpak instead of AUR when possible can help further.
I guess the key point there, using Manjaro as Manjaro, not as Arch. It can be stable that way since they also have their own repos. And I agree that using flatpaks instead of AUR on Manjaro would be better. Though at this point, if I am to switch distros, I would go for Void I guess. It’s actually nice to hear that Manjaro seems more stable now.